[Free]

P.S. Bob, you wanna help him out a bit here? Tell that he should just ignore the questions to which the answers will be inconvenient? Show him how to break through walls to extract himself from the corners he's painted himself into? I'm certain he'll be eternally grateful.

Peter, I do think you should pretty much ignore Tad at this point. Tad doesn't really want to make progress in this sport. If he did, then he'd be doing what I've suggested above. Furthermore, I believe Tad is motivated more by some sort of twisted revenge than by any desire to actually improve the sport. So you cannot have a calm and rational discussion with him if you're one of his chosen targets for that revenge. Additionally, Tad has far more free time on his hands than any of us, so we're all at a disadvantage when trying to debate him ... whether we're right or wrong. Tad's single-minded pursuit of revenge combined with his abundance of free time may end up being the downfall of the US Hawks forum if we don't figure out a way to deal with it. I'm open to suggestions.

I've already said that Peter doesn't need any encouragement to ignore uncomfortable questioning. Peter Birren came on to this site 'swinging a big club' using vulgar language in an arrogant mannor. I didn't see him being called down or people being advised to ignore him.

Now that Birren has argued his way into a corner, he is given a free pass to skip merrily down the road past the very bodies he can now refuse to talk about?

I'm no psychiatrist and I don't think you are one either, Bob. Personally I think that field is mostly witchcraft.
I think it's used to enrich drug companies to lobotamize and chemically emasculates the survival instinct out of the public.

Figuring out how people think and react is an old science. They already know. The compartmentalized work the military industrial/pharma/chemical complex had you doing, Bob, was probably just pushing the envelope a little farther toward the pure hell that is being developed for us hoi polloi. A few chip controlled zombie worker bees are cheaper and more expendable than expensive robots.

Political correctness is all about putting us in little boxes dependent on people in bigger boxes to meter us chemically altered food, water, air and tell us what to think.

Then some 57 toxic vaccinations before adulthood, for example, and new deadly concoctions dreamed up every day continue the insanity of our new scientific tyranny. We are being dumbed down.. chemically and psychologically. Political correctness is a box inside a box.

Let Peter Birren, answer the questions.
He came here looking for a fight, let him fight.

If he knows something in contrast to the politically expedient story that we have heard, then he needs to say it. Come out of the box Peter, and answer the questions.

Warren

[Bob Kuczewski]

Hi Warren,

Again, I appreciate you participating in this forum. Thanks very much.

You wrote:

Let Peter Birren, answer the questions.
He came here looking for a fight, let him fight.

Is it possible that Peter didn't come here looking for a fight? Is it possible that he (and many others) would like to come here to build a better hang gliding association? Is it possible that they're concerned about the direction USHPA is heading? Is it possible that they're concerned that USHPA holds a monopoly and they'd like to see an alternative to protect the sport of hang gliding in an increasingly paragliding world?

But I'm glad you've asked what you've asked, because it gave me an idea. I've often said that one of the goals for the US Hawks should be dispute resolution within the hang gliding community. We sure needed that at Torrey but USHPA refused to help us.

You used the word "fight", so maybe the US Hawks needs a special forum where people who want a fight can go and "duke it out" without ruining the rest of the forum and driving everyone else away. There are contributions that both Peter and Tad can make to the sport of hang gliding which are not in conflict with each other. Those non-confrontational posts belong in the normal forum. But if they want to go at each other, then they're invited to do it "in the ring". If one of them doesn't want to participate, then that's their decision.

I'm interested in anyone's thoughts on this idea. Again, my goal is to build a better and more responsive national hang gliding association. In that process, I don't mind giving people a platform to speak. But I don't want that platform undermining my goal of a better and more responsive national hang gliding association. Does that make sense?

[Bob Kuczewski]

Whenever you hear one of these total morons babbling on about how complexity is directly related to failure rates - on a release system or anything else on a glider - ask him to cite A SINGLE ACTUAL EXAMPLE.
 :
"My VG system jammed again 'cause it has too many pulleys and internally routed lines."

I have flown with a prototype VG system that jammed. When pulled too tight it locked itself into the full-on position. I tried and tried to get it to "relax", but it would not. I ended up landing with full VG. It wasn't the worst experience of my life.

Compare that to a release system that locks up. That might be the worst (and last) experience of one's life.

Now I'm not saying that your system is "bad" Tad, but you asked for a single example and I gave you one. I'm sure you'll try to find a way to discount my example, but that doesn't make it go away.

[Free]

I have flown with a prototype VG system that jammed. When pulled too tight it locked itself into the full-on position. I tried and tried to get it to "relax", but it would not. I ended up landing with full VG. It wasn't the worst experience of my life.

Compare that to a release system that locks up. That might be the worst (and last) experience of one's life.

Now I'm not saying that your system is "bad" Tad, but you asked for a single example and I gave you one. I'm sure you'll try to find a way to discount my example, but that doesn't make it go away.

It would be a little hard to discount your example without knowing details of your example.
When did you become a test pilot, Bob?

VG construction has been pretty well vetted for many years. Were you trying out something that was supposed to be an improvement of some kind?

I've studied Tad's idea of an integrated/internal release and I don't think it has the ability to kill nearly as many pilots than Davis Straub's bent pin offerings. An internaly tensioned bungee cord that pulls a pin seems fairly straight forward to me and something that can be done without taking a hand off the control bar which is the built in killer for both barrel releases and Link Knifes.

[TadEareckson]

Bill Cummings - 2011/11/26

I've watched pro towing...

No you haven't.

There's no such thing as "pro towing". That's a bulls*** term for aerotowing from the pilot/shoulders only and it's designed to perpetrate a lie that it's a configuration that a skilled, experienced tow pilot can safely use.

The effect of towing from the shoulders only is that the pilot is pulled way in the front of proper position with respect to the control frame and thus loses a lot of the speed range for which the glider was certified and the roll authority he would have by being able to use that speed.

If the glider gets blasted up by a thermal or dust devil on launch a Hang Five with two decades of aerotow experience won't be able to pull the bar one inch farther back than can a Hang Two with two weekends worth and will end up just as dead after the ensuing whipstall.

It's a major compromise in safety margin for a payoff of saving on some equipment, expense, and drag. I don't have a huge problem with it but let's call a spade a spade.

...and Koch towing.

The Koch two stage is used for surface towing when the tow angle progresses from zero to high. At takeoff you have the same speed range limitation as with one point aero but your situation constantly improves as your tow angle increases.

I've also watched pilots climbing too fast near the ground...

1. A glider climbing too fast near the ground does NOT have a high angle of attack. It has a high tow tension and a high pitch attitude but the angle of attack is going to be fairly normal - UNTIL:

Jim Rooney - 2011/08/26

The "purpose" of a weaklink is to increase the safety of the towing operation. PERIOD.

-a) The weak link increases the safety of the towing operation. PERIOD.

Towing Aloft - 1998/01

Pro Tip: Always thank the tug pilot for intentionally releasing you, even if you feel you could have ridden it out. He should be given a vote of confidence that he made a good decision in the interest of your safety.

-b) The driver makes a good decision in the interest of the glider's safety.

or

Peter Birren - 2009/05/09

If you want a truly foolproof release, it's got to be one that eliminates the pilot from the equation with a release that operates automatically. See http://www.birrendesign.com/LKOpinions.html for more details.

c) A Birren Design Pitch and Lockout Limiter operates automatically and eliminates the pilot from the equation.

THEN the glider will have a very high pitch attitude and very very high angle of attack and stop climbing too fast near the ground and start doing the precise opposite.

...and not being able to get the AOA lowered.

A pilot will not be able to lower his angle of attack for one of three reasons...

1. He's still vertical with his hands on the downtubes after foot launching.

2. He bought into the "pro tow" myth.

3. He's prone and the bar's stuffed as far as it was ever intended to go.

The situations in which a Three person isn't able to use his available pitch range to safely manage his airspeed are extremely rare and virtually always avoidable.

I realize that there are some apples and oranges going on here...

Not really. We're basically pulling into the air a big kite with a big monkey underneath it. The issues aren't all that complicated.

Towing from the chest area as compared to towing with a two to one bridle puts the tow operator in control of the AOA while towing with the Koch.

1. The driver mostly controls the PITCH ATTITUDE - *NOT* the ANGLE OF ATTACK.

2. The pilot has pretty good control of the ANGLE OF ATTACK until the bar is stuffed, the weak link increases the safety of the towing operation, the driver makes a good decision in the interest of his safety, or the Pitch and Lockout Limiter eliminates him from the equation.

3. AT LOW TOW ANGLES the Koch (or other one point configuration) gives the pilot a limited range of hold down authority, the two to one may be a step up, and the one to one is best.

4. At high tow angles there's no difference in pitch authority worth mentioning but if you've got a two point arrangement - either two or one to one - the bridle leg coming down from the keel is gonna occupy the space where you want your head to be.

The pilot towing with a two to one bridle solves that problem in that the pilot can lower the AOA even if the tow operator pulls too fast or even if a thermal is encountered.

1. No bridle configurations SOLVE problems - they MITIGATE them.

2. A one to one bridle gives the pilot more hold down authority than a two to one 'cause there's a sixth more portion of the towline tension going to the keel.

3. And furthermore, at the most critical phase of the tow - takeoff and early climb - the bottom strands of the two to one neutralize, at least to some extent, the hold down authority by pulling up on the basetube. And the one to one is pulling up with a sixth less force.

Manned Kiting
The Basic Handbook of Tow Launched Hang Gliding
Daniel F. Poynter
1974

"The greatest dangers are a rope break or a premature release." - Richard Johnson

Jim Rooney - 2007/08/01

Whatever's going on back there, I can fix it by giving you the rope.

It's more of this crappy argument that being on tow is somehow safer than being off tow.

Manned Kiting
The Basic Handbook of Tow Launched Hang Gliding
Daniel F. Poynter
1974

"A bad flyer won't hurt a pin man but a bad pin man can kill a flyer." - Bill Bennett

4. High line tensions, pitch attitudes, and climb rates themselves tend not to be problems for people. They only become problems when the occur in conjunction with crap equipment and crap operators.

The problem that is being solved is the pitch problem.

The problem that is being MITIGATED is the pitch problem. But it's not mitigating it as well as a one to one.

And a one to one can be safely released from the keel which means that you can blow tow with both hands on the basetube. If you release a two to one from the keel it's gotta clear an extra ring and as the end is whipping back towards the second ring it's lined up pretty well with an area of your anatomy that most people would prefer it wasn't.

And at high tow angles it offers no advantage and the keel attachment becomes a liability. And it's hard to beat the Koch for ease and speed of actuation for any release that requires a hand to come off the basetube. And you're not left with ten yards of crap to wind up after you're off.

Notice that I have learned from Tad by putting up two different quotes to make a point while exonerating myself from any responsibility or making a statement that anyone can hold my feet to the fire with. (Tad aren't you proud of me?)

Yeah, sure. But I'm still waiting to hear what the two to one bridle is supposed to accomplish as well as other commonly used configurations, why it isn't the worst of all worlds, and why no fatality reports are coming out stating that if only the pilot had only been using a Hewett Bridle he'd have been fine.

[TadEareckson]

Bill Cummings - 2011/11/27

I'm confused here since there seemed to be some disagreement on this board if, being held strongly and properly can be best done with the control bar on the shoulders or with a tight hang strap. Did we come to a consensus on this or did we only agree to disagree?

Tad Eareckson - 2011/11/21

There has NEVER been a disagreement between Tad and Bill on this. Tad has ALWAYS been perfectly fine with that. I'm sure I've done it that way myself in light air when I've been too lazy to hike it up.

I have virtually no problem with or interest in how anybody foot launches. Hang gliding culture has known how to do it since the days of bamboo. And people who do it wrong don't need ME to punish them - they get IMMEDIATE feedback EVERY TIME and usually minor to severe corporal punishment after about a dozen warning tickets are ignored.

I'm only interested in what happens JUST PRIOR TO LAUNCH 'cause virtually EVERYONE does that part wrong, there's only feedback once every five hundred or so violations, and it's common for violators to be unfairly singled out for immediate execution without so much as a previous warning ticket or slap on the wrist.

Isn't this a contributing factor to the blown dolly launch that happened to Davis S.? (one to one bridle)

1. Who gives a rat's a** what happens to Davis S.?

2. No.

-A. If you used a two to one bridle - which NOBODY does for aerotowing - you'd have less force pulling forward and down on the keel so you'd be less prone to power whack. But you'd also have less force pulling forward and down on the keel so you'd hafta move the anchor point proportionally farther forward to get the same trim speed for the Dragonfly tow so you'd have the same force power whack.

-B. If you're flying one to one and releasing from the top you need to have a secondary release (or two if you want) in case the top end of the bridle doesn't clear the tow ring. With that Sport 2 trimmed the way it is for one to one, if the secondary release is accidentally triggered and the bottom end of the bridle wraps at the tow ring you are really screwed if you don't blow the primary IMMEDIATELY.

-C. If you're flying two to one and releasing from the top you need to have a secondary release (or two if you want) in case the top end of the bridle doesn't clear the tow ring. With that Sport 2 trimmed the way it would be for two to one, if the secondary release is accidentally triggered it stays with the tug - nothing else needs to go wrong - and you are really REALLY screwed if you don't blow the primary IMMEDIATELY because your trim point is even farther forward.

-D. If you're flying two point - one or two to one - and releasing from the bridle apex you can't release with both hands on the basetube and if you aerotow with a release that doesn't allow you to blow tow with both hands on the basetube you're an idiot.

3. If somebody had been flying one point a glider suitable for one point towing he might have been able to get away with it for a launch or two. But flying one point increases your chances of getting killed in other situations.

4. THE PROBLEM was that the cart was defective. Davis KNEW the cart was defective from his previous tow on it. And that little detour to the emergency room didn't get the cart taken out of circulation. It caused another serious crash the second day. And the sad part is that the gene pool only improves when the individuals are rendered incapable of reproduction.

5. You don't deal with one dangerous equipment problem - like a defective launch cart - by trying to balance things out with another dangerous piece of equipment - like a one point aerotow bridle. That's EXACTLY what Donnell tried to do with HIS towing system. His original Skyting bridle/release system was the most insanely dangerous piece of junk ever deliberately installed on an aircraft and he tried to compensate for it with insanely dangerous understrength weak links, insanely dangerous drivers with their eyes glued to insanely dangerous tension gauges, and insanely dangerous spotters with insanely dangerous machetes watching for excuses to use them.

6. Fix the freakin' launch cart so it works like damn near all the other ones which get tens of thousands of consecutive one and two point tows off the ground without incident.

[Bill Cummings]

"Tad,

3. AT LOW TOW ANGLES the Koch (or other one point configuration) gives the pilot a limited range of hold down authority, the two to one may be a step up, and the one to one is best.

BC here:
That said it better than my attempt.

AOA and Pitch I have to be more careful.

You're right, mitigate was a better word choice since it doesn't solve the problem. (Koch compared to a two to one concerning which will yield better pitch control at low tow angles.)

Pro tow ---We really need a satire font here Bob. Until then may I recommend that when we say "Right!" and really mean "That is BS we should spell that kind of right like Riiight!
Thanks Tad.

[SamKellner]

launch carts which get consecutive one and two point tows off the ground without incident.

Produce the plans.
I won't even ask for the one that gets "tens of thousands".

[Free]

launch carts which get consecutive one and two point tows off the ground without incident.

Produce the plans.
I won't even ask for the one that gets "tens of thousands".

http://home.golden.net/~jpop/tdolly.htm

John Pop has some good plans for a 'T' dolly that inspired me years ago to assemble a spin off heavy duty, welded steel version.

The frame was 1/8" steel tubing that 2" sq. aluminium outriggers and tail would plug into.
It was heavy but it didn't seem to be a problem. It dampened the bouncing.
Jim Gaar, stole it a few years ago.

The front castering wheels are the trick of the whole cart thing.
It would be worth it to get the plans.

[TadEareckson]

Peter Birren - 2011/11/27

I'll say again what I said then, that the more complex the system, (A) the more that can go wrong with it and (B) the less it'll be used because of the hassles of setup.

bobk - 2011/11/27

This is all true. General aviation combats this complexity by adding a lot of overhead to the process (requiring an A&P mechanic to do almost any repairs on an aircraft). The more complexity we add to our aircraft, the greater the burden of maintenance to ensure that it's all working.

Ya know what I'm not hearing here? I'm not hearing that this complexity, overhead, and maintenance burden contributes to systems being LESS safe or reliable. And I'm guessing that BECAUSE the general aviation establishment supports the complexity, overhead, and maintenance burden that the PRECISE OPPOSITE is true. Or do you have some other explanation?

So there's a cost-benefit tradeoff, and we allow our pilots to make the choices of which additional complexity (and costs) are worth which additional benefits.

Right. If they don't wanna pay for an FAA approved fuel pump for the 'ol Cessna they can hop on over to Lockout Mountain Flight Park and get Matt to cook up something...

GT Manufacturing Inc. (GT) and Lookout Mountain Flight Park Inc. (LMFP) make no claim of serviceability of this tow equipment. There is no product liability insurance covering this gear and we do not warrant this gear as suitable for towing anything. We make no claim of serviceability in any way and recommend that you do not use this aerotow gear if you are not absolutely sure how to use it and or if you are unwilling to assume the risk. Towing and flying hang gliders is inherently dangerous.

...out of surplus coffee cans, clothes pins, inner tubes, coat hangers, and paper clips.

I am 100% behind allowing our pilots to make that choice.

NO SH*T!!! REALLY?!?!?! Who'da thunk?

If properly used, there is a minimum of three ways to release from the towline. Do not depend on any of these ways by themselves and fly with a back up. The first release is the primary release which under certain situations may fail, second, is the secondary release that works most of the time, if all is set up correctly, and third, the weak link which will break under the right load. You should also fly with a hook knife that will allow you to cut the line if need be.

GT and LMFP Inc. assume no liability for the function and serviceability of this equipment. If you are uncomfortable with the risk of using this tow gear you will need to get gear that you are comfortable with or do not tow. There is an inherent risk in towing hang gliders that you must assume if you want to use this gear and you want to tow. Learn and understand the risk and the use of this gear. Your safety depends on it.

Tad, if you want to convince people to use your system, then maybe you should focus on telling us about your system rather than trying to bash everyone who points out (A) and (B) as Peter has done.

1. I tried that. When it started working I got blacklisted by the Flight Park Mafia and my flying career was ended. Besides... bashing everyone who points out (A) and (B) as Peter has done provides an absolutely indescribable amount of fun!

2. Who said anything about me wanting to convince people to use my system anyway? The vast majority of hang gliding people I know I want using Peter's, Matt's, Davis's, and Bobby's systems. The few people I DO want remaining in the gene pool don't need any convincing from me. They've seen what happens to the people who use Peter's, Matt's, Davis's, and Bobby's systems.

Furthermore Tad, you must know of some pilots with brains larger than "half the size of a walnut". Why don't you convince them to use your system to get the ball rolling?

You mean like Antoine?

2011/10/14

Tad,
you will laugh.. some voices ask to impose your barrel release for the French Championship 2012 in the flats near Poitiers. And we will invite the Brits in a FAI cat2 event..
Not really sure it will happend but stay tuned..

I know of manufacturers that you quote with a high degree of respect. Why don't you convince them to incorporate your system?

Jim Rooney - 2011/08/25

It's only a mystery why people choose to reinvent the wheel when we've got a proven system that works.

Zack C - 2011/08/26

Maybe because they're tired of releases that don't work under tension, releases they have to relinquish control of the glider to activate, stalling near the ground because of weak links breaking for no reason, instructors telling them to intentionally break weak links in an emergency when they can't get to their release, hook knifes being considered an acceptable release option, secondary releases on a V-bridle being considered a backup for the primary release, bridles wrapping on tow rings, tugs having weaker weak links than gliders, disagreement among even professionals over what a weak link is for, tow operators not having a clue what line tensions break their weak links...

In my opinion, we have a long way to go.

Do you think for a nanosecond that for twenty years people have been velcroing Wallaby, Quest, and Lookout crap onto their downtubes 'cause Steve Pearson is too stupid to be able to run a string up a downtube to a mechanism capable of reliably letting go of another piece of string?

There's a reason that that hasn't happened and won't and it's the same reason the teaching of hook-in checks is practically nonexistent and will remain so. There are too many people too heavily invested in making sure things keep getting done wrong.

Peter, I do think you should pretty much ignore Tad at this point.

I KNEW Peter could count on you! He was really getting beat up bad and guys like you need to stick together and stay on the same page if you have any hope of staying on top.

Furthermore, I believe Tad is motivated more by some sort of twisted revenge than by any desire to actually improve the sport.

I just never can figure out why you keep assuming that these are mutually exclusive hobbies and that one should be denied the joy of doing both.

Tad's single-minded pursuit of revenge combined with his abundance of free time may end up being the downfall of the US Hawks forum if we don't figure out a way to deal with it. I'm open to suggestions.

C'mon, Bob. You know EXACTLY how to deal with it. You just wanna assemble enough of a base of support to create the illusion that you're acting fairly and with justification.

bobk - 2011/11/27

I have flown with a prototype VG system that jammed. When pulled too tight it locked itself into the full-on position. I tried and tried to get it to "relax", but it would not. I ended up landing with full VG. It wasn't the worst experience of my life.

But as soon as you removed three of the pulleys and routed the lines outside of the downtubes it started working just fine, right?

Compare that to a release system that locks up.

No. That's not the comparison.

You pulled the VG system "too tight" (for what I have no idea) and it locked itself into the full-on position. That's exactly what a release system is supposed to do. You can try and try to get it to "relax" all you want and it won't reconnect to the tug.

That might be the worst (and last) experience of one's life.

JD Guillemette - 2009/02/13

New Lookout Release--preliminary test

Sweeeet!!!! Looks good to me.

I like the bent gate bar, as Marc suggested that should make release force many times less than tow force, if not nearly independant of tow line force.

Nicely done Lookout! Elegant solution!

As in most cases, the simplest designs work best.

Zack C - 2011/11/07

Yeah, I've had to pull the loop twice sometimes...and that's with the newer release I exchanged my old one for last July.

And I recently learned one of our guys using a Lookout release (I think the only one who uses one besides me) had an in-flight failure of his. Don't know the details but something broke and it no longer released. He contacted Lookout and they said there was a bad production run having that problem and offered to replace it.

Great record these things have...

"In my opinion, the LINKNIFE is exceptionally brilliant! It seems to solve most of the problems associated with release systems without increasing the complexities. I cannot think of any major weaknesses or objections that you did not address. Please send me four Linknife releases as soon as possible.... They are still the best releases I know about. Some of my flying buddies are needing releases and I have run out of spares."
--Donnell Hewett
Towing pioneer, author of the 12 Skyting Criteria, inventor of towline tension sensing and designer of the Hewett Center-of-Mass bridle.

Al Hernandez - 2010

I can't reach my CUT line 'cause I have both hands on the downtubes, and if I let go of the Coke bottle grip I will crash.

Peter Birren - 2008/10/27

So you pull whatever release you have but the one hand still on the basetube isn't enough to hold the nose down and you pop up and over into an unplanned semi-loop.

Yeah? Well I'm not having any trouble getting my Rube Goldberg system to work when the s*** hits the fan - but all these marvels of simplicity always seem to need the supplements of half G weak links and the interventions of loving gods for the pilots to stand a snowball's chance in hell.

Now I'm not saying that your system is "bad" Tad, but you asked for a single example and I gave you one.

Not by the most convoluted stretch of anyone's idiot imagination. That VG system malfunctioned because it was poorly engineered and inadequately tested. Complexity didn't have a goddam thing to do with it.

I'm sure you'll try to find a way to discount my example...

What example?

...but that doesn't make it go away.

It never existed. It didn't any more exist than any of those totally imaginary incidents of gliders being blown off launch because of people allowing their wings to float up into turbulent jet streams that you fabricated to justify gutting hook-in check rules.

And that's the BEST you can do? Dealing with this kinda crap I lose more brain cells through atrophy than I do guzzling my morning bottle of bourbon.