The US Hawks should:

[TadEareckson]

Lessee...

My C was "None of the above."

Your C is "Competency."

I think we're converging and actually making progress on this issue. C is only one vote behind "B - Do whatever the hell you feel like." And that one may have been cast by a spammer and get thrown out as invalid. I may be seeing a faint glimmer of hope.

P.S. Zack, how soon do you want to get your replacement bridle?

[Bob Kuczewski]

This is a push poll designed so that that's the only possible vote you can take - GIVEN THE TWO AVAILABLE OPTIONS - so Bob can get the outcome he's looking for - "Do whatever the hell you feel like."

You get a competent organization to train competent instructors who then go on to train competent pilots, you stop having dead folks. There is no good reason to crash a hang glider and even less reason to jump off a cliff without one.

I vote C, Competency.

I'm not against other options, and I can start another poll if you guys want to contribute clear and concise statements regarding your preferred method(s). But if you're going to use a phrase like "just prior" or "Competency" then we're going to need objective definitions of what they mean. Tad has suggested that people not in compliance should lose their ratings, but we can't enforce that if the definition of "just prior" is judged on a cosmic scale - where dinosaurs were "just prior" to the ice age.

So if anyone wants to take a crack at a better regulation, please be my guest. When we've got all the proposals (maybe tomorrow?), I'll lock this topic and start another one.

Fair enough?

[Bill Cummings]

I still fly with a relic spaghetti harness since I crashed once trying to fool with getting into a foot stirrup on an older harness.


1. Install a bungee loop from the (call it) right end of the stirrup to the middle.

2. Pull the stirrup and loop up over your right calf.

3. When you're airborne kick your left heel into the left half of the stirrup and push it off your right leg.

4. Nobody ever died because he didn't or couldn't kick into a stirrup of boot. (And two or three people HAVE died 'cause they were trying when they should've been flying.)

I agree! The bungee is what broke on this cold winter day of the crash!
___________

Any pod pilot with a zipper that says they never had trouble with their zipper either doesn't get out much or is a liar.


And any pod pilot who's still trapped at two hundred feet and hasn't resigned himself to a belly landing is an idiot. (A couple of people have died by valiantly struggling on as well. (See my 1996/04 letter to the editor.))

Agreed!

_____________
I've never drug my parachute out thinking it was my zipper cord.


Lotsa people haven't.
Agree! (I only saw one on Youtube.)
_____________
Requiring a tight hang strap starting run.


What if you just tightened it a couple of seconds BEFORE starting the run then dropped it back down to wherever the hell you felt like?
Agree!
______________
The next time you go flying get vertical, keep your body straight and see how close you can hold your shins to the base tube. (Good luck with that. Then tell me you have more control over pitch with a tight strap.)


1. On a launch ramp don't most people tend to be vertical anyway?
AGREE!

2. How much more limited by your shins is your bar stuffing ability when the wing is up all the way than when the control frame is down on your shoulders?
AWCL: WITH THE NOSE MAN ON THE RAMP TRYING TO BE NUTRAL ON THE WIRES, (SAY 25MPH) GETTING LIGHT ON MY FEET MAKES IT HARD ON THE ARMS TO HOLD IN ON THE DOWN TUBES WITH A TIGHT STRAP.
ON MY SHOULDERS IT IS EASIER TO OVER POWER THE SPROG AND LUFF LINE EFFECT.

3. How much bar stuffing ability do you need when you're standing on a launch ramp?
ENOUGH TO KEEP THE NOSE MAN NATURAL ALL THE WHILE I WAIT FOR HIM TO GET OUT OF THE WAY.

4. How much bar stuffing ability do you need when you're standing on a launch ramp doing a hook-in check a couple of seconds before commitment to launch?
I CAN TRUST THE NOSE MAN "LIFT AND TUG," IF I STILL HAVE CONTROL YELL CLEAR, AND LAUNCH.
______________
I do think that "lift and tug" where/when possible is a very good idea and should be done but I'm going to keep the down tubes on my shoulders where I have more control over pitch, roll and yawing around for the start of the run. (Loose strap.)


Fine. Is there a problem with doing a lift and tug JUST PRIOR TO LAUNCH - like it says in the existing USHGA SOPs?
WITH A NOSE MAN ---NO! AGREE!
_______________
JBBenson - 2009/01/25

I get what Tad is saying, but it took some translation:

HANG-CHECK is part of the preflight, to verify that all the harness lines etc. are straight.

HOOK-IN-CHECK is to verify connection to the glider five seconds before takeoff.

They are separate actions, neither interchangeable nor meant to replace one another. They are not two ways to do the same thing.


This issue isn't about what you do as part of your assembly and preflight procedures - it's about what you do at the beginning of your launch sequence to make sure you haven't done anything terminally stupid since your assembly and preflight procedures
AGREE!

PS nobody: I was just trying to follow directions ---If I had to choose between A or B.

[Bill Cummings]

So if anyone wants to take a crack at a better regulation, please be my guest. When we've got all the proposals (maybe tomorrow?), I'll lock this topic and start another one.

Fair enough?

Give it some more time.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Give it some more time.

Sure. We're not in any big hurry since US Hawks regulations currently carry no weight at any site in the known world.

On the other hand, I'd like to get something down so we can stop all this sniping and move on to other topics. Besides, whatever we decide can be easily reversed fairly by just taking another vote. So this doesn't have to be a Waterloo moment for anyone.

I look forward to seeing what everyone proposes ....

Bob Kuczewski

[TadEareckson]

...regarding your preferred method(s).

This isn't and can't be about anyone's "preferred method(s)". This has gotta be about what's logical, makes the most sense, has proven the most effective, and is backed up by whatever data we can get our hands on.

If you're feeling tension the chances that your carabiner is dangling behind your knees as you begin your launch run is ZERO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doe_sNB1wbg

If you did a hang check on the ramp the chances that your carabiner is dangling behind your knees as you begin your launch run is *NOT* ZERO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ls2QiDtSO7c

Anybody PREFER that that not be true?

But if you're going to use a phrase like "just prior"...

Everybody and his dog knows what "just prior" means. It's just that you've got a tiny minority of people who actually adhere to it and a huge majority of people who spend all their time coming up with reasons why it shouldn't or doesn't apply to THEM - or somebody else in some totally imaginary scenario.

...or "Competency"...

No problem.

Christian Williams - 2011/10/25

What's more, I believe that all hooked-in checks prior to the last one before takeoff are a waste of time, not to say dangerous, because they build a sense of security which should not be built more than one instant before commitment to flight.

Just do the math.

Tad has suggested that people not in compliance should lose their ratings...

Have them suspended. I don't want them to lose their ratings - unless they continually just flat out deliberately defy the regulation. But if hang gliding is supposed to be "self regulated" aviation like we're always boasting to everyone (when we're not busy finding more hiding places for the skeletons) regulations hafta mean SOMETHING and there need to be some consequences for violating them. Hand out warning tickets the first time or two.

...but we can't enforce that if the definition of "just prior"...

If you didn't check the traffic in both directions JUST PRIOR to (two seconds before) proceeding through the stop sign and intersection and you caused a wreck there's no question as to who bears the responsibility. How come sixteen year old kids seem to have no problem whatsoever with this concept while it's such a massive thirty year BFD for idiot glider jockeys?

"I'm really sorry officer. But my driving instructor didn't specify that the Carter administration wouldn't fall within an acceptable limit of the definition. I naturally assumed it would because we're only up to Van Buren in American history class."

So if anyone wants to take a crack at a better regulation...

If the kid can do it at the stop sign we can do it at launch position. If there are extenuating circumstances we can make provisions and/or allowances. But there bloody well better be extenuating circumstances. And they better be something north of "In my judgment if I had the dog would've eaten my homework."

Fair enough?

What Bill said.

I only saw one on Youtube.

Guess ya can't save everyone from himself.

AWCL: WITH THE NOSE MAN ON THE RAMP TRYING TO BE NUTRAL ON THE WIRES, (SAY 25MPH) GETTING LIGHT ON MY FEET MAKES IT HARD ON THE ARMS TO HOLD IN ON THE DOWN TUBES WITH A TIGHT STRAP.

1. I'm totally fanatical about my laziness in general and on the launch ramp in particular and have no consideration whatsoever for the miserable slobs on my wire crew. If I even suspect that something may be the least bit difficult for me to do something I'll pawn the assignment off on someone else in a New York minute.

2. If you - and/or your nose man - nose and float the glider up to the point at which you're feeling ten pounds of tension through your suspension, how much lighter on your feet will you be? Extra credit for calculating the reduction on each foot.

ENOUGH TO KEEP THE NOSE MAN NATURAL ALL THE WHILE I WAIT FOR HIM TO GET OUT OF THE WAY.

Have your shins ever been a limiting factor?

AGREE!

Sounds like we're pretty much on the same page with this.

I was just trying to follow directions...

Not always a good idea. I ended up overshooting a field on my third mountain flight because I just followed the directions of my idiot "instructor". And then there's the whole Nuremberg issue.

We're not in any big hurry since US Hawks regulations currently carry no weight at any site in the known world.

If we write solid regulations they can carry weight - whether they're legally enforceable or not. I've written stuff on the web that's carried weight and has had positive effects halfway around the world.

On the other hand, I'd like to get something down so we can stop all this sniping and move on to other topics.

1. Oh goodie!!!

Identity Protected USHGA Director - 2009

Perhaps a strongly worded letter from Tim will do the trick. We can't force Tad to work within the USHPA framework but we can make it unpleasant and expensive for him if he chooses to makes derogatory and false statements about USHPA to the FAA he can't back up.

Jack Axaopoulos - 2010/09/27

I worry every time I see my PM notification, and then after I read it, just more and MORE support from everyone thanking me for getting rid of these people.

This community rules and is 100X better without them. THANK YOU ALL for your support. I really appreciate the flood of positive PM's. I expected only the people with an issue to PM and flame me. What a surprise when 100% of the PM's were positive instead

Jason Dyer - 2010/04/03

Thanks Davis, it will be a better place without him.

Then we can have a nice friendly hang gliding community into which any parent would feel great about sending his sixteen year old daughter - just like in the REAL organizations.

2. Just writing the SOPs ain't gonna put much of a dent in the problem. USHGA's SOPs didn't stop a SINGLE instructor from teaching that a hang check in the setup area was a solid confirmation of hook-in status at launch and didn't get a SINGLE bent pin release out of the air. Don't expect failure to hook in deaths or flame wars to stop just because another set of regulations will be on the books for everybody to ignore.

Besides, whatever we decide can be easily reversed fairly by just taking another vote.

Oh goodie!!!

1. US Hawks aviation regulations will be determined by a popular vote of those registered members who have been deemed to be real people!

2. Does it say that somewhere in the US Hawks Operating Manual?

3. As Chairman of the US Hawks Safety and Training Committee I may have a few problems with that approach.

Besides, whatever we decide can be easily reversed fairly by just taking another vote.

Oh goodie!!! I get to spend a few thousand hours getting a few people with functional brains tuned into the right frequency then half a dozen Aussie Methodist nut jobs and/or Lookout and Manquin Hang One halfwits can wipe out the standards in fifteen minutes any time they feel like it and replace them with various techniques for the pilot to be able to assume he's hooked in on launch based upon what he remembers having done half an hour ago.

Just out of curiosity, Bob... Do your "opinions", input, decisions on aerotowing issues count the same as mine?

I look forward to seeing what everyone proposes ....

I propose that if you expect the sniping to stop you should wait a little while before you start holding your breath.

Nobody - 2011/11/05

You get a competent organization to train competent instructors who then go on to train competent pilots, you stop having dead folks. There is no good reason to crash a hang glider and even less reason to jump off a cliff without one.

I vote C, Competency.

You don't EVER get a competent aviation organization, competent instructors, and/or competent pilots out of a goddam idiot democracy. Let's start working on C - Competency - instead.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Tad, for a guy who has so much to say, you're surprisingly unable to come up with an actual measurable regulation. And yet you want people to listen to you?

You can blow all the hot air you want, but if you can't write down a meaningful and measurable regulation, then don't be surprised if people don't bother to read what you write.

You've been going on and on and on about this issue for a long time now, and I'm giving you the chance to write down what you think would be a proper regulation - without all the mush words like "just prior". It's time to put your cards on the table and tell us exactly what you propose.

Thanks.

[Bill Cummings]

I’m not going to wade through the entire 1030 plus pages of the Federal Aviation Regulations / Aeronautical Information Manual (FAR/AIM) to find the various departures and exceptions to the rules that pilots a allowed to make in the interest of safety in General Aviation since Part 103 is what we are concerned with while hang gliding.
Here is a GA sample:

14 CFR 91.3 - Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.
(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.

Several places in the FAR/AIM are rules that do cover us that I can no longer find that says in part:
No part of this section blaw, blaw, blaw, is intended to over ride the pilots judgment ----blaw, blaw, with regards to the safe blaw, blaw blaw and operation of the blaw blaw, pilot in command. (Paraphrasing, you understand.) It’s hidden in there somewhere. Right now my FAR/AIM is under the right wheel of the motor home to keep it level. It was a little too thick so I tore out some GA sections.
So go ahead and make some rules about launching hang strap tight or not I’ll wrap myself in the pilot in command safety section when they haul me off to court. (Gee I hope I didn’t tear out the appeals section.)

[ZackC]

Everybody and his dog knows what "just prior" means.

I disagree. Almost exactly one year ago HHPA debated this furiously.

I think the reason no one enforces USHPA's regulation is that it's too vague to be enforceable. How about we change 'just prior' to 'within ten seconds'? I doubt it will completely satisfy anyone here but I think even an effort to teach this if not enforce it will make a big dent in the number of hook in failures.

Zack

[SamKellner]

(Gee I hope I didn’t tear out the appeals section.)

That is funny, Bill. Right, pilot in command. No mandates needed.

For everyone who obsesses over being hooked in or not, get a flippin rear view mirror and attach it under the nose plate,
simple enough.