[Bob Kuczewski]

Well ....

Between the time that Phil posted his message (9:52 am) and the time of this message (10:31am), Jack Axaopoulos (operator of hanggliding.org) had already removed Phil's entire topic. He didn't just bury it in the basement. He completely removed it.

In another current topic on his site, Jack Axaopoulos continues to compare hanggliding.org to his own "his living room". That's a nice metaphor and it certainly gives Jack the right to do what he pleases to his "guests".

But if you ever wonder why the sport of hang gliding is in such dire straights, you can see the answer right there in Jack's metaphor. The sport of hang gliding deserves an open discussion forum that's NOT in someone's living room.

Welcome to the US Hawks!!!     

P.S. Thanks again for making that effort to spread the word Phil.  

[Rick Masters]

I've been studying this odd effect for some time. Free-flight moderators seem to become like jealous mother monkeys, determined to protect their helpless and innocent wide-eyed little ones from the disturbing knowledge that the tigers are eating them on the other side of the island - but not in their own shady corner of the coconut grove.

[Bob Kuczewski]

I wish it were that innocent.

Jack isn't suppressing information to protect his members. He's suppressing it because he hates me and he hates the US Hawks. He hates us because we present a threat to his domination of hang gliding discussion forums.

Jack makes money from the ads on his forum, and he loves to advertise hanggliding.org as "The web's # 1 hanggliding website" (it's right on his front page). Jack also craves the control that he has on his site. That's why he killed the HGAA back in 2010. It would have been a competitor to him and he wouldn't control it because we were setting it up as a democracy with a Board of Directors.

As a side comment, I'll note that Tad (kitestrings.org) also openly hates the US Hawks (for different reasons). But Tad has the decency to recognize and speak out when injustices are being committed - even to people he dislikes. I have to give him credit for that.

As for Davis, he just does what he feels is in his own best interests. I don't think he harbors the hate that Jack does, but he recognizes that USHPA has power and he wants to benefit from doing their bidding from time to time. But he'll play both sides if he feels it's in his own best interests.

Well, that's my view of this jungle landscape. : )

[Bob Kuczewski]

Yesterday I sent the following message to USHPA's Executive Director Martin Palmaz with a copy to USHPA's President (Rich Hass) and many others:

Mr. Palmaz (cc Rich Hass, bcc others),

In your letter below, you indicate that the USHPA Board is initiating an expulsion procedure against me based on the good faith determination that I have failed in a material and serious degree to observe the rules of conduct governing USHPA or have engaged in conduct materially and seriously prejudicial to the purpose and interests of USHPA.

Since the upcoming "hearing" is to determine whether I've:

    1. "failed in a material and serious degree to observe the rules of conduct governing USHPA"
      - or -
    2. "engaged in conduct materially and seriously prejudicial to the purpose and interests of USHPA"

then I would like clear and definitive answers to these two questions:

    1. What are the rules of conduct governing USHPA?
    2. What are the purposes and interests of USHPA?

Please answer those two questions separately, and please include any references to external documents as well as the full text of those external references so that your response is self-contained and stands on its own. I am making this request as a current member of USHPA.

Thanks in advance,
Bob Kuczewski

This morning I got a call from one of our Torrey Hawks members who asked me to call Martin to open up lines of communication. As a favor to that member, I agreed to make the call, but I commented that I thought Martin wasn't really the decision maker in this matter, and he was just writing for the Board.

True to my word, I did call Martin, and we had a very civil conversation. I relayed a willingness to open communication on the matter and he said that he appreciated that and would pass it on to the Board.

I don't think anything will come of it, but I appreciate any Torrey Hawks member who's willing to take the time to call me. I also think it's helpful for people to see that I've tried (for many years) to resolve the problems at Torrey Pines with USHPA's assistance, but USHPA has failed to respond in kind.

I just followed up with this email message to Martin, Rich, and others:

Mr. Palmaz (cc Rich Hass, bcc others),

Thanks for taking my call today. As I mentioned on the phone, I was asked by a member of our local club to reach out to you to open communications, and I've honored his request.

I would still like a clear response to my questions that I asked below regarding the charges made against me:

    1. What are the rules of conduct governing USHPA?
    2. What are the purposes and interests of USHPA?

I would like the answers to those questions in order to formulate a "defense", and I would like references to where those answers could be found by any member of USHPA.

Thanks in advance,
Bob Kuczewski

[Free]

Well ....

Between the time that Phil posted his message (9:52 am) and the time of this message (10:31am), Jack Axaopoulos (operator of hanggliding.org) had already removed Phil's entire topic. He didn't just bury it in the basement. He completely removed it.

Jack Axaopoulos ' censorship and banning was borne out of fear and cowardice years ago.
Jack used to be quite outspoken in his younger days on the old hang gliding list: utah.edu.
I've had many discussions there with Jack that Jack couldn't control.

That's why he banned me from .org years ago. It's the competitive coward's way out.
When you can't win one way, change the rules.
He learned from Davis.

Reinventing and controlling the game makes them winners.

Their first bannings may have been fraught with trepidation but their adrenalin buttons were also fed.
It's an adrenalin rush. Coming off the high, there is need for another and another. Much like a serial murderer.

Now it's getting easier and easier for Jack and he needs more and more of that rush to validate himself.
Political correctness was designed for this sickness and Jack Axaopoulos is now on a roll.

In another current topic on his site, Jack Axaopoulos continues to compare hanggliding.org to his own "his living room". That's a nice metaphor and it certainly gives Jack the right to do what he pleases to his "guests".

That's the legal property rights consensus at this time but maybe not in the future when Obama's internet control kicks in.

But if you ever wonder why the sport of hang gliding is in such dire straights, you can see the answer right there in Jack's metaphor. The sport of hang gliding deserves an open discussion forum that's NOT in someone's living room.

Welcome to the US Hawks!!!     

Except for those that you have thrown out of the living room.
Notice any adrenalin like rush that tempts you again?

P.S. Thanks again for making that effort to spread the word Phil.

Too bad it didn't have any effect, Phil.
Other than to put you on Jack Axaopoulos' short list for future bannings..

P. S. I edited all of Bob's clapping emoticons, just like Jack Axaopoulos edited all the effort Phil had in posting it.
I do have to admit, it is a bit of a rush..

[Bob Kuczewski]

The first banning may be fraught with valid trepidation but their adrenalin buttons are fed.
Coming off the high, there is need for another and another. Much like a serial murderer.

It's getting easier and easier for Jack now and he needs more and more of that rush to validate himself.
Political correctness was designed for the sickness and Jack Axaopoulos is now on a roll, banning right and left.

Very good analysis and insights into human nature Warren. I agree with you 100%.

Welcome to the US Hawks!!!     

Except for those that you have thrown out of the living room.
Notice any adrenalin like rush that tempts you again?

No. But I do recognize the weakness in all of us to want our way. That's why I've been working to build up our Trial Board of Directors so we can do better than Jack or Davis or Tad - who have all banned more people from their forums than we have.

There's only one real person (believed to not be a spammer or sock puppet) who's been banned from the US Hawks and that's Tad. I got no "adrenalin rush" from that, and I've wished many times for a better solution. If you have one, please post it for the Trial Board of Directors to consider. That's the constructive way to help build the US Hawks.

[Free]

There's only one real person (believed to not be a spammer or sock puppet) who's been banned from the US Hawks and that's Tad. I got no "adrenalin rush" from that, and I've wished many times for a better solution. If you have one, please post it for the Trial Board of Directors to consider. That's the constructive way to help build the US Hawks.

Tad has told you how to let him post and protect people of varying ages and the answer is also within your own words.

The sport of hang gliding deserves an open discussion forum that's NOT in someone's living room.

Remove the personal email function and tell him to not use naughty words.
Instead of the living room analogy I think it is more like a restaurant setting.
All communication is in public and rude words are not acceptable.
Simple rules that depend on those present and of course, the restaurant owner who gets the last word.*

Tad is fluent enough to make his points without needing the seven (?) or so words, that are so embarrassing to a more gentile crowd.
Also the children.. let them be children. Free speech is free speech but rude public language is just rude.
There can be some common sense rules here that do not infringe on free speech.

* This is the legal standard that the corporate fiction running Torrey Pines is using to kick you out of their 'restaurant'.
'Restaurant' = public land given free as a plum prize to selected political insiders

[wingspan33]

Well, its been a few years since I left USHPA. But the comment Davis made that "The USHPA is an insurance company with a tandem exemption." - is not really intended literally.

Apparently (dated 2013), these are the guys doing the insuring: http://firstflightinsurance.com/Site/375021952/airsports.asp

Certainly 3rd party liability seems to be the main thrust, one wonders how the two aircraft compare as actual risks to on lookers. Hang gliders certainly have a higher mass and potentially damaging structure... but a collapsed paraglider certainly could drag an old lady off a cliff.

There are things to wonder about regarding the liabilities created by HGs compared to collapsible canopies (CCs).

I think it's indisputable that CCs are much less safe for their occupant than HGs are to their pilots.

As far as insurance goes, CCs are a greater risk if a crash (or collapse and plummet) victim (or surviving close relative) decides to sue the U$hPA and/or a U$hPA insured launch site owner for some type of negligence. As in, an improper rating being issued (i.e., too soon), a U$hPA Certified Instructor giving deficient lessons or student supervision (as has occurred with Air California Adventure Inc.).

For site liability there would be issues if the site allowed CCs to fly but it was, in reality, inherently unsafe for CCs to launch and/or fly there. Cliff launch sites come to mind. Liability also opens up -regarding the U$hPA - connected with CC Tandem accidents. Specifically where the passenger is injured. CCs are also more likely to get snagged on power lines due to their much greater top to bottom dimension. This type of incident can cause damage to the power lines and/or the CC occupant - and perhaps killing power to many electric customers. Such accidents can pose a serious liability for the U$hPA.

The liabilities concerning HGs also involve similar problems as described above, but the frequency of such incidents (HGs can't crumple up and plummet to the ground) is lower. Probably much lower. Since learning to HG takes longer and is more involved, it's also less likely a student or early experience pilot will have a "poor instructor/deficient lesson" problem. That would hold as long as the instructor was U$hPA certified.

The U$hPA has experienced liability problems connected with the airframed nature of HGs. Dust devils have lifted HGs and thrown them into a group of spectators, as one example. Another is an HG on approach into a spectator filled LZ (like a public ocean front beach site) and colliding with and injuring someone who never saw the glider coming. And HGs can also hang up on power lines. But, once more, this is less likely to happen with HGs. On the other hand, the HG's typically electrically conductive airframe has the potential to do more harm in such a case.

I doubt I've heard all the stories about the actual or potential liability issues generated by either wing but these may given a better perspective on the subject.

One last thought would be that all the U$hPA needs in one BIG liability claim connected to either wing and the liability "balance" can shift.

[SamKellner]

Using the company's online form, I placed a request:

What opportunity might you express for we who want to obtain recreational hang gliding third-party insurance apart from USHPA. We recognize that we do not want to be associated or actuarily connected with canopy soaring parachutes (paragliders). Our airframed hang gliding sector will one day be fully separate from the USHPA which has become dominate by the soaring parachutes (paragliders). The soaring parachute culture and fatality record and collapse of integrity as aircraft are some of the reasons while the USHPA can no longer be home to the airframed hang glider sector.

Way to go #5 .... Lay some "FaustSpeak" on 'um. Gotta start somewhere.

[wingspan33]

A full page ad in "Hang Gliding & Paragliding" magazine should do it.

GREAT Idea! The U$hPA becomes blind when someone offers them money for an advertisement.