US Hawks Hang Gliding Association

Journalistic Conflict of Interest?

By a secret consensus vote of one, Davis Straub, ends another discussion on tow bridle safety in the "Oz Report" forum. http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22660
"What can be learned from this "scooter" towing accident?"

Journalist? Davis Straub, fails to address a personal financial conflict of interest he may have in that discussion.

Straub sells a particular style of tow release different than that being discussed when the discussion was abruptly censored.

This, of course, is not the first time the 'journalist' has personally censored tow bridle/release mechanism discussions.

Pilot, Tad Earickson, who has contributed many hours of research and development re: tow release bridles was previously censored and then banned by (journalist/entrepreneur) Davis Straub, also on the "Oz Report" forum.

Various other pilots have also been censored for reasons known only to (journalist) Davis Straub, in the past.

The interest of safety should be the number one priority for all pilots and these discussions should not be limited to the lowest common denominator of one self-interest entrepreneur that fails to disclose his personal conflicts of interest in these matters.

Davis Straub can't have it both ways.

Is Davis Straub really a journalist or is he merely a (self-interest) blogger who's personal income may be more important than the safety of other hang glider pilots?

Are Davis Straub's personal tow release sales the 'end of the line' for those of us that may want more information before placing our lives, literally, on the line?

It is said that the truth will set you free.
Will your tow bridle do the same?

Who gets to decide?
Davis Straub?

Free wrote:It is said that the truth will set you free.
Will your tow bridle do the same?

Who gets to decide?
Davis Straub?

Great points Warren!!!

I'm also glad you mentioned Tad Earickson. I recall that he's been censored on a couple of forums. Could you let him know about the US Hawks ... the new group of "Banned Brothers"?

Thanks!!!

bobk wrote:
I'm also glad you mentioned Tad Earickson. I recall that he's been censored on a couple of forums. Could you let him know about the US Hawks ... the new group of "Banned Brothers"?

I wish I could but I believe I'm censored more places than anyone else here!
Someone else will have to make a personal invitation.. and we could start an "invite" thread or two over here.
There are a lot of creative minds being suppressed on both those commercial hang gliding sites because tyrants and bullies can't stand to be shown up by any creative thinking.

Suppressing minds and ideas seems to be the path to personal gain and stardom these days.

I think I have an email address for him, so I've sent him an invitation to join us here on the US Hawks.

I remember when I was Regional Director there was a big dust up about Tad back in May of 2009, and some of the Directors were calling for legal action to censor him. On May 11, 2009, I sent the following message to the Board. I believe in open dialog, so I started by pointing out that Tad had included his email address in his letter (so we could contact him). I then offered my support for Dennis who suggested that we try to talk with Tad before taking legal action. Here's my message to the Board:

Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 12:40 AM
To: Pagen, Dennis; Tate, Lisa
Cc: USHPA Regional Directors
Subject: Re: aerotow SOP complaint

Hello Dennis (cc Gregg and other Regional Directors),

First, I think Mr. Eareckson's email address was in Gregg's original letter included below if anyone needs it (TadErcksn@...).

Second, I cast my vote for having Dennis write a letter to Mr. Eareckson as he suggested. Mr. Eareckson is obviously intelligent and passionate, and we can certainly use those qualities if we can harness them in a positive direction. If Dennis can do this, then that's the win-win solution. Another invitation to attend (or even present) at the next Towing Committee meeting might also be a good idea. I vote for inclusivity over litigation.

Third, I'm not an expert in towing, but I consulted someone who knows the topic pretty well. His comment was that while it might be good for USHPA to make recommendations in this area, there is still plenty of room for innovation. For that reason, he doesn't think USHPA should mandate any kind of obligatory system that would stifle that innovation - whether Mr. Eareckson's or any other. I have very little background in towing, so I'm just passing this perspective on for your general consideration.

Thanks,
Bob Kuczewski

Of course, there was a lot more to this exchange than I've posted. For example, Brad Hall didn't miss an opportunity to snipe at me as he often did in front of the Board. I've got all the email messages from that exchange and I may post them when I find the time. It's interesting (and enlightening) to look back at the past ... with the knowledge of what's happened since then.

Spelling name and documents of
Tad Eareckson
http://www.energykitesystems.net/Lift/hgh/TadEareckson/index.html

bobk wrote: I remember when I was Regional Director there was a big dust up about Tad back in May of 2009, and some of the Directors were calling for legal action to censor him.

Simply amazing.. even I am a little bit stunned at this. Legal action on what grounds?

Of course, there was a lot more to this exchange than I've posted. For example, Brad Hall didn't miss an opportunity to snipe at me as he often did in front of the Board. I've got all the email messages from that exchange and I may post them when I find the time. It's interesting (and enlightening) to look back at the past ... with the knowledge of what's happened since then.

Please do post them.
Tad may not even know that the borg was looking for some way to sanction him.

I hope Tad does join in the discussion here. I'm not very impressed that the two commercial blog sites (Oz and Org) plus the corporate USHPA borg have all censored information from reaching people that would like to make up their own minds on the matter.

Without naming names (I'm curious to see if they'll own up to it first), on May 10, 2009, one Director wrote:

We need to consider getting an injunction against this guy communicating with the FAA on this subject.

That same day, another Director responded:

I forwarded the letter to Tim Herr yesterday asking about this.

For those who don't know, Tim Herr is ... USHPA's lawyer!!

A third Director (who I'll call "Mr. X") chimed in that same day with this:

Mr. X wrote:Perhaps a strongly worded letter from Tim will do the trick. We can't force Tad to work within the USHPA framework but we can make it unpleasant and expensive for him if he chooses to makes derogatory and false statements about USHPA to the FAA he can't back up.

If I understand the previous comments, his sending USHPA a draft letter is an indication of willingness to engage in some dialogue before going to the FAA.

Good luck with this guy!

That's an example of USHPA's typical tactics: Call up the lawyer, then Attack, Attack, Attack. I responded to this last message by focussing on the only positive quote I could find in there:

Bob Kuczewski wrote:[Mr. X] wrote:

"his sending USHPA a draft letter is an indication of willingness to engage in some dialogue before going to the FAA."

I agree with that sentiment, and I think it would be wise for USHPA to ask Mr. Eareckson what it is specifically that he is seeking. I don't think trying to silence him with an injunction is a good start.

Also, I have almost no background in towing, so I've asked a close friend to review his concerns for my own enlightenment. If anyone else on the Board with towing expertise would like to offer comments on Mr. Eareckson's points for similar enlightenment that would be appreciated by us gravity launch pilots.

Thanks,
Bob Kuczewski

That all took place before my May 11th "vote" on the matter (which I posted earlier - 4th post on this page).

Eventually, some of the cooler heads among the Directors began suggesting that someone discuss this with Tad (pretty much as I had suggested). Unfortunately, none of those "cooler heads" were members of the Executive Committee (EC). In fact, if this discussion hadn't been circulated to all the Directors, there's a good chance that the EC would have taken legal action via their lawyer as they did with me (the infamous Rich Hass "Gag Letter"). That's yet another reason why later in that year (2009) I insisted that the EC should allow all Directors to attend their monthly teleconference calls. That would open up these issues to more Directors with more viewpoints. The EC didn't like that, and they refused to allow me to attend - despite repeated written requests and a telephone stand-off with Paul Montville (I'm glad that guy's gone). Eventually Dave Wills urged the Board to pass SOP changes that now allow them to exclude anyone they want ... including other DIrectors!! My legal advisor (lawyer) seemed to think it was illegal for them to exclude Directors (including me) without those SOP changes, and it may still be illegal for them to exclude any Directors even with those new SOP changes. This is because the Directors are effectively operating for the owners of the corporation (us members) and they should have a right to inspect every aspect of the corporation on our behalf. But rather than opening itself up to more member scrutiny, USHPA has done just the opposite. They even passed an SOP forbidding the recording of their meetings!! Unbelievable.

Aside from the details of this particular incident, it was interesting for me to see how the Board "circled the wagons" and how several Directors immediately began suggesting that USHPA should spend our member's money on lawyers to attack Tad. I'm sure that's how the conversations went behind my back when they prepared their Fall 2009 ambush for me. They even flew their lawyer (Tim Herr) all the way to Austin Texas for that fiasco. But that's another story...

This is so freaking incredibly COOL! All that damage done by one lousy little four and a quarter page draft letter that I never even wanted to send. Can you imagine what would happen if TWO people wrote draft letters? How's that Arlo Guthrie song go?

People who've got nothing to hide don't behave that way. They're scared. This is gonna be fun.

Sorry I haven't been able to participate in this before now but I've been busy over at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TUGS/

cutting Tracy Tillman's tiny little balls off and shoving them down his f***ing throat - something I've REALLY wanted to do for a VERY long time. And you gotta take these opportunities when they present themselves.

Warren,

I wish I could but I believe I'm censored more places than anyone else here!

Let's find out.

Capitol Hang Glider Association (Cragin Shelton)
Skysailingtowing (Peter Birren)
HangGliding.org (Jack)
Paragliding Forum (Steve Uzochukwu)
Oz Report (Davis, with collaboration from Sam Kellner)
Houston Hang Gliding & Paragliding Association (popular demand)

And currently I've got a REAL good shot at:

TUGS (Jim Gaar)

So watchya got - PUNK?

Straub sells a particular style of tow release different than that being discussed when the discussion was abruptly censored.

Davis and Highland Aerosports - the alma mater of Jim Rooney, his equally misshapen clone - sell the same dangerous junk that was a big factor in this scooter towing negligent homicide that Davis and Jim wanna make sure nobody learns anything from.

Pudpud is Mike Lake - one on a rather short list of my heroes in this idiot sport and an important historical figure. He was there in the thick of the core of the birth of the branch of modern towing that got things mostly right. He invented the first bridle/release system that allowed towing with an increasing tow angle (a la stationary winch, for example) without interference with the basetube. It was the predecessor to the Koch two stage.

And to see scum like Davis and Jim treat somebody like that like that...

Bob,

Dennis Pagen...

I think I can make a pretty good case that Donnell Hewett's Skyting "theory" of towing is the biggest disaster ever to hit aviation - and I don't mean just within hang gliding.

Towing Aloft isn't far behind. There's some really good stuff in there that I'd have at least had a real hard time figuring out on my own but maybe the bulk of it is unbelievably stupid ROT. And if you wanna kill as many people as possible give them rot but mix in a lot of good stuff to put them off guard.

Third, I'm not an expert in towing, but I consulted someone who knows the topic pretty well. His comment was that while it might be good for USHPA to make recommendations in this area, there is still plenty of room for innovation. For that reason, he doesn't think USHPA should mandate any kind of obligatory system that would stifle that innovation - whether Mr. Eareckson's or any other. I have very little background in towing, so I'm just passing this perspective on for your general consideration.

Any chance of me finding out who this idiot is? This sounds a lot like Donnell's 1980/01 letter to the editor opposing the requirement that gliders meet airworthiness standards before being allowed in competition.

http://kitestrings.prophpbb.com/post29.html#p29

(Ask George Worthington how that approach tends to work out in the short run.)

We've seen how tow equipment "innovation" with no ground rules works out - most recently eighteen days ago.

Did you ask this idiot to catalog all of the "innovation" that this USHPA No-Ground-Rules Utopia has been producing in the past three decades?

As far as what's in use on any significant scale in the US...

What's happed in aerotowing tow equipment since the Dragonfly started circulating in 1991 and we had a cable with a two dollar panic snap on one end and a loop on the other?

Oh yeah, we replaced the two dollar panic snap with a seventy-five dollar spinnaker shackle so's we could snag the weak link and kill Robin.

And we put a brake lever where the loop used to be and moved the bottom end from the basetube to the downtube so we could kill Rob Richardson and Mike Haas and JUST MISS killing Davis - lose/lose/lose.

Then we decided that we really didn't need a two point release anyway and put a bent pin inside a little chunk of aluminum tubing and tied it to a shoulder and half killed Holly Korzilius and fully killed Steve Elliott.

In surface towing we innovated the three-ring release in 1982. Well, we really didn't innovate it - we ripped it off from Bill Booth who innovated it for skydiving in the Seventies. And then we figured out ways to modify and rig it to make it not work when we wanted it to - and kill Richard Graham, Debbie Young, and Frank Sauber - and work when we didn't - and kill Brad Anderson and Eric Aasletten.

And, of course, everybody knows that a single loop of 130 pound Greenspot is the PREFECT weak link for ALL gliders so no improvement on that need be even considered.

Yeah, it's great "for USHPA to make recommendations in this area". Like this:

The United States Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association, Inc.
Standard Operating Procedure
12. Rating System
02. Pilot Proficiency System
10. Hang Gliding Aerotow Ratings
-B. Aero Vehicle Requirements

05. The weak link at the tow plane end of the towline should break with a towline tension approximately 100 lbs. greater than the glider end.

"SHOULD". Just a "recommendation". That way a**hole tug drivers can and do use weak links lighter than the ones on tandem and solo gliders and, since there's no minimum...

The weak link at the glider end must have a breaking strength that will break before the towline tension exceeds twice the weight of the hang glider pilot and glider combination.

can and do leave them on until they disintegrate.

So everything's totally cool after Arlan Birkett and Jeremiah Thompson do a fatal two hundred foot whipstall off the end of the runway at Cushing Field.

And it's also totally cool WHEN gliders are frequently left with 250 feet of Spectra draped over the basetube - potentially at 75 feet over the fence at the end of the runway. But hey, when was the last time anybody heard about a trailing towline snagging and killing anybody?

Let freedom ring.

About the only things that don't totally suck in hang gliding are the gliders themselves. And the gliders themselves stopped totally sucking the instant they were - for all intents and purposes - REQUIRED to meet minimum strength, stability, handling, and glide standards. Innovation within those standards has been phenomenal. The top competition gliders are things of stunning beauty and there's been a convergence of evolution so that they all are built, look, perform, and handle pretty much the same and are probably near the peak of what physics and technology will allow.

Yeah, on rare occasions in violent air they tumble. But there's probably not much we can do about that without designing something that stops being a hang glider. We accept that risk and deal with it the way paraglider people accept collapses and deal with them.

But nobody's complaining about how crappy the gliders are and clamoring for something better.

Release systems... No standards; no requirements; no innovation; no evolution; failure accepted as normal, cost of doing business, "occupational hazard"; regularly scheduled kills; everybody's scared sh*tless of them...

And a nonstop thirty year cry for something better.

And the market flooded with total crap with no performance or reliability - just the claim of excellence by the commercial interests.

And a national organization made up of those commercial interest and thus heavily invested in making sure that none of the crap they sell is subjected to any minimum performance and reliability standards.

We need to consider getting an injunction against this guy communicating with the FAA on this subject.

They want to get an injunction to prevent a private citizen from communicating with a government agency? What a bunch of cowardly Nazi thugs.

We can't force Tad to work within the USHPA framework...

I TRIED LIKE HELL to work within the USHPA framework starting on 2008/10/07 when the Towing Committee Chairman asked for my involvement but never followed through when responded. But, then again, Gregg never follows through on anything.

I spent a month and a half revising the SOPs and Guidelines from when Gregg asked me to on 2009/02/11 and the BOD meeting in Colorado Springs at the end of March. I submitted tweaked revision after tweaked revision requesting comments. I hung by the computer and telephone that whole weekend to field questions. None of you useless illiterate motherf***ers even bothered to skim it.

None of you useless illiterate motherf***ers even bothered to contact me for a month after the meeting and tell me that none of you useless illiterate motherf***ers even bothered to skim it.

It wasn't until 05/09 that I asked y'all to take a look at the letter I was thinking of sending to the FAA. I immediately got this letter from one of your top Regional Director / Towing Committee sh**heads:

http://kitestrings.prophpbb.com/post95.html#p95

After y'all went berserk for a day I said OK, I won't send it as long as you discuss the issues with me. The instant the heat was off was the instant your attention spans bit the dust and you went back to chasing squirrels. So by the end of October when I hadn't had a single solitary peep I sent the f***ing letter and posted it online.

...but we can make it unpleasant and expensive for him if he chooses to makes derogatory and false statements about USHPA to the FAA he can't back up.

Yeah a**hole? All I gotta do is copy and paste from thirty years of your own stupid magazine archives. You bet your a** I can back it up. I can cite names, dates, and causes of death of the top of my head with my eyes closed. Don't even think about trying to challenge me.

And my life sucks so much as things are now that you probably wouldn't have a helluva lot of luck trying to make it worse.

If I understand the previous comments, his sending USHPA a draft letter is an indication of willingness to engage in some dialogue before going to the FAA.

But you never did and, after Matt got me to waste a couple of weeks at Lookout at the end of May / beginning of June on the pretense that he was interested in participating in getting some safe standards on the books, you never will. Matt's not the solution - he's the problem. And he's USHGA. So y'all can go f*** yourselves. Y'all are EXTREMELY legally vulnerable if a legal team gets coached by someone who really knows what he's talking about and knows where all the skeletons are buried.

Aside from the details of this particular incident, it was interesting for me to see how the Board "circled the wagons" and how several Directors immediately began suggesting that USHPA should spend our member's money on lawyers to attack Tad.

And never once did anybody even look at a single sentence of the revisions and say "I'm not sure this is a good idea because..." which was all I ever wanted. And they were - and are - solid and bulletproof. And if anybody reads them he would see that, had they been implemented, Shane Smith would still be paying for USHGA membership for many years to come. And I would too. But hey, plenty more where we came from.

Hi Tad,

Could I ask you to go back and clean up the language a little bit? Maybe put in a few *'s or $'s so we don't have profanity on the forum. This forum software does an automatic substitution for some words, but it doesn't appear to catch all the various forms of usage, so it would help me if you could go back and clean it up. Thanks.

If it turns out that you can't edit it (this forum only allows changes for about an hour), then please let me know and I'll be happy to do it. Thanks again.

With regard to the towing content, I don't have the expertise to make any real comment since I've never towed myself. As Directors, none of us had all the skills needed for all decisions, and that's why I tried to solicit comments from everyone in my region (and everywhere else). So I'm still not qualified to go much farther in the towing content.

But what I objected to (and still do) was USHPA's almost knee-jerk reaction to try to use their "big legal guns" against our members. That's where I think they really crossed the line, and that's what I objected to when I was a Director. That's why I made the comments that I did at the time. Fortunately, some others were in agreement, and I don't think there were any legal threats made. But you could be the one to let me know. Thanks.

With regard to the US Hawks, my goal here is to create an alternate national organization that will hopefully be more responsive to its members. That means that we will eventually write our own SOPs and have our own rating system. I believe that will finally introduce competition and that's the basis of our society. If we can do things better than USHPA, then we will attract more members than USHPA. It's that simple. I hope you'll be willing to join us and help us build something we're all proud of.

Thanks for posting. I look forward to many more. : )

Bob Kuczewski

Thanks for joining us, Tad!
It's been a long time since I've been called a punk!
Thanks for the compliment and maybe down the road I'll put together the list of places that I am banned from.
I just might beat you at this point. I certainly started well before you so in that case there is the question of who the punk is? Ha!

It's a big job playing catch up on the vast info in your wake but I'll give it my best shot. It may take a while.

I've got a little background in towing but certainly nothing to brag about.
We used what was available and were fairly lucky. I do look forward to learning more.
I'm presently in a boycott mode in respect to U$HPA and the local sites here in the midwest that are about 6 hrs. away. I probably jumped the gun a bit a while back and bought a 4 cylinder Toyota winch over the internet.

I had been thinking scooter tow for a while and rationalized the cost and trouble of finding a suitable Honda donor bike and doing the conversion so I impulsively sprang for the built up rig. Too bad it's still a thousand miles away but that seemed easier to overcome than finding a putt putt that might not have the power to do what I wanted anyway.

I've got payout and aerotow experience but winching 'in' is going to be new. A safe release is at the top of my concerns. It is sad that self interests and weak egos of Davis Straub and others are limiting discussions/development of safer, more reliable systems.

"Conflict of interest" doesn't cover the moral/integrity issues here. It's sad that Davis Straub is the way he is.
I can't help thinking about one of the competitions where a foreign pilot was killed *on launch* and Davis carped on for days that the dead pilot's team members didn't want to go on with the little pecker measuring contest, (as their friend was being scraped up off the tarmac) that makes up Davis' only existence... I digress.. Straub will probably never change and that is sad.

Onward and upward. Flying is special.
What some of us don't understand that flying doesn't make us special.
Drug addicts arent special and neither are we.
We should be able to appreciate things for what they are.

I appreciate all the work that that Tad has put into the mechanisms of tow systems.
And I don't appreciate those that repress that work, for whatever their reasons.
More power to you Tad, I'll try to catch up.

The one thing that I'm probably qualified to comment on at this point is that your style of dealing with your detractors does seem to have a negative effect on how your message is recieved.
In a world of inflated egos and thin skins, ya gotta play the game to stay in the game.
I'm still learning that myself, so I''m just saying..
Don't let 'em get your goat and please hang in there with your contributions to a safer future.

Punk.