Tad, I have no problem with the lift and tug in any conditions where the pilot BELIEVES (since you don't like "feels")...
Oh, don't trouble yourself too much with the distinction. In this situation they both suck. A REAL pilot wouldn't BELIEVE or FEEL - he would KNOW.
...it is safe to do so.
And since in the three and a half decades or so that the smart people in this sport have been following this procedure for EVERY foot launch we still have ZERO ACTUAL reports or evidence of it being the least bit dangerous, a REAL pilot will KNOW it's ALWAYS safe to do so.
What you don't seem to be understanding is there can be situations where a pilot feels (oops ... believes) that it isn't safe to stand at launch lifting the glider to tighten the hang straps.
Yeah. But you can't actually cite any.
That should be the PILOT'S call ... not yours ... and not ours.
So what's a "pilot"? Anybody connected to a hang glider suspension strap or dangling from a basetube? Does he hafta meet any standards or exhibit any competencies? If so, who defines the standards and competencies?
A couple of summers ago John Seward - who hadn't been taught to fly - didn't get his glider back under control until he was pointed back at the Packsaddle launch. At that point the proper - and counterintuitive - procedure would've been to stuff the bar, accelerate back towards the slope, and snap it back away a little bit before arrival. But in that situation he FELT/BELIEVED that slowing the glider down and reducing his closing/ground speed was the safest strategy and so made that CALL.
And guess what happened.
Launching anything always involves an element of risk - even under ideal conditions.
OK, then maybe I can count you as being on board with the viewpoint that using a weak link that blows every other tow doubles the risk involved in getting to altitude.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTa6XL16i0UOops. Forgot the landings. You OK with saying that it quadruples it?
And less than ideal conditions tend to increase that risk. Fortunately, there are decisions a pilot can make to decrease that risk as well. If a pilot is absolutely (within the practical meaning of that word) sure that they are hooked in...
Like the way everybody who's ever launched unhooked has been? Yes, do continue.
...but they feel (oops, BELIEVE) they are on the very edge of their ability to handle the wind with no ground crew available, then standing at launch and lifting the glider is NOT a good trade off.
1. Because, with no supporting evidence, that's what YOU *BELIEVE*. And NOTHING will EVER change that belief.
Paul Hurless - 2011/10/16
Having your hang strap taut will help you avoid that kind of problem. When it's loose you don't have that direct connection to the glider, which limits the control you'll have over it.
Brandon Russell - 2011/10/16
Come to think of it, I usually make a conscious effort to pick the glider up high enough to tighten my hang strap. I didn't do that here.
2. While meanwhile, back in the REAL world, it seems the PRECISE OPPOSITE is true.
3. I've got news for ya. If he's in marginal wind conditions HE won't be lifting the glider. He'll either be letting it do what it wants to or fighting to hold it DOWN.
The pilot has the right, no, the responsibility to make those tradeoffs.
Definitely. He should always go with HIS beliefs and HIS feelings and ASSUME that something's a TRADEOFF - even if it's actually a win/win.
I know you're going to quote me this regulation again, so I'll do it myself:
>
With each flight, demonstrates a method of establishing that the pilot is hooked in just prior to launch.
<
That's fine, and I endorse it within common sense constraints.
So when you were on the USHGA Board of Directors how come you didn't move to put common sense restraints on the regulation THEN? Think of all the lives you coulda saved.
OK, let's modify it...
With each flight, demonstrates a method of establishing that the pilot is hooked in just prior to launch within what the individual determines are common sense constraints based upon his beliefs, feelings, and/or monotheistic religious affiliation.
(Does "common sense" include determining that an actual problem exists before you start dismantling a solid safety system to solve it?)
But the there's nothing in that regulation that says the "method" can't be that the pilot explicitly remembers that they are hooked in...
George Whitehill - 1981/05
The point I'm trying to make is that every pilot should make a second check to be very certain of this integral part of every flight. In many flying situations a hang check is performed and then is followed by a time interval prior to actual launch. In this time interval the pilot may unconsciously unhook to adjust or check something and then forget to hook in again. This has happened many times!
If, just before committing to a launch, a second check is done every time and this is made a habit, this tragic mistake could be eliminated. Habit is the key word here. This practice must be subconscious on the part of the pilot. As we know, there are many things on the pilot's mind before launch. Especially in a competition or if conditions are radical the flyer may be thinking about so many other things that something as simple as remembering to hook in is forgotten. Relying on memory won't work as well as a deeply ingrained subconscious habit.
In the new USHGA rating system, for each flight of each task "the pilot must demonstrate a method of establishing that he/she is hooked in, just prior to launch." The purpose here is obvious.
But they didn't SAY in the regulation that you couldn't just rely on your infallible and distraction proof memory and go fifteen minutes from an ACTUAL check - so let's really sock it the ol' nanny state and royally gut this thing.
...and that they can demonstrate it by saying "I know I am hooked in because I did a hang check and a hook-in check and my hands have been on the down tubes ever since".
Yeah, sure.
With each flight, demonstrates a method of establishing that the pilot is hooked in just prior to launch or distinctly remembers doing a hang and hook-in check and has kept his hands on the downtubes ever since.
Now I'm not saying that's the best "method", but at some point we must rely on some degree of MEMORY or pilots shouldn't be flying. I've flown airplanes which are regulated by your often-referenced FAA. The FAA regulations implicitly accept the notion that a pilot can REMEMBER what they've done and what they haven't done in preparing for a flight. When you're sitting on the runway with the yoke in one hand and the throttle in the other, you must be REMEMBERING that you've checked the fuel for water because you remember that you went through the check list. You don't have to perform that check (and dozens of other checks) AS YOU ARE TAKING OFF. You know that you've performed all of those checks based on your memory so you can keep your hands on the yoke and throttle ... rather than on the carb heat and fuel selector valve!!
bobk - 2011/10/25
If you can convince him that he should be teaching "lift and tug" instead of "turn and check", then you'll get my vote of support.
1. Kinda like when you're on the ramp you don't need to and shouldn't be repeatedly turning and checking to see that the carabiner is fully, rather than partially, engaging the hang strap - 'cause you took care of that as part of your PREFLIGHT procedure BEHIND the ramp?
2. Can you think of any circumstances between the tie-down area where the pilot performed his preflight checks and the downwind end of the runway which would cause him to get out of his plane and add water to his fuel tanks?
3. Can you think of any circumstances on a launch ramp that would give the pilot cause to unhook from his glider?
4. In the REAL world, which is faster and easier to perform - a lift and tug or check of the fuel for water?
5. Would you rather be in the cockpit of a Cessna with a sputtering engine or hanging from the basetube of a hang glider?
Now there's nothing wrong with lift and tug, and it's probably the best method out there ... when the pilot believes that it's safe to do so. But if the pilot believes (for whatever reason) that it's not a safe tradeoff, then we must allow the pilot to make that decision.
Yep, let's make sure we keep reality subservient to the Pilot's Sacred Beliefs and Feelings.
1. A loop of 130 pound Greenspot is the ONLY acceptable weak link / lockout preventer for ANY glider - regardless of its flying weight - and puts it at 1.0 Gs, the ideal rating.
2. A weak link blows at much lower tension if it's shock loaded than it does if the tension is gradually increased.
3. If you're having trouble penetrating away from the ridge turn somewhat parallel to it to present a reduced profile.
4. Backup suspension is installed on gliders to protect against primary suspension failure.
5. When you're surface towing in a crosswind crab the glider to stay straight behind the truck.
6. If you anchor your release at the carabiner you need to turn it around backwards so the gate won't be pulled open.
7. You are not hooked in until after the hang check.
If that means interpreting "just prior" as 15 seconds or 15 minutes (with a solid memory of nothing having intervened)...
bobk - 2011/10/26
We are human beings. That means we can make mistakes.
Yeah, great.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ls2QiDtSO7cLet's encourage people to rely on their solid memories.
...then that's how it must be interpreted in the context of that launch and in those conditions.
Yeah. Fifteen seconds, fifteen minutes... Whatever the pilot FEELS and BELIEVES. And whatever the Pilot FEELS and BELIEVES are dangerous, marginal conditions. "If I lift the glider just prior to launch I'll get an extra two seconds of ultraviolet radiation in my face and I might get skin cancer. So I'm gonna skip the hook-in check 'cause I JUST DID a hang check."
I will make one more comment here. We are human beings. That means we can make mistakes.
Which is why we need strict rules to follow when we go into deadly environments with which we're not very well evolved to cope.
But it also means that we have judgement. You (and our current "nanny state") tend to lean toward removing our judgement and replacing it with some set of "hard rules".
You mean like in REAL aviation?
What you'll find is that those "hard rules" can often be very brittle. I've spent most of my professional career trying to get computers to exhibit some of the more flexible characteristics of human thought using techniques known as "Neural Networks". Why? Because we've found that brittle logic (at which computers excel) often fails in the real world.
Not in this of the real world. Not hooked in - zero. Hooked in - one.
It's simply not robust under all of the conditions that we encounter in the real world. By your own admission ("Minus folk like Zack what physically can't do it ...") you have someone who's not physically capable (I don't know why) of doing a lift and tug.
Geometry of person/glider combo and straps adjustment. If hang gliding wanted to it could modify the equipment such that we wouldn't have to allow for exceptions. And I guarantee you that if you Zack and I did a body swap for an hour or two I'd find his needle and dental floss have a fix before the return flip.
So your brittle little absolute rule is already broken!!
1. Again - It was NEVER my brittle little absolute rule. It was NEVER my brittle little absolute rule as recently as:
Tad Eareckson - 2011/10/24
Some people are physically incapable of lifting and tugging in light or nonexistent air. But EVERYBODY can do SOMETHING to check connection status within five or ten seconds of launch.
See if you can get that to sink in this time.
2. Not for the people who can do it - whom I'm pretty sure represent the overwhelming majority.
3. And then we make allowances and compromises. Zack says to a nearby pilot or wuffo, "Unhooked", gets a response of "Hooked", and clears and goes.
So rather than try to make absolute rules and force everyone to obey them...
1. Like happens in the REST of the Pilot Proficiency System - particularly the spot landings...
2. Whenever we go flying there WILL BE absolute rules - which USHGA doesn't make - which everyone WILL BE forced to obey. And lots of these rules have penalties which make Texas look like Amsterdam.
...how about if you use your writing talent to put together a persuasive manual that convinces people of the best practices in hang gliding?
Bill Cummings - 2011/10/26
Very fine effort Tad.
1. So you've read my Aerotowing Guidelines? Just kidding.
Ridgerodent - 2011/08/31
Zack figured it out. Well done Zack! Enjoy your vacation.
Kinsley Sykes - 2011/08/31
Well actually he didn't. But if you don't want to listen to the folks that actually know what they are talking about, go ahead.
Feel free to go the the tow park that Tad runs...
2. Your typical hang glider pilot is a TOTAL MORON with a ten second attention span in whom no amount of explanation, reasoning, logic, or common sense will make the slightest dent. He will do WHATEVER his first day instructor tells him to or latch on to what all the EXPERTS are doing and there is is NOTHING you can do to change him afterwards.
If Steve Wendt tells him to do a hang check in the setup area to be positive he'll be hooked in a half hour later that's what he will do for the rest of his hang gliding career (which, if he's Bill Priday, may be extremely short).
If Pat Denevan tells him to lift and tug the last instant before committing to launch he will go through his entire career doing just that - blissfully ignorant of the danger to which he's exposing himself launching alone in marginal conditions.
You could build an on-line site featuring videos of people not hooking in.
And that would impress them so much more than going down to the Tennessee Tree Toppers Team Challenge and watching the first glider to launch reappear in front of the ramp without its pilot. Yeah, you can bet people started taking the "just prior" thing seriously after that one.
I think that would save far more lives than trying to force our organization into forming rules intended to replace good judgement.
1. I'm not trying to REPLACE good judgment. I'm trying to instill it. Committing to launch based upon your MEMORY of a procedure when the cost of final moment verification is something from a tiny bit above to well below zero and the penalty for lack of verification can be near certain death is ALWAYS poor judgement.
2. I can't FORCE "our" organization to do ANYTHING 'cause right now and for the foreseeable future "our" organization is you.
If you do a good job, then we might even ... make a rule ... requiring people to review the material and possibly even take a test as part of their rating. But our rules should NEVER remove a pilot's ability to exercise their own good judgement when THEIR LIFE is on the line.
So we're gonna pull people in with USHGA ratings and tell them, "Ya know that 'just prior to launch' requirement that everybody ignores all the time and violates the crap out of? Just keep ignoring it all the time and violating the crap out of it 'cause Bob thinks it might be dangerous. Exercise your own good judgment which, because you have a USHGA rating, we are confident is SUPERB. (And brush up on your spot landings 'cause we're gonna cut the allowances in half so you'll be able to safely park it in a tennis court if you push your luck in an XC competition.)"
I don't have time to respond to the rest of your post, but I have read it ... and you're getting half a warning for language.
Great! Next time do I get a quarter warning? And after that...
I suspect you know that the word "bull..." is not acceptable, but you either don't know what you're saying (one form of pathology) or you can't resist saying it anyway (another form of pathology).
bobk - 2011/10/26
You (and our current "nanny state") tend to lean toward removing our judgement and replacing it with some set of "hard rules".
OR... I just don't like being told what I can and can't say and being diagnosed as pathological by my nanny.
Either way, this is yet another fair warning, so there will be no sympathy for your complaining when you end up confined to the "Free Speech Zone".
You got a consensus on that, right? Everybody on US Hawks is in full agreement with you?
Home
