[Rick Masters]

It will be curious WHY he closed the topic.

Well, we could list the available possibilities and pick one. Here's a few.

1) The hang glider pilots on Oz Report are too stupid to discuss the topic with each other so their nanny spanked them.
2) The discussion drew heat from USHPA so Davis decided to shut up the hang glider pilots who don't "get it."
3) Various instructors got pissed at Davis for allowing the topic to continue so he shut it down to please them.
4) The Secret Society Corporation ordered Davis to shut it down.
5) The Secret Society Corporation ordered Davis to shut it down or he would be next.
5) Davis suddenly realized a nice chunk of his donations came from joyriding money.
6) All of the above.
7) None of the above.

[Bill Cummings]

I learned to fly hang gliders by means of boat towing January 7, 1978
On December 30, 1978 my friend and I taught ourselves to tow on the frozen lakes in Minnesota behind snow machines.
As time went on I learned all sorts of towing methods and am rated for Aero Tow, Static Tow, Platform Tow, and a bunch of other tows like Truck, three wheel atv, four wheel atv, People tow, anchored static high wind launch and kiting, Car tow and more that I’m having trouble remembering right now.
I have absolutely no problem speculating on the possible things that could have gone wrong at Jean Lake. Why -- because as a more than thirty seven year experienced tow pilot there isn’t much that has escaped my knowledge of the things that can go wrong with towed flight.
I can come up with all sorts of scenarios as to what happened at Jean Lake and when I’m done the cause will more than likely be covered but not by the USHPA final analysis because they are all about Risk Mitigation for the insurance company. Pilots are hopefully only no lower than second place.

[JoeF]

I can come up with all sorts of scenarios as to what happened at Jean Lake and when I’m done the cause will more than likely be covered but not by the USHPA final analysis because they are all about Risk Mitigation for the insurance company. Pilots are hopefully only no lower than second place.

The u$hPa report will be just one piece of the puzzle; every report on accidents by that org must be taken as a sub-whole piece of what may be the case; the distance from objectivity is significant enough to warrant the cautionary constraint. Enough spirited clauses have surfaced to erect a warning flag concerning that org's report texts; that org party has a built-in conflict of interest. Such does not mean that there will be no value in the accident reports when and if they surface from that org; one can bet that there will always be some value in the reports. But the urge is to stay open about matters on each case--open to alternative understandings of the incidents and their causes and their lessons. Shunting conversation and thinking on cases with the any presumptive air that the org has all or even the best of the answers will miss contact with what could be more value and opportunity of learning and correction.

Davis confirmed that he will open a "new" topic on the subject case when the "org" releases a "report." His shunting conversation in his forum on the case until such report may belie a philosophy or/and a perspective that disfavors open broader investigation of incidents; he has 100% control over his discussion space. Differently, the discussion continues in HangGliding.org forum and in the US Hawks forum. The scenarios discussion is prized by many; scratching for tools and perspectives may prepare pilots to scan for flows of action and materials that may be missed by a select few org investigators. I am aiming for the course that misses less of the actual. Interpretations will flow fuzzily in all cases of reporting and examination; but such is not to discourage efforts to sharpen an investigation; along the way in the broader effort much education and technical community may be bolstered.

[Bill Cummings]

A caution first about eyewitness testimony.
http://www.bing.com/search?q=how%20reliable%20is%20eyewitness%20testimony&qs=SC&sk=&pq=How%20relyable%20is%20eye&sp=1&sc=8-19&form=BDKTKA&pc=BDT3&shash=&BDParam=0000&mkt=en-US

[Rick Masters]

The other one.

Tandem HG fatality, – Mike Rusho, 33, pilot and Rusty Laminach, 22, passenger
September 3, 1985 Jean, Nevada, USA
Rusho had little experience in tandem flying.
Conditions were strong, reportedly 30 mph.
After several passes of the ridge, the hang glider turned into the hill and crashed, killing Rusho and his passenger.

[brianscharp]

Who has the video now?

[Bill Cummings]

As a child in the 1950’s I rode in cars that were not equipped stock with lap belts.
Even when my children were growing up in the 1970 they had no booster seats and usually stood on the front seat if we were driving in our small village of 3500 people at or under the 30 mph speed limit.

The first person I ever saw wearing a bicycle helmet in all of the, later to become, City of Hoyt Lakes Minnesota was a sneaky, suspicious, rubbernecked, greedy, little weasel faced man that the locals referred to as a “pack sacker.”
He was also our only local insurance agent.

Times have changed. I now have in my possession a meat thermometer (some where.) Only by the grace of God or an extremely long run of luck my family was never brought up on charges by, Child Protective Services, of Child Endangerment, Child Neglect, or Reckless Disregard.
I’m sure my two grand daughters will be fine under the care of our risk mitigating nanny state.
My desire to fly hang gliders was so great that I figured in the late 1970’s that this new sport had a very good chance of killing me but I had to do it.
My GI life insurance was even good for suicide if you held it for a couple of years and there wasn’t an exemption for being a pilot. I drew up a will in the early 1980’s and handed over the check book and other finance things to my wife until she knew how to get along without me. (She’s still with me. So it must be love.)
In Minnesota the legal age of consent for a young girl was 16. However if at 17 some man that was in a position of authority over her like a relative, employer and such, that man could still be charged with statutory rape.

The legal system has decided that for different decisions different ages will apply. Subject to change from time to time.
Like buying a car before age 21. Purchasing alcohol, signing an enforceable legal contract. Operating a boat without first taking a water safety course. Driving a farm tractor on the highway. There are all kinds of exceptions.

What would be a reasonable age for a child to take lessons on a tandem paraglider or a hang glider? Do non pilot parents really understand the risk of signing a release for their child to take a ride on either? How should we decide when it will be a lesson or a fun ride for a child?

One day we may look back and say what in the world was everyone thinking?

Just like some of us do now when we look back on booster seats, safety belts, and bicycle helmets.

[wingspan33]

I was told by a first hand source that the Las Vegas Metro Police have the video. That was about 10 days to two weeks ago. The LV Regional FAA Office is who should actually have it.

Who has the video now?

[wingspan33]

Bill,

Your post gives an interesting perspective. Time verses Awareness. Hawks and eagles are hit by trains and trucks because they don't have a sense that things can actually move that fast. They fly across a rail line or highway and don't see the speeding vehicle coming. Human beings have also created technologies which WE don't realize can hurt US - until we do.

Between the FAA and the u$hPa, updates NEED to be made. Prepubescent children can certainly learn, but can they appreciate the serious importance of learning a lesson where their life may be at risk if they don't completely "get it"?

I would say that caution should rule the day in the case of a young person who has not reached the age of 16,17, or even 18. In their case, neither they nor their parents should be allowed to sign an "assumption of risk" sports waiver. That means that young people would be excluded from the USHPA's FAA tandem exemption.

Let them live a bit of life before they are able to risk it on what should not be a "thrill ride" but instead, a very real "lesson" in basic aviation.

[Bill Cummings]

So first off can most of the viewers agree that photos of the the crash shown on the links here indicate that the tow line and line recovery parachute container are visible in the impact zone?
Would that be strong strong strong circumstantial evidence that the tow line was never released?

(An example of strong circumstantial evidence would be, with you looking out the window of your house before closing the blinds or curtains as you are preparing to go to bed and you see the green grass of your lawn.
In the morning the green grass can't be seen because one inch of snow is covering everything.
Although you never actually witnessed snow fall at any time --- there is very strong circumstantial evidence that it did in fact snow while you slept.)

So can we all agree that with the information available that no release ever happened during the flight or was the evidence likely rigged then photographed?
What is reasonable to assume?
Keep in mind that at this point there is no proof of fact.
I've looked back at past pages and I see where links have been taken down.
I wish now I had taken a snip-it picture. I wanted to link the picture that reveled the towline and recovery chute bag.