Oz Report

Pre-Worlds 2004

Results (thanks to Dave Seib) at:

http://www.moyes.com.au/preworlds2004/

Attila says forget about getting dinner if he is on the task committee. With the winds 10-15 kph out of the north-northeast, we call a 150 mile (242 kilometer) task south-southwest to Victoria and the Bendigo gliding club. Everyone seems up for a long straight out task, so why not.

The last time we had a task like this and we made it to goal was at the previous preworlds when Mad Dog was the meet director and he wanted to average 100 mile tasks. The lift got me to 11,000' on that day under a beautiful cloud street, but today we are forecast to get to 7,000' and it will be blue.

Being on the task committee interferes with getting into the launch line but I weasel my way in and am off third. I'm thinking that maybe the earlier start clock is the go at 1:30 (first start clock) or 1:45. I'm rushing everything to get ready and actually input the task coordinates while I'm on the cart.

Grant pulls me into 900 fpm, but the other pilots around me in the start circle seem to have poor lift and nothing is really gelling yet. I launched at 1:15 and see a couple of pilots out by the start circle circumference at 1:30, but that seems like a thin crew to go with. With poor lift in the start circle after my first climb the pilots are bobbling up and down waiting for the next start time. A few more take the 1:45.

A group of pilots heads for the edge of the circle just before the 2 PM start time and they find a thermal that drift us outside the start circle, but not far enough that we can't get back and take the 2 PM start time. Another group of pilots including the fast guys will wait and go back for the 2:15.

I'm a bit low at the start, and with a radio that will not allow me to transmit, so I head south-southeast to get near the highway to Denniliquin, which parallels the course line. There are ten or fifteen pilots in our group so it looks like I might have company. Jonny Durand has gone off my himself further upwind to the east of the highway.

With pilots out in front from the earlier start times and those who were higher at the start gate there are good markers heading down the highway. We're getting to 5,500' AGL and moving along at a good clip leaving the lift whenever it gets a bit weaker.

I'm noticing that I can't easily adjust the Litespeed VG. It has been hard before, but now I have to shake the glider to get the VG off. I also have to pull the cord across my body with my left arm to get the VG to go to a little past half way. I'm wondering what the problem is as I decide to keep the VG on at about half way and try not to mess with it.

At 80 km from the start the highway does a bit of a jog to the south east and I head out on my own over the dirt roads to the southwest paralleling the course. Yesterday I left my buddies to my great regret. On that day I already had 15 minutes on them, and if I had just stayed with Lenny I would have either won the day or come in second. The difference is that on that day I was acting on pride thinking that these guys were too slow for the likes of me. Today, it just seems like the lift is good and I'm moving in the right direction.

I'm crossing the creek six kilometers west of Waganella, and just getting light lift as I glide south-southwest. It's not enough to turn in, but it's great just to be in lift while gliding. Makes me feel good about my decision to go off on my own. Jonny Durand is to my east also on his own. No fast guys to go with him.

As I glide in the lift I hit a strong core and climb to 7,000' in the best thermal of the day so far. After that invigorating climb I'll go on a 20 kilometer glide and start searching seriously for lift at 3,000' AGL. The Edwards River is up ahead and that means trees along the river. I know that I have to find lift before I cross the trees not because I won't be able to make it over the trees, but because I won't be able to concentrate on finding lift if I also have to think about crossing the trees low.

I am searching and searching finding small bits at 1,500' and heading toward some paddocks that extend further south before the tree line hoping to extend my search before coming to the trees. I circle low in broken loft always searching when I'm finally in the last paddock before the trees and I find lift at 700'. Without a working radio, I've got to make it to goal.

I saw some pilots behind me when I first climbed out to 7,000'. Now after my low save I see three of them to my west more on the course line. I come in under them and the lift is decent to almost 7,000'. I've been on the course for over two hours now and am averaging about 55 kph.

Up ahead I can see the trees that mark the Murray River and that is the line that we cross to get from New South Wales into Victoria. The trees are to our right, west, and in some place they must be 5 kilometers across or more. Further south they appear to be thinner, and that's where I'm heading.

I can hear Bo Hagewood and Kevin Carter on the radio 15 to 20 kilometers behind me. Kevin also started at 2, but Bo took the 2:15. Bo is near the fast guys who took the 2:15 clock. It looks like in spite of my low save I'm progressing along well enough.

As I approach the trees from the east, I can see a few other pilots who are also heading south near the tree line heading for the thin spot to get over them. I come in over a red plowed field and climb out to 7,000' again. Nick, from Switzerland, and another pilot will come in a few thousand feet under me and I get high a few kilometers before the trees.

There is a small gaggle a few thousand feet below me as I head out over the trees. It looks like the fast guys are about 10 kilometers behind and I'm high and on my own. I find a good thermal in the brown fields just on the other side of the river so at 75 kilometers out from goal at 5:15 and right on the course line it looks good for getting there.

A couple of pilots come in under me but too far below me as I climb in this thermal to 6,000', so I'm on my own again going to goal. It will remain that way.

I head off to the west a bit to get over some red plowed fields as I get low and have to search again at 1,500'. I see a few little wisps of dust devils over the field, which is a good reason to go to such a field that can display the lift, drive upwind to them and climb out.

I'll have to repeat that little maneuver one more time to stay up. Meanwhile to my east the fast guys will be finding better lift and catching me as I grovel low in search more over the red fields. Bo and Kevin will be flying together and with the fast guys.

It's a slow climb out 24 kilometers from goal to 5,000', but then it looks like I can go on final glide. It's after six o'clock and I'm looking at a 15 kph tail wind, with buoyant late day air over open fields. There is some sink heading for goal, but at 15:1 L/D required to make it, I can float along until I get close and then dive in.

The last two slow climbs cost me the chance to get in early. Jonny Durand flew the whole flight on his own and won the day. Gerolf landed early.

My average L/D over the flight was 17:1, so you know that the tail wind was a big help.

On landing at goal, I had Jonny look at the glider to see what was wrong with the VG. There was a rope that had jumped out of the pulley and was jammed between the pulley and the clamp holding the pulley.

When I was setting up net to Jonny in the morning at the tow paddock. I had mentioned to him how the Climax VG was much more user friendly, easier to pull, less rope. He stated that that was fine, but he had heard that Rohan had had a problem with the rope jumping from the pulley, so there were problems with the Climax VG, implying that there weren't with the Litespeed VG.

I guess God heard him and punished me by having my rope jump off the VG and then having Jonny find it. I spoke with Rohan at goal and he said that it did happen to him once on the Climax in Brazil and that it was on a prototype setup. Kraig and Jonny were very helpful and took that glider to be fixed. Again, I found something that no one had found before. I'm wonder now if this has been my problem with the VG being hard to pull (part of it being user unfriendly) all along.

Task 3:

Totals after three days:

Oliver Barthelmes «oliverbarthelmes» sends in this shot of a tow in the dust at Hay:

Discuss "The 15^th Annual Pre-Worlds 2004 - day five, task three" at the Oz Report forum   link»

cost|food|internet|picture|radio|Swift|tandem|tug|Worlds

The US National Hang Gliding Championships was a big deal for the fairly depressed town of Big Spring. We’re holding the meet at the former air force base, so there’s one source of local revenue and people that’s gone. The refinery laid off a lot of people also, so there isn’t much in town in the way of jobs.

The town really expressed their support for having the Nationals there, and they are hoping for the Worlds (flex or rigid/women’s/Swift). They want us to come back next year, of course.

They served us dinner at the airport office on the first night, let us use two hangars, and the air conditioned airport offices as well as the taxi way. We got free high speed wireless and wired internet access from a local ISP (and thanks to Tim Meaney the super scorekeeper and network analyst. The Super 8 motel manager provided a lot of rooms gratis so that David could put up a bunch of the tug pilots and keep the cost of the meet down.

The mayor came out and welcomed us to Big Spring and he and his wife had tandem flights. There were many radio ads and sponsorship from the local radio station. There were billboards, and media from all over Texas there. Pepsi brought out their Aquafina blimp on the last day. There were food vendors every day and more on Saturday. There was a flea market held at the airport on the last day.

They setup bleachers with shading for spectators (although they should have put it closer to the action). They brought ice cream on the day they wanted us to fill out a questionnaire.

People were encouraged to come out to the airport for tandem and ultralight flights. This provided extra income for tug pilots (and owners), and delighted the town.

Chris Cheney, the local jeweler who last year came out, decided that he really did want to hang glide, took lessons during the year, and this year was aerotowing in a Falcon, worked the launch every day. Many volunteers from the town chased the carts and got us all lined up. Chris got a three hour soaring flight on the last day.

The owners of the Texas RV Park, where a bunch of us stayed, organized the dinner. They’ve got three cabins available next year for about $5/person. Air conditioned.

We may be nobody in the big picture but to a small town down in the dumps, we are somebody.

Discuss "Big Spring – Keep Hope Alive" at the Oz Report forum   link»

antenna|cost|FAI|Flavio Tebaldi|Flytec 5030|waypoints

www.brauniger.com

Flavio Tebaldi <dclaveno@tin.it> writes:

The 2.13 WS version is now available!

Last week end I tested my new IQ Compeo with GH80 antenna and I can tell you that it's fantastic! During flight it received from 7 to 9 satellites with maximum signal level (instrument rotated longitudinally of about 60° in my direction)!

Now FAI route is easily configurable and the waypoints are alphabetically ordered.

From 2.14 version on the analog vario display will be similar to the IQ/Comp vario display.

Peter tells me that it is possible to upgrade one’s instrument to the new GH80 antenna. In case your instrument has a bad reception he'll change it for free, otherwise there will be a small cost.

Discuss "Brauniger IQ-Compeo/Flytec 5030 Upgrade" at the Oz Report forum   link»

CIVL|CompeGPS|competition|cost|Dennis Pagen|finance|GAP|insurance|Ivan Twose|NAA|sailplane|scoring|SeeYou|site|transportation|USHGA|Worlds

The actual statement was: “The USHGA, in fact, inhibits competitions in the US (as well as helps).”

I don’t think that Steve and I have any argument here. He mentions a number of ways that the USHGA inhibits competitions and then goes on to come up with even more ideas than I came up with how the USHGA could help to promote competition. I think we are just arguing about words.

Let’s look at it this way. The USHGA has a competition budget of about $12,000/year. It takes all this money and gives it to the NAA or to fund our CIVL representatives. No money goes to support any of the ideas that Steve proposes above. All of the money goes to support a system that allows the very top US pilots to fly in the Worlds or set World Records. None goes to benefit the 99.9% of the membership that might actually take part in a local, regional, or national competition.

Now if there weren’t any good ways to spend that money that would encourage more competitions, then, okay, let Dennis Pagen have his playground. And let us select few get our opportunities to fly in the Worlds and set World Records.

But think about it. The USHGA could fund a seminar where Tim Meaney could train people interested in being score keepers. It could pay Ivan Twose for a license for CompeGPS for all US competitions and specify the changes that are needed to get CompeGPS and Race to work well together.

The USHGA could finance the development (to be paid back from competitions) of a version of SeeYou (the program now used for almost all sailplane competitions) that would incorporate Race, GAP, and other hang gliding scoring systems.

As Steve says above it could finance the mentoring of potential meet directors, scorekeepers, meet organizers. It could send around a meet organizer consultant that would help potential meet organizers get started.

It could eliminate the sanction fee, the deposit (under certain guidelines), and the site insurance fee for meets. All these would reduce the costs to pilots for entering meets. It could encourage meet organizers, by providing a subsidy, to allow new competitors to come to a competition at a reduced fee.

I’ll bet the major inhibitors keeping pilots from attending competitions are the difficulty in getting the time off work to attend and the costs: cost of getting to and from the meet, cost of lodging during the meet, cost of retrieval, and entry fee. More regional meets would cut down on transportation costs. If the USHGA provided support to meet organizers so that they could coordinate getting lodging and retrieval support to competitors, that might encourage more to come to meets. Using virtual goals is one way to cut down the costs that impact the entry fee.

The USHGA might even do a survey among its members to find out if they want more competitions, and what it would take to make them more successful.

All these things are possible if all our competition money wasn’t going into one pocket.

Discuss "USHGA – the competition budget" at the Oz Report forum   link»

calendar|competition|cost|David "Dave" Glover|David Glover|Flytec Championships 2003|insurance|J.C. Brown|John Borton|magazine|NAA|Nick Kennedy|Ron Gleason|software|space|sport|Sport Class|Steve Kroop|USHGA

Steve Kroop <flytec@earthlink.net> writes:

As a meet organizer and a member of the USHGA BOD I would like to comment on the notion that USHGA inhibits competition. I agree that we are not getting our money’s worth with respect to the NAA, but I think that we are with respect to USHGA. While the USHGA may not be doing everything that it could, I do not believe that it inhibits competition. Maybe restrict in the interest of fairness would be a better characterization.

You are correct the USHGA doesn’t train meet directors, provide score keeping software, train scorekeepers and it doesn’t help with registration. As a meet Organizer I do not consider those USHGA responsibilities. I consider USHGA responsibilities to be to create a fair framework for us to operate within and then stay out of the way. To that end, I believe that the USHGA competition committee of the past several years to have done pretty well thanks to the help of John Borton, JC Brown, Ron Gleason (also thanks to Davis for his extensive work on the rulebook).

With respect to cost. It does not cost any member anything additional to enter competitions (e.g., sporting license). The only costs associated with a USHGA competition are sanction fees and event insurance (paid by the meet organizer).

Event insurance is relatively inexpensive and probably only available because of the USHGA. Imagine the look on your local insurance providers face if you were to say that you want coverage for a hang gliding competition where 100+ gliders will be towed into the air by 20 ultralights in 30 minutes and then the hang gliders will fly inches apart for an hour waiting to start the race. After the agents guffaw subsides, and assuming the agent hasn't given you the "bums rush', imagine what the cost of this policy would be. As a meet organizer I consider the coverage that USHGA offers us an awesome deal. I would say that this facilitates competitions not inhibit.

For a class A meet the sanction fees are $300. In the case of the Flytec Championship this represents approximately 0.5% of the total budget (at the upcoming Nationals it will probably be around 1%). In our case this comes to less than $3 per competitor. I don’t think many pilots would say skip the USHGA sanctioning and cut the price of the meet $3. The top pilots want the points that sanctioning brings and the rest of the pilots want the opportunity to fly with those top pilots. Additionally, the $300 sanction fee includes the USHGA publicizing the event on the USHGA website and in the magazine.

The administrative process is very minimal. I don’t think it took an hour to fill out the sanction paperwork and the application for insurance. The performance bond is not a big deal either. $1000 on an event with a $50,000 budget is not unduly burdensome. With the new rulebook, I believe that the bond may not be necessary for “proven” organizers and is not required for class B events.

Where I think the USHGA is "falling down" is in the area promoting new competitions and new competitors. The revitalization of the not yet utilized class B meet (championed by Nick Kennedy, Davis, David Glover, Ron Gleason, and myself) was a step in the right direction. Do I think the USHGA should sponsor or subsidize new competitors…no. Do I think USHGA should underwrite new competitions that cater to new competitors…absolutely.

There are a lot of things that the USHGA could do to help out new regional comps such as: free ad space in the magazine (in addition to the calendar), offer USHGA promotional items for prizes, subsidize a well attended meet director to mentor potential new meet directors, subsidize a top comp pilot to mentor the new competitors, promote a "sport class" ranking system and post scores on the website and in the magazine.

These scores should be listed by region to promote competition between regions. There should also be a Sport Class Nationals where each region can send its best to compete for Sport Class National Champion and the honor of their region. This comp can be a stand alone event or could be piggybacked onto an existing comp. There are incentives that USHGA can offer to entice organizers to host this event as well.

Our comps are filled with more and more grey hair, it is time to bring some young guys up.

Discuss "USHGA – it supports competition" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Bill Bolosky|cost|harness|history|insurance|magazine|power|powered|sport|towing|USHGA

Bill Bolosky <bolosky@microsoft.com> USHGA President writes:

When the USHGA was created in the 1970s, the people who formed the association wrote a legal document called the Articles of Incorporation. These founders filed the Articles with the State of California to form the United States Hang Gliding Association, Inc. In the Articles, there is a statement that sets out and limits the primary purpose of the USHGA. In relevant part, it reads:

The specific and primary purposes are to engage exclusively … in the … use of fuel-less flight systems and aircraft capable of being launched by human power alone ….

This places two limits on the type of aircraft that we can deal with: they must not use fuel, and they must be launchable by human power alone. These restrictions cause two problems for the USHGA.

The first is immediate: it's not entirely clear that the Articles permit us to have programs for any kind of towing system that uses fuel. Since towing of all sorts is an integral part of both hang gliding and paragliding, and since the USHGA has programs relating to towing, it seems clear that we need to modify the Articles to remove any ambiguity with regard to towing.

The second problem relates to a direction that we may want to go in the future. In recent years, powered harnesses for hang gliders, and powered backpacks for paragliders have become increasingly popular. We have been receiving requests from our members to develop programs to cover these aircraft, and we have been approached by an association of powered paraglider pilots asking us to provide programs that would encourage their members to join the USHGA.

If we want to do these things, then we need to modify the Articles to allow them. Deciding to take on powered harnesses is a fairly major expansion of what the USHGA does, and even if it wasn't required by law, we wouldn't consider doing it without the informed consent of our members. The membership will make this decision in the form of a vote to modify the Articles and the Bylaws.

We will have a special membership meeting for the purpose of adopting these amendments during the Fall Board of Directors' meeting on Saturday, October 4, 2003 in Kitty Hawk, NC. All members will be able to vote either in person or through the mail in the form of a proxy vote. The official notice and proxy form will be published in the September Hang Gilding & Paragliding magazine.

We will structure the amendments as three separate questions: the first is to add to the purpose clause the phrase "and methods and systems for getting these flight systems and aircraft airborne" right after "human power alone." This amendment will make it clear that we can have programs related to towing. The USHGA Executive Committee believes that this should be a non-controversial question, and strongly encourages all members to vote in favor of it. If it fails, we will have to consider whether we can continue to support towing in the future.

The second question will be to remove the phrase "fuel-less" from the purpose clause. Adopting this amendment will allow us to handle powered harnesses, as long as the basic aircraft are still able to be launched by human power alone. Because we're keeping the human power restriction, the USHGA will continue to be prevented from getting into heavier aircraft, such as trikes or Light Sport Aircraft, unless they are to be used for towing.

The third change will be to amend the bylaws to create a new membership class for pilots using power. This will allow the USHGA to charge different membership fees for powered and glider pilots, which may be necessary because the cost of insurance may vary depending on the presence of motors. We expect that the dues would be the same for pilots regardless of whether they fly unpowered gliders, powered harnesses or both. In the future, however, the insurance company may offer us higher or lower rates for powered harnesses, based on their loss history, and we'd like to be able to reflect that in the dues paid by those pilots. We need a different membership class to make that possible.

The Board of Directors thinks that the right way to go is include powered harnesses. The main reason for this is that we have seen that many of the people flying them are the same people who fly unpowered hang gliders and paragliders. It is common to use a powered harness to launch from flat ground, get into lift and turn the motor off for the remainder of the flight. That is, they are us. Of course, there will be people who will choose to fly with the power on for the entire flight, and if we adopt these amendments we will be working to help them, too.

In the end, this decision belongs to the membership and not to the Board of Directors. We hope that this will be a topic of discussion among the members between now and the final vote so that everyone will have ample opportunity to make an informed and thoughtful decision.

(editor’s note: I certainly want to see the USHGA standing behind towing as an integral part of the hang gliding community. I’m fine with powered harnesses and powered paragliders.)

Discuss towing and powered harnesses at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "USHGA – Towing and powered harnesses" at the Oz Report forum   link»

badge|CIVL|cost|FAI|government|HPAC|insurance|job|Martin Henry|NAA|record|Stewart Midwinter|USHGA|Vincene Muller|Will Gadd|world record

Vincene Muller <fly@mullerwindsports.com> writes:

I read the posts on the cost of US sporting licenses and record ‘applications.’ In Canada we have a different system. The fees for members of the Hang Gliding & Paragliding Association of Canada (HPAC) are as follows:

Aero Club of Canada Sporting Licence $55 CAD – a pilot must be a member of HPAC

Fee breakdown is $50 to the Aero Club and $5 to HPAC for paperwork

(editor’s note: This is a similar fee to what US pilots pay to the NAA for a Sporting License. A Sporting License is only needed for FAI Badges, World Records, and CIVL sanctioned competitions.)

FAI Badges, Canadian & World Records $10 CAD - paid to HPAC for paperwork.

The Aero Club of Canada does not charge a fee.

(editor’s note: This as compared to the $275 fee that the NAA charges to homologate records. I’m not arguing that the fee isn’t reasonable given the work required to homologate a record, just that it doesn’t encourage World Record attempts by hang glider pilots, and appears to be much higher than that charged by other countries.)

The FAI charges 100CH (approx. $70USD) for world records processed. I don’t think there is a fee if the record is invalid. This fee has been in effect for the last two years. It is not an unreasonable fee. HPAC has in the past paid this fee for Canadian World Records however in the future this cost will be paid by the pilot as most of the HPAC membership fees go toward insurance payments. HPAC and Canadian pilots have no government funding or assistance for records or attending World Championships.

(editor’s note: And who was charging Canada with being a socialist country?)

The HPAC Office has never handled record and FAI badge applications. This is looked after by a volunteer committee. I have been chairperson of that committee since 1987. I currently have two committee members, Stewart Midwinter (who was the CIVL Committee Chair for several years & knows everything about record procedures) and Ted de Beaudrap. Stew and Ted look after checking the record claims (this is the difficult job) and I just look after the paperwork.

Canada, which has not a lot of hang glider and paraglider pilots, has four current world record holders, Mia Schoker, Martin Henry (Hang Gliding), Jim Neff (Hang Gliding, Rigid Wing) and Will Gadd (Paragliding).

Maybe a volunteer committee would be the answer to cutting the high fees for US pilots attempting record flights. Through your efforts there are many more US pilots interested in record flights. They have become very knowledgeable on the wording in the FAI sporting code. Might be time for some to step forward and volunteer. USHGA could possibly consider a new committee at their next meeting. The committee could then deal with the NAA & FAI.

(editor’s note: What Vincene doesn’t mention here are the dues that the HPAC pays to the Aerocclub of Canada. I wonder what they are. Also, it is not clear that the NAA would allow us to homologate the records ourselves. They use to charge us a fee even when we would homologate them through the SSA.)

Discuss CIVL at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "How we do things in Canada" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Bill Bolosky|CIVL|comic|Comic Sans|competition|cost|Dennis Pagen|Jim Zeiset|NAA|NTSS|Roman Dobler|software|USHGA|Worlds|Zapata

The USHGA pays the NAA between $15,000 and $18,000 a year in dues plus the cost of sending the CIVL delegate and perhaps the alternate to the annual CIVL Plenary plus other costs so that:

-.5in;mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;tab-stops:list .75in">1)We can belong to CIVL

-.5in;mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;tab-stops:list .75in">2)US National teams (less than two dozen pilots) can fly in the Worlds (or the Europeans in which very few American ever fly)

-.5in;mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1;tab-stops:list .75in">3)A few pilots can attempt World Records (and pay the NAA dearly for them).

Now, as a US National team member I’m going to appreciate being able to go to Austria next year to fly in the Worlds in Greiffenberg, and attempt Word Records at the fifth annual WRE in Zapata. So thanks all of you very much.

The question I and others have is this, is this the best use of all the money that the USHGA spends on competition? Are we just doing this out of inertia? Are we doing it because we think we have to, but we don’t have to spend money to promote competitions in the US, so we don’t?

The USHGA in fact inhibits competitions in the US (as well as helps). It charges fees and requires deposits. It demands a good deal of work on the part of the meet organizers. It requires proposals and presentations at the fall BOD meeting. But what does it do in return?

It provides a rulebook. It provides an NTSS point system.

It doesn’t help meet organizers. It doesn’t train them or meet directors. It doesn’t provide score keeping software. Nor train scorekeepers. It doesn’t help with registration. It doesn’t encourage more competitions or regional competitions. It doesn’t help fund competitions. It doesn’t encourage pilots to enter competitions. It doesn’t try to keep the fees down.

In the Australian Nationals, two years ago, if you had never entered the Australian Nationals it was free to enter.

Does the USHGA want to have a competition system? Do they want to support it and grow it? Do they want to see more competitions? Are they willing to spend their money to make it happen?

I’m part of the USHGA. I’m responsible for rewriting the rulebook. I’m a voting member of the competition committee which may or may not have something to say about whether the USHGA funds the NAA or not. I handle the NTSS points.

Do you want this to change? If so then you need to organize and contact your regional director, competition committee chairman, Dennis Pagen (who appears to be in charge of this), Jim Zeiset (the USHGA CIVL representative), Bill Bolosky, the USHGA president, and all those who actually make a decision (okay, that may only be Dennis).

Discuss CIVL/NAA at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Why zero for US competitions?" at the Oz Report forum   link»

book|CIVL|competition|cost|David "Dave" Glover|David Glover|FAI|FAI Sporting License|Jayne DePanfilis|NAA|NTSS|record|site|USHGA|world record

“There ain’t no free lunch.” But I wish these freeloaders would quit eating mine!

Thanks to Jayne’s piece I have a opportunity and motivation to write about something that has been on my list for a while.

Jayne has spoken to the issue of Sporting Licenses. CIVL officials were wondering why Americans were complaining about having to have Sporting Licenses for their CIVL category 2 sanctioned meets. After all they just got FAI Sporting Licenses as a condition of their membership in their national hang gliding association. So why would we complain?

Well when they finally understood that it cost each pilot an extra $35/year to have an FAI Sporting License (and the money went to the NAA and not to FAI/CIVL), then they began to see why we might have a problem with their demand that every competition require FAI Sporting Licenses. Talk about adding another barrier to getting pilots into competition in the US.

This whole discussion came up with the thought of dropping all the CIVL sanctioning of our meets because we didn’t want to burden the pilots with an additional cost. CIVL plans to start punishing meet directors would don’t demand and verify proof of FAI Sporting Licenses from all the pilots in the meet. Well, we could just drop the CIVL sanctioning, opt out of the European dominated WPRS system, and be done with it.

Of course, in other countries all the members of the association “subsidize” those members who need Sporting Licenses by having a portion of their membership fees go to pay a fee which supports the issuance of “free” Sporting Licenses to the membership. The Sporting License is just a tax, like a stamp tax, and like that tax, we have very little say in how it is used.

Like Sporting Licenses, other national hang gliding associations “subsidize” those members who attempt world records by paying their national aeroclub associations to homologate the records without requiring that the individual world record applicant pay those fees. The cost is the cost of having some individual around with the skills required to homologate world record attempts, and having that person verify the record and process the paperwork up to CIVL (with their $70 fee).

The USHGA, under then President David Glover, opted out of this system (so then he subsequently had to pay through the nose for his own world record). Now the individual US pilot who attempts a world record, pays the fees.

All this, so that their world record can be “recognized” by an “official” body (FAI/CIVL). So that it can be published on the CIVL web site, and in the NAA’s fat little book of mostly inconsequential records. Big Whoop!

The individual pilot may ask himself or herself, is it worth the cost? The national hang gliding association has already made its decision that not worth it to them to have their association members set world records.

And we wonder why the Idaho pilots and meet organizers don’t want to have their meets sanctioned by the USHGA? We’ll think about it. The first requirement is USHGA membership, and that is a big burden on pilots who aren’t interested in USHGA membership. Second, sanction fees from the USHGA. Third, participation in the NTSS points system, which they don’t feel to be a legitimate measure of pilot skills.

I feel, in a manner similar to the Idaho pilots, that the NAA and CIVL offers very few benefits given the huge costs that we incur paying fees both as an organization to NAA and as individual pilots. A very small number of USHGA pilots are allowed to fly in CIVL sanctioned category 1 meets. Big whoop!

I think that the USHGA membership should “subsidize” competitions because it can help build the organization and the hang gliding community, but I don’t think giving all this money to the NAA is the best use of our competition funds.

So, let’s drop CIVL sanctioning for our US based competitions. Let’s reallocate our competition funds to support US-based competitions. Let’s hire a contract worker on a piece work basis to homologate records in the US. Let the USHGA be the “official” body that homologates these records and puts them up on their web site. Let’s restrict NTSS points to US-based competitions only.

Discuss competition funding at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "My response to Jayne’s article" at the Oz Report forum   link»

airspace|Chris Muller|competition|cost|Dennis Pagen|FAI|government|history|insurance|Jayne DePanfilis|job|NAA|record|sport|USHGA|USHGF|world record|Zapata

Jayne DePanfilis <jayne@ushga.org>, Executive Director, USHGA and USHGF, writes:

I discussed sporting licenses with the NAA yesterday and more specifically, the possibility of obtaining "free" sporting licenses for the less than 100 USHGA member pilots who might apply for one. The NAA's primary concern regarding the issuance of free sporting licenses to USHGA pilots is not the potential loss of revenue, for example, 100 licenses x $35.00 each, as much as it is the danger(my choice of wording) of setting a precedent. Even though the USHGA member pilots require relatively few licenses, there are other associations that require larger numbers of them that provide a larger source of revenue to the NAA. The NAA simply can't afford to set a precedent of offering free licenses.

Also, it is my understanding that the SSA and AMA do include sporting licenses with their memberships but what I did not know until yesterday is that these associations are paying an additional fee for their right to issue the licenses. The fee is in addition to the per member assessment etc. for their NAA affiliate membership dues. The current management of the NAA did not negotiate these arrangements.

I also asked NAA about the relatively "high" cost of world record attempts for hang glider and paraglider pilots. The USHGA was not in a position to manage the record kit paperwork at the time the NAA agreed to manage this process for us. The USHGA staff is not in a position to manage this paperwork today. The USHGA has had as many as nine employees at one time in the past but today, we have 4.5 staff persons in the office.

It is my understanding that it is not the NAA's goal to process the record setting paperwork as much as it is to be sure the paperwork is forwarded to FAI. I guess the NAA is a conduit to the FAI for this process. You may understand better than I do. In any case, I also believe that the USHGA Board decided at some point in the recent past that the fees associated with world record attempts should not be paid by the USHGA membership at large since so few pilots are engaged in these activities. I believe the USHGA intentionally implemented a policy that required the pilots to deal with the NAA directly on world record attempts.

Chris Muller, a paraglider pilot (super guy), and resident of Canada, attended the WRE in Zapata this month and the US hang glider and paraglider pilots became even more frustrated about these fees when Chris told them that he pays only $5.00 for record attempts. This prompted some of the US pilots to contact me to find out why they have to pay so much more. When I explained this situation to the NAA, they commented that "someone is paying" for that record attempt. Someone, somewhere along the way, is paying an amount in addition to the $5.00 for the record attempt. I guess this seems obvious now that I think about it. I don't know if the Canadian government or another entity subsidizes these efforts, perhaps, you know Davis.

Finally, I was asked to approach the NAA by numerous competition pilots/record breaking pilots to try to negotiate "away" the sporting license fees for you. I believe I did a good job of advocating this position but I regret to report that I was unable to convince the NAA that they should "at least" issue free sporting licenses to the top 100 pilots in the USA. I explained to the NAA that I thought it would be a great public relations coup for them to issue free sporting licenses to USHGA member pilots but the NAA simply can't afford to give away sporting licenses even if it means they have to forego positive publicity.

I understand the NAA's position but I don't think I have enough of a history or background on this issue to have a definitive opinion. I was a true advocate on our behalf but I consider myself to be more of a reporter of the results of our discussion in this venue. My limited experience with the NAA indicates that they are eager to serve the USHGA but I'm not exactly sure how to maximize the benefits of our affiliate membership in this association.

The NAA coordinated a meeting between sport aviation association executives and managers in March. I was unable to attend the meeting and Dennis Pagen graciously agreed to attend in my place. The NAA provided an opportunity for these parties to develop a common ground and consensus on some of the more serious issues confronting us today, like airspace regulations and insurance. I think the NAA would like to facilitate more of these meetings on our behalf. I think they try to be a "neutral" party capable of bridging political differences and helping involved parties to work together in a cooperative manner.

Discuss the NAA at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Jayne on the NAA" at the Oz Report forum   link»

"Awesome" Bob|Charles "Charlie" Baughman|cost|Dragonfly|George Longshore|Juan Ramirez Rpo|Lawrence "Pete" Lehmann|magazine|Quest Air|Steve Kroop|Tim Meehan|USHGA|Zapata

https://OzReport.com/toc.php?7.157#3

Tim Meehan <tim@ushga.org> at the USHGA writes:

Flytec Ads Rule

I'm pretty lucky. I get to see magazine content before publication- especially this month. Your back-page ad rocks this month. Best ad this magazine has ever seen (at least since Advance's "We have winglets" ad)

Awesome work. Keep it up.

(editor’s note: We think that ad is awesome, and not just because it highlights the WRE and Zapata - check out the signage. Flytec and Quest Air are our big national sponsors here at the WRE along with our local sponsors, Renato Ramirez, president of the local IBC bank, and Charlie Averitt, the local airport manager. Without their support there is no way the organizers could afford to pull this off at such a low cost to the pilots.

We’ve got two Dragonfly’s (one thanks to George Longshore), two Dragonfly pilots (and Pete Lehmann is learning and almost was the one to pull me up this morning), and a pile of Flytec varios for pilots to set records with.

We’d love to see other manufacturers be as clever as Steve Kroop at Flytec and come up with as funny of ad campaigns as he’s put together. We’d also love to be a part of those campaigns connected to their web sites.)

Discuss "Remember that Flytec ad about Zapata?" at the Oz Report forum   link»

cost|magazine|tail|William Wixon

William Wixon <wixon@warwick.net> writes:

The May 2003 issue of Experimenter magazine, "Metal Windsocks!" http://www.home.earthlink.net/~gigax7/

Very durable. He sells plans for $30. It says materials can cost less than $75.

You can see in the photos it's got a little tail fin. Rigid pilots will like that feature. Hey, a rigid windsock for rigid pilots.

Discuss windsocks at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Metal windsocks" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Australia|cost|fatality|Helen Ross|power|safety|site|Steve Blenkinsop|wind power

Steve Blenkinsop <blenkinsop@ozemail.com.au> writes:

100m high (yes, very big) wind turbine generators are planned for 300m high hills we drop back onto from a coastal site here in South Australia. The developers want SAHGA to drop objections to the project.

Background

SAHGA Representaitives (Stuart McClure, Helen Mckerral and Robert Woodward ) attended a meeting with two representatives of Trust Power Rontheo Van Zyl & Rodney Ahern in response to the SAHGA submission to the development application to build the wind farm on the Willunga Range.

As you may be aware SAHGA's submission requested the relocation or removal entirely of the two turbines ( 15 & 16) in the back ridge bowl behind launch where two pilots have has emergency landings in the past. SAHGA contends that the construction of the turbines in this location will add to the risk of flying for our pilots in our existing operations at this site.

Summary of some Possible Options

1 (Do nothing) - We withdraw our objection, and live with the towers and for those pilots who choose to continue to fly there do so with an awareness of the increased risk of pilot fatality.

2 (Seek Compensation) - withdraw our objection, live with the towers and an increased risk of pilot fatality, but seek compensation for the loss of the back ridge (ie flyable for fewer pilots) to develop alternative flying sites or maintain existing and for those pilots who choose to continue to fly there do so with an awareness of the increased risk of pilot fatality.

3 (Fight for short term shut downs) - withdraw our objection if we're granted the (modified) weekend flying window and for those pilots who choose to continue to fly there do so with an awareness of the increased risk of pilot fatality.

4 (Fight to the end) - keep our objection - the towers may be disallowed, but the developers will certainly fight and if they win there's a chance we'll lose the back ridge to an exclusion zone, and possibly face some adverse media coverage that may affect our relationship with the local community and council.

Summary of meeting

SAHGA stated that removal of the turbines was desirable. Helen also suggested a compromise, of a short term shut down while flying was operational, and indicated that our operations were generally restricted to the winter months between certain wind speeds & directions and if they could shut the turbines (15 & 16) down on weekends in the winter months during daylight hours we would have no problem.

Trust power indicated that any further reduction in wind farm capacity would render the farm unviable. They also indicated that at a cost of $250.00/hr/turbine there was no margin to shut them down temporarily and that turbines 15 and 16 were there most productive turbines.

Trustpower want us to withdraw our objection ( Woody believes that our case is strong for measured consideration by the Minister and if these two turbines are rejected by the minister Trustpowers whole development may be in jeopardy) and are looking for a compromise to get us to drop our objection.

Trustpower seems happy enough for us to fly there while the towers are operational however, Trustpower also indicated (the subtle big stick approach) that they could apply to have us banned from the area if we did not withdraw our objection.

Woody asked if they had had dealings with CASA and how much time they thought it would take to declare restricted areas around the turbines (Woody's experience with CASA would leads him to believe that this would not be a quick process and even if successful, Woody thinks we could argue that the restricted area was limited to maybe 100 metres).

Point and counter point were raised that attempts to ban us could also cause them unwanted negative publicity which would not be conducive to there aims and also would not be good for SAHGA to be seen as an obstructive organisation.

One compromise floated at the meeting was some form of sponsorship/compensation for the impact Trustpowers presence will have on our operations and safety. Woody suggested that funds provided by Trust power could be put towards the cost of managing Tunkalilla.

Outcomes so far

Trustpower have offered today an amount of $2,500.00 pa for 5 years.

Woody's and Stuarts personal feeling is that our flying will be affected for the life of the wind farm and accordingly any sponsorship should be ongoing ie for the 50 years and we believe we should push for two days per year in which the club can operate a fly-in with the turbines turned off.

Stuart feels option 2 is our best option for a win win situation

Responses Required

All who have an opinion should express it via email to Stuart, Helen or Woody by Friday

Stuart - <Stuart.McClure@csiro.au> Woody - <rob_woodward@ultimatepositioning.com>

Discuss wind power at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Wind power" at the Oz Report forum   link»

balloon|cost|emergency landing|Gordon Rigg|landing|lawyer|site|XC

Gordon Rigg <hangpoints@btinternet.com> writes:

An incident in our Local Club, Derbyshire, in the Peak District South of Manchester and west of Sheffield England took place just 1 mile from my house and about 4 miles from the nearest launch site.

It turns out that the Farmer had previously written off a hot air balloon a few years ago. Andy Wallis writes:

As most of you will know, earlier this year my hang glider was destroyed by a farmer whose field, near Tideswell, I landed in after an XC. He ran into the glider with his tractor without so much as stopping to speak to me first.

The farmer was prosecuted for criminal damage, but pleaded not guilty. The hearing was yesterday at Chesterfield Magistrates Court. He was found guilty, and sentenced to keep the peace for 3 months. I was awarded £2000 compensation, and he also has to pay around £300 court costs.

During my cross-examination, I was asked what gave me the right to land on someone's property without seeking prior permission. I answered 'The Air Navigation Order gives any civil aircraft the right in law to affect an emergency landing'. This seemed to come as a surprise to the defense lawyer and the magistrates, who obviously were not familiar with the ANO, as they asked me to repeat it!

Amongst the nonsense which was produced by the defense was the allegation that my landing had caused around 11 lambs to be aborted and several prize ewes to be injured at a total cost of somewhere in the region of £8000, and the loss of a whole years work!! (I had in fact landed at least 200 yards away from the nearest livestock, which were totally unconcerned by my arrival).

I now have the option of suing the farmer for the full replacement cost of the glider. The burden of proof for such a civil action is lower than that for a criminal action, so this should have a good chance of success. I have yet to decide whether to pursue this option.

I intend to write up the incident and lessons learnt, to help others who may find themselves in a similar situation.

In the meantime, I would like to thank all of you who provided invaluable moral and technical support, and assisted me in taking this to a successful conclusion.

Finally, the co-ordinates of what is now an excellent goal field are: SK 145 742!

Discuss having fun with farmers at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "From mad cows, mad farmers" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Aeros Combat|Aeros Combat 2|Airborne Climax|barefoot|Bubba Goodman|Carl Wallbank|cloud|competition|cost|David "Dave" Glover|David Glover|flight park|Krzysztof "Krys/Kris" Grzyb|Moyes Litespeed|Oz Report|Paris Williams|photo|Raven Sky Sports|release|Rik Bouwmeester|Ron Gleason|Russell "Russ" Brown|safety|sport|students|tug|weather|Wills Wing|Wills Wing Talon

http://www.flytec.com/mwregionals

Check out the animated track logs (click “Top Tracks” - you have to wait for a few minutes for them to begin animating).

Check out the photo gallery (http://flytec.com/mwregionals/gallery.html)

Have I said often enough just how much fun it is flying and competing here in the Midwest? Twin Oaks/Raven Sky Sports is a great flight park and the air conditions here in southern Wisconsin are phenomenal. We’ve had a great competition with seven days of flying out of nine days.

Competition developed out in the west with the big air conditions back in the days when hang gliders were more hang than glide. With the outstanding performance we can get from our super ships these days, we can have very valid competitions in areas where only short flights were possible in the past.

Competitions are competitions between glider pilots. Everyone is in the same conditions and you’ve got to see if you can do better than the next guy in whatever conditions you’re in. It doesn’t matter that conditions are “weak” and scratchy. If you can stay up in those conditions while everyone else goes slower or lands out than you’re the top dog. So what if it takes two hours to go twenty miles?

Any half witted hang glider pilot can get up and go far in strong conditions. Just what are competitions in such conditions telling us? Who can handle the rough stuff?

It takes real skills to be able to fly together with your friends in minimal lift conditions with no sunlight under black clouds.

Of course, not every day has been extraordinarily weak. We’ve had plenty of lift on most days and the last two days a significant number of the pilots have made goal. And as I found out on the practice day, conditions here can be booming, if you like that sort of thing (I don’t).

“Low and slow.” Didn’t that use to be a major identifier for hang gliding in general? Here in Wisconsin we are practicing it every day and frankly it is the most fun you can have in hang gliding. The country side is very beautiful here, the people are friendly, the fields are in clover (I’m flying barefoot). What more could you want?

Did I mention how great it was here at Raven Sky Sports? How well we’ve been treated by all the staff and the owner Brad?

http://www.hanggliding.com/

We didn’t get to see that much of Brad as he takes responsibility for the marketing, sales, and reservations end of the business (and he definitely has the feel of a business oriented type a guy) from his home office. It seems that Brad started off possessed like all other folks who are starting a new business with no money and almost succumbed to “founders” syndrome where the founder can’t ever let go of the business and let it grow.

Finally Brad realized he was either going to go nuts or he was going to hire good people and have them take responsibility for the flight park (and of course he had to get out of their way so they could). One way to do that is spend your time at home making sure that there are students coming to the flight park for lessons from your crew.

Thanks to Brad for making sure that we could come here and have a great competition and to David Glover for assuring him that it would all work out even if we didn’t have 50 pilots. Thanks also to Brad for his support for the Oz Report and for helping out with my tows in exchange for my weather forecasting. Forecasting has turned into a nice little income (actually cost reduction) supplement.

David Glover, America’s best meet director, has turned in another low key behind the scenes performance keeping everything working and letting the pilots make all the tough decisions – tasks, safety, and protests.

Speaking of tasks. The weather forecast was for stronger lift (400-500 fpm) and 15 knot winds out of the northeast. There would be cu’s, but little if any vertical development in them. Cloud base was predicted to be 6,000’, but the height of the lift was predicted to be 4,000’. Funny, that doesn’t really work out.

When we get out on the run way it looks a lot more northerly than easterly, so I go back and come up with a 44 mile task due south to a farm grass strip just south of I 90 in Illinois. After the launch window opens but before anyone goes we decide to use that task instead of the same task as yesterday. Our goal is to get two thirds of the pilots to goal.

There are cu’s but they are small. There is a big block of cirrus right over us which is cutting off the lift. The tug pilots take us to the east where the clouds are lining up pretty nicely.

Russell Brown is in second place and is the only pilot who has a chance to catch me on this last day. Paris is far ahead in first in the flex wings, but three pilots are close for second. Paris could be caught if he falls down.

We get towed over to the clouds but there is very little lift. We have to work everything we can find and the strong wind is pushing us to the southwest off the course line. I’m slowly climbing to cloud base with Chris Grzyb, but we are alone. I’m covering Russ but he’s gone back toward the air strip and is down to 300’. Ron Gleason has to land.

Chris and I are at cloud base at the start circle circumference, but there is no one to go with. I decide to fight back up wind to cover Russell as he is getting up with an ATOS pilot (Jim or Dave), but my Velcro on my nose nappy comes loose and the glider starts vibrating. I don’t know what the problem is by Chris can see it from above.

I get back to the air strip and after trying to get back up with all the flex wings and rigids now high above me decide to land and get towed back up. I find the problem with the nose cone right away and it is quite a relief to fix it.

I’m towed up just as the last start window starts and I release 6 minutes after it starts up high. After one else has taken the 1:45 PM start time and I’m starting at 2:08 for the 2 PM start time.

The wind turns out to have a lot of easterly component in it and there is a big blue hole to the south of the start window. I push southeasterly for six miles to get under some forming clouds and get my first lift out on the course line. I’m down to 1,200’ so I take the 60 fpm that is offered and stick with it for 12 minutes before I can slide with an extra 500 feet over to a better cloud and climb out to 4,000’ AGL. That thermal will average 300 fpm.

The next two which get me to 5,000’ AGL will average 600 fpm. Whoa, this is the best lift I’ve seen during the contest. My average climb rate over the task today will be 250 fpm, much better than any previous day.

The strong lift gets me fifteen miles down the course line and I finally see four flex wing pilots off to my right a mile. I won’t get any more strong lift, but I’ll get enough to get over 3,500’ AGL a couple of times. I haven’t seen Russell or any of the ATOSes and no flex wings other than the four to my right.

There are plenty of clouds in front of me and now the question for me is can I get in quick enough to beat Russell in speed or at least get close to him so that I can win the meet. Since I can’t see him I’ve got to keep trading off rates of climb (which are weaker now) with how fast I can get down the course.

Four miles out I’m down to 1,600’ AGL as I had assumed that I would have hit something a bit better after going on what I though was a final glide at 11 miles out at 3,500’ AGL. My IQ-Compeo was saying I had 650 feet above my best glide line. I was slowing the glide way down to 35 mph to make sure I was flying near best L/D speed (and , of course, I was watching the vario to make sire I was doing that).

I decided that I needed 500’ at 100 fpm in order to make it safely into goal, as the IQ-Compeo was telling me that I was only 100 feet over my best glide line. The height of above goal had been jumping all over the place just like it use to on the IQ-Comp (same algorithm).

I zipped on into goal with 400 feet at the quarter mile cylinder. Since I had been pulling in for the last two miles, it was clear that I would have made it without taking that last bit of lift and spending 5 minutes climbing 500 feet.

As I come over goal I see that Russell has just landed a couple of minutes before me. All the other rigids are there also. They all started 23 minutes before me.

Paris, Bo and Andreas are also there. They were the first three into goal coming into together after flying together within a few seconds of each other. Why didn’t Bo start doing this when the meet started?

Terry, Dennis, Chris, Bubba and Carl all come in a few minutes later. It is the first time Carl has made goal.

The goal is just a grass strip at a farm. Apparently no one had been flying out of it recently as the grass is a foot high. They have been mowing the lawn though, so we break down there. No one is home.

Flex wings today:

Flex wings total:

Rigids today:

Rigids total:

Discuss "Midwest Regionals – the final day" at the Oz Report forum   link»

advertising|Angelo Crapanzano|bridle|certification|cost|DHV|equipment|glide ratio|Juan Lara|nylon|parachute|Rob Kells|safety|site|Wills Wing

Angelo Crapanzano <angelo@metamorfosi.com> writes:

It almost looks like Rob Kells felt my article as an attack to the Lara. :-( :-) I'm really sorry because it was, not at all, my intention: I do consider Wills Wing a true safety conscious manufacturer and the Lara a safe parachute.

I do agree with Gary Douris on everything. What I actually wanted to point out is that a good diaper pod could be as good as a good envelope one, and there could be quite bad envelope or diaper designs.

The debate between diaper and envelope is worthless. What really counts is to have an exactly staged deployment sequence: bridle-lines-canopy, and a pod which holds firmly the parachute until you throw it but opens and lets out the canopy easily. This could be achieved (or not…) both with a diaper or an envelope. The other differences are, in my opinion, more a matter of tradition and philosophy than practical ones.

I mainly wanted to push pilots to test the reliability of their equipment (as explained in my previous mail) and to check if their pod works good (regardless if it's a diaper or an envelope).

I agree with Rob Kells too: Kevlar or Spectra significantly reduce bulk and weight but increase the price. Cost is important but (as Rob says) "the lowest cost is not at the top of the list in decisions we make on emergency reserves" too. For example, since 1982 I use Kevlar on Metamorfosi canopies while the Lara Gold uses Spectra and Kevlar on lines and bridle. Lara and Conar parachutes are simply quite different designs and require different solutions. It is not mandatory that one is good and the other is bad… even if I believe my one is better… while Rob and Gary, I'm sure, think the contrary :-) :-)

I have to apologize if my English was misleading: what I wanted to say is that, given the same parachute design, the use of Spectra or Kevlar increases the opening shock, thus reduces the "strength" of the parachute (considered as the maximum acceptable speed). This lower maximum speed could be perfectly acceptable for our use, or a slightly slower opening time (for example using more porous fabric) could counterbalance the loss of strength. In this example the use of a more porous fabric would increase the sink-rate, thus one would need a bigger area and more bulk (which could be higher or not of the one saved using Kevlar lines and bridle) to get the same performances. It is just a matter of compromise and it's even possible to get similar results with very different designs.

For sure it was not my intention to say that a Kevlar bridle would break and a Nylon one will not. I'm sorry if I could have been misunderstood. I just wanted to point out that, because of the reduced elasticity of a Kevlar bridle, there need to be something to compensate in the parachute design to get the same parachute "strength".

Of course, as Rob says, both a properly designed Kevlar or Nylon bridle, likely, would not break: since the one inch tubular webbing disappeared from the market I heard of very few cases of a bridle failure (possibly due to uncoated cables?). Still people must know of the problem because there are too many obsolete parachutes around and many bridles which are not properly protected from sunrays which, regardless if they are in Kevlar or Nylon, should be replaced.

I also agree with Rob about the DHV test: it leads to bad deployment bag design (regardless if they are envelope or diaper…). This test is made letting fall a dummy and the deployment bag at the same time, from 60 m high: the parachute has to open before hitting the ground. To pass this test it's only important to add drag to the deployment bag and to let out the canopy as soon as possible. This is not exactly what we need in a true emergency with a broken glider!

I agree the ultimate test is: "at what speed has it been tested without failure?" The Lara has proven to be good and, for example, the Conar 18 has been certified throwing it from an airplane at 150 km/h (93 mph) with 100 kg (222 lb) load, and tested without failure with 80 kg (178 lb) load, after a free fall of 150 m where it achieved 180 km/h (112 mph). Again, Lara and Conar are two totally different design but both proved to be strong enough.

I also agree that descent rate tests of parachute have a great deal of scatter and some manufacturers declarations are well beyond reality: I still remember the Cyclon (an English manufacturer's hang glider from 1978) was declared to have 14 of glide ratio, like a modern topless glider! I've also seen parachutes with 28 square meters of fabric declared as 35 :-( By the way, I have made lots of accurate sink-rate tests and in my web site I do declare for my Conar parachutes about 5% worse sink-rate than what officially measured during AFNOR certification.

As Rob says "any emergency reserve system that saves a life is a good one" but I'm sure he doesn't mean any parachute is a good one. As with everything there are several good, many acceptable and, unfortunately, some bad ones. It is up to the pilots to make the choice and to the manufacturers to give correct information, not just advertising.

I'm glad to hear there have been more than 400 saves with Free Flight parachutes because, added with the 276 reported saves with Metamorfosi parachutes, makes quite a lot of happy… and still alive… costumers :-)

Well Rob, up to now it looks like we practically agree on everything… maybe except the way to skin the cat? :-) :-)

Rob you're right: I don't know of any malfunction which could be clearly in relation with the swivel at the junction between lines and bridle but, in my opinion, there could be problems, at least in theory and in some particular cases, with this setting. Unfortunately this mail is already long (and tiring for everybody) enough. Moreover to explain what is the problem would take some time and I would like to make it clear; please could you wait a couple of days?

Discuss parachutes at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Angelo responds re: parachutes" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Bill Marvin|cost|magazine|PG|USHGA

Bill Marvin <bill_marvin@hotmail.com> writes:

USHGA members can easily help with marketing with no cost to them and not very much effort. One way that might help is to take your older issues of HG/PG magazine with you to your doctor's office, barber or hair salon, blood collection center, or any place that has a waiting room full of "Ladies Home Journal" magazines.

You can conveniently leave your magazine there for others to find. Black out your name and address if you like, but if you leave it there someone might lookup your phone number and call you to ask questions about how to get started. I know I would rather look through a magazine about surfing or skateboarding or skydiving or hang gliding rather than how to decorate my bathroom.

Discuss marketing hang gliding at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Guerilla marketing" at the Oz Report forum   link»

advertisement|advertising|Australia|cost|Flytec USA|food|game|Helen Ross|magazine|Oz Report|PG|record|site|space|world record|World Record Encampment

Helen McKerral <hiflioz@yahoo.com.au> writes:

I, for one, was very disappointed to see the ads appear and multiply. Fast. Have you set a limit? Pop up banners are annoying and thankfully you haven't gone that path (yet), but providing advertising space will inevitably lead to a compromise in editorial freedom. As a published author familiar with the industry, you should know this better than most.

I was a staunch advocate of your "pay for subscription" drive and said so publicly on the HG list. However, I don't believe you can have your cake and eat it, too. You pointed out that one of the reasons you wanted/needed subs was because you *didn't* have paid advertising. Now that you do, will you cease to ask for subs as well? I continue to admire your report, but will not pay a sub next year if you continue to run ads. You are receiving recompense for your work, which was my point to begin with.

I wrote back:

I assumed that there will be some (many?) that share your opinion. That is the cost (tradeoff) of making such a decision, some will withhold their support (funds), but hopefully overall the income will be more positive.

Will there be the perception that commercial support compromises editorial freedom? Yes. Will it? I doubt it.

Right now I am constrained by my resources, my interests, my skills, and what I think will interest my readers. These are far greater constraints than what I think advertisers will feel.

Thanks for your past (and I hope future) support (in all forms).

Helen, after seeing the copy of the Flytec ad in the last Oz Report writes:

Well, the advertising slide has happened even faster than I imagined it would. I can't express how disappointed I am. There is now an advertisement in the body of the Oz Report (earlier, you implied that discreet ads on the side would be all and a week or so later, this).

Whether the ad is clever or not, doesn't matter. Your urging to click through to Flytec's site gives the game away. I ask - did Flytec pay you to include that ad?

Nope.

To urge readers to click to their site?

Nope. I had to ask them to do that to reduce the bandwidth on my site.

To include anything extra in your report?

Nope.

Was there any inducement from them at all (including a promise of continued sponsorship, or a threat to withdraw)?

Nope. In fact I had to talk them into letting me put their ad in the Oz Report. It was for HG/PG Magazine and didn't want to dilute the impact of it by having it in the Oz Report, but they finally relented feeling that it would be okay.

If you look at the ad closely you'll see that it helps promote the World Record Encampment, which, of course, I promote and am involved in. They had originally hoped to have the ad in earlier in the HG/PG Magazine.

Does it have anything to do with the exhaustive Brauniger Comp review?

Nope.

Have you ever included a "funny ad" by one of your sponsors in the body of the Oz Report before?

I have produced over 1000 Oz Reports and don't recall what is in all of them. I have included many many unpaid for ads and product announcements in them. I can't recall if they were funny or not.

Oh, wait, yes I included a very funny and controversial Flytec ad about six months ago. I did it because it was controversial, not because it was funny. In fact it came from Australia. It was for the Blue Goggles which Flytec USA sells in the USA.

Check out the unsolicited article on them https://OzReport.com/toc.php?Ozv5n188.htm. You can find the ad here: https://OzReport.com/toc.php?Ozv6n249.shtml.

If not, why now (Flytec has had funny ads before)? Or, worst of all: was there a subconscious devil on your shoulder refusing to be quiet, whispering in your ear, justifying your actions: "It's okay to include this, it made me laugh, it's fun, it's not really advertising, it's simply entertainment etc etc."

You have a funny view of human nature. No devil here. Just delight in the content of the ad. I suggest going to www.despair.com to get the idea. BTW, I have no connection with www.despair.com. In fact, I have no connection with the 1000’s of URLs that I have published over the years in the Oz Report.

I've added my original message, both of which I am now happy for you to publish if you wish I hope you will publish, but am almost certain you won't. There are too many dollars at stake and I'll wager that there will be few articles critical of your advertisers in the Oz Report in future. It won't be sudden or obvious, but it will happen. You're halfway there already.

Of course I will publish. I would be most happy to publish. I can't believe that you are a regular Oz Report reader and not know that I would be more than delighted to publish this.

I’m beginning to think that your letter has more to say about you than it has to say about me and the Oz Report.

The next step will be advertisers threatening to withdraw funding if you say A, B or C. Or they'll say, "Hey, you've given X competitor Y amount of space and they don't even sponsor you! We deserve the same space or more!" Will you then say, "Too bad, I'll forfeit the $$$?" Or will you find a way to squeeze in both advertisers? Davis, I'm a journalist too, I earn my living from my writing, and I know how difficult it is to refuse kickbacks that come without effort. I had to say, years ago, "Zip, Nada, Nothing!" (I'm almost off the radar now, I think;-). It's even more difficult for publishers to do, of course.

No advertisers have said anything like that and as I personally know almost all of these people and they know me, they know just how far that would get them.

Are you in this for the dollars? If so, fine. There's nothing wrong or immoral about that - you need to earn a crust like anyone else. But you also need to be clear in your own mind what is most important to you. You simply cannot have a truly independent publication of the kind you produce, if it has paid advertising.

Nope. I do want the Oz Report to pay for itself and to provide some income, but I would have to be nuts to do this for the pitiful amount of money it produces. It, like everything in hang gliding, is a labor of love.

Davis, you've already compromised your editorial freedom and - most dismaying of all - you don't even realize you've done so!

It is so easy to accuse others of blindness.

I won't publish these opinions online (another reason I expect you won't publish this) because I know how difficult it can be to make a living as a writer. If I had to feed a family and the food on the table depended on compromising editorial freedom well, I'd do the same as you are doing. No contest. But I wouldn't pretend to myself or my readers I was doing otherwise. I would say, "I need the money to live, and I have to include advertising."

I have no children. I live in a trailer. I have no expensive bad habits. I want to include advertising because I feel that these manufacturers are a legitimate part of the hang gliding community and I want the Oz Report to generate additional income. I can then use this income to improve the Oz Report and help pay for my work and that by others.

I have been asked to do ads for long distance service and printer refills. Not part of the hang gliding community as far as I’m concerned. Not to say that these things are bad, just that I restrict the ads to hang gliding ads (paragliding is fine also).

The HG list has many flaws, but commercial advertising is not one of them. Please protect the Oz Report, Davis, if finances allow you to do so. The Oz Report has been something rather special. I'd hate to see it become Just Another Advertising Site. Think about where you're heading, and whether you want to be there. You can't go back.

Thanks for your letters Helen. I very much appreciate your feedback and the opportunity to publish it here.

Discuss "Oz Report editor irretrievably corrupted" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Angelo Crapanzano|Betty Pfeiffer|bridle|cost|DHV|equipment|Ernie Camacho|Europe|exhibit|FAA|landing|military|nylon|parachute|PG|release|Rob Kells|Roy Haggard|safety|sport|Wills Wing

Gary Douris <gary77douris@yahoo.com> of Free Flight Parachutes writes:

Addressing the letter from Angelo Crapanzano (https://OzReport.com/toc.php?Ozv7n132.shtml#7)

His seven points for a good deployment bag are right on. As he guessed, it is only his feeling that a four-flap diaper is better than an envelope type deployment bag that I disagree with.

The best way to deploy a parachute is to have it extracted from the container by some method attached to the apex. It must have the skirt contained until all the lines are extended and there is tension on the whole system. Because this sequence is not possible with a hang glider deployment, some other ideas had to be used.

More than 20 years ago, Free Flight's Ernie Villanueva used his skydiving and rigging experience to develop the deployment bag with a side pouch for line stowing. The canopy was secured in the bag with 2 line stows and the lines were secured with 2 stows of the bridle.

When Angelo's diaper is deployed, the bridle goes first followed by the lines. When the diaper is opened the canopy is left sitting there all nice and neatly folded just like it was in the diaper. It must now unfold then deploy.

The envelope system we use does one thing that the diaper does not. When the envelope is deployed, the bridle goes first followed by the lines. Then the canopy unfolds and is more or less straight lengthwise and then deploys.

This is the best of a world which is not perfect due to the cables, tubing and such that can catch a canopy on its way to a good deployment leading to a nice safe landing.

I commend Angelo on his letter, I should have written it myself.

Rob Kells <Rob@willswing.com> at Wills Wing writes:

I'd like to address a few comments contained in Angelo's most recent letter on parachutes, and offer a few of my own.

A little background: Since 1978, Wills Wing has sold parachutes designed and manufactured by Free Flight, and thus we have a clear bias. We have always trusted in their design expertise and build quality. They have been manufacturing FAA certified skydiving parachutes for more than twenty-five years.

Envelope Deployment Bags vs Diapers

There are two different deployment systems commonly used for hang gliders, and as you'd expect, each has advantages and disadvantages. The Envelope provides a more secure stowage of the paraswivel, and a more staged deployment, but requires regular rubber band maintenance, while most Diaper bags do not.

The DHV drop test that is done from a bridge favors the Diaper bag because it can be packed in such a way as to require a very low pull force on the bridle to release the lines and parachute from the bag. The Envelope bag does not do well in this test because there are four separate stows to undo before the parachute can deploy, compared to one on most Diapers. Because most of Europe follows the DHV testing methods, it is logical that most European pilots are flying with the Diaper D-bag instead of the Envelope type commonly used here in North America.

Both Envelopes and Diapers are designed to get the parachute clear of the wreckage, and if properly packed, both systems accomplish this objective. The market here in the US has chosen the Envelope type system for two main reasons. First, between the two of us, Betty Pfeiffer of High Energy and I have done the majority of formal parachute deployment seminars in North America. We both believe in the Envelope system. We saw many more Diaper equipped parachutes fall out on the floor below the pilot when an attempt was made to throw it in a practice deployment than Envelope equipped parachutes. This was usually the result of the closing stow being too loose.

We have also seen a number of Envelope systems exit the bag prematurely when the rubber bands were old. In recent years changes such as relocating the deployment handle so the force of the pull and throw did not load the rubber bands directly, and using a double over flap at the opening end on the Envelope, are design improvements that have made the condition of the rubber bands much less critical.

Kevlar and Spectra vs Nylon

It's true that Kevlar and Spectra have much lower stretch than Nylon. It is not true that an emergency reserve must have a slower opening time to exhibit an acceptable opening shock. It depends on the construction of the parachute.

If we were to use it as a sport parachute that was designed for repeated openings, the Kevlar/Spectra blend would not be appropriate. But let's remember what the design purpose is. If you are unlucky, you may deploy your reserve once in a lifetime, if you are careless or stupid, maybe a few times in a lifetime of flying.

Roy Haggard designed the LARA (Low Aspect Ratio Annular) for the US Military, and licensed Free Flight to built it for Wills Wing to sell in the HG/PG community. The LARA (Nylon Type 18, 6000 pound bridle, with nylon lines) was repeatedly drop tested from an airplane at speeds up to 90 knots without failure.

FFE's Ernie (cited in Gary's letter as the designer of the original Envelope deployment bag) has jumped the LARA from an airplane at 90 miles per hour a number of times, again without failure. Next came the LARA Gold, which was also drop-tested from an airplane without failure. We choose to name it "Gold" because the Kevlar bridle and Spectra lines added significantly to the cost.

The important point is that using Kevlar and Spectra reduces the weight by more than 1.5 pounds, and the pack volume by about 35% giving you a very light weight, small pack volume with a large parachute, and it's associated slow decent rate. The Kevlar bridle is a woven flat 6000-pound webbing that, because of the weave, has some stretch. I'm not sure if it is because English is Angelo's second language, but his historical note regarding pilots breaking cable hang loops in the 1970s seems to imply that pilots can expect to break Kevlar parachute bridles.

In the real world, the ultimate test is: at what speed has it been tested to without failure? Does the opening shock fail the parachute, or not? I am not aware of any structural failures on FFE emergency reserve.

I agree with Angelo that a one-inch tubular bridle is not acceptable. We know of several cases when parachutes with one-inch tubular bridles were cut away on deployment. Free Flight has used a minimum of one inch Type 18 flat 6000-pound material since the early 1980s, with no cut-aways that I'm aware of. I also agree that a Kevlar bridle is less subject to being cut by heat from friction because it has a much higher melting temperature.

Speaking of Swivels

Angelo does not make it clear why he writes about 'swivels that "they should not be put near the junction between lines and canopy, but this is another story :-)".

The implication here is that there is a problem with paraswivels, so please tell us this story. I believe that the majority of hang glider reserves sold in the US for hang gliding utilize a paraswivel, while most sold in Europe do not.

There have been several instances that we know of where a spinning glider twisted the bridle so many times that eventually the shroud lines also twisted and closed the parachute. Wills Wing felt so strongly that the swivel was a necessary piece of safety equipment, that we bought the US patent to make them in volume, so as to reward it's inventor, reduce the cost, provide them as standard equipment on all HG reserves, and of course to sell more of them.

The 'swivel is mounted just eighteen inches from the lines. All the airplane drop tests and hundreds of real world emergency deployments have not shown any problems with this mounting location. We do not want the 'swivel on the pilot's end of the bridle, because if the bridle gets caught on spinning glider wreckage between the 'swivel and the parachute, it cannot serve its purpose.

Virtually all-skydiving canopies utilize hardware to attach the lines to the risers, so I'm very curious what information Angelo has as to why this mounting location is a problem. We have made over one thousand 'swivels. The only problem I am aware of was with a batch that was made with the setscrew hole not drilled deep enough in the barrel.

For more information on the advisory issued in May 2000, see any of the parachute pages at www.willswing.com

Just as Angelo could use our ideas if he thought they were better than his own, we could use his. If we found that his deployment bag, materials used in the bridle, or lack of a swivel was a better way to go, that's what we would be selling. In all three examples it would be less expensive to manufacture, but the lowest cost is not at the top of the list in decisions we make on emergency reserves.

For more information on the LARA reserve see: http://www.willswing.com/prod2.asp?theClass=parachutes&theModel=lara

Descent rate data FFEs drop test data has a great deal of scatter. The descent rates range from 14 - 19 feet per second. We publish (what we think is) a conservative number of 17.5 feet per second for the LARA.

To put the performance data you find on manufacturer's web sites in perspective: in the early 1980s we stopped publishing glider performance data, because regardless of the real numbers being achieved, some manufacturers published performance data that was well beyond reality, just to sell more gliders. (Imagine that :')

As the saying goes "there's more than one way to skin a cat". Any emergency reserve system that saves a life is a good one. There have been more than 400 "saves" with Free Flight parachutes.

Discuss parachutes and deployment bags at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Other parachutes" at the Oz Report forum   link»

cost|Oz Report|site

All we want is your e-mail address so that we can send you the Oz Report. See our privacy guarantee (https://OzReport.com). We never share your e-mail address with anyone. You get the Oz Report delivered directly to you. Just click https://OzReport.com/ozSubscribe.php.

Why do we care, and why should you? Funny, but it doesn’t cost us anything to send you e-mail, but it costs a lot to host a web site. In May our costs rose for $30/month to $130/month just for web site hosting. Half the reason was all the videos I put up on the web site, but the rest of the bandwidth came from downloading Oz Reports with their pictures.

This month I can cut back to $75/month, but I sure would like to get it down to $30/month. If you view the Oz Report issues on the Oz Report web site you can help reduce our costs just by subscribing. You can unsubscribe at any time at https://OzReport.com/ozSubscribe.php.

Between 1,500 and 2,500 people visit and read the Oz Report on our web site every day. We love that you come here to read the Oz Report, but we would really appreciate it if you subscribed.

By the way, lots of you downloaded the videos and that was great. On one day in May we had 100,000+ hits and 5 GB of videos and Oz Reports downloaded. We hope you enjoy the videos and pass them around to your friends.

Discuss "Please subscribe" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Brad Kushner|cost|site|weather

Brad Kushner subscribes to a service that graphically displays the forecasted weather for the local area. It’s obviously a national service that is resold through the local television station. He let me on the site (start at http://www.wkowtv.com and click the My Micro Cast button) and this is what I found:

This graphic displays the forecasted precipitation for each hour over the day. You can have it play or take it one frame at a time. You can also see the maximum predicted wind speed for each hour, temperature, etc.

You also get a chart for your specific location (longitude and latitude):

The cost was minimal at $3/month. I’ll bet the service (which comes out of Madison, Wisonsin from a company called MyWeather, LLC) is available elsewhere. You can put in a zip code in another state and it comes up fine.

So was the precise forecast accurate? Nope. The rain came three hours earlier, then stopped when the forecast said it would rain the hardest, then came back five hours later than the forecast, when no rain was forecast.

Discuss weather forecasting at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Futurecast" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Brett Hazlett|competition|cost|GPS|Tom Pierce|Will Gadd

http://www.dowsett.ca/cdnnats

The last two days of the Canadian Hang Gliding Nationals were blown/rained out. The results after five days are the final results with Brett Hazlett winning the nationals.

The paragliding nationals are now on, and the first day was rained/blown out. They should be flying on Monday.

Tom Pierce <tommyp_25@yahoo.com> ATOS pilot who competed in the Canadian Nationals writes:

Will Gadd (on a paraglider) kicked my butt, on day one, but not on day two.

Actually on day two I was first to goal. Unfortunately, we had a virtual goal, and I had my GPS set for a 400 meter radius, and was 50 meters wide of the 400 meter total width goal line. Oh well, I gained some experience at the cost of some points.

Will Gadd wrote of that day:

An interesting day--those who flew well got out on course, while those of us who didn't, well, didn't! Bit tricky getting up off launch, but I watched two people have flat-land style low saves off a brown field I was standing in--couldn't decide where to cheer or throw rocks as they thermaled over head, grin. Nice work, an Atos (Tom Pierce) and a red something.

Discuss competition at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Canadian Nationals" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Alegra Davidson|cost|harness|Leo Jones|XC

Ben Davidson, Tek Flight Products <tek@snet.net> writes:

With our Hang Glider Pilot Needs Ride shirt, I had six rides before I was finished breaking down on the shirt's test flight.

Leo Jones <thermaleo@yahoo.com> writes:

The best way to get a ride after a XC flight is simply to let drivers know who you are. Let's face it few people are going to stop for some scruffy, oddly garbed individual, carrying some weird bag on the side of the road in the middle of nowhere. I wouldn't. Not in the USA anyhow!

Solution - carry a sign. Mine is approx 16" x 10", bright fluoro yellow with big black letters 4" high saying "GLIDER PILOT". You can read it at 75mph from 100 yards away. It's laminated and folds neatly into 4, weighs 2 oz, and stows easily in my harness bag. Cost about 50 cents. Its value is obvious - it explains a lot, far more folks will stop, especially pilots of all sorts - there are a lot of them out there and you may make a friend.

Think about it - you'd stop for some scruffy weirdo if he held up a sign saying GLIDER PILOT. Wouldn't you?

Discuss hitch hiking at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "“I stop for hang glider pilots”" at the Oz Report forum   link»

aerotow|bicycle|cost|David Prentice|DHV|Dragonfly|Gerard "Gerry" Farell|Gordon Rigg|Hans Bausenwein|Laurent Thevenot|parachute|payout winch|PG|powered|release|tail|tow|trike|tug|winch

Hans Bausenwein <Hans@aerosport.de> writes:

Great attempt by Dave Prentice! I think the solution would be to fix a small payout winch to a Dragonfly, run the rope through a steel tube to the end of the tail and off you go. I have such a unit made by Christoph Schuhwerk an engineer and hang glider pilot from Germany.

This little payout winch only weighs 20kg, has a Kevlar drum and an exact means of setting the thrust to anywhere up to 100 kg (ideally you set it to the pilots body weight). The unit has a small bicycle bell on it that rings with every revolution. So you hear how fast you are paying out rope and can speed up or slow down accordingly.

It is usually used on a car and is ready to mount on a 50mm ball head of a tow bar. It even has a guillotine to cut the rope in an emergency. The release rope of the guillotine is run to the driver’s seat. We use a large mirror (like a traffic mirror) mounted on the bonnet of the car with big suction cups to see the pilot all the time.

The drum has 600m of 3mm spectra rope and can hold more than 1000m. I will be coming to southern Texas end of June and could bring it if anybody wants to try to fix it to a Dragonfly. Contact me if you are intersted <hans@aerosport.de>. The unit even has a DHV Gütesiegel. It is several years old, but I only have used it a little bit (less than 50 tows). Cost was around 3000 US $. I do not know how much it will cost today.

Gin Gliders have bought two of these Schuhwerk payout winches just recently to use them on an expedition to Mongolia. The expedition is not happening now and Gin wants to sell them again. Contact <gin@gingliders.com> if you are interested. Gin Seok Song also had the intention to come to South-Texas for long distance flying, but wasn't sure if he will find the time.

Mike Dillon <mikedillon@flightconn.com> writes:

It was good to hear that someone has finally aerotowed an paraglider. I've been daydreaming about this for years. The way Dave and Bobby accomplished this sounds fun, but I don't know if it would catch on, it sounds way too complicated.

I think a more practical way to aerotow would be behind a powered parachute (not a paraglider, but one of those large, low performing square chutes powered by a trike). I think they have a top speed of about 28 mph and a bottom speed of about 24 mph (maybe even slower). I've thought for a long time that this would be the ideal tug for a paraglider. I don't have the balls to try it, but it sounds like David Prentice just might - anyone?

Gordon Rigg writes:

Gerard Thevenot did some experiments aerotowing paragliders in 1996 or before using a trike. Given up as too unsafe.

Discuss aerotowing PG’ers at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Aerotowing PGer’s" at the Oz Report forum   link»

cost|Gordon Marshall|sport|video

http://www.hangglide.com.au/skysports.htm

https://OzReport.com/toc.php?Ozv7n128.shtml#2

Gordon Marshall <gordon@hangglide.com.au> writes:

The man behind the CD is an ex Californian living here in West Aussie, Mr. Sun Nickerson. I hope I didn't ruffle too many feathers with the footage. We are just trying every thing that we can think of to get the sport out to the public in the most cost efficient manner.

Discuss marketing and videos at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Video CD" at the Oz Report forum   link»

CIVL|cost|FAI|FAI Sporting Code|FAI Sporting License|Florida|Flytec Championships 2003|Hay|Heather Mull|Mart Bosman|NAA|Oz Report|USHGA|US Nationals|Worlds

Mart <hmmb@xs4all.nl> writes:

I noticed that sometimes you are a bit negative about CIVL. I would like to say something about that. As with all democratic organisations some people will not be happy with some decisions made by CIVL but it is just impossible to please everybody. I for one don't agree with the high number of points awarded to the European Championships but to change the rules about that you will have to ask your national representative to put it on the agenda and than they will vote about that at the meetings.

(editor’s note: Please be aware that I have done this in the past. I have also personally contacted every one of the non-European CIVL delegates about this issue. I raise this issue in the Oz Report to make other pilots aware of the unfairness of the 50% bonus for the European Championships, so that they can contact their CIVL representatives and get them to propose and vote for dropping it.)

I know one thing for sure; most work for CIVL is done voluntarily by people. Heather for instance has been a steward at a number of big comps and had to do a lot of work, as stewards have to check everything. I have seen her get up very early and work until late the whole comp' for no pay at all and after the comp is over she will write a lengthy report (like 10 pages) on how it went with recommendations for future comps.

I have also seen the points she has made in the past to CIVL to make the future organisation rules better. These are discussed at the CIVL meetings and they have led to some changes in the rules. The points made to help comp' organisors are often not or only partly followed which has led to problems. I want to emphasize here that CIVL is an organisation where a lot of people do a lot of work for no money at all to make hang gliding better for all of us.

(editor’s note: Let me say that Heather and I are on the same wave length on this. Many people that I deal with think that CIVL should be destroyed or ignored. I feel, like Heather, that there should be reforms in its rules and regulations.

I, like Heather, point out what changes could be made to the current rules to make things better for both CIVL and for the world’s pilots.

I appreciate that CIVL is a volunteer organization. I have never attacked individuals at CIVL and only bring up issues that need to be fixed in order to make CIVL work better. I’m sure that everyone wants that. ☺)

The ranking system is another problem but by throwing out the licensing system and CIVL with it just to create a fairer system you will throw out years of experience and will very likely make a big mess where the person with the biggest mouth wins.

(editor’s note: I certainly haven’t advocated that. I have only advocated that CIVL implement its own WPR system, which they have already and was developed by CIVL.

I haven’t advocated that they throw out the licensing system, but go back to the nonenforcement policy of the past. I suggest that meet organizers will not apply for category 2 sanctioning if they are facing double fees.)

Paula wrote that the FAI licenses are for free so the best thing is to harass your own organisation to give them for free to or ask your rep' to put it on the agenda for the next meeting. If your rep' doesn't want to do that vote him out and get one who will.

(editor’s note: Let me take you through this one step at a time, once again. The USHGA (the US hang gliding organization) doesn’t give out FAI Sporting Code licenses. I wish they did, maybe they can, but they don’t. I am working with them to see if they can.

The NAC in the US is the NAA. Here it is in charge of the FAI (not CIVL, notice) Sporting License. You have to pay them $35/year for the FAI Sporting License. This is ⅗^th’s of the cost of the yearly dues to the USHGA.

Can you imagine how many US competitions pilots are going to be interested in buying an FAI Sporting License for $35 to attend the Flytec Championship, the Wallaby Open, and the Us Nationals? I suggest zero.

Now, how do I get the NAA to give up the income from the FAI Sorting License and let the USHGA provide them at minimal cost? Have you got a solution for me? I’m working on it, but frankly this is not a big issue for most of the USHGA members (just the very small minority that would be affected).

I’m sitting here with the organizer of the upcoming US Nationals. He wants to know what CIVL is going to do if one person doesn’t have an FAI Sporting License. Are they are going to double the fee next year?

What happens to the other pilots’ WPRS ranking points (assuming that they have FAI Sporting Licenses) if one pilot doesn’t have a Sporting License? Are they counted or not?

Should the meet organizer tell the one pilot to leave because he messes up everyone else re WPRS points? What’s the story?

I would also like to write about the next Worlds. The majority voted for Hay. Maybe in America the guy that loses the election becomes the boss ;-) but not everywhere.

(editor’s note: Florida was, of course, heavily involved in this decision. ☺)

Apparently the reasons that Florida lost the bid were; a poor presentation (maybe they thought it was an easy victory), a much higher entry fee, problems which could not be explained about the 2 flight parks 37 km. apart and because of that there was going to be a cut. A lot of people do not like a cut.

You pay a high entry fee, fly a few days (at the Europeans in Laragne for instance 2 poor days) and you are out. You don't have to have a degree in physics to know that you are not going to win a bid when there is a cut, everybody who thinks he might not make it will vote against that possibility. (By the way; I asked my rep' to vote for Florida.)

(editor’s note: It is my understanding that the $20,000 prize money offered by the US bid organizers was subtracted from the pilot’s entry fees by the CIVL subcommittee, the pilots entry fees were very similar.

I agree that there were numerous problems with the US bid. What we have all found interesting is that so many pilots have said that they want to go to Florida and not to Hay (this irrespective of the problems with the bids). Manfred and Oleg even hinted that they wouldn’t go to Hay for the Worlds.)

Discuss "Civil with CIVL?" at the Oz Report forum   link»

CIVL|cost|FAI|FAI Sporting License|NAA|sport|USHGA|Worlds

It is by mutual agreement and consent of the governed that we allow the FAI to continue as the international sanctioning body for air sports. Some organization should be there to do it, and the FAI is as good a venue as any other.

The issue for us was whether instead of the NAC, the actual specific air sport body, in our case the USHGA, should instead issue the Sporting License (under an agreement to act in the stead of the NAC) and perhaps have a greater incentive to keep the costs down to hang glider and paraglider pilots.

The US NAA is so far removed from the average hang glider pilot that they see little benefit from supporting the organization (I am a member of the NAA). The average hang glider pilot has a hard time even recognizing the importance of the USHGA.

The problem arises because now CIVL requires the FAI Sporting License of Category 2 CIVL sanctioned competitions. This was not true before.

Many national level competitions have previously opted to become CIVL category 2 sanctioned competitions because the cost was minimal and the benefit was that the attending pilots would be ranked in the WPRS system. The thought was that these competitions would be additionally attractive to foreign pilots (especially top ranked foreign pilots) as they could obtain WPRS points at these meets.

Now a new cost/benefit analysis is being done in the minds of pilots and organizers.

First, the WPRS system sucks and is heavily weighted to European pilots. The Brazilians have already opted out. There is little to no benefit to a meet organizer wishing to attract Brazilian pilots to have CIVL Category 2 sanctioning.

Second, pilots who now want WPRS ranking, have to pay additional for the FAI Sporting License. Given this additional cost for very little benefit, pilots may opt out of the WPRS system all together.

Third, meet organizers seeing the now additional costs to them for policing the FAI Sporting License system, the additional costs to pilots, and the reduced benefit due to pilot resistance to these additional costs, may decide to no longer apply for CIVL Category 2 sanctioning.

Fourth, if only a few pilots are in the WPRS system at all, then it basically falls apart and there is no benefit at all to having an FAI Sporting License.

Given all this, it is my recommendation to all meet organizers that they do not offer CIVL Category 2 sanctioning. Of course, then the whole screening process for the Worlds and the Europeans falls apart also.

The other solution is to make sure that FAI Sporting Licenses are given out by the national CIVL affiliated organizations (the USHGA in the US) at no additional cost.

Discuss FAI Sporting Licenses at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Just say no to the FAI Sporting License" at the Oz Report forum   link»

certification|competition|cost|crash|Destin Peters|fairing|fatality|Flytec USA|George Stebbins|injury|Kathleen Rigg|Mike Barber|safety

George Stebbins <gstebbins@lahd.lacity.org> writes:

“Coated or uncoated wires will make no difference if you hit them at the right (or wrong) angle.”

Perhaps I am misinterpreting what Peter is saying, but it seems to me that he is implying the following:

Since coating wires doesn't always stop them from cutting us, we shouldn't coat them.
Since parachutes don't always work we should not fly with them.
Since helmets don't stop all head injuries, we should fly bare-headed.
Since Hang Checks don't stop all failures to hook in, we should abandon them.
Since seat belts don't always save your life, we shouldn't wear them.

Now, I have my opinion about coated wires, but what I am arguing here is that the discussion needs to focus on cost vs benefit, not absolutes. I am aware that the "benefit" varies from person to person based on their value of their own life, and that "cost" also varies, based on their perception of how much the smaller drag of uncoated wires matters to them. But saying that coatings make no difference in safety is silly. Just ask Mike Barber. (I don't know whether he thinks that uncoated wires are worth it, but I'm pretty sure he knows that coated wires would have reduced his injury.)

Peter said that the VG rope (much thicker than an uncoated wire) caused his injury. But he kept part of the finger. If he had been cut that way by an uncoated wire, he would likely have lost it entirely. It is all a matter of improving our odds at minimal cost. There are no guarantees in life, just better and worse odds, and higher and lower costs.

Flytec USA <flytec@earthlink.net> writes:

I am sorry to hear about Peters injury, as I was to hear about Kathleen, Mike, and Greg, but with all due respect, saying “Coated or uncoated wires will make no difference if you hit them at the right (or wrong) angle” is like saying seat belts wont make a difference in a car crash. There are scenarios where seatbelts will not mitigate injuries or prevent a fatality but there are plenty of situations where they will make a difference.

This is a philosophical issue. Do we as an industry want to make our activity as safe and as injury free as we can (within reason of course)? If we really want to be safe we won’t fly, but that is not what I talking about. Items like coated wires and helmets with crushable foam will make a difference. They wo’nt save every one but they will save some. If the someone that it saves is you or one of your friends, I’m sure you will be grateful.

(editor’s note: It wouldn’t hurt (relatively speaking) if all competitors were required to use coated wires in competition. The benefit is reduced changes of injury. The cost is the costs of exchanging the wires on existing gliders. There is no marginal cost for new gliders.

In the same vain, it wouldn’t hurt (relatively speaking) if all competitors were required to use “certified” helmets in competitions. Most helmets sold meet the European certification standard (or better) and only a few brain buckets are used for fairing purposes only.)

Discuss wires at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Got your coat on? It might rain." at the Oz Report forum   link»

cost|exercise|Flytec USA|G.W. Meadows|helmet|news|Steve Kroop

Steve Kroop at Flytec USA <flytec@earthlink.net> writes:

Please beware of international inquiries (especially from Indonesia) for Flytec and Garmin instruments. We have been getting numerous email requests to purchase these products with a credit card and I know that several of you have been getting these inquiries as well. In most cases these are scam artists with stolen CC numbers. Here is a typical scam email:

From: selh ep (mailto:slumber_green@yahoo.com)
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 11:34 AM
To: info@4superfly.com
Subject: Costumer Inquery

Dear Sir

I'm from Indonesia, and very interest to buy the products from you. That is: # Variometer Flytec (4030) Do you accept payment via credit card? Do you ship to Indonesia via FedEx? Give me recalculate the total price include the shipping cost to Indonesia via FedEx.

Please confirm me ASAP, and I look forward to hearing a good news from you.

Thanks and have a great day.

Leo

Do not get burned, exercise extreme caution with unsolicited email inquiries

G. W. Meadows <gw@justfly.com> writes:

I too have been contacted by these people. They use the name "sol paragliding". They never seemed quite right and I could not confirm any of the information they gave me regarding billing info on the credit cards that they gave me. My bank would not guarantee them either.

When I told them I would give them a discount if they would wire the money to my account - I never heard back from them. One of the biggest telltale clues was that they never asked me a price to begin with. They wanted to buy 10 helmets, but never asked how much - just gave me a credit card to pay for them.

I know they tried to buy Flytec varios from Chad using the same m.O.

It's hard to turn down 10 helmet sales at retail in the middle of winter - but luckily my 'little warning voice' won out.

Discuss scammers at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "The greedy looking for the greedy" at the Oz Report forum   link»

cost|Europe|North Wing|trike|tug

Gary R. Collier <grincloudbase@yahoo.com> writes:

I have been looking at motors for trikes since the ultralight motors from Europe are noisy and expensive. Having a motorcycling background it is natural that I have been looking at the Japanese motors for their reliability and low cost of maintenance.

Forget about the inline fours, the singles of the later model dirt bikes are good, with around 35-40 HP (Stock) for the engines, However the best for tugs I believe are the 90° V Twins, (Suzuki TL 1000, and SV 650)and (Honda RC 51). These engines are around 135 lbs and some weight could be shaved off. The TL 1000 is fuel injected.

The TL 1000 and the RC 51 are 115 or more HP. and The SV 650 is around 65 HP in stock form. Together with a slow wing like the North Wing Mustang Trike Wing (large), you would have a low cost tug that is slow, inexpensive, and quiet.

Anyone who wants to pay me to do R&D on such a trike this summer can contact me at <grincloudbase@yahoo.com>.

Discuss "Quiet Trikes" at the Oz Report forum   link»

aerotow|cart|cartoon|cloud|Cloud 9|competition|cost|David Maule|donations|Dragonfly|equipment|FAA|flight park|Florida|Flytec USA|food|foot launch|game|glide ratio|government|harness|instruction|landing|Maureen Grant|Moyes America|Moyes USA|parachute|photo|record|release|Rick Agudelo|Rob Kells|safety|site|sport|Sport Aviation|Spot|spot landing|storage|students|tandem|tow|towing|Tracy Tillman|training hill|transport|travel|tug|USHGA|weather|Wills Wing

aka the Dragonfly Cup - a new comp with a tall attitude and monster-size prizes.

by Tracy Tillman and Lisa Colletti

(from Reality Check cartoon series)

While working in the laboratory late one night, we created a new hang gliding competition for 2003, the Dragonfly Cup. The comp will take place at Cloud 9 Field in Michigan, home of the Draachen Fliegen Soaring Club. The value of prizes to be awarded is over $6000. Major sponsors include Wills Wing, Moyes USA, Flytec USA, High Energy Sports, AV8/Icaro, and Cloud 9 Sport Aviation.

Hot Comps

Many of the most successful meets taking place across the world use aerotowing as the primary means of launch. At a good site, it allows launching into any wind direction, and enables a large number of pilots to launch in a short period of time (provided that there are enough tugs and tug pilots available). The large cross-country meets that have been hosted by our friends in Florida and Texas over the last five years are a great example of the popularity and success of aerotowing as a launch format. The mass launches are an awesome site to behold, and participation in those comps is an experience that one will never forget. By all means, one should try to get to one or both of the Florida meets, as a participant, tug pilot, volunteer helper, or spectator.

The good flying conditions and high-level of competition at these meets bring together some of the best pilots in the world. These are relatively complex, work-intensive, and expensive comps to run, which results in entry fees being near $400, not including tow fees. With travel, food, lodging, and support crew costs added, the overall cost for a pilot to participate in one or both of the Florida meets is significant. Never-the-less, registration for both of these meets fills up almost immediately after opening.

Despite the popularity of these meets, it has been difficult for some clubs to run a successful meet in other parts of the county. Here in the Great Lakes/Great Plains region of the country, poor weather and low pilot turnout has resulted in the cancellation of meets more often than not. We can experience great soaring conditions across the summer flying season in this part of the country, but the weather patterns are not as consistent as in Florida or Texas. Also, many average Jo/Joe hang glider pilots who live in this part of the country are more interested in participating in a lower-cost, fun-type comp, rather than in a higher-cost, intensely competitive cross-country competition; and, it may be difficult for some pilots to take many vacation days away from work to attend a meet.

The Dragonfly Cup

With these issues in mind, and after some discussions with Rob Kells of Wills Wing, we created the Dragonfly Cup hang gliding competition for the summer of 2003. Aerotow and hill slope will be the primary means of launch. The comp will be hosted by the Draachen Fliegen Soaring Club (DFSC) at Cloud 9 Field in Michigan. It is a low-cost comp to benefit the DFSC, with large prizes sponsored by major hang gliding companies.

(A good summer day at Cloud 9. Photo by Rick Agudelo)

To avoid weather cancellation issues, the Dragonfly Cup is running season-long, from May 15 through September 1 (Labor Day), 2003. To avoid weather-related cross-country task problems, there are five different task categories: Race, Distance, Duration, Spot Landing, and Glide Ratio. To avoid retrieve problems, all task landings are at Cloud 9 Field. To reduce expenses, the cost is only $10 or $20 per comp flight, depending upon the task(s) declared by the competitor, plus the cost of the tow for that flight. A pilot can enter and declare a flight as a comp flight as many times as he/she likes across the season. To enable any level of pilot to win, a handicap system will enable lower-performance gliders to release from tow at higher altitudes. Pilots will foot launch from the newly-constructed training hill at Cloud 9 Field for the glide ratio task, which will enable non-towing student pilots, and even paraglider pilots, to compete in the meet. (Note: It is not a large hill; using a light, slow, high-lift wing may offer an advantage for this task.)

Results will be recorded across the season. Those who finish at the top of each category will be eligible to win one or more of the major prizes available. So far, the prize list and sponsors include: (a) Falcon 2 hang glider, sponsored by Wills Wing and Cloud 9 Sport Aviation ($3075 value); (b) Contour Harness sponsored by Moyes America ($950 value); (c) 4030XL variometer sponsored by Flytec USA ($899 value); (d) Quantum 330 reserve parachute sponsored by High Energy Sports ($650 value); and (e) PVC storage/transport tubes sponsored by AV8/Icaro ($500 value).

The cost for declaring a hill flight as a glide ratio comp flight is just $10, which means that for as little as a $10 entry fee, a pilot could win a brand new Falcon 2 glider worth over $3000. The cost for declaring an aerotow flight as a comp flight is $20 (plus tow fee), but the pilot can choose two of the four aerotow task categories for that flight: (a) Race, which is the fastest out and back 16 mile round trip time to the neighboring Sandhill Soaring Club field; (b) Distance, which is the most out and back round trips to the Sandhill Soaring Club field; (c) Duration, which is the longest time aloft; and (d) Spot Landing, which is landing (by foot or wheel) within a prescribed circle. All landings must be on Cloud 9 field; out-landing flights will be disqualified. For the aerotowing tasks, the tow height limit is1500 feet AGL for rigid wings, 2500 feet for topless flex wings, 3500 feet for kingposted double-surface flex wings, and 4500 feet for kingposted single-surface flex wings.

(Lisa, Tracy, and DFSC club members. Artwork by Bob and Maureen Grant)

The DSFC will host comp parties on Memorial Day weekend, July 4 weekend, and the first weekend in August, to encourage pilots from other clubs to schedule a trip en masse to fly here with us. The grand finale party will be held on Labor Day weekend, with final results determined and prizes awarded on Labor Day.

The winners of each task category will have an equal chance at winning the major prizes. A drawing of the task winners' names will be held on Labor Day to determine who gets which prize.

We feel that events like the Dragonfly Cup can help the sport to grow, as do several major manufacturers and distributors. Wills Wing, Moyes, Flytec, High Energy Sports, AV8/Icaro, and Cloud 9 Sport Aviation are offering significant donations in support of the 2003 Dragonfly Cup. These companies are dedicated to supporting our sport with their excellent products and services, please support them in return.

Cloud 9 Field and the Draachen Fliegen Soaring Club

If you have not flown with us before, please be aware that we have a specific operations formula that may be somewhat different from what you have experienced at other aerotowing sites. Because we have a nice site with a very active club, some pilots mistakenly think of our DFSC club site as a commercial flight park-it is not.

Cloud 9 Field is our sod farm, private airfield, and home. We purchased the land specifically with the intent of building a house, hanger, and private airfield, and to create a home base for the Draachen Fliegen Soaring Club. We are on the executive board of the Draachen Fliegen Soaring Club, and are the owners of Cloud 9 Sport Aviation, which is a supplementary mail order hang glider equipment business that serves Michigan and the Great Lakes region. We are also the owners of Cloud 9 Field, Inc. sod farm.

We allow DFSC club members and guest members to camp on our property (temporarily, not permanently) at no charge, and bathrooms and showers are available in our hanger for members and guests to use. The hanger has a second-floor club house/game room/kitchenette and observation deck overlooking the field. Our airfield is flat and open, and allows smooth cart launches and foot or wheel landings in any wind direction on mowed and rolled sod grass. Last year, we also built a 30 foot training hill on the edge of the field with the help of several club members (thanks Rick, Mark, and Jim!).

(Cloud 9 Field hanger and DFSC club house.)

The DFSC has been active since 1997, and has been flying from Cloud 9 Field since 1998. Even though we gained prior approval from the local, state, and federal government for the establishment of our private airfield for aircraft, ultralight, and hang glider operations, the local township government reacted to complaints from a neighbor about our towing operations, and sued us to prevent us from flying. As a result, we purposely kept a low public profile (but did not stop flying) while battling the lawsuit over several years.

Since that time we have learned how common it is, all across the country, for legal action to be initiated against people who own or establish airstrips and conduct flying activities. We also discovered that it is very important to find attorneys who are well versed in the appropriate areas of law, and who really care about your case. At a significant cost to us, we settled the lawsuit last year. In addition to having a great pair of attorneys working for us, one of which is a hang glider pilot and now a DFSC club member, we also had to do a great deal of work to help them develop an understanding of the case and to build a solid legal argument for the court. We learned a lot, but it was very time-consuming, stressful, and expensive.

During this process, we were inspected twice by the FAA. Their visits and reports supported our legal argument by helping to verify that we are not a commercial flight park operation, that we are operating properly within FAA regulations and exemptions, and that we are operating safely and relatively quietly. After getting to know us and the nature of our operations, the FAA asked Tracy to serve as an Aviation Safety Counselor for the FAA Detroit FSDO region, which also had a positive impact for us in court.

We are both ultralight basic flight instructors, and airplane private pilots. Lisa is the main tug pilot, and Tracy is the tandem hang gliding instructor for the club. We have two Dragonfly tugs, one with a Rotax 914 engine, and one with a Rotax 912 engine. We also own a Maule STOL airplane, painted in the same colors as our Dragonfly tugs.

In consideration of our neighbors, we have been successful in significantly reducing the engine/prop noise generation levels on both of our tugs. We use quieter and more reliable 4-stroke engines, custom-designed Prince propellers that provide increased thrust and reduced noise, after-muffler silencers with exhaust stacks that direct the noise upward, and towing/flying techniques that minimize noise levels on the ground.

(Tracy and Lisa with one of their Dragonfly Tugs)

Our operations formula has been refined over time to best meet FAA, IRS, USHGA, USUA, and other federal, state, and local laws, rules, and regulations. As such, all of our hang gliding instruction and flying operations take place via the Draachen Fliegen Soaring Club, Inc., which is a not-for-profit, mutual benefit organization to promote safe hang gliding and instruction. Club members share in the cost of our operations for their mutual benefit, such as site preservation and maintenance, tow operations, and instruction. All flights conducted by the DFSC are considered instructional flights. Instruction is free, but the club collects membership dues and fees from each member to cover their own specific towing expenses (non-member pilots can fly with us a few times a year as guests of the club without paying membership dues, but club members pay less for tows).

Our field is a private airfield for non-commercial use, not a public flight park for commercial use; therefore, all pilots, students, and visitors must contact us prior to coming out to our field to fly---on each and every visit. We try to be available for flying on most good days, but will be away from the field on occasion, so call before you come. Our season runs from May 1 through October 31. We are available to tow after 10:30 AM six days a week (not on Tuesdays), and on weekends only after Labor Day (when Tracy has to resume his faculty duties for the fall semester at Eastern Michigan University). We conduct tandem instructional flights in the evening, in conditions that are appropriate for students.

Everyone who flies with us must be a DFSC club member or guest member, a member of USHGA, sign our club waiver, and follow all club rules and procedures. We are very safety and instruction oriented, and expect pilots to do what we ask of them. Anyone who does not, will be reminded that they are at our home and on our field as our guest, and will be asked to leave. We would hope that pilots understand that there are many complex factors and issues involved in the establishment and operation of a successful aerotow hang gliding club, which mandates that we do things in certain ways. So far, our approach seems to work--we have an excellent safety record, a great group of pilots, a lot of fun, and a good reputation among students, pilots, and FAA officials who know us.

In spite of the cost and effort (on top of our regular professions) that it has taken for us to create and maintain the field and buildings, equipment, and club operations for the club, we support the club and its members because we love hang gliding and flying. We have had good success in bringing new pilots into the sport and we have helped to improve the flying skills of our club members.

Now that we have settled our township-related problems, we can be more open about our club's flying activities. We are hoping that more pilots will come to learn and fly with us in 2003, and we are very much looking forward to hosting the Dragonfly Cup this year.

Instruction and continuous improvement of flying skills and safety are the prime directives of our club. We take that very seriously. Accidents and injuries are not fun-safe flying is more fun for everybody. We will continue to focus on helping all of our club pilots improve their flying skills throughout the year, and we think that the Dragonfly Cup is a great way to help make that happen.

We are looking forward to having a great flying season ahead. Come fly with us, and enter the Dragonfly Cup - you've got a good chance at winning big!

For more information about the DFSC and the 2003 Dragonfly Cup, visit our website at http://members.aol.com/DFSCinc, email us at <DFSCinc@aol.com>, or call us at 517.223.8683. Fly safe, Lisa and Tracy.

Discuss competition at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Young DraachenStein" at the Oz Report forum   link»

cost|history|Maria Diekmann|record|site|space|survival|tow|world record

www.RESTafrica.org

Rafael Dubois <Rafael@geebroadcast.co.uk> sends this announcement:

The Rare & Endangered Species Trust (REST) is excited to announce the scheduling of its second Flight for the Plight of the Cape Griffon Vulture. This year's Flight will take place from October 14 - 23, 2003, and will raise funds for Namibia's most endangered species, the Cape Griffon Vulture (Gyps coprotheres).

The Plight

We must act to save this species from extinction now! The Cape Griffon Vulture is endemic to southern Africa and is experiencing continuous declines as the result of poisoning, electrification, habitat destruction and diet deficiencies. There are only an estimated 8-11 birds remaining at Namibia's last colony at the Waterberg Plateau Park near REST Headquarters.

The Flight

October 10 - 13 will be arrival and test flight days with participants arriving from all over the world at REST headquarters near the town of Otjiwarongo. From October 14 - 16 pilots will launch near REST. Flight days will consist of downwind races with open distance in order to accumulate as many sponsored kilometers as possible and to add to the possibility of a pilot breaking a local or world record.

On Friday, October 17 we will hold a Community Awareness Fly-in day at the Otjiwarongo Airfield. The public and press are invited to visit and watch the pilots launch. There will be information on Cape Griffons and REST founder Maria Diekmann will be on-hand to answer questions. Nelson, REST's educational Cape Griffon vulture will be on hand to meet visitors and show off his beauty.

On the 18^th our pilots will depart on a cross country tour, heading towards a mountain launch site in the south of the country and ending at the edge of the Kalahari desert for more tow launching.

Two years ago 23 pilots representing 3 continents and 6 countries participated. Because the pilots and the vultures share the same air space and use the same engine - thermals and the sun, we feel that this is an excellent way to raise international awareness and to generate funds for this endangered species.

Why help?

This is a marvelous opportunity to save this majestic yet misunderstood bird from extinction in Namibia. If we lose these vultures, it will be only the second time in recorded history that Namibia has lost a species, and the first species, the white rhino has recently been successfully reintroduced.

All funds generated from this fundraiser will go to the following projects:

Satellite telemetry collars for the ultimate flight - so that we can collect vital information on the bird's foraging, behavioral & social patterns.
Testing the birds for contaminates & heavy metals.
Photographing and expanding our 'vulture passports' so that we can positively identify the current population.
Supplemental feeding programs at REST's vulture restaurant.

Outputs from Flight for the Plight I - 2001

N$15,000 was earned and covered the cost of building materials for the vulture hides that the international volunteer organization Raleigh International built for us. This hide has become the center of all of our observations - both for pleasure and scientific research. Photographers and filmmakers have commented on the enhanced quality of their productions based on the design and location of our viewing hide.

On the 19^th and 20^th of April 2003 this hide held observers who discovered 3 new young birds in our Namibian population. This was a major breakthrough for our research. REST owes the pilots from the FP 2001 a huge thank you for your contributions to the survival of the Cape Griffon in Namibia!

To register, contact:

Jörg & Maria Diekmann
REST
PO Box 178
Otjiwarongo, Namibia 9000
Telephone: 00264.67.306226
Email: <awt@iway.na>

Discuss flying birds in South Africa and Namibia at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Flight for Plight II" at the Oz Report forum   link»

cost|Florida|site|sport|weather

Tony Degroot <aomthomas@cox.net> writes:

I doubt you have thought much about the fear of flying in that plush Florida air. However, after bailing in the beginning part of a recent flight I thought to look up more information about it on the web and came to find quite a bit of information about "The Fear of Flying". It is all related to commercial aviation but you can apply the same information to our sport. Here is just one of a number of sites most of which cost money. This one is free information at http://www.anxieties.com/7Flying/fear_of_flying_summary.htm

I have talked about the fear of tumbling or turbulence with several pilots. Most have successfully overcome there fears in a number of different ways. Usually the first step is to change gliders and fly something that gives you confidence. Another step is getting more into the weather to understand the conditions they are flying in. The last step is getting involved in actively flying the weather of the day. "Getting into it" and enjoying "going after it".

I think this is something that is not addressed enough and is responsible for a number of pilots getting out of the sport. Or, a number of pilots are still flying but are dealing with variations of it. Maybe you can set up a site so I and others could read some success stories of how other pilots overcame their fear of turbulence or tumbling.

Discuss the fear of flying at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Fear of Flying" at the Oz Report forum   link»

advertising|bungee jumping|communication|cost|electric|equipment|FAA|FAQ|fatality|Florida|game|job|landing|magazine|news|Oz Report|PG|picture|radio|Rod Clark|safety|sailplane|site|space|speed gliding|sport|students|USHGA

Rod Clark <Rod.Clark@ge.com> writes:

Since beginning to hang glide I’ve become acutely aware of the need to bolster participation in the sport. It’s clear by reading The Oz Report, and Hang Gliding and Paragliding Magazine that our sport needs new pilots. I’ve seen discussions on marketing in The Oz Report, and as a marketing person myself (for General Electric. Yes… I bring good things to life) I began thinking about how we can grow our sport.

I had a chuckle when I saw the “We need your friends” ad in the HG and PG magazine. I’ve been trying to drag friends into the sport since I began, and haven’t been successful once. As a marketing campaign goes, it’s a bit silly. USHGA’s target market isn’t people interested in me (my friends). USHGA’s target market is the people who’ve always dreamed of flying, but weren’t exposed to our sport. Thus, I’ve put together a few ideas about how we can capture the hearts and minds of those individuals and really communicate a message to them. Soaring is a reality, and it’s available to you.

My plan boils down to two basic premises in marketing; Identifying a target market, and providing for them an awareness of our sport. Let’s look first at the target market.

Paraglider pilots are the first and most obvious choice. First, paraglider pilots are already interested in soaring and have already taken the first steps to make their dream come true. However, because of the overlap in flying conditions, Hang Gliding offers Paraglider pilots an opportunity to fly when they might otherwise be to strong. Every USHGA instructor should encourage all of their students to become biwingual at some point in their flying career. It’s good for the sport and the pilots.

Although sailplanes are in the same dire membership situation we are in, it is a source of potential hang gliding and paragliding pilots. Although much of the sailplane community is older, there is a core group of young people that hang gliding may appeal to. I personally was never interested in hang gliding per say. I wanted to soar and I wanted to fly sailplanes. What I really wanted to do was fly, and when I realized the drawbacks for sailplanes (they are expensive, easily breakable, must always be flown within distance of a landing strip, much more work in the air, and the tiny excuse for a cockpit that you are claustrophobically stuck in) I began looking elsewhere.

A low cost marketing campaign would be to make an alliance with the SSA and “swap” (by swap I mean run ads without charging each other) advertising space in our respective member magazines. We could run ads saying “think outside the bubble”, “think smaller”, or something silly like that. Push the idea that flying with the wind in your face is the dreamy alternative, that high-performance hang gliders are almost reaching 20:1, and you don’t have to pay for tows.

One of our best sources is the FAA/AOPA private pilot community. How many times have you heard this story. We all have friends who are licensed private pilots who are not flying, or are not even current on their rating. Why? There are several reasons. First, renting Cessnas is terribly cost prohibitive. Who can afford to go flying at $70 per hour? Not me, and truth be told, not many people. My best friend has had his private license since he was sixteen. He’s thirty now with one kid and probably hasn’t flown in a year (not because he doesn’t want to).

Second (and most importantly), most private pilots are disillusioned by the idea of flying. People are drawn to flying from a young age. Every kid runs down the sidewalk with their arms out like a bird trying to lift off the ground. They imagine the wind in their face, swishing and swooping with the birds. Then, when we become “grown-ups” we seek the most obvious choice, a private pilot license. After getting licensed most pilots come to the same conclusion, “This isn’t like my dreams of flying”.

Frankly, flying a Cessna sucks. It’s noisy (really noisy). The cockpits are awful (like flying a Yugo). The windshield is usually scratched up to the point you can barely see out of it. You are severely restricted in where you can fly, and what you can do when you fly there. Headphones and an almost constant communication with an air traffic control tower make the dream of “running down the sidewalk with your arms out” seem more like mechanized warfare.

Before those perspective pilots become to disinterested (or go broke renting planes) let’s capture them and bring them into our sport. Again, our two governing organizations can “swap” advertising space in our member magazines. FAA/AOPA can run ads saying “Go further” or “Have the batteries in your lift died”. USHGA can run ads saying “What’s the buzz all about” eluding to the noise of the cockpit. We need to exploit our strengths (like cost, noise, fun) and share with them “this is closer to your original dream”. Also, break the common reply “I need a motor to feel safe” by describing how you can always fly within gliding distance of a safe landing spot.

Let’s also cater to the idea of owning something high-tech. Show them high performance wings like the ATOS or the Talon and give them something to get their mouth watering. Most people like the idea of owning something. Since hang gliders no longer look like “the bamboo butterfly”, we can advertise “You can’t afford that Cessna, but you can own this super-high-performance-flying machine for less than ten grand” (well, sort of). I read in a recent article of Flying Magazine how cost prohibitive it is to own a twenty year old Cessna 182. They estimated total cost of ownership at over $22,000 per year, or $179.00 per hour to operate. Let’s sell them our toys for much much less!

Heck, I could lay out the ads if you can negotiate the free advertising space. Additionally, my swapping idea is really effective if we get placement on their web sites (and this goes for all of my markets).

RC pilots also make a great audience. First, the hobby is thriving, especially in the electric and sailplane/electric markets. Second, the audience spans all generations. RC pilots start as bright teens and carry on well into their twilight years. Many of the “twenty’s and thirty’s” pilots probably do not realize that our sport would allow them to “actually fly” and in many cases be comparable in cost (have you priced a comp RC sailplane and 8-channel computer radio these days?). For about the same cost as a nice RC sailplane you can own a Falcon. Again, swap space in AMA’s magazine and on their web site.

I struggle with some of the following suggestions, because it may sound as though I’m contradicting myself. We need to grow our pilot base by appearing as an intellectual sport, and Zen sport, but a large audience is the X-Games generation. Allow me to address these individually.

First, the perception in the mind of the general public is that hang gliding is for the lunatic fringe and the thrill seeker. A common response when somebody hears that you are a hang gliding pilot is “Oh, do you also skydive and bungee jump”. Bungee jumping is a game of crapping your pants for eleven-point-five seconds. Hang gliding is a sport of Zen like concentration. Those who endeavor (and survive) are typically intelligent, conservative people who thrive on the extreme concentration, strategy, and constant decision making.

In a way, Rock Climbers are an excellent target market for hang gliding. Have been a former big wall climber myself, I can tell you this first hand. In rock climbing (as in flying) you really hope that nothing “exciting” will happen. A climber may work diligently and focus intensely for hours on end trying to reach the summit. During that process, a Zen like clearing of the mind and all of its worries is achieved through a purging of any excess, allowing for a clear calming focus. Sound like a light lift day to you? We can appeal to this audience. Put an ad in Rock and Ice magazine saying “Seeking a higher Zen, try this”.

The part that I struggle with is this.

We need to appeal to the X-games generation. Rock climbing, hiking, mountaineers, pilots are all a similar breed of conservative individual. These people are the same age as the X-gamers, have common interests with X-gamers, and are in the same overall demographic, but are fundamentally different in their willingness to put their life on the line. I fly because I feel it is safe. I am a pilot, not a lunatic. I’m also from the X-game generation.

The tough part is, we need the exposure of something like the X-games to bring people awareness of our sport. The down side is that we may not want some of the people it may bring (freestyle motocrossers come to mind). The last thing hang gliding needs is a surge in popularity by reckless thrill seekers and have our annual fatality rate skyrocket. We must choose carefully which genera we appeal to. X-gamers will likely be enthused about speed gliding. But that enthusiasm could in the long run kill our sport. Can the WRE make it as an X-game or Olympic test sport? We should ask.

The second part of my marketing plan (the first being target marketing, which we just covered) is about awareness and perception of the general public, and making hang gliding desirable and accessible.

The first issue to tackle is the one of safety. The perception in the mind of Joe Public is that hang gliding is a dangerous sport. Because of the steep learning curve just thirty years ago, this worry is not without merit. However, whenever hang gliding appears in the press outside of our circles, it is important that we stress that the sport has evolved into a safe, fun activity with high-tech equipment and structured teaching. Instructors and pilots must preach this to prospective pilots.

Having said that, USHGA should have a public relations person (even a member volunteering their services) to actively communicate with local news papers whenever an event is taking place in that area. Beyond that, we can even push for story placement in lifestyle sections of the Sunday paper. This is especially important in markets with such huge potential (such as those in California or Florida). Articles should stress safety, soaring as a sport in general, and the opportunity for every man and woman to become a pilot. And emphasize, “We are not the lunatic fringe!”

Once these open minds have been captured an exciting web portal must be available for the prospective pilots to explore. I believe that an exciting and graphic FAQ section on the USHGA web site is highly desirable. Current visitors to the USHGA are greeted with a very business like web site, designed to suit active pilots and instructors. For that purpose, I believe that USHGA has done a very good job. However, a picture section, with descriptions of different facets of our sport would be highly beneficial in capturing the imagination of prospective pilots, and furthering their dreams of soaring.

Since the low cost, compared to any other type of flight, is a highly desirable trait, we really must emphasize it. You’ve all had a look at your fellow pilots. You know that most of us are of modest means. When I initially became interested in Hang Gliding, the first instructor I contacted only offered package deals for lessons. I thought, jeez I can’t plunk down $1400 up front! I ultimately chose an instructor that allowed me to pay per lesson. In my opinion, all USHGA instructors should offer per-lesson plans. We have to make it as easy as possible for anyone to become a pilot, and not give any reason to turn them away.

We’ve developed a bunch of great single surface gliders. Now let’s get some new people excited about using them!

Discuss “marketing” hang gliding at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Flying the flag for foot launched flight" at the Oz Report forum   link»

CIVL|competition|cost|Europe|FAI|FAI Sporting License|HPAC|insurance|NAA|sport|Vincene Muller

Vincene Muller <fly@mullerwindsports.com> writes:

I have looked after badges, records & sporting licences in Canada for the past 20 years. Currently the interest in competitions is at an all time low. Our Meet Directors are going to great lengths to try and encourage pilots to enter competitions. For our Nationals in 2003, the meet director has applied for Category 2 status. It is unfortunate that CIVL is insisting on all competitors having a sporting licence. This 'rule' will ensure low attendance at our National competitions. This I am sure is not the intent of CIVL.

I have never understood why CIVL requires a sporting licence for cat 2. In North America , unlike Europe, very few pilots have a sporting licence unless they represent their country or attempt records. There does not appear to be a valid reason to force pilots to have a sporting license for a cat 2 event. CIVL does not benefit financially, the FAI doesn't get additional fees. The only body that benefits is the Aero Club of Canada.

The Hang Gliding & Paragliding Association of Canada are having financial problems due to a huge increase in insurance premiums (the same as other organizations in the FAI/CIVL). Each year they question the reason why they are paying huge fees to the Aero Club of Canada (who in turn pays to the FAI). The majority of pilots receive no benefit from the FAI/CIVL membership. Over the years I have strongly urged the HPAC to continue membership however it becomes more and more difficult as our Board of Directors try to justify huge fees and now the latest demands regarding pilots entering a national meet to have to purchase a sporting licence.

The sport of hang gliding is dying in North American, paragliding is barely surviving and it is our aim to encourage pilots to enter competitions which give great publicity and hopefully brings in more participants. I believe that CIVL should be working on increasing participation rather than imposing additional rules and fees.

We have had several prospective competition directors back out of holding national championship because of the CIVL rule regarding a sporting licence. The message the you just sent threatens to destroy future competition in Canada & possibly other countries as well.

(editor’s note: FAI Sporting License cost: $35.00, for non-NAA member $25.00, Individual NAA Membership Dues U.S.-$34)

Discuss "No to FAI Sporting Licenses" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Belinda Boulter|cost|landing|Larry Tudor|Nick Kennedy|record|Tim King

Nick Kennedy <nkavalancheranch@yahoo.com> writes:

Mix in unstable / thermal conditions into this Wind Gradient and we can have what Larry Tudor once wrote an article about in Hang Gliding: Ground Rotor take place, on the flat ground or a mountain face. This is why we have to be very careful close to either the flat ground or a cliff or mountain face.

Have you ever been landing in a steady somewhat smooth wind of say 10-20 mph and just gotten slammed into the ground? You may flown into a ground rotor, a tumbling bit of air that is rolling over the ground. Larry talked and wrote about this after his early Hobbs record setting flights. I found out first hand at King Mountain one day, about "ground rotor" and it cost me 2 downtubes and a instrument bracket! You and Belinda picked me up that day!

The point I'm trying to make is we have to be always be very careful while we are close to the ground or ridge. We cannot for the most part see the air. Two very experienced sailplanes pilots, last season "bought the farm" after hitting the ridge, while ridge soaring and this is with much faster, heavier wing loaded aircraft with full span ailerons! I think the gusts, ground rotor and wind combined to "move" the airplanes into positions of no return.

Discuss "Ground Rotors" at the Oz Report forum   link»

cost|Icaro 2000|landing|power|Steve Uzochukwu|technique|Xavier Verges

Steve Uzochukwu <steveu@which.net> sends this notice:

Flex wing hang gliders have usually been a compromise. That compromise has been made between a low performance glider with a loose, billowy sail with easy handling and simple landing but lower performance and a high performance blade wing with a tight sail, which glides very well but requires strong arms in the air and excellent technique to land.

Xavier Verges at UL team has been working on a system that would make the tighter, higher performance glider easier to turn. At the moment it is available for retrofit to some of the Icaro range of gliders but retrofits to other makes are available after an initial assessment of the glider in question.

Two versions of the system were on demo at St. Hilaire. One type on a kingpostless glider, one on a kingposted type. On the more costly type for kingpostless gliders, a small device sits on top of the keel, like an upside down French connection, but aligned in the roll axis. Two wires run up from the hang point via the bell cranks on the device to wires which then lift the sprog on the side the pilot wishes to turn towards. The sprog is lifting the sail a bit like a very small spoiler or an aileron. This causes a turn.

The idea is similar on the lower cost version, used on gliders with a kingpost and luff lines. The hang point wires in this instance operate cams which then pull on wires which go to the tip sticks or washout rods. These are then raised and then aerodynamic control augments the weight shift element.

Several advantages are claimed for the system. The speed of response of the glider may be increased without having to slacken the sail and the glider is easier to fly with the VB on. Some gliders have large amounts of anhedral to improve their handling and with this power steering addition the amount of anhedral may be reduced, making the glider more stable to fly and not requiring constant control inputs. As a result of all this the gliders handling is improved generally.

Xavier says there is a very good chance his system will be fitted to the next model of Laminar from Icaro 2000 for whom he has done a lot of consulting work, including working on the Lumina before Icaro went into partnership with A.I.R. with the ATOS.

More information from:

UL Team 69 rue de Ebavous, 38660 La Terrasse France. E-Mail: <xavier.verges@wanadoo.fr>

Discuss "Power Steering for hang gliders" at the Oz Report forum   link»

control frame|cost|Florida|landing|Oz Report|tandem|Vincent "Vince" Endter

Vince Endter <vince@vincenancy.com> writes:

I just got off the phone with Felix. I had called him about something else, but he brought up his new tandem Atos. It has a span of 14 meters (46 feet) and a wing area of 16 sq meters (172 sq feet). The tips are canted up to give more ground clearance on takeoff/landing.

(editor’s note: See the last Oz Report for the pictures.)

There is not much that is interchangeable with the Atos-C. The spar is bigger as are the ribs. The control frame might be the same. He said he took it on a test flight solo and it has a sink rate of only .5 meter/second (100 feet/min). Felix hooks in between 240 and 250 pounds. He probably will not make it to Florida because he wants to finish up the design.

(Editor’s note: I find it hard to believe that this is only a tandem glider. Molds cost $30,000. Hard to recoup your costs on the mold with tandem glider sales.)

Discuss "ATOS VX" at the Oz Report forum   link»

aerotow|Airborne C2|cost|glide ratio|tow|Wills Wing Eagle 145

www.willswing.com

A few days ago, I had an opportunity to take a short flight on the Wills Wing Eagle 145, which is a glider positioned between the Falcon and the U2 in terms of the capabilities required by pilots in order to fly the gliders safely. As I reported earlier, it is easier to aerotow from your shoulders than the Falcons (even a bit easier than the Attack Falcon) basically because it can fly a bit faster and so on tow you are not near the top of its speed range.

The Eagle is light handling in lift and has a better glide ratio than the single surface gliders. Without the VG of the U2, you are not going to be going 70 mph, even if you could hold the bar in with all your might.

It was almost as easy as the Falcon to land, allowing the pilot to slow the glider way down before having to flare. In terms of skills required it is a small jump up from the Falcon or any other single surface glider.

The glider classification scheme has a few funny aspects. Part of the reason that gliders are divided into classes is to give the customer some idea of the skills needed to fly a certain glider. Skills come only through practice and practice takes time.

If you apply yourself, have reasonable ability to break bad habits and learn good behavior, than over a certain amount of time and hours of practice you should pick up the skills to progress from one glider to the next. It isn’t always clear if there is a four stage progression, or three stages, or just two – single surface then rocket ship.

The Eagle is meant to be the second stage in a four stage process (advanced hang II, beginning and intermediate hang III). Wills Wing believes that an experienced hang III (intermediate) pilot can safely fly a U2.

Most hang glider manufacturers want to sell their “intermediate” gliders to both intermediate pilots and advanced pilots. On the other hand Moyes advertises their Litesport as an advanced glider, i.e. a glider for advanced pilots.

These king posted gliders are intermediate in other senses. They are intermediate in cost. They are intermediate in performance, perhaps some are closer to the performance of the topless gliders than others. They are intermediate in handling (the issue re pilots’ skills).

Not all thee intermediates overlap, because there are plenty of pilots with advanced skills who would be plenty happy flying an intermediate glider, just as long as everyone recognized that they were still advanced skilled pilots. They’d like to save the money, but they also want to save face.

This makes for a difficult marketing proposition for the hang gliding manufacturers. How do they signal to everyone that this is a cool glider, even if it doesn’t have the highest performance? How can they say that its handling characteristics are reasonably benign without threatening the manhood of those who might choose easier handling?

Then there is the perception that topless gliders are a handful. Maybe they are and maybe not. I sure found the Airborne C2 to be perfectly fun and easy to fly (well, not completely true, see below). I’ll have to try a Wills Wing Talon again and see how I feel about that.

Discuss "Wills Wing Eagle 145" at the Oz Report forum   link»

cost|health|instruction|insurance|Mark Forbes|sport|students|USHGA

Mark G. Forbes <mgforbes@mindspring.com> Region 1--OR/WA/AK writes:

Traditionally our national association (USHGA) has been a pilot organization, focused for the most part on pilot services. Instruction is a part of that, but unlike PADI or NAUI (scuba groups) we've been first-and-foremost a pilot group. PADI and NAUI are both *instructor* associations, with recreational divers a secondary consideration.

One of the philosophical points I'd like you to ponder is this:

For the long-term benefit of hang gliding as a sport, and pilots in general, is this really the right thing to do? Should we consider putting more of our effort and resources into instruction, even though the direct benefit may only go to a relatively small fraction of our members? (i.e. instructors)

The specific example that I'm thinking of is instructor liability insurance. Right now, our insurance covers recreational flying, but it makes an exemption for commercial general liability coverage. Many instructors don't carry this coverage because it's expensive to get individually, and they don't do enough business each year to have a prayer of justifying it. Other folks decline to even consider instruction, because they've got houses, bank accounts, investments and the like which they're not willing to put at risk for the dubious honor of running up and down a sand dune all weekend.

One cure for this problem would be to purchase a group policy that covers commercial liability. That would cost more (How much? I don't know yet… let's just assume 'enough that it matters') but would provide coverage for anybody who wants to be an instructor. But many pilots aren't planning to teach, so they'd be subsidizing those that do. On the other hand, if the pool of instructors and new students dries up, the long term health of the whole sport goes down the tubes.

Another option would be to just surcharge the instructors for the cost of the extra insurance, but given the relatively small number of instructors compared to overall pilot numbers, the cost is likely to still be too high for the vast majority to afford.

I'm not thinking of this as just USHGA-centric, though that's the specific context I'm asking about. How do other countries handle this, and what's the perspective from there?

It's an issue that we'll have to consider and hopefully find a good solution for, and I'm curious about what you think is the right course of action. Ponder this, and let me know of your opinion.

Discuss "USHGA – no PADI" at the Oz Report forum   link»

climate|cost|insurance|James Gaar|sport|students|USHGA

http://www.AdventureAirSports.com

James R. Gaar <jim@adventureairsports.com> writes:

Your readers might want to know about our commercial liability insurance from First Flight out of Kitty Hawk, N.C. Their premiums are based on total annual income. As we don't even come close to their minimum of $20,000, our premium is the lowest figure, that being $2332 annually, for a $1 million policy, at $250,000 per occurrence. There are other per occurrence amounts. We split the premium between the LLC partners and to help make the payment it is due at the end of the flying season.

As for instructors, for another $250 we can create an umbrella for any instructor that becomes a member of Adventure AirSports Flight Club. That small fee can easily be assumed by the instructors. The more instructors we have the greater the division of cost, thus lower cost overall for insurance. It simply pays to be part of our LLC at that point. We hope to create a base of students for any instructor that comes on board.

Members and Instructors must be USHGA members, sign all applicable forms and follow First Flight's guidelines in order to guarantee coverage, but that is all spelled out in the policy guidelines and instructions. I strongly suggest that pilots start to consider getting a group together to pool resources in order to take advantage of First Flights offering and to help create a favorable climate for instructors. This may well compliment the direction that the USHGA is moving with regard to increasing the number of qualified instructors and help to encourage a favorable climate for growth in this great sport. Your readers may email me if they have any questions.

Discuss "Inexpensive Commercial Liability Insurance" at the Oz Report forum   link»

advertising|airspace|branding|clubs|communication|competition|cost|FAA|gear|government|Hang Gliding|Homer Simpson|insurance|magazine|Mark Forbes|Paragliding|powered|sites|sport|students|TV|USHGA|video

Dan responds to Warren’s article (please read on conjunction with that article):

First, USHGA is not spending a single dime on this process--not even a single penny. The work is being done by staff already on the payroll, and by volunteers. That is, I am the editor of "Hang Gliding & Paragliding" magazine, but I am also the Director of Communications for USHGA, and while wearing that hat, I handle the marketing and communications programs. And before anyone gripes about excessive pay, please note that my pay rate is substantially less than that of the previous editor, even while my responsibilities are substantially higher. So USHGA is getting more work for less pay. (Okay, so I'm not a great business mind, but I do what I'm doing in the communications field).

As for the success of branding programs, I agree we need a quality product to attach to a brand, but I don't think anyone disagree that even the best products need some marketing work or they will fail. (Case in point: the old Beta-Max video tapes far exceeded VHS in quality but the VHS format had better marketing targeted toward both manufacturers and consumers, so Beta disappeared from the consumer market. That is, a lower quality product succeeded because of superior marketing).

But USHGA isn't developing a marketing plan and brand-awareness campaign to compete with anyone -- at least not directly. We are doing it to raise awareness of our lifestyle and 'sell' the sport to potential new enthusiasts. We have good products-the free flight lifestyle in general, and an association that is effectively representing its members-but we don't have good communications with our members, nor with the outside community. Our goals are to improve those communications.

We need to let our members know all the good work being done on their behalf by USHGA - working with FAA to keep airspace open to sport pilots (this is a very real, and on-going threat to our sport); working with our insurance brokers to keep members and sites insured at reasonable rates; working with land managers to get sites open, and keep them open; etc. All too many members think USHGA does nothing for them but provide insurance (I myself believed that just 18 months ago) when the truth is, we might still be hindered by drastic airspace restrictions following 9/11 if not for the aggressive efforts of the USHGA Executive Director and Board of Directors to work with the FAA and other government agencies to restore our airspace rights. Marketing is about communication and to date, our communications (internal and external) have been sadly subpar.

In short then, when we talk about branding and marketing, we are talking about increasing awareness of, and appreciation for, a solid, proven product. And we are doing it at no additional costs to the association. Not one single dime.

A big part of external marketing is advertising, and TV coverage (product placements). We don't have an advertising budget, but we can help ensure that hang gliding and paragliding gets more, and better, coverage on TV and in print media. In the last year, we've seen paragliders used in advertisements for Chevy Avalanche trucks and Saab cars.

Hang gliders appeared as part of the competition in a CBS TV reality series. During last season's "The Simpsons", hang gliding made Homer Simpson's list of "top three things to do before I die," and previously he had flown a paraglider, while bartender Moe had flown a powered paraglider (word has it, there is a hang glider pilot and a paraglider pilot on the writing staff of the show).

There have been numerous other positive references to hang gliding and paragliding in the past year or two, and while these are all minor instances in and of themselves, there is a cumulative effect on viewers-the more people see and hear about free flight, the more likely they are to want to give it a try. Toward that end, I'm working with editors from various magazines (SKI, Backcountry, Couloir, Outside, Mountain Bike, etc.) to get stories about free flight placed. Again, all without costing USHGA one-single-dime.

Warren wrote, “…marketing plan must deal with building and improving the hang gliding infrastructure or "offering." Anything else will be a complete waste of time and money.”

We couldn't agree more, and I apologize for neglecting to cover this component of our marketing and membership plans in my previous report. The ideas are still being formulated and plans developed, but the USHGA Board of Directors and teams of volunteers are working on ways to improve and enhance the instructional infrastructure of our sports.

The Board is streamlining the instructor rating programs by eliminating unnecessary red tape and bureaucratic practices-there will be no reduction in quality or oversight of the instructor rating program, but it will be managed more efficiently so would-be instructors can more easily get the training and skills they need.

We are improving the apprenticeship program, and looking into enhanced services for instructors. A great deal of attention will also be devoted to developing new and improved training facilities around the country. We will assist clubs and chapters in securing training hills and ensuring they are properly insured.

Mark Forbes also floated an idea that would help smaller schools and part-time instructors operate. The idea is to create a network of volunteers who would be willing to donate, or loan, their old, but still flyable, gliders and gear to instructors. USHGA may be nothing more than a facilitator in the process, but the idea is locate usable training gear for instructors to use at little or no cost since one of the biggest hindrances for small instructors is the availability of gear for students to train on. We'll keep you posted on this program as the plans develop.

In short, we recognize the importance of instructors in any plans to develop new enthusiasts in hang gliding and paragliding. We know that is pointless to stir a desire for free flight in people if they can't then find instructors to teach them. We are working on this just as diligently as we are working on other components of the marketing plans. And again, we are not spending one single dime on any of the plans

Discuss "USHGA – Dan the marketing man" at the Oz Report forum   link»

barefoot|branding|competition|cost|Dan Nelson|equipment|Fun|general aviation|Jules Gilpatrick|sites|USHGA|Warren Schirtzinger

Jules Gilpatrick <freeflite@centurytel.net> writes:

Warren Schirtzinger makes a very astute observation. In addition to the "package" however, there is going to have to be the initial "hook". I think that "hook" has got to be the belief that Freeflight, as nothing more than simple, unencumbered "flight" for its own sake, on simple equipment is easy to get into and that an initiate can choose whatever level of complexity they wish to achieve.

That is why I have been emphasizing the need to have lots of pictures of smiling and laughing people flying barefoot and in shorts at simple beach sites. I have talked with several non-Freeflight people who have told me that they were intimidated by the amount, cost and complexity of equipment required for safe X-C, as though X-C (and competition) were the "be all and end all" of Freeflight.

(editor’s note: This is my orientation also and I have been working with Dan Nelson at the USHGA as this is his orientation. You’ll see more soon on the Oz Report.)

Freeflight is not like General Aviation, where a poster of a 747 cockpit can be an inspiration to press on to higher ratings. That "inspiration" is almost always the thought of six-figure incomes for 60--80 hrs of work a month. The only motivator Freeflight has is the pure desire to fly. Unless the idea is planted in an initiate that one can get into Freeflight at a simple, inexpensive and relatively unencumbered level, so as to immediately achieve the goal of flight for its own sake, all the "branding" in the world will be for naught. (I would, however, love to get rid of the "hang" in hang gliding!)

Discuss "USHGA - Fun, fun, fun, til her daddy took her hang glider away" at the Oz Report forum   link»

cost|Hal Hayden

cost|Hal Hayden|John "Ole" Olson

cost|Hal Hayden

Hal Hayden «hal» writes:

I have been reading with interest the thread about marketing hang gliding in the U.S. Although several contributors have suggested that the cost of high performance wings and the associated gear is prohibitive, I don't think it is a barrier at all. Look at the many other costly sports that have grown rapidly in the last decade.

Think about the ATV market, for example. We just returned from a few days in the Anza Borrego State Park in Southern California and on the way we drove through Glamis and Ocotillo Wells - popular off-roading areas. We couldn't believe the number of people there with all of their ATV's, sand buggies and huge luxury RV's to stay in. There were thousands of people camping in these areas and each must have had a minimum of $20,000 in equipment.

The same increase spending has occurred with mountain bikes, ski gear, jet skis and so forth over the past decade or two. In fact, despite the recent downturn in the economy, disposable income still seems to be as high as ever in this country.

I agree with those who say that the key to attracting more people to the sport of hang gliding is to increase the exposure of easy, entry-level sites like beaches. There are a lot more people hanging out at the beach than at a place like Walt's Point and the whole scene is much friendlier and more accessible to the general public.

Discuss "Costs, what costs?" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

BHPA|competition|cost|holiday|John Aldridge|news|scoring|site|Trevor Birkbeck

Jim Bowyer sent me news of the upcoming UK hang gliding meets:

The second leg of the British HG Nationals will be held in Monte Cucco Italy, from the 3^rd July to 9^th July this is 2 weeks before the worlds and just before the pre-Europeans which are being held just across the Austrian border. Any pilots wishing to enter the British comp in Monte Cucco should contact the meet director «john» and/or visit the HG comps website at www.theleague.force9.co.uk for updated information.

Other comps taking place early in the year are:

The British Open

This very popular annual, 3-day open competition is scheduled to be run in South East Wales over the early May Bank Holiday. Entry will cost £35 and be limited to 20 League and 45 non-League pilots with the remaining places allocated to the Ladies. To be eligible pilots must be at least Pilot rated and be current BHPA members. Selection for the non-league places will be by a draw held on 28^th February and the result will be posted on this site soon after that date. Entry forms can still be obtained from the BHPA Office («office»). Pilots are reminded that the highest placed non-League pilot in the Open gets the opportunity to fly in next year's National Championships.

Places are very limited for this comp and early entry is advised - pilots should not turn up on the day hoping to enter.

National Championships 1999, 1^st leg - Mid-Wales

The first leg of the 1999 National Hang Gliding Championships is a 5 day event and will be run on the Mid Wales and Long Mynd Clubs' sites from Friday 28^th May to Tuesday 1^st June. The competition base and scoring room will be in the Lion Hotel at Llandinam and Trevor Birkbeck has volunteered to by the local organiser. There are still places available for suitably qualified pilots to fly as guests in this leg of the championships. The entry fee is £37.50 and more information and/or application forms may be obtained from «john». It is advisable for any pilot wishing to take part to read the championship rules which are available at www.theleague.force9.co.uk .

Discuss "UK Meets" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

competition|cost|Exxtacy|Felix Ruehle|Flight Design Ghostbuster|Ghostbuster|lawyer|news|safety|technology|US Nationals

A couple of issues ago I published an interview with Felix Ruehle about the new ATOS and it touched on his former relationship with Flight Design and the Exxtacy. Matthias Betsche, the president of Flight Design, sent me a note about a few things that Felix said, and I've included both what Felix did say (and my original interpretation of what he meant), and followed that with Matthias' note.

Felix said:

"Yes I had a contract with Matthias Betsch that he produces the glider and pays me a licence fee. Matthias sold the gliders for 200DM from one company to an other. From this 200DM wholesale price I got the per cent for the Licence. After many remainders I received the first bill directly after the ACC. Nobody knows how this works and it is up to the lawyers to find out if this is correct or if I have to pay the lawyer's costs, too. A former worker has now received the money after a process, another one is still waiting since years (constructor of CT)."

Here's what I wrote:

200 DM is not a lot of money for a hang glider. I think what Felix is saying here is that Matthias played a bit fast a loose with the bookkeeping. By selling glider at ridiculous prices from one of his companies to another (if this is in fact the case), he made Felix's license worthless.

This is the note from Matthias:

Dear Davis,

Thank you for all your reporting and posting of hanggliding news, especially the new rigid developments. Please keep up your efforts for all to read and enjoy as, I am sure, everyone appreciates your column as much as we.

Upon returning to the office after the holidays we saw your interview with Felix Ruhle. When we first saw the comments made by Felix about us, we chose to ignore them, because we feel we are pilots and designers and not actors in a soap opera. However, the selected semi-truths seem now to continue so we feel forced to give a one time comment to the public attacks of Felix Ruhle.

Felix originally had a contract with ACM GmbH. This is a company owned only 10% by me personal until Feb.1997. Because of the tremendous development cost of the projects, the banks stopped credits, so we have had to shut it down in early 1997. When we shut it down, we in Flight Design continued our rigid efforts, as we had since 1988. The same contract was offered immediately to Felix by Flight Design, but Felix requests changes. We have agreed four times on new conditions with Felix, but at the end, he has never signed. I think according all what has happened he has been fairly compensated according to industry standard.

Felix has said before that Jürgen Lutz (Pegasus designer) has cheated him, Felix Rühle says now Flight Design has cheated him. In four years, after Felix Rühle has made his diploma work under the supervision of Thorsten Lutz (a cousin of Jürgen Lutz) in the Jürgen Lutz company on the Pegasus project, he has promoted himself to the well known rigid wing designer and has become a company owner. We think that Felix should be happy with that what he has achieved instead of marketing by blaming.

The Exxtacy will remain in production and the first 1999 version with new flaps and ailerons has been already sent to the states. The Exxtacy series of glider will be under steady development with the target to get performance, safety, very good road handling and ease to repair, which has resulted in a high second hand value. This glider will change, but never mutate to a very light and thin 13m span, low area and high aspect ratio glider.

The Ghostbuster will have a total different shape and technology. We are still in the process of combining all new components and in about four weeks we can issue all details.

With the results we have, we are sure that Exxtacy will be the 1999 choice for all pilots which want to have certified and proofed gliders. For those who want the risk, they have now the choice between the ATOS and the Flight Design Ghostbuster. We believe that we have always the best glider you can buy.

We are looking forward for a comparison at the US Nationals in April.

Matthias Betsch
Managing Director

While we are not aware of any of the specifics of the issues in contention here, we also look forward to the US Nationals and hope that there will be lots of rigid wing pilots competing at the Wallaby Open and the US Nationals. It looks like Matthias is saying that he will be bringing a Ghostbuster to the Nationals, and we look forward to that. Maybe GW can have an Aeros rigid wing available for these two meets.

While there is apparently bad feelings between the former major players at Flight Design, the best solution is to have them fight it out on the field of competition. I think Felix will be here to fly his new creation. Maybe Manfred also?

Felix responded after I wrote the above:

The statements of Matthias Betsch are resulting from a discrepancy between him and me which will be clarified internally. I had good reasons to break up my business relationship with him.

I'm looking forward to a good ATOS season with thanks to the pilots and dealers who have already ordered an ATOS after the first presentations.

Discuss "Response from Matthias Betsch at Flight Design" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

carbon fiber|cost|Exxtacy|Felix Ruehle|Ghostbuster|news|side wires|site|tandem|towing|USHGA|Wallaby Ranch

AIR, manufacturers of the ATOS, have a new, as yet incomplete, web site:

http:/home.t-online.de/home/felixruehle/index.htm. You can also see ATOS photos athttp:/www.davisstraub.com/ATOS. We hope to add photos of other rigid wings, also.

The latest word on the production schedule for the ATOS is that we won't see the first couple here in the US until April. Hopefully just before the Wallaby Open - April 18^th - 24^th.

Felix Ruehle will be at the USHGA meeting and show in Knoxville at the end of February to show off the ATOS. There is a possibility that ATOS towing close to the site of the show will be available.

I spoke with GW Meadows (http:/www.justfly.com) today here at Wallaby Ranch. He said that he expects to see the new rigid wing glider from Aeros also available in April. Only a few details are available. It isn't flying yet. 78 pounds. There will be lower side wires to the wings to cut down on the weight. Control surfaces will be activated at the hang point. 39 foot span. 143 square feet. High aspect ratio. Carbon fiber construction with a cross bar. We expect it to come in at a considerably lower cost then other rigid wings, as per the Aeros tradition.

Matthias Betsch at Flight Design (http:/www.fun2fly.com for the US distributor) has announced the Ghostbuster as well as modifications to the Exxtacy for 1999 (should be on the new ones that have arrived lately in the US). We don't know if the Ghostbuster is flying yet. See below for more details.

QuestAir has a tandem/wheeled version of the Exxtacy. Perhaps you can contract with them for conversions.

Discuss "Rigid Wing News" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

cost|Wallaby Open 1999|weather

The Wallaby Open dates are April 18^th-24^th. This is the week after Sun 'n Fun (April 10-17^th). JC Brown is now the meet director. Malcolm is the meet organizer. The cost is $250. See www.wallaby.com for snail mail address. E-mail is «gloverdh».

BTW, there are money prizes at the Wallaby Open. $3000, $1500, $500 for 1^st, 2^nd, 3^rd in Class I. None for Class II, but I guess if you can afford a Class II glider, who needs money. :-) I asked Malcolm about the weather and he didn't want to talk about it because he didn't want to jinx it. It's been too good for a month now. Last year with El Nino, it rained every day in the Winter.

Discuss "The Wallaby Open" at the Oz Report forum   link»