[Bob Kuczewski]

The thugs that pass as "moderators" on paraglidingforum.com make up whatever rules they like. Here's the quote about banning Rick:

"He behaved badly for some time on the forum and then we banned him, as we have a handful of other people over time."

No specifics, just a vague "behaved badly". Where's the list of posts where we can see for ourselves if he "behaved badly"?

They did the same thing to me ... and I'm a P4 rated pilot.

[Rick Masters]

It's pretty obvious that they banned me because I refused to falsely recognize that paragliders were "airworthy," as Frank Colver puts it.
Only if paragliders are actually airworthy - or "safe' - can their arguments blaming accidents on pilot error hold water.
If paragliders are not safe, all their arguments and beliefs fall into question and disarray.
Clearly, they are true believers who haven't been killed yet. (That tends to change over time.)
To question their beliefs is the action of a heritic, who must be silenced.

Bob, didn't you bring up my argument as having some merit?
As a paraglider pilot, you should have known better.
After all, those who stray outside the herd must be culled by the wolves.
----------------------------
http://www.paraglidingforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=40924
Bob Kuczewski
Joined: 18 Jan 2010
Posts: 51
Post karma: +106 / -123

Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2011 6:15 pm Post subject: RE: What is this site?
Quote: keithpenny wrote:
Got to admit, he's [Rick Masters] done a very good job of creating a list of worldwide accidents all in one place. The guy has a lot of spare time and has put it to good use.

I was surprised by the statistics posted on Rick's page.
[ https://web.archive.org/web/20110720065738/http://www.cometclones.com:80/ ]
I hadn't realized there were that many deaths each year in paragliding. Here's what he shows (year deaths):
[Note: These are the numbers that I was aware of way back in 2011. The numbers today are much, much higher. - RM]

2011 48 (to date)
2010 95
2009 113
2008 122
2007 88
2006 90
2005 66
2004 89
2003 69
2002 59

Just to be sure we're dealing with the facts, can anyone confirm or refute those statistics?

Thanks in advance.
----------------------

Bob Kuczewski
Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 9:32 pm Post subject: Counting the Losses
It might be debatable whether a counting of events can be considered a "statistic" or not, but I do think the word "count" would have been a better choice for my post. Thanks for that suggestion.

Also thanks for the reference to the 2010 USHPA report. I've included a graph from it below along with Rick's counts (note that Rick's counts use the scale on the right, while the original USHPA graphs use the scale on the left).
[PG forum concealed Bob's chart from the public.]

It seems that there's some disagreement here with Rick's counts, but I haven't seen anyone put forth their own actual counts or estimates of paragliding deaths worldwide. From what I can tell, Rick gathers his information from a variety of sources, and it's quite possible that his method is more likely to undercount than to overcount since he cannot know of unreported deaths. On the other hand, some of you have claimed that some of his cited deaths are more coincidental than actually related to paragliding. So those two error sources will tend to counteract each other.

The question remains ... does anyone have actual numbers to either support or disprove Rick's assertions?

By the way, I think Lars' comments are a good practical reaction to this topic. If nothing else, we can all try to be more careful with our margins when we fly. Thanks Lars!!
----------------
Those who follow this thread with their eyes open will notice things get stranger and stranger.
Note here as the future president of the USHPA pipes in:

Pmurdoch
Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Posts: 304
Post karma: +466 / -26
Location: jacksonville, Oregon
PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:48 am Post subject: Unfortunately... Login Reply with quote
Joe [Faust] appears to be a Rick Masters in training.

There are numbers for HG/PG fatalities in the US, but the hang gliders don't like them. In the past 4 years, 50% more HG pilots have died than PG pilots. This, in spite of lower overall HG hours.

The more interesting thing to me is the psychology of this weird obsession. Frequently older, outdated pilots. Why such an axe to grind? Why spend so much time at it? Their numbers are statistically irrelevant, and I suspect they know it. For example, what good is incident/injury and fatality data without a context? how many flights? how many pilots? What is their training?...
------------
These are the guys who destroyed hang gliding in the USA.

[Rick Masters]

Paragliding -- When three's a crowd

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fjustincalva%2Fvideos%2F10213876012921926%2F&show_text=0&width=560

[Rick Masters]

Manned Rocketeering



Rocket Launch to Prove the Earth is Flat
Amboy Ghost Town
Saturday November 25
Not Open to Viewing Public Will be Available on Internet PPV

http://madmikehughes.com/
https://www.facebook.com/madmikehughes/


What if Mike goes over the edge? Then he's screwed!


Elon Musk, eat your heart out

[Rick Masters]

Flying over erupting volcanos in motorized hang gliders

[Rick Masters]

Manned rocketeering

Sad news about Mad Mike Hughes        

2015

The flat earth is hard!

2016
His motorhome wouldn't start in his driveway.
And BLM said "No way!"
Stay tuned for next week, he says.

[Frank Colver]

Here you go - two wingsuit jumpers landing in an airplane's open door. We need to get these guys into the USHPA as soon as possible & further expand the definition of "free flight" to include more lunacy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YL9sNrOlK-I

FC

[Rick Masters]

The birth of a new death sport.
"I was this far from being chunky salsa!" says man, realizing his life's dream.
Now they can start making wingsuits without parachutes.
Hardcore, baby! Go USHPA. 3PL for these guys!

A new Olympic sport?

I can't wait for the no-parachute wingsuit ski jump landing.
"No parachute really makes you concentrate," says first contestant.

[Frank Colver]

I thought you would like that video, Rick.

A new betting game would be to have them repeat it several times and bet on how many before one or both get killed. A side bet could be if one of them ends up in the prop (more salsa). An additional betting subject would be the plane hitting the mountain in the dive.

Wow! So many wagering possibilities here!

FC

[Rick Masters]

Frank, yes, wingsuit BASE-jumping is the most dangerous form of parachuting but when I poke fun at these guys it is with substantial respect for the great deal of technical research and tremendous skill that goes into proximity flying.
BASE-jumping is all about eliminating unknowns.
These guys are on the cutting edge of life or death and the level of risk often comes down to the diligence of their homework and skill.
The wingsuit will fly if your jump is good.
You will not descend into terrain if your glide is calculated correctly.
You will not collide with obstacles if your skill is adequate.
Your one parachute will probably open if you packed it correctly.

In comparison with paragliding, there are actually some positives in favor of wingsuit BASE-jumping.
You are never subject to a collapse of your wingsuit at takeoff.
You are never subject to a collapse of your wingsuit in flight.
Over the LZ, you are not likely to experience a collapse of your robust skydiving parachute.

That said, wingsuit BASE-jumpers often fly within the zone of no recourse - too low an altitude to deploy.
When things go bad - often due to unexpected turbulence or sink - this gets a lot of them.
Hence the gamble.

I think of wingsuit BASE-jumpers as control freaks.
Everything they do is a real-world test conducted under absolute self-control.
This was born in the military mindset toward equipment and flowchart-style reaction in emergencies developed in and following WWII.
It was carried over to recreational skydiving and then transferred again to BASE, where everything must be prepared perfectly because there will probably not be time to correct any problem that develops.
This is far and away from what goes on with paragliding and explains why many BASE-jumpers will not fly paragliders.
Just like hang glider pilots, they regard a parachutes as something that will save your life and get you to the ground safely.
It doesn't attempt to do other things poorly, it does this one thing excellently.

So when you talk about gambling, it is appalling to notice that:
Every paraglider blithely accepts the gamble that turbulence will not strike during take off and close his parachute.
Every paraglider blithely accepts the gamble that turbulence will not strike during low flight and close his parachute as he searches for lift.
Every paraglider blithely accepts the gamble that turbulence will not strike during landing approach and close his parachute as he descends below effective reserve deployment altitude.
In contrast to the technical perfection approach of the BASE-jumper, the paraglider relies on nothing but wishful thinking and herd behavior.
The wingsuit BASE-jumper's risk is specific and can be recognized and minimized at each step.
The paraglider's risk is random.
To me, that you can die in a random encounter with turbulence is much more terrifying than BASE-jumping.

In my world, there is no room for random death in extreme sports.
If one goes to the extreme, one proceeds competently and diligently, with all cylinders firing.
That is the attitude in skydiving, BASE and wingsuit proximity flying.
It was my attitude during my career of hang gliding, as well.
It doesn't always work, but at least you usually know when you go in that you screwed up.

But paragliding takes gambling in aerial sports to a whole new level.
You don't need to screw up to die.
Instead, you get killed by a perfectly normal component of the atmosphere.
Turbulence.
Only a few of us - especially hang glider pilots - understand why.