I've followed this debate/controversy/argument/trench war/food fight/contretemps/battle of the ideologies for years and have never made a post on this topic until now.
I think that most of this discussion misses the point. And Tad's rants simply represent a more extreme form of missing the point. All those who believe that they have a magic solution to the problem and that everyone else is wrong have missed the point. Those who think that one method of avoiding FTHI is better than another have also missed the point.
The real point IMO is that no method (including the lift-and-tug) is infallible. No method can completely prevent failure to hook in, or indeed any other form of pre-flight set-up error. When you life depends on it and your are doing something dangerous, and doing it repeatedly, 99.99 percent reliability is no good, only 100 percent will do. The problem is therefore in our nature as human beings. How can we perform at the 100 percent reliability level when carrying out a complex task such as preparing for gravity-defying flight? How can we be sure that we don't get distracted and forget a step? The last-gasp before take-off check, the LGBTOC, whether lift-and-tug, four C's, or whatever, is just another way of coping with this problem, but it is also subject to the same human fallibility. The very thing that we think with (the old gray lump) is a flaky instrument and can't be totally relied upon (some gray lumps are more flaky than others
). In other words, I think this whole topic is a human factors issue, not an issue of methodology although, obviously, methodology is not unimportant.
The LGBTOC is just another pre-flight check, and this includes the lift-and-tug, the four C's or whatever else you can come up with. All such checks depend on
having the discipline to actually do them. The lift-and-tug is no exception, contrary to what Tad would have you believe. I can image a scenario, admittedly a bit far-fetched, in which a pilot is about to take-off, does the lift-and-tug, gets distracted by something, unhooks to deal with that, then gets pressured to launch quickly for some reason (maybe his best mate has just crashed in the LZ and he needs to get down there fast). He then forgets to repeat the lift-and-tug, with the inevitable result. Tad would have you believe that something like this can't happen, that his method will always save the day. But in the end, human frailty can defeat just about any method or any plan.
The real problem, regardless of the actual pre-flight method that you use, is to
have the mental discipline to be rigorous in actually applying the method. If any part of the pre-flight ritual is interrupted, then the checks need to be repeated. Your LGBTOC needs to be done and not skipped, regardless of whether it's lift-and-tug, the four C's, the Aussie method, or even three resounding blasts on a Mukkinese Battle Horn (whatever floats your boat). They are all of no-use if you skip doing them or allow a distraction to compromise them. The only thing keeping you from a mistake is the degree to which you can apply this rigour. On this point, we need to be like someone with Howard-Hughes-level OCD: always make the checks, and if distracted, repeat the checks, and if distracted again, repeat them again. And for the older pilots with deteriorating memory (like me), the problem is even worse: "Did I actually just do step 8, or was it step 7, or am I only imagining that I just did step 8?".
The real point is that no method is infallible. Don't let Tad or anyone else convince you otherwise. It's all about having the discipline to follow
rigorously and without fail in any circumstance whatever method you personally have decided to use. It's your decision and you need to slavishly apply it in all circumstances, and apply it as if your very life depends on it.
Because it does.