[Bob Kuczewski]

That was his first appearance on this page. In fact, it was his first appearance in this entire topic.

Right on both counts. That little guy STILL looks tired to me.

He bugs you because you're particularly sensitive to being mocked or laughed at. So one appearance of that icon is magnified in your eyes. You imagine that everyone is laughing at you and that drives you over the edge.

bobk - 2011/10/27

The "s" word is not being used (in most cases) to convey the meaning of excrement. It's being used to be offensive. So if someone is using a word to be offensive, then why are they surprised when people are offended?

Isn't that EXACTLY what these little yellow icons and animations are meant to do? Offend people? I'd much rather have Peter calling me a fuckin' coward and an asswipe. Whole lot more up front and less irritating.

I don't believe there are any icons built in to this forum that would be banned on broadcast television. I also don't think any of them are particularly offensive. But your own hyper-sensitivity to being disrespected magnifies their power beyond being little smilies into something that drives you to "go to war" over them.

I almost sent you to the free speech zone for your use of the "f word", but after a second look, I can see that you may have been quoting Peter verbatim. I haven't checked all of Peter's posts to see if that's true, but I'll give it to you for now. However, I am warning you that any further use of banned words - whether quoted or not - will end up restricting you to the Free Speech Zone. If you need to quote someone else who has used foul language, you can use first letter notation (such as "f***ing coward and an a**wipe"). I think you're intelligent enough to make that translation.

I should also give fair notice to everyone else, that we should work to clean up our language in general on this forum. Tad has been the worst offender by far, and that's why I've come down on him. But let's all try to make this a site where parents won't be horrified to find their 16 year olds reading it. Fair enough?

When you pull your release and nothing happens , and you shitt your pants, then you will know how!

Now that I've been written off as beyond any hope of rehabilitation maybe you can dedicate some time to helping Sam regarding HIS pathological way of expressing things?

I have no worries about Sam at all. But I've already created a special "Free Speech" group for you Tad. So far it has zero members, and I really hope we can keep it that way. Your thoughts are welcomed on this forum, and your insight into many aspects of hang gliding are also welcomed. But your foul language and continued personal attacks undermine everything else that you bring to the table.

[TadEareckson]

He bugs you because you're particularly sensitive to being mocked or laughed at.

Such is the fate of a straight pin guy in a bent pin world.

So one appearance of that icon is magnified in your eyes. You imagine that everyone is laughing at you....

What's your data on that?

I know EXACTLY who's laughing at me and who isn't. And if I know a person's IQ I can pretty accurately predict the camp into which he's gonna fall.

...and that drives you over the edge.

I was driven over the edge decades ago and have absolutely no desire whatsoever to cross it again.

I don't believe there are any icons built in to this forum that would be banned on broadcast television.

1. And what does that have to do with the point I was making?

2. It's really SUPER that US Hawks is using broadcast television as a model for what it hopes to achieve. (And now a word from Viagra.)



3. William Todd Foster?

I also don't think any of them are particularly offensive.

Holly Korzilius - 2005/10/01

I don't have many details at this point, but I just got a call from Scott. Bill Priday launched from Whitwell without hooking in. Scott indicated there was about a 100 foot drop off from launch.

| | | | | | | |

When I saw that dust devil start tracking across the LZ when you were on final I thought, "Holy Shitt!!!" Good job keeping it together! Glad you're OK.

Context. Intent.

But your own hyper-sensitivity to being disrespected magnifies their power beyond being little smilies into something that drives you to "go to war" over them.

I - for the most part - am my numbers. My numbers are Sir Isaac's numbers. You disrespect me, you disrespect Sir Isaac. You disrespect Sir Isaac you get my nephew killed. Consider the disrespect a declaration of war and don't be too surprised at whatever happens next.

If you need to quote someone else who has used foul language, you can use first letter notation (such as "f***ing coward and an a**wipe").

Bob Kuczewski

US Hawks National Hang Gliding A**ociation

Can't be too careful nowadays.

Lauren Tjaden - 2005/01/21

Jim hung onto the plane and I hung onto Griffin's basetube, but at 400 feet my pussy-##s weak link broke.

1. If it's a double profanity involving two items of unacceptable anatomy do we hafta obscure BOTH words? Like "p##sy-##s"?

2. But maybe she meant a cat for the first part part so "pussy-##s" is OK.

3. Or maybe she actually meant unacceptable anatomy for the first part and a donkey for the second and it should have been "p##sy-ass".

4. Or maybe she meant a cat and a donkey and "pussy-ass" would've been just fine - but she was being overly paranoid.

Lauren Tjaden - 2008/03/23

When Jim got me locked out to the right, I couldn't keep the pitch of the glider with one hand for more than a second (the pressure was a zillion pounds, more or less), but the F'ing release slid around when I tried to hit it. The barrel release wouldn't work because we had too much pressure on it.

Anyhow, the tandem can indeed perform big wingovers, as I demonstrated when I finally got separated from the tug.

5. And maybe if everybody got sane decent equipment and stopped using F'ing Wallaby and Bailey releases and pussy-##s weak links there'd be a lot fewer incentives to use and quote profanity in hang gliding discussions.

I should also give fair notice to everyone else, that we should work to clean up our language in general on this forum.

Wish we would work a fraction as hard to clean up our procedures and equipment.

Tad has been the worst offender by far...

Probably not anywhere close to Peter if you look at things percentage-wise. But Peter's WAY more of a threat to hang gliding when he's not responding to me than when he is.

But let's all try to make this a site where parents won't be horrified to find their 16 year olds reading it.

1. "My GOD!!! I couldn't IMAGINE where my sixteen-year-old learned LANGUAGE like that! Then I checked the history on the browser on his/her laptop. I had to dig through about eighty porn sites to get to the bottom of this matter but FINALLY - there it was - US Hawks. They should be hearing from the FAA VERY soon."

Daily Mail - 2011/10/30

This is the first picture of the 16-year-old girl who died after her hang glider plunged to the ground on a training flight.
Experienced pilot Lois Preston was taking part in the exercise at Ashbourne, Derbys, when her glider crashed on Friday afternoon.
She was rushed to hospital in Nottingham but died later from her injuries.
Before the flight Lois had tweeted: 'In a great mood!' She added the hashtag 'Couldn't be better'.

2. A parent of a sixteen-year-old checking out a hang gliding site who's worried about profanity has got some seriously warped priorities.

I have no worries about Sam at all.

Isn't that a bit double standardish?

But your foul language and continued personal attacks undermine everything else that you bring to the table.

1. Not everybody thinks so.

2. Personal attacks in hang gliding are not necessarily bad things in a form of aviation in which there has never been much faintly resembling enforcement or accountability.

[Bob Kuczewski]

A parent of a sixteen-year-old checking out a hang gliding site who's worried about profanity has got some seriously warped priorities.

Tad, your statement contains an implied false dichotomy. It is possible to for a parent to be concerned about both the safety of exposing their child to hang gliding and the wisdom of exposing their child to hang glider pilots who speak as you do.

You seem to imply that doing one precludes the other, and that's a false dichotomy because there's a third choice of doing both.

As a guy who boasts about adding 2 plus 2 and always getting 4, you fall woefully short on basic logic skills.

[TadEareckson]

OF COURSE it's POSSIBLE for a parent to be concerned about BOTH the safety of exposing his child to hang gliding AND the wisdom of exposing his child to hang glider pilots who speak as I do.

That's the basic malfunction*- severe Perspective Deficit Disorder - that gives us "pilots" who wouldn't DREAM of flying without backup suspension but have no problem whatsoever putting a glider without wheels on a launch cart and using a weak link they KNOW has a very high probability of blowing the moment they get airborne.

And if he thinks for a nanosecond that he won't be exposing his precious child to hang glider pilots who speak as I do he's got an extremely tenuous grip on reality. I've watched a lot of people come into LZs in dead air and light switchy conditions and I've never once heard anyone use an asterisk.

He's also almost certainly got an extremely tenuous grip on reality if he thinks Precious isn't speaking as I do the second the front door closes after he walks out through it with one of his friends - even if Precious and his friend are two thirds the age you cited.

And this is an EXTREMELY rotten sport for people with tenuous grips on reality and we're already flooded with people of that description participating in and controlling it. So if there's a genetic component to that malfunction*then maybe this ain't such a great pastime for Precious anyway.

bobk - 2011/10/27

I spent some time in the US Army, and we cussed like sailors.

Obviously you've since had professional treatment to cure - or at least manage - that pathology but if you had been participating in hang gliding at the time it might have been unwise for Precious to have been exposed to you?

As a guy who boasts about adding 2 plus 2 and always getting 4, you fall woefully short on basic logic skills.

Tad, your statement contains an IMPLIED false dichotomy.

You SEEM TO IMPLY...

I ain't IMPLYING NUTHIN' and there ain't NUTHIN' wrong with my basic logic skills.

Yes, I recognize that there are parents who are more concerned about Precious being around people who use four letter words than they are about people who will kill him but leave his soul untainted. It's just that I don't like those people any more than they like me and I don't want them around any more than I did when I was sixteen or twelve or eight. I get tired of society always having to cater to and gear for its least common denominators.

"I don't want there to be any chance of Precious being able to hear or see this on broadcast television so I'm not going to allow ANYONE hear or see it."

I'll tell you want I want for MY Precious (nephew)...

He already knew all the Carlin words when his age hit double digits so his soul is toast anyway and three or four eternities burning in Hell aren't much worse than one. So I'd be just fine with you and your army buddies on that score.

But I don't want him within a hundred miles of people like THIS:

Rick Masters - 2011/10/19

At that moment, I would banish all concern about launching unhooked. I had taken care of it. It was done. It was out of my mind.

- on launch anyway. That sets a dangerous example and contributes to a dangerous environment and group mindset at the ramp and I don't even want him to SEE that approach until after he's got about five years of doing it right under his belt.

I want him totally surrounded by people like THIS:

Rob Kells - 2005/12

Always lift the glider vertically and feel the tug on the leg straps when the harness mains go tight, just before you start your launch run.

Nobody - 2011/08/10

Bob, you're full of sh*t. Go learn how to launch with a tight hang strap!

Brian McMahon - 2011/10/24

Once, just prior to launch.

Christian Williams - 2011/10/25

I agree with that statement.

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.

who comply with both the letter and intent of USHGA's most important and effective Pilot Proficiency Program regulation instead of inventing all kinds of idiot reasons why they shouldn't have to.

I want them all watching his suspension like freakin' hawks as he's getting set to go. And if it doesn't go tight between T minus two seconds and his foot moving I want one or more of them to hunt him down in the LZ, smack him around a little, and tell him to NEVER int*rcoursing launch an int*rcoursing glider unless the int*rcoursing straps are tight.

Cragin Shelton - 2005/09/17

You are not hooked in until after the hang check.

Peter Birren

These are Donnell Hewett's original 12 elements of a good tow system. They are as viable today as they were in the early 80's when he wrote them.

Towing Aloft - 1998/01

Weak links very clearly will provide protection from excessive angles of attack, high bank turns and the like for this form of towing.

Wallaby Ranch - 1998/02

If you fail to maintain the correct tow position (centered, with the wheels of the tug on the horizon), the weak link will break before you can get into too much trouble.

Jim Rooney - 2007/08/01

Whatever's going on back there, I can fix it by giving you the rope.

Jim Rooney - 2011/08/31

But you see... I'm the guy you've got to convince.

Those are some of the REAL obscenities in hang gliding that Precious's mom and dad SHOULD be worrying about. And until US Hawks snuffs with them and their purveyors with whatever measure of brutality it takes it has absolutely no business whatsoever trying to attract ANYBODY'S kid - age 12, 16, 36, or 66 - into this organization or sport.

P.S. Any comment on whether or not it's possible to use any of our innocent looking little smileys in astronomically offensive ways which would rightly turn ANYONE away from our organization so fast he'd need a neck brace for a couple of weeks?

P.P.S. There are asterisks after the two uses of the word "malfunction" in the text above. The software wouldn't allow me to post - or even preview - with the spaces in place. This has happened before. Something weird going on with some code.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Tad's Cessna 172 Checklist:

....
Check the engine oil.
Tighten dipstick to be sure it doesn't come out in flight.
....
Place one hand on flight controls and the other on the throttle.
Get out to recheck dipstick to be sure it doesn't come out in flight.
Place one hand on flight controls and the other on the throttle.
Get out to recheck dipstick to be sure it doesn't come out in flight.
....

Tad, in what you call "real aviation" pilots are able to rely on their memory when the situation demands it - even in life and death matters. A seized engine on takeoff is exactly as dangerous as a broken weak link on launch - they're both loss of power at a critical moment.

I don't know how to get this through other than to repeat that a "lift and tug" is fine as long as the pilot is certain that it can be done safely. If the pilot is not certain that it can be done safely, then a safer method of hook in checking should be allowed. The pilot has his life in his hands ... not yours. You can endorse "lift and tug" until your fingers bleed (and I might endorse those endorsements). But we should NOT be mandating that the pilot over-rule their own judgement of what they can and cannot perform in a tricky and dangerous launch situation. It's their call and not yours or mine.

As for profanity, your last posting was acceptable. Thanks.

[TadEareckson]

Tad's Cessna 172 Checklist...

Ya know what? I don't operate a glider that way. I operate a glider THIS:

Brian McMahon - 2011/10/24

Once, just prior to launch.

Christian Williams - 2011/10/25

I agree with that statement.

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.

way. I preflight my connection before getting to launch and verify it at the beginning of my launch sequence by tightening my suspension - if the wind's not already doing that for me. I don't turn around to make sure I properly engaged the strap. I did that already - and REMEMBER doing it.

If it crosses and I hafta stand down for fifteen seconds I tighten the suspension AGAIN just before I commit - without leaving the cockpit.

And nobody's ever had to recover my glider from down the ridge somewhere, pack up my gear, and call my family.

So screw that analogy.

And why aren't you calling it "Rob Kells' Cessna 172 Checklist"? We're pretty much joined at the hip on this issue. Just funnier and easier to get away with using "Tad"?

Tad, in what you call "real aviation" pilots are able to rely on their memory...

You mean the way I load test my sidewires before moving out to the staging area and plopping my glider on a cart? Yes, do continue.

...when the situation demands it - even in life and death matters...

Yeah. When the situation DEMANDS it. And when it DOESN'T demand it you don't hafta RELY on it. And sometimes you can keep monitoring a situation at virtually no cost.

A seized engine on takeoff is exactly as dangerous as a broken weak link on launch...

1. So can I put you down as being in disagreement...

Jim Rooney - 2011/08/26

The "purpose" of a weaklink is to increase the safety of the towing operation. PERIOD.

...with God's Special Little Messenger?

2. Is it as dangerous as falling through the floor onto the runway a hundred feet below because a particular hidden pin that gets removed between every flight wasn't back in place this time?

3. Don't they have little gauges and flashing lights and warning buzzers on some of these planes so that you can monitor your lubrication system without getting out, checking the dipstick, and risking a screwup on the replacement every couple of minutes?

4. What's the cost of glancing down at a gauge an extra time just before you floor it?

5. Doesn't the danger presented by a seized engine tend to diminish with altitude?

6. What percentage of general aviation pilots have crashed or even had an engine seize because they screwed up on the dipstick routine? Personally know anyone who's been bashed up or killed that way?

I don't know how to get this through other than to repeat that a "lift and tug" is fine as long as the pilot is certain that it can be done safely.

Hang glider pilots are CERTAIN that a loop of 130 pound Greenspot on a bridle end is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTa6XL16i0U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JR_4jKLqrus

...to a safe aerotow launch and have been for at least twenty years - with virtually no sign whatsoever of moving towards some minimal level of sanity. We don't write the goddam procedures manual based upon what the goddam pilots are CERTAIN of. We make it reality based. And so far I have ZERO evidence of a lift and tug EVER contributing to an unsafe launch - and a helluva lot of dead pilots evidencing that the precise opposite is the case.

But we should NOT be mandating that the pilot over-rule their own judgement of what they can and cannot perform in a tricky and dangerous launch situation.

I'm still waiting to hear of ONE SINGLE *ACTUAL* incident.

It's their call and not yours or mine.

They don't get to make that call as USHGA "pilots" - they just violate the hell out of the regulation and are only ever held accountable by the rocks.

WE can shape the organization, define what "calls" are permissible for people to make as US Hawks rated pilots, and eliminate one helluva lot of lunatic "pilot" "judgment" - starting with "I know I'm hooked in because I distinctly remember doing a hang check at the back of the ramp ten minutes ago."

[Nobody]

Bob,

Do you find any discrepancy in this document?

[Bob Kuczewski]

3. Don't they have little gauges and flashing lights and warning buzzers on some of these planes so that you can monitor your lubrication system without getting out, checking the dipstick, and risking a screwup on the replacement every couple of minutes?

From my flying experience (mostly 70's and 80's) small planes have an oil pressure gauge and cylinder head temperature gauge. The pressure gauge will be fine as long as there's enough oil to keep from sucking air. The cylinder head temperature will also be fine as long as there is some oil lubricating the engine. The normal "run up" procedure might catch it ... or it might actually pump oil out the dip stick tube at a higher rate - bringing the failure closer to the actual take off (when power and RPMs are at their maximum).

4. What's the cost of glancing down at a gauge an extra time just before you floor it?

Pilots are taught to scan their instruments all the time, but the instruments won't say anything until the pressure is gone. The better chance of catching this problem is the hope that oil will either be seen seeping out of the engine compartment covers or that it splashes on something hot enough to make visible smoke.

But you're missing the point. The point is that in "real aviation" pilots are trusted to be able to make life and death checks before committing to flight ... and remember that they've made those checks while committing to flight. [sarcasm alert] Maybe you'd better stop worrying about the 5,000 or so hang glider pilots in this country and start beating down the doors of the FAA about all the "real" pilots (and passengers ) whose lives are at risk because they're committing aviation based on what they remember having done 10 minutes ago. [/sarcasm alert]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I think the lift and tug method is very good, and I strongly endorse it when the pilot judges the conditions to be safe enough to use it. But if the pilot - in their own judgement - determines that the procedure creates additional hazards that are greater than their uncertainty about their hook-in status, then the pilot should exercise their best judgement in using any alternative method of hook-in verification just prior to launch.

OK, we've beat this to death on this thread and many others. So I'd like to ask everyone who's participated to weigh in on a simple question:

The US Hawks should:

  A - Require ALL pilots to launch with a tight hang strap in ALL conditions.
  B - Recommend launching with a tight hang strap, but leave it to the pilot's decision whether it's safe to do so in any conditions.

I'd like to get an "A" or a "B" from everyone whose posted on these topics. You can list other choices, but please also list your choice between A and B (imagine they were the only choices and you had to make a decision).

Thanks.

P.S. I vote for "B".

=========================================================================

Update:
I've created a special poll topic to discuss the US Hawks Hook-In Verification policy. The poll is at:

    Building the US Hawks
        US Hawks Hook-In Verification Poll

Let's please continue these discussions in that topic so this one can focus on Aerotowing Guidelines as its name suggests. Thanks again.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Bob,

Do you find any discrepancy in this document?

I'm sorry, but I still haven't had time to read it. If we can settle the hook-in check requirement, I'm hoping I'll have a lot more time available for other things - like reading the document you've mentioned.

But thanks for reminding me.

[Nobody]

Terry,

Do you find any discrepancy in this document ?

http://energykitesystems.net/Lift/hgh/T ... elines.pdf