Post your videos as file attachments here. One video per topic please!

Moderators: sg, mods

User avatar
By stephmet
#225938
Pardon my ignorance, but who is Rick Masters? Is he credible?
User avatar
By franklingrx
#225941
sg wrote: Denial is a river in Egypt it seems.
One of my favorite quotes of all time:

"Man is not a rational animal; he is a rationalizing animal." Robert Heinlein
User avatar
By CHassan
#225958
Facts are facts, granted Rick pulls no punches and does add his own "flair" to it, but you can't argue the fact it happens, and happens a pretty fair amount.
User avatar
By SWIFTY
#225966
I've wondered for yrs why a hot shot personal injury lawyer hasn't "owned" every PG maker in the world. Look what happened to Pete Brock and UP. If there're so many PGs somebody's making enough $ to make it worth sueing them. If it's true that 30%+ of the accidents result from collapse (and I don't doubt it) there's a design fault and the makers know it. "Oh we forgot the frame" :roll: "We don't need no stinkin frame!"

If HGs hadn't of figured out full luft dives and the remedity for them HG would've been long gone by now. But it's ok for PGs to wad up because, " that's just the way it is."
User avatar
By jimrooney
#225969
SG... speaking of Mullers... you're aware that Chris piled himself into the earth on a HG right? I was there if you'd prefer a first hand report.

Ya'll can bang the old drums of ignorance if you like.
I'm happy to share some reality if anyone really cares.

Jim
User avatar
By HGXC
#225972
jimrooney wrote:SG... speaking of Mullers... you're aware that Chris piled himself into the earth on a HG right? I was there if you'd prefer a first hand report.

Ya'll can bang the old drums of ignorance if you like.
I'm happy to share some reality if anyone really cares.

Jim

What does PG deployments have to do with a pro HGing pilot crashing doing a stunt?

The only drums of ignorance I see is people choosing to fly a freakin glider that can't get any L/d performance and has a smaller envelop of flying condition for safety.

I don't think that has changed has it?

You usually argue more on point then this Jim.

BTW you and the flying community in NZ OK after the quake? Sorry for those who were affected. :thumbsup:

Dennis
User avatar
By mlbco
#225988
I guess people arguing against PG's feel that flex wings are more safe. I don't have accident statistics to argue this one way or the other, but flex wing hang gliders have design flaws also. Imagine how sailplane or general aviation aircraft pilot's view our equipment and safety record! I've listed a few below but if you compare an HG to a sailplane, there would be many more.

Some flex wing flaws:
1) Pilot is in the prone position for optimal operation. This results in the pilot's head/neck taking the brunt of the impact if he can't get upright before crashing. The pilot is minimally protected in any crash regardless of body orientation.
2) The aircraft has low control authority in certain flight regimes because it is weight shift controlled. Weight shift does not directly increase control authority with airspeed (like a sailplane's controls do) and if the VG is set tight there may be minimal roll control power.
3) The aircraft has non-recoverable unstable modes that can lead to structural failure (i.e. tumble or inversion and negative 'g' flight)
4) The aircraft has a higher stall speed than a paraglider and therefore the pilot is moving faster w.r.t the ground during launch and landing maneuvers, increasing the risk of injury if impact occurs during this phase of flight.
5) Most flex wings do not have inherently stable spiral or phugoid dynamics (i.e. can not safely fly hands-off for extended periods of time).


Steve
User avatar
By jimrooney
#225996
I don't have accident statistics to argue this one way or the other
No one does.
Cuz they're about the same... they're both dangerous as s---.

When I started HG, my instructor was very clear...
"Do this long enough, and either someone you know, or you, will die doing it".

So ya'll can sit back and try to make yourselves feel better, but it ain't gonna make a damn bit of difference.

I fly HG and PG for a living. I fly nearly every day. Most people I know fly as well. Everything from 737s to base jumpers. Microlights, ultralights, hellicopters, sailplanes, regular planes, HG, PG, skydivers, you name it. I live this s--- 24/7. And I'm here to tell ya... you're delusional.

But do continue trying to convince me that I should take your opinion about something you don't even fly over my first hand experience.

Yeah, you're the experts here.
Jim
User avatar
By whitemaw
#226001
mlbco wrote:This results in the pilot's head/neck taking the brunt of the impact if he can't get upright before crashing. The pilot is minimally protected in any crash regardless of body orientation.
Steve
may want to look at this thread:

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.ph ... eatt+brace
User avatar
By dave hopkins
#226017
jim rooney wrote:SG... speaking of Muller's... you're aware that Chris piled himself into the earth on a HG right? I was there if you'd prefer a first hand report.

Ya'll can bang the old drums of ignorance if you like.
I'm happy to share some reality if anyone really cares.

Jim
So are you saying Ricks claim of 750+ PG deaths in the last 10 yrs is not true. Is he just making this up?

If collapses are all pilot error then you instructors must be doing a really crappy job.

I know HG instructors could do a better job and there is a lot of dumb s--- that happens that is pilot error but a HG frame usually gets pilots over the hump of ignorance to the point they are like to survive.

I watched Chris come down under canopy after doing PG batics in lakeview in the 90s. He missed rt 395 and power lines by a few feet. Sad to see him find his limit.

Dave
User avatar
By Paul H
#226019
Wasn't that during the HG nats in 2000? If I recall correctly his canopy barely opened in time to keep him from splatting.

dave hopkins wrote:
I watched Chris come down under canopy after doing PG batics in lakeview in the 90s. He missed rt 395 and power lines by a few feet. Sad to see him find his limit.

Dave
User avatar
By jimrooney
#226023
SG, it's self-delusion that I refer to.
The "Those guys are nuts!" stuff that HG pilots spew to make them feel better about flying HG. OMGz, at least ours don't collapse!!!!
And such.

This crazy notion that collapses are pilot error :crazy:
And... that they're this dramatic and deadly event.

I think I've been on here a number of times trying to keep this stuff straight for people, but HG pilots seem bent on embracing misconceptions.

One of my big frustrations is that I can have discussions about this stuff, but then people that have absolutely no background try to argue with me about it. Talk about crazy.

So I'll throw out a few of the usual bits of info again...

I can fly with 1/3 of my wing. I am not exaggerating here. I demonstrate this on a regular basis.
Collapses are negative AOA. You are far more prone to collapses if you allow the wing to surge in front of you. Flying with speedbar also greatly increases your likelihood of experiencing a collapse.
But again, they are not the death-on-a-stick boogieman that HGers seem to think they are.

The trouble is what you do when you have one.
If you fly your glider straight, you're fine. With all but the largest collapses, this is very easily achieved.
If however, you lean into the collapse, then things get real bad real fast.

Again, I demonstrate (and teach) this stuff on a regular basis.
In fact, an exceptionally common "decent technique" in PG is nothing more than causing two symmetrical collapses. You've no doubt heard of "big ears"... that's what that is. For my demonstrations, I collapse far more than just the tips and both symmetrically and asymmetrically... and continue to fly quite happily along while doing so.

I think you might begin to see why I find most of what I hear from HG pilots to sound quite a bit like Chicken Little :ahh:

That's fine too... it's when people start arguing with me about it that it gets to me. In the back of my mind is this nagging "WHAT THE F DO YOU KNOW!!???".

Like I said, I'm happy to spread information and have discussions. I just can't stand arguments.

Jim
User avatar
By jimrooney
#226038
We've talked about this at length before.
But I guess we're due again.

HG stalls and spins into the ridge as a result of the pilot mushing around in bumpy air.
Cause of crash?
Pilot error.

PG does the SAME THING...
Cause of crash?
Collapse.

Can you see why I just don't give that stat that you love to quote as much weight as you do?

Some more examples...
HG "pops his nose" on takeoff.
Cause of crash?
Poped his nose of course.

PG does the same thing...
Cause of crash?
Collapse.

You've got a single box that you fit so many PG problems into and then tell me how it's the glider's fault. Bullshit.

I don't say I'm "the authority". I say I'm knowledgeable and you are not.
You are drawing conclusions about something you do not know.
I look at the same stuff and have a vastly different conclusion.

I'm more than happy to discuss why and how and whatnot, but I do dismiss people's assessments of my assessments. I live this. I'm quite happy with my opinions. I find few people that have the background necessary to actually argue with me do so. I only wind up in these discussions with people who lack that background.

Jim
User avatar
By jimrooney
#226039
Oh, and have a better look at what I actually said, which I stand by...
A collapse isn't the big deal.
Handling a collapse in the wrong way is.

Fly straight and no big deal.
Turn into it and very big deal.

Jim
User avatar
By jimrooney
#226043
No, you're not listening, you're arguing.

Collapses aren't the issue.
It's what you do with them that is.

Causes of collapses are AOA issues. Some of it's the air, some of it's the pilot. In the end, it doesn't matter. What matters is what you do when you get one. The difference in what happens next is drastically determined by your actions.

IF you respond correctly, yes, they're generally no big deal.
If you respond incorrectly, then they become a very big deal very quickly.

Responding correctly in most cases is a very easy thing. However, as we all know, people tend to jump into the deep end of flying all too soon. In the PG world, this translates into not yet knowing how to deal with collapses.

So where you see discontinuity... I see lack of understanding due to having an argumentative approach.
Jim
User avatar
By mlbco
#226061
I've only flown as a tandem passenger in PG's at a coastal site and otherwise have no direct PG piloting experience. When a friend wants to know what it's like to fly foot launch I recommend a tandem ride in a PG at the coast (smooth air) and I honestly think this is safer than a tandem HG ride at the same site. The PG is easier and safer to launch/land tandem (IMO) and less intimidating for the passenger (i.e. they "walk" into the air). I've had 10 friends of all ages, sizes, men and women, fly tandem in a PG at the coast and all had a great experience.

I went to a mountain site this summer when 25 PG pilots were flying in an XC clinic in fairly rowdy air. I was the only HG flying that day. I was very impressed at the distances the PG's covered and their ability to handle the rough conditions. I would never have guessed that PG's would be so good at XC in those conditions, but they can work small broken thermals better than HG's and they have more landing options than HG's so they often work the lift lower in nasty terrain. On this day I think there was one PG chute deployment (no injury) and many collapses in the rough air, all recoverable except the chute deployment incident. I spoke with some of the PG pilots and they seemed to indicate that chute deployments were fairly common in thermal conditions. I didn't like hearing this but they didn't seem to be concerned over it. After this day of flying I had a new respect for the performance and capabilities of paragliders. I had flown this same site with flex wings for years and most of us rarely flew as far as the PG's flew that day. None of this proves PG's are or aren't safer than HG's, but I mention this story to show that there is a lot to be learned from people who fly these wings.

As far as what I think is safer, all I can say is I fly a 3-axis rigid wing with a steel cage around me and a positive/negative harness system. The rest of you guys are all nuts. :)

Steve
By old newbie
#226063
Regarding hang gliding safety I usually ask a twin engine airplane pilot. For learning about paragliding safety I will usually ask a hang pilot that stopped flying twenty years ago. I find this to be the best method for learning how to fly safely and getting the best information.

As for Rick's number I have no idea how he arrives at the total. I have seen sky diving and base jumping accidents with bad reporting end up in Rick's list. I am sure some are counted twice since he seem to be getting things online from various sources. Yes there have been a lot of deaths and accidents and a lot of pilots doing a lot of flying.

What are the figures in the USA where we can verify them. A lot of hang glider fatalities the last few years but I know those are diffferent and have nothing to do with any design flaws since hang pilots accept those flaws therefore they don't exist. Uh just like paraglider pilots accept paragliders design flaws. Of course if paragliders could not collapse you could not safely fly suspended below the wing( well at least at the present level of development)

Saturday I will take two wings to the beach and fly. I know either one can be deadly and either one can be flown safely. The pilot is the biggest part of the safety equation.

Steve Forslund
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 9