Sign in, say "hi", ... and be welcomed.

Re: Should we try a different way? Designwise....

Postby Rick Masters » Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:24 pm

Dayhead, your premise appears to me to be somewhat flawed.
This is a subject that I have been meditating on for quite some time now.

I hear and read about the alleged decline in participation in HG, and how PG is thriving.

Any un-biased observer should be able to see why wanna-be pilots find PG more attractive than HG. Standing around in the Andy Jackson Memorial International Airpark at a busy fly-in shows that a PG landing is a total non-event, while everyone stands up to watch HG's, piloted by "experts", come in to land. A good landing by a HG is greeted by cheers, an acknowledgement that landing one successfully is a demonstration not just of skill, but good luck as well.

        Image
                Chart by Rob McKenzie
Rick Masters
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 3260
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 5:11 am

Re: Should we try a different way? Designwise....

Postby Bill Cummings » Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:08 pm

The chart put together by Rob M. may not take into account aircraft that land out/short due to normal thermal turbulence.
Wouldn’t thermals be the filter, for some aircraft, lowering the crash statistics within the intended landing zones?

I once heard of a pilot landing in the middle of the lake and then swimming for shore. Just short of the shoreline the pilot tired and went under.
It was listed as a hang gliding accident and not a drowning accident.
This after swimming just short of half of a mile.
How many miles does one have to swim from a boat before it’s called a drowning accident? :wtf:
Bill Cummings
User avatar
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 3359
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:20 pm
Location: Las Cruces NM 88005 (Region 4)

Re: Should we try a different way? Designwise....

Postby Dayhead » Fri Oct 02, 2015 7:36 pm

Went out 4-wheeling and some hiking the other day. Standing on a windy ridge, contemplating (of course!) being able to launch (no problem) and land (a different story).

Watching the Ravens cutting it up on the slope, teasing us. For them, flying is a fun game, they laugh at everyone else. And I had what I think is called an epiphany, or however it's spelled.

CONTROL.

I grew up, aeronautically speaking, with hang gliding, starting in '76 with a Pliable Moose 18' standard. I was just a couple/few hours short of my private pilots license when I made my first real flight, in a hang glider.

As time went on I realized that I did not have what I considered to be adequate control of my hang glider. The Cessna 150 never left me with the feeling of inadequate control, but the HG did.

I went along with the game. No one else complained, so I rarely spoke up, not wanting to be thought of as a pussy, although those that know me well will testify that I am indeed a pussy. That being said....

I kept hanging on to the belief that the control issue would be resolved in the weight shift HG world. Anyone that ever flew a Wills Wing Raven felt justified in believing this.

But Hg has made two big mistakes. #1 is believing that weight shift control (for roll) is compatible with high performance.

#2 I'll leave open for right now, it's time for Bill Maher. Catch ya later.
Dayhead
User avatar
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 6:55 pm
Location: Crestline

Re: Should we try a different way? Designwise....

Postby Bob Kuczewski » Sat Oct 03, 2015 9:12 pm

Dayhead wrote:... Hg has made two big mistakes. #1 is believing that weight shift control (for roll) is compatible with high performance.

#2 I'll leave open for right now, it's time for Bill Maher. Catch ya later.


Hey Steve ... don't leave us sitting on the edge of our seats!!      What's #2?          ;)
Join a National Hang Gliding Organization: US Hawks at ushawks.org
View my rating at: US Hang Gliding Rating System
Every human at every point in history has an opportunity to choose courage over cowardice. Look around and you will find that opportunity in your own time.
Bob Kuczewski
User avatar
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 8374
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Should we try a different way? Designwise....

Postby Rick Masters » Sun Oct 04, 2015 10:36 am

I once heard of a pilot landing in the middle of the lake and then swimming for shore. Just short of the shoreline the pilot tired and went under.
It was listed as a hang gliding accident and not a drowning accident.
This after swimming just short of half of a mile.
How many miles does one have to swim from a boat before it’s called a drowning accident?

If you fly into high power lines and get electrocuted, is it a flying accident? Why? Gliders don't have electricity...
If you fly into rocks and get busted up, is it a flying accident? Why. Gliders don't have rocks...
If you crash on a highway and get run over by a truck, is it a flying accident? Why? Gliders don't have trucks...
If you crash on a mountain and break your leg, then fall off a cliff dragging yourself down, is it a flying accident? Why? You weren't even near your glider...
If you land in a tree and fall out trying to climb down, is it a flying accident? Why? You had already unhooked from your glider...
If you launch unhooked or slip from your harness and fall to your death, is it a flying accident? Why? The glider is still flying...
The answer to all of these is yes because the accident was a result of you flying and wouldn't have happened if you had not chosen to fly.

If you land safely and unhook from your glider, then are murdered by a thief for your vario, is it a flying accident?
If you land safely, unhook, then drop dead from a heart attack, is it a flying accident?
If you pack up your glider, put it on your car, then crash your car on the drive home, it it a flying accident?
If you choke on pizza and beer at your local pub after a great day of flying, is it a flying accident?
The answer to all of these is no.

But what if you have a heart attack while you are flying and the glider lands in bushes. You don't have a scratch but you are dead. Is this a flying accident?
Yes and no. It can be argued both ways. I would choose to say yes, because you died flying.

And then there is V96.15...
Rick Masters
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 3260
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 5:11 am

Re: Should we try a different way? Designwise....

Postby Bob Kuczewski » Sun Oct 04, 2015 11:41 am

RickMasters wrote:But what if you have a heart attack while you are flying and the glider lands in bushes. You don't have a scratch but you are dead. Is this a flying accident?
Yes and no. It can be argued both ways. I would choose to say yes, because you died flying.


I guess it depends on the question one is trying to answer. If asking about consequences of human decisions, and presuming that the heart attack was destined to happen anyway (clogged coronary arteries), then it's probably not a "hang gliding accident" (even though I'd probably find myself using that phrase in casual conversation anyway).

Ending up in the middle of a lake, on the other hand, probably wouldn't have happened without the decision to fly over it without power. But the question being asked there isn't so much about hang gliding as it is about decision making.

But that's all getting a bit off topic. I think Steve's original question of "Should we try a different way?" is a great topic worthy of more creative thought.

Thanks Steve!!      :thumbup:
Join a National Hang Gliding Organization: US Hawks at ushawks.org
View my rating at: US Hang Gliding Rating System
Every human at every point in history has an opportunity to choose courage over cowardice. Look around and you will find that opportunity in your own time.
Bob Kuczewski
User avatar
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 8374
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Should we try a different way? Designwise....

Postby Frank Colver » Sun Oct 04, 2015 8:47 pm

Back to other design ideas for hang gliding.

I had a very good conversation with the owner and brains behind Alpacka Raft when I was in Mancos CO, a couple of weeks ago. It was about inflatable parts for hang gliders. She had not thought about this subject before and was unaware of the Air Force's experiments with inflatable drones. She was interested in what i had to say and we had a good discussion on the subject. I talked about the need for individual designer/experimenters who don't have a facility, like her manufacturing plant, to make prototypes of their ideas. She was very understanding and sympathetic to that.

I told her about the attraction to paragliders because of their portability and that there were individuals who were trying to design very compacable hang gliders to counteract that tendency. She also understood the dangers in an unframed flying parachute glider.

In summary: Alpacka is a very successful and busy company designing and manufacturing various packraft designs. They have done some custom work for me but they don't like to do much of that sort of work because of the time involved. She didn't reject outright making some inflatable HG parts that someone might come up with, but she didn't say she would either.

Interesting tidbit: She has already been looking at internally vertical baffled tubes like Joe F talked about and illustrated earlier in this thread. If she started making structures like that then it could be easier for us to get inflatable spars or leading edges made with vertical internal web baffles.

We also talked about the problem of internal pressure increase with altitude gain and solar heating. On a river I don't have the first effect but I do have the second.

What I attempted was to open the door to source possibilities down the line. The quality of their products is beyond compare.

Frank Colver

BTW- I had my packraft weighed while I was there. It is 6 lbs, 12 oz. this boat is the biggest they have made and that's all it weighs :!: It's about 8 feet long and 4 feet wide. Also I left it inflated in my shop for over six months and it didn't lose any air.
Frank Colver
User avatar
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 1292
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 11:21 am

Re: Should we try a different way? Designwise....

Postby Rick Masters » Sun Oct 04, 2015 9:17 pm

Image
Put your inflatable hang glider on one of these inflatable vehicles and bounce up to your launch site.

Image
Helium-filled Bede Wing (1975?) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bede_Wing
"Has anyone seen my hang glider? It was here a minute ago..."


Image
Image
Image
Goodyear Inflatoplane (1955)
Rick Masters
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 3260
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 5:11 am

Re: Should we try a different way? Designwise....

Postby Rick Masters » Mon Oct 05, 2015 12:06 am

Rick Masters
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 3260
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 5:11 am

Re: Should we try a different way? Designwise....

Postby Frank Colver » Mon Oct 05, 2015 12:25 pm

Goodyear touts the lightness of their inflatable aircraft. Imagine how much lighter the inflatable aircraft could be today without any rubber needed to seal the fabric. Rubber is very heavy compared to a polyurethane coating.

I'm imagining that a 25 lb hang glider could be built using modern material like my packraft uses. It could pack up into a backpack and the rigid components like the control bar etc would need to be collapsible into short tubing sections like modern tent poles (shock corded). Since this would be rigid flying wing tip rudders (swept wing) or elevons or spoilers (straight wing) would have to be used for roll control.

The pressure changes with altitude and solar heating could be controlled by a small lithium battery powered pump similar to the pump method used on the engine in the Goodyear planes. I use a little light weight lithium powered pump to fill my packraft when I hike to a river. I could fill it a number of times on one battery charge.

Frank
Frank Colver
User avatar
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 1292
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 11:21 am

PreviousNext
Forum Statistics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Chris McKeon and 21 guests

Options

Return to Hang Gliding General