Wills Wing
Flytec

Oz Report

topic: Dave Broyles (62 articles)

Results from the USHPA BOD meeting

October 28, 2011, 9:30:30 MDT

Results from the USHPA BOD meeting

Changes (some) in the BOD

Bill Bolosky|Dave Broyles|Dennis Pagen|Jamie Shelden|Rich Hass|Rod Clark|Tracy Tillman|USHPA

Rich Hass <<richhass>>, USHPA PResident, writes:

Jamie Shelden was elected as a Director-at-Large. Ken Grubbs will join the executive committee as the newly-elected vice president. I'm super-happy about both results. Two excellent people.

Ken was elected vice president. As such, he replaced Dave Wills as vice president. Dave Wills resigned from his position as a regional director and vice president a few days before the meeting.

Steve Rodrigues was elected by the board to serve out the remainder of Dave Wills term as a regional director in Region 2. He will also chair the Operations and Bylaws Committee.

Dave Broyles, Bill Bolosky, Dick Heckman and Dennis Pagen were all reelected as directors at-large. Jamie, of course, is the other Director-at-Large. Jamie takes the spot vacated by Rod Clark (who didn't show at the meeting).

Greg Gillam is the new chair of Membership and Development (replacing Rod Clark). Tracy Tillman replaces Lisa as chair of Towing. I'm looking for someone to chair the Awards Committee, as Brad Hall is not running for reelection and he isn't interested in continuing as chair. Safety and Training remains under Dave Broyles.

Oh, goody.

Discuss "Results from the USHPA BOD meeting" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Who got the student to take down his accident video?

August 13, 2011, 4:55:51 pm CDT

Who got the student to take down his accident video?

Was it Dave Broyles, USHPA Safety and Training Committee Chairman?

Dave Broyles|USHPA|video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWM0yIh3_mw

That's right it's gone.

I'll soon have it back up again (as I took a copy earlier when I figured that it wouldn't be up on YouTube for very long). It is here: http://oz-report.s3.amazonaws.com/accident.mp4 (77 MB). Please download it and keep a copy on your computer for later use.

Discuss "Who got the student to take down his accident video?" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Dave Broyles »

August 9, 2011, 8:27:50 CDT

Dave Broyles

The Chairman of the USHPA Safety and Training Committee

Dave Broyles|USHPA

Who is responsible for instructor revocations? According to this document https://ushpa.aero/member_file.asp?id=389:

The Controlling Committee for Basic Instructor and Advanced Instructor certifications is the Safety and Training Committee.

Headed by Dave Broyles.

Reasons for revocation (see the document linked to above):

A. Conduct demonstrating a lack of judgment and maturity commensurate with the rating, certification or appointment.

B. Conduct under the auspices of the rating, certification or appointment that unreasonably endangers the persons or property of others. This includes unsafe instruction...

There has to be a revoking official. In this case it would be a Regional Director.

Discuss "Dave Broyles" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Dave Broyles at the controls

August 8, 2011, 7:55:52 CDT

Dave Broyles at the controls

The Chairman of the USHPA Safety and Training Committee

Dave Broyles|USHPA|video

On July 10, 2011: http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24635

Be sure to check out the X-rays and other pictures at the end of this video. Jump over the middle part where you can't see much of anything.

In July, 2006: http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3099

Follow the long discussion after this video.

I let the videos speak for themselves. This has been a very long running issue and it has never been resolved. Many pilots in the community are aware of the deep safety issues. I publish these videos and the accompanying forum threads as a community service to give fair warning to all who have an interest in learning to fly hang gliders in Texas, as I don't expect any other actions to be taken to address the situation as they weren't after the first time I raised the alarm. Buyer be ware.

How many times does this have to happen before something is done about it?

Discuss "Dave Broyles at the controls" at the Oz Report forum   link»

USHPA Fall 2010 BOD meeting

September 10, 2010, 8:56:55 MDT

USHPA Fall 2010 BOD meeting

The schedule

Bill Bolosky|Dave Broyles|David Glover|Dean Funk|Foundation for Free Flight|Leo Bynum|Lisa Tate|Mike Haley|Paul Voight|Rich Hass|Rod Clark|Tracy Tillman|USHPA

Bill Bolosky|Dave Broyles|David Glover|Dean Funk|Foundation for Free Flight|Jon James|Leo Bynum|Lisa Tate|Mike Haley|Paul Voight|Rich Hass|Rod Clark|Tracy Tillman|USHPA

Thursday, October 21, 2010

8:00 -12:00 EC Meeting
9:00-12:00 Ad Hoc ED Hiring Committee Meeting (Tracy Tillman)
1:30- 5:30 Director Training (All Directors)


6:00-9:00 Ice Breaker Reception –
McMenamins- Rambler Room-700 N.W. Bond Street 541-330-8567
http://www.mcmenamins.com/537-old-st-francis-school-event-spaces

Friday, October 22, 2010

8:30- 9:45 Committee Meetings

Site Committee Jon James
Elections Mark Forbes
Membership & Development Leo Bynum/ Rod Clark

10:00 -11:30 Committee Meetings

National Coordinating Dick Heckman
Safety and Training Dave Broyles & Dave Wills
Chapter Support Dean Funk
Towing Committee Felipe Amunategui

1:00 -2:45 Committee Meetings

Publications Urs Kellenberger
Insurance / Finance Committee Mark Forbes / Rich Hass
Awards Brad Hall
Tandem Committee Paul Voight

3:00 -5:00 Competition Committee Mike Haley

5:00 – 6:00 Bylaws Dave Wills

Saturday, October 23, 2010

8:30-12:00 General Session

Call to order (Lisa Tate)
Roll Call (Rich Hass)
Approval of minutes (Lisa Tate)
Executive Committee Report (Rich Hass)
President’s Report (Lisa Tate)
Treasurers Report (Mark Forbes)
Old Business

Strategic Planning Group Report (Riss Estes / Lisa Tate)

Report by the Foundation for Free Flight (Bill Bolosky)

Committee Reports:

Site Committee (Jon James)
Elections (Mark Forbes)
Membership & Development (Leo Bynum)
National Coordinating (Dick Heckman)
Safety and Training (Dave Broyles & Dave Wills)
Chapter Support (Dean funk)
Awards (Brad Hall)


1:30-2:45 General Session

Committee Reports:
Publications (Urs Kellenberger)
Insurance (Mark Forbes)
Finance (Rich Hass)
Towing Committee (Felipe Amunategui)
Tandem Committee (Paul Voight)
Competition Committee (Mike Haley)
Bylaws (Dave Wills)

3:00- 6:00 General Session

Location of Fall 2011 BOD Meeting (Lisa Tate to present proposals received)

New Business

1. Torrey Pines Funding Request (Brad Hall)
2. Proposal to eliminate or reduce funding to the Foundation For Free Flight (David Glover)

Elections
Directors At Large
Corporate Officers
Adjourn

Discuss "USHPA Fall 2010 BOD meeting" at the Oz Report forum   link»

No Special Observers

February 26, 2010, 7:39:15 CST

No Special Observers

No reconsideration

Dave Broyles|USHPA

From the proposed agenda for the USHPA BOD meeting. Dave Broyles writes (I assume):

1. Reconsideration of the elimination of the Special Observer position. (I will overrule reconsideration because of the fact that special observers are not trained or rated as instructors and do not have instructor insurance.)

2. Consideration of providing assistance for Special Observers who have been active to become certified instructors and the possible allocation of funds to implement this. Based on online discussion of these issues.

Nice to see that they are listening in.

Discuss "No Special Observers" at the Oz Report forum   link»

USHPA Governance, part 2 »

February 16, 2010, 7:09:51 pm PST

USHPA Governance, part 2

One on one

Dave Broyles|David Glover|Dennis Pagen|Leo Bynum|Lisa Tate|Mike Haley|Paul Voight|Rich Hass|Rob Sporrer|Steve Kroop|Tracy Tillman|USHPA|USHPA Governance

I raised the question in the last article on this subject, how can the USHPA BOD expect us to communicate intelligently with our regional directors if we are kept in the dark about what the BOD is considering? I pointed to the fact that the BOD (in the form of all BOD members who are also members of the competition committee) are currently voting on proposals regarding USHPA Competition Sanctioning, but the affected parties, competition pilots, meet organizers, and just regular USHPA members, have no awareness that this is even happening (unless they read about it here in the Oz Report).

I remember something about a well educated population being necessary for the proper functioning of a democracy. I assume that the issues being discussed and voted on have previously been of great interest to the affected parties as they have petitioned the USHPA regarding competition issues and made perfectly clear that they have concerns in this area. So why do they continue to be kept in the dark?

So how about if each Oz Report reader who would like the USHPA BOD to make their emails to each other open to the USHPA members ask their regional directors to share/forward the emails that they receive available to the requesting members of their region? Each regional director would keep a forward email address list and when they received an email addressed to the BOD list, they would forward it to the list? Quick and easy.

If you think that this is a good idea, how about if you email your regional director and ask them to do this and to make this the policy of the BOD? Here are their addresses:

REGION 1 - AK, OR, WA
Rich Hass R 2010 (425) 453-7177 <lowenslo>
Mark Forbes R 2011 (541) 760-3231 bio <mgforbes>
Mike Haley L 2010 (541) 702-2111 <mike_haley>
REGION 2 - North CA, NV
Bill Cuddy R 2011 (775) 378-1707 <billcuddy>
Urs Kellenberger R 2011 (650) 802-9908 <urs>
Dave Wills R 2010 (650) 324-9155 <dave>
REGION 3 - South CA, HI
Rob Sporrer R 2011 (805) 968-0980 <rob>
Bob Kuczewski R 2010 (858) 204-7499 bio <bobkuczewski>
Brad Hall R 2011 (760) 438-7804 bio <brad.reg3>
REGION 4 - AZ, CO, NM, UT
Mark Gaskill R 2010 (801) 949-2803 bio <airutah>
Ken Grubbs R 2011 (970) 879-7770 bio <kengrubbs>
Leo Bynum L 2010 (505) 255-1097 <leo>
REGION 5 - ID, MT, WY
Lisa Tate R 2011 (208) 376-7914 <lisa.tate>
REGION 6 - AR, KS, MO, NE, OK
David Glover R 2011 (405) 830-6420 <davidhglover>
REGION 7 - IL, IN, MI, MN ND, SD, WI, IA
Tracy Tillman R 2010 (517) 223-8683 <cloud9sa>
REGION 8 - NH, CT, ME, MA, RI, VT
Jeff Nicolay R 2010 (603) 542-4416 <morningside>
REGION 9 - DC, DL, KY, MD, OH, PA, VA, WV
Felipe Amunategui R 2010 (216) 751-0347 <felipe.amunategui>
L.E. Herrick R 2011 (304) 704-2331 <le_herrick>
Dennis Pagen L 2010 (814) 422-0589 <pagenbks>
Art Greenfield - NAA X (800) 644-9777 <awgreenfield>
REGION 10 - AL, FL, GA, MS NC, SC, TN, VI, PR
Steve Kroop R 2010 (321) 773-2307 <info>
Matt Taber R 2011 (706) 398-3433 <fly>
Bruce Weaver R 2011 (252) 441-3589 <bruce>
REGION 11 - LA, TX
David Glover R 2011 (405) 830-6420 <davidhglover>
Riss Estes L 2010 (512) 329-0790 bio <parariss>
Dave Broyles L 2010 (972) 727-3588 <broydg>
REGION 12 - NJ, NY
Paul Voight R 2010 (845) 744-3317 bio <flyhigh>
REGION 13 - International
Tracy Tillman 2010 (517) 223-8683 <cloud9sa>

The USHPA BOD might even think of a simpler way to do this, carry out its "secret" business out in the open on a forum in the Members Only section of the USHPA web site.

Am I crazy to ask that the BOD seriously consider such options?

Discuss "USHPA Governance, part 2" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Election of USHPA officers

November 14, 2009, 4:27:44 pm CST

Election of USHPA officers

The status quo is confirmed

Dave Broyles|Dennis Pagen|Leo Bynum|Lisa Tate|Mike Haley|Rich Hass|USHPA

The incumbent five directors at large were re-elected: Leo Bynum, Dennis Pagen, Dave Broyles, Riss Estes, and Mike Haley. I guess the theme of the election here is not change.

There was only one contested election for the officers. Mark G. Forbes continues as treasurer, Rich Hass as Secretary, and Lisa Tate as president. It would have been nice to replace one of those folks. Riss didn't run again as vice President. The new vice President is Mark Gaskill.

This means that the work of saving our existing competition program will continue to face an uphill challenge. Hopefully, given the time and date mandates for the subcommittees to do their work we can get the right system in place soon.

Discuss "Election of USHPA officers" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Scooter Tow instructor clinic

October 21, 2009, 9:06:41 PDT

Scooter Tow instructor clinic

From Gregg Ludwig and Fly Texas

Blue Sky|cart|Dave Broyles|Gregg "Kim" Ludwig|Jeff Hunt|scooter tow|Steve Wendt|USHPA

Gregg Ludwig <<GreggLudwig>> writes:

Nov. 7-8, 2009

Location - Thunder Field - private airstrip 15 miles northeast of San Antonio, TX. 3267 Lower Seguin Rd. Marion, TX 78124

Current USHPA Instructor - one day free (you have to pay for the other if you wish to have two days, the second day would be practice). Current USHPA rated pilot - $50/day

Preregistration required.

Contact Gregg Ludwig 281 788 6754 <greggludwig>, Jeff Hunt 512 467 2529 <jeff>

Gregg Ludwig is the facilitator. Jeff Hunt is the host and assistant. This clinic has been approved by USHPA for funding in order to promote this training method.

See equipment list and notice glider to be used (Condor 330) and small tow device for low'n'slow (80cc). Jeff and I are strong believers that the Condor 330 is the only suitable glider for the low'n'slow training method as well as a low power scooter. Instructor participants will have a chance to operate the equipment but any H-0's that participate will only be towed by me as the qualified facilitator.

Scooter Tow Equipment List:
New and used scooters - 5 hp/35 mph (1 80cc, 2 250cc)
Converted rear wheel to drum for line
Trailer and other mounting / transport system line guides and fairleads
Wheel chocks to secure trailer

Tow line and line management:
Tow line - Amsteel 12 Spectron 7/64" hollow braided line
Leader Line with drogue chute / drag device
Weak links
Line retrieval - ATV, Golf Cart and rewind system
Turn around pulley
Auger screw in anchors to secure turn around pulley
Hook knife or other emergency line cutting device

Student equipment:
Harnesses - training type with appropriate tow loops
V-Bridles
Barrel Releases - one for each harness
Helmets - selection of sizes
Eye protection
Knee pads

Glider and glider equipment:
Condor 330
Large basetube wheels
Primary release

Field Management:
Orange marker cones
Wind streamers

The focus of the clinic will be to use the 80cc small scooter system with the Condor for the Low'n'Slow training method. Actually the Condor will only be towed with the small Scooter.

The other more powerful scooters will be used, as time permits, for the full on tows as a side show/fun fly for experienced pilots. New students that may be participating will only fly the Condor low'n'slow.

I asked Gregg were he took his scooter tow training. He had an unfortunate answer:

My formal Scooter Tow training was done with Dave Broyles during an Instructor seminar.

It would have been hard to find a more unfortunate answer. But he continued:

This clinic will use more modern or "state of the art" low'n'slow training methods as well as the best late model equipment including the WW Condor fitted with a BlueSky harness.

Members might be interested to know that because I am a Director and Tow Committee Chair and also facilitator of this USHPA funded event that I have decided not to accept any compensation in the interest to avoid a possible conflict of interest.

I feel that in spite of Gregg's (training) pedigree that this should be a good experience for instructors looking to become acquainted with the Steve Wendt, Blue Sky, scooter tow method of instruction and I encourage you to attend this clinic that is sponsored by the USHPA. Gregg did much to get the USHPA to endorse and support this training method. He has said all the right things about how he is going to instruct, and this is a wonderful opportunity to take instruction from an enthusiastic instructor.

Response to the email from Lisa Tate, USHPA President

October 12, 2009, 8:11:59 PDT

Response to the email from Lisa Tate, USHPA President

Lisa has sent out an email to all USHPA members

CIVL|Dave Broyles|Dennis Pagen|Foundation for Free Flight|Gregg "Kim" Ludwig|Leo Bynum|Lisa Tate|Mike Haley|Ollie Gregory|Paul Voight|PG|Rich Hass|Rob Sporrer|Steve Kroop|Tracy Tillman|USHPA|World Pilot Ranking Scheme

You may have recently received an email from Lisa Tate, USHPA President, regarding proposed changes to the USHPA Competition Program. Lisa states that the Competition Workgroup has recently made some changes to their original proposal. We applaud this change: the separation of the Race-To-Goal type meets from other types of events/competitions. We want to preserve and enhance the existing competition program, not damage it with ill considered changes.

We ask the USHPA BOD to reject the proposed sanctioning and accreditation process found in the Competition Workgroup proposal and instead implement the proposals found here. We ask you to ask your Regional Director (either by email or phoning) to vote with us in rejecting the CWG proposal if it in any way impinges on the Race-To-Goal competition program. Their phone numbers and email addresses can be found below.

Lisa has asked pilots to respond to their Regional Directors regarding a number of concerns that the CWG and the BOD are mulling over. We have provided our answers to those questions below. We ask you to consider our answers, make up your own mind and send in your answers to your Regional Director, along with our request above. Here are their questions along with our answers:

Section 1 – National Championships and Mentoring (Pros/Cons delivered to board week of 9/14):

(1) Should National Champions be crowned based on performance in a single event, as in years past, or by means of a series, as was tested in 2009?

Steve Kroop has proposed a Cross Country National Champion chosen from the results of "open distance" type competitions. As well as a Race to Goal National Champion chosen from pilots competing in race to goal type competitions. Two separate tracks (although pilots would be free to fly in either or both kinds of competitions).

I have proposed that the CWG proposal be edited to create this very cross country type competition system. You can find that proposal here: http://ozreport.com/docs/...rkingDraftfirstcopy.pdf. Redline version here: http://ozreport.com/docs/...aftfirstcopyredline.pdf.

I also proposed that the Race to Goal National Champion be the pilot with the highest total NTSS score from two meets out of the five race to goal meets sanctioned by the USHA in a given year (that number can vary). So you don't have to go to all five meets to be the National Champion, two will do, just do well in them. The math to do this is already in our NTSS ranking system.

I also propose that you can do the same thing or something similar with the Cross Country National Championship. Just make sure that your co-ordinate the scoring systems across competitions.

(2) Should National Championship competition events be given 100% “pre-meet” validity?

No, see above. The National Race-To-Goal Champion should be chosen as above from all the Race-To-Goal sanctioned meets.

(3) Is the Meet Director apprentice program contemplated by the 2009 draft
competition and events manual appropriate?

No. This program is poorly thought out and not funded (for the mentor). If the USHPA is willing to fund this (not just expenses of the mentee) paying the meet organizer/meet director(s) to do the mentoring, then this would be a step in the right direction (otherwise competition pilots will be asked to pay for this).

(4) What is the best way to foster mentoring and at which meets should mentoring be required, if any?

Follow the Ollie Gregory proposal for replicating Team Challenge type events. Provide financial support to Meet Organizers for Sport Class and for mentors for the Sport Class Pilots.

Section 2 – Foreign Competitions and Competitors (Pros/Cons to board week of 9/27):

(1) How should the attendance of foreign pilots affect the pre-meet validity of US meets?

Yes. Here is my proposal (originated by the paraglider pilots):

1. Foreign pilots are welcome and allowed in USHPA Sanctioned competitions.

Pilots ranked 1st - 100th: 45 points
Pilots ranked 101st - 200th: 30 points
Pilots ranked 201st - 300th: 20 points
Pilots ranked 301st - 400th: 15 points
Pilots ranked 401st - 500th: 10 points
Pilots ranked 501st - 600th: 5 points

(2) The draft presented to the board last Fall contemplated reducing the number of foreign events a US pilot can count in calculating their NTSS score from 2 down to 1. Should the US system be changed in some way so this doesn’t happen, and how?

The Race-To-Goal foreign competition provisions should be left untouched.

(3) Should all foreign events have FAI certification for them to be considered for use in NTSS?

Don't care, either way. Almost all hang gliding competitions outside the US are CIVL sanctioned.

(4) The draft competition manual contemplates levying a surcharge on competition participants at high level events, which moneys would go into a USHPA fund to pay for the travel expenses of world teams. Is this appropriate?

No, it is not.

If our goal is to have more competitions and more attendance, why are we discouraging attendance by taxing it? Isn't the complaint that the meets already costs too much, and that pilots want to go to competitions like the King meet which are less costly?

The National teams are free to raise money for their expenses. The USHPA contributes ZERO dollars to the US National team. Why should the USHPA collect a tax for a team that it doesn't even support?

Won't putting on a tax hurt the fund raising efforts of the National team? Right now pilots have the possibility of helping fund the team voluntarily through contributions to the Foundation for Free Flight (which goes to pay their entry fees at the Worlds, only). And they can participate in voluntary fund raising efforts by the team. Why undercut those efforts by instituting a tax?

Future Section Topics:

Pilot and Organizer Burden

() Many comp pilots feel strained to attend 3 competitions per year, considering a finite number of vacation days. Does the plan place too heavy of a burden on pilots aspiring to the world team?

No, it does not. Only four meets over a two year period are required. Where did the number three come from?

() Should the number of sanctioned events for each class be managed or restricted in some way to accommodate best estimates of supply and demand or should a hands-off, free market approach be used?

The more meets the better to serve our members. The USHPA must recognize that meet organizers are a limited resource and they must be encouraged to provide this wonderful service to the membership. We do not have a problem with too many meets, but too few.

() Comp pilots have reported they don’t want to be required to attend any low-level events. Does this requirement represent an excess burden on pilots, and is this requirement appropriate?

Yes. How about attracting pilots as opposed to forcing them? How about more carrots and less sticks? Isn't this supposed to be fun?

() What should the sanctioning fees be for accreditation and sanctioning? What changes, if any, should be considered at such time as sponsorship dollars are available?

We already have well over $20,000 spent on us each year at Big Spring. The dollars seem available now to meet organizers willing to do the work.

The sanction fees and bonds should be reduced by a factor of ten at least.

Validity and Scoring

() What is the best pre-meet validity system for the sport (i.e. headcount vs. ranking)

Race-To-Goal - GAP scoring.

The current NTSS system is an appropriate and well balanced validity system. I (through the paraglider pilots) have proposed a slight modification:

1. Each competing pilot in the meet (a competing pilot is one who has duly registered and flown at least one competition day) who is NTSS ranked 80th or higher brings points to the meet in accordance with the following schedule:

Pilots ranked 1st - 15th: 45 points
Pilots ranked 16th - 30th: 30 points
Pilots ranked 31st - 45th: 20 points
Pilots ranked 46th - 60th: 15 points
Pilots ranked 61st - 75th: 10 points
Pilots ranked 76th- 80th: 5 points

Previously it was:

Pilots ranked 1st - 10th: 45 points
Pilots ranked 11th - 20th: 30 points
Pilots ranked 21st - 30th: 20 points
Pilots ranked 31st - 40th: 14 points
Pilots ranked 41st - 50th: 9 points
Pilots ranked 51st - 60th: 6 points
Pilots ranked 61st - 70th: 4 points
Pilots ranked 71st - 80th: 2 points

In addition this change:

1. Foreign pilots are welcome and allowed in USHPA Sanctioned competitions.

Pilots ranked 1st - 100th: 45 points
Pilots ranked 101st - 200th: 30 points
Pilots ranked 201st - 300th: 20 points
Pilots ranked 301st - 400th: 15 points
Pilots ranked 401st - 500th: 10 points
Pilots ranked 501st - 600th: 5 points

Previously it was:

The NTSS ranking is made up only of U.S. pilots. However, the NTSS recognizes, for the purpose of points calculation, an equivalent foreign pilot's ranking according to the most current WPRS ranking with the top 20 places equal to the top 10 U.S. pilots and the WPRS ranking 21 through 40 equal to the NTSS 11 to 20 and so on up to WPRS 140 through 160 equal to NTSS 70 through 80.

() Should the number of total points required to achieve a fully valid meet be reduced (how much)? PG only?

No.

() Should competition tasks be scored using barometric or GPS altitude?

Barometric as it was at the Worlds. But, of course, altitude is not used in scoring unless air space is an issue.

You can ask your regional director to support these changes here:

REGION 1 - AK, OR, WA
Rich Hass R 2010 (425) 453-7177 <lowenslo>
Mark Forbes R 2009 (541) 760-3231 bio <mgforbes>
Mike Haley L 2009 (541) 899-1775 <mike_haley>
 
REGION 2 - North CA, NV
Paul Gazis R 2009 (650) 604-5704 <pgazis>
Urs Kellenberger R 2009 (650) 802-9908 <urs>
Dave Wills R 2010 (650) 324-9155 <dave>
 
REGION 3 - South CA, HI
Rob Sporrer R 2009 (805) 968-0980 <rob>
Bob Kuczewski R 2010 (858) 204-7499 bio <bobk>
Brad Hall R 2009 (760) 438-7804 bio <brad.reg3>
 
REGION 4 - AZ, CO, NM, UT
Mark Gaskill R 2010 (801) 949-2803 bio <airutah>
Ken Grubbs R 2009 (970) 879-7770 bio <kengrubbs>
Leo Bynum L 2009 (505) 255-1097 <leo>
 
REGION 5 - ID, MT, WY
Lisa Tate R 2009 (208) 376-7914 <lisa.tate>
 
REGION 6 - AR, KS, MO, NE, OK
Gregg Ludwig R 2009 (281) 788-6754 <greggludwig>
 
REGION 7 - IL, IN, MI, MN ND, SD, WI, IA
Tracy Tillman R 2010 (517) 223-8683 <cloud9sa>
 
REGION 8 - NH, CT, ME, MA, RI, VT
Jeff Nicolay R 2010 (603) 542-4416 <morningside>
 
REGION 9 - DC, DL, KY, MD, OH, VA, WV
Felipe Amunategui R 2010 (216) 751-0347 <felipe.amunategui>
L.E. Herrick R 2009 (304) 704-2331 <le_herrick>
Dennis Pagen L 2009 (814) 422-0589 <pagenbks>
Art Greenfield - NAA X (800) 644-9777 <awgreenfield>
 
REGION 10 - AL, FL, GA, MS NC, SC, TN, VI, PR
Steve Kroop R 2010 (321) 773-2307 <info>
Matt Taber R 2009 (706) 398-3433 <fly>
Dick Heckman R 2009 (205) 534-1461 <hekdic>
 
REGION 11 - LA, TX
Gregg Ludwig R 2009 (281) 788-6754 <greggludwig>
Riss Estes L 2009 (512) 329-0790 bio <parariss>
Dave Broyles L 2009 (972) 727-3588 <broydg>
 
REGION 12 - NJ, NY
Paul Voight R 2010 (845) 744-3317 bio <flyhigh>
 
REGION 13 - International
Dick Heckman 2009 (205) 534-1461 <hekdic>

What am I proposing to change?

October 5, 2009, 9:12:02 PDT

What am I proposing to change?

Very simply what are the changes I am proposing to the USHPA Competition system?

Dave Broyles|Dennis Pagen|Gregg "Kim" Ludwig|Leo Bynum|Lisa Tate|Mike Haley|Paul Voight|Rich Hass|Rob Sporrer|Steve Kroop|Tracy Tillman|USHPA

Here simply is what I want changed:

  1. Let ranked competition pilots bring more points to sanctioned meets, for example, instead of the top ten pilots bringing 45 NTSS points each to the meet, make it the top fifteen and so on. Similarly for the top foreign pilots. This increases the value of competitions.
  2. Divide the USHPA Competition Rulebook into three documents in order to make it more useable by the three different audiences to which the original document was addressed, especially for competition pilots at meets.
  3. Remove outdated restrictions on meet organizers in order to encourage them to organize more and better competitions. Reduce sanction and bond fees by a factor of ten.
  4. Have the competition pilots in both disciplines choose the Competition Committee co-chairman and have these co-chairman choose the competition committee members from among the competition pilots. Have the competition committee meet virtually.
  5. Change the Competition Workgroup proposal to eliminate any conflict with the NTSS competitions and put the revamped proposal in the Membership and Development committee. Let them develop a separate open distance and event based competition system.
  6. Choose a meet validity for the King Mountain co-Nationals that is consistent with the Competition Rulebook in force at the time of the meet.

These proposed changes can be found in detail here.

The full background on these proposals can be found here:
CWGarticles.htm
Kingnats.htm

You can ask your regional director to support these changes here:

REGION 1 - AK, OR, WA
Rich Hass R 2010 (425) 453-7177 <lowenslo>
Mark Forbes R 2009 (541) 760-3231 <mgforbes> bio
Mike Haley L 2009 (541) 899-1775 <mike_haley>
REGION 2 - North CA, NV
Paul Gazis R 2009 (650) 604-5704 <pgazis>
Urs Kellenberger R 2009 (650) 802-9908 <urs>
Dave Wills R 2010 (650) 324-9155 <dave>
REGION 3 - South CA, HI
Rob Sporrer R 2009 (805) 968-0980 <rob>
Bob Kuczewski R 2010 (858) 204-7499 <bobk> bio
Brad Hall R 2009 (760) 438-7804 <brad.reg3> bio
REGION 4 - AZ, CO, NM, UT
Mark Gaskill R 2010 (801) 949-2803 <airutah> bio
Ken Grubbs R 2009 (970) 879-7770 <kengrubbs> bio
Leo Bynum L 2009 (505) 255-1097 <leo>
REGION 5 - ID, MT, WY
Lisa Tate R 2009 (208) 376-7914 <lisa.tate>
REGION 6 - AR, KS, MO, NE, OK
Gregg Ludwig R 2009 (281) 788-6754 <greggludwig>
REGION 7 - IL, IN, MI, MN ND, SD, WI, IA
Tracy Tillman R 2010 (517) 223-8683 <cloud9sa>
REGION 8 - NH, CT, ME, MA, RI, VT
Jeff Nicolay R 2010 (603) 542-4416 <morningside>
REGION 9 - DC, DL, KY, MD, OH, VA, WV
Felipe Amunategui R 2010 (216) 751-0347 <felipe.amunategui>
L.E. Herrick R 2009 (304) 704-2331 <le_herrick>
Dennis Pagen L 2009 (814) 422-0589 <pagenbks>
Art Greenfield - NAA X (800) 644-9777 <awgreenfield>
REGION 10 - AL, FL, GA, MS NC, SC, TN, VI, PR
Steve Kroop R 2010 (321) 773-2307 <info>
Matt Taber R 2009 (706) 398-3433 <fly>
Dick Heckman R 2009 (205) 534-1461 <hekdic>
REGION 11 - LA, TX
Gregg Ludwig R 2009 (281) 788-6754 <greggludwig>
Riss Estes L 2009 (512) 329-0790 <parariss> bio
Dave Broyles L 2009 (972) 727-3588 <broydg>
REGION 12 - NJ, NY
Paul Voight R 2010 (845) 744-3317 <flyhigh> bio
REGION 13 - International
Dick Heckman 2009 (205) 534-1461 <hekdic>

Petitioning the USHPA

September 18, 2009, 8:13:32 MDT

Petitioning the USHPA

Just what kinda petition have you got there, boy?

Dave Broyles|Dennis Pagen|Gregg "Kim" Ludwig|Lisa Tate|Mike Haley|Paul Voight|Richard Heckman|Rich Hass|Rob Sporrer|Steve Kroop|Tracy Tillman|USHPA

As Oz Report readers know 105 mostly competition pilots have petitioned their regional directors at the USHPA BOD to:

I, the undersigned USHPA member, have lost confidence in the ability of the current USHPA leadership to competently and fairly manage the National Team Selection System (NTSS). I respectfully request that the competition committee chairman resign and the USHPA Board, Executive Committee and president stop moving forward on changes to the competition rulebook and NTSS system without first getting direct and considered input from the pilots, organizers and meet directors who are the most familiar NTSS competition.

I believe the validity of the rankings may have been compromised by recent competition committee actions and the 2009 Hang Gliding King Mountain NTSS point totals should be examined by a group of knowledgeable competition pilots, meet directors and scorekeepers to objectively determine proper validity.

I strongly encourage the USHPA Board to adjust their focus to support and create events outside the NTSS system to achieve and satisfy the important mission and goals of the USHPA.

You'll notice that this petition is not asking for the USHPA to take up a new subject and have a vote on that issue. It is asking Mike to resign and for USHPA BOD members to listen to the pilots on issues that they will already be voting on.

Lisa Tate, USHPA President, has responded to an inquiry from Steve Kroop, Region 10 director, with a statement that there is a procedure for accepting petitions at the USHPA and that it can be found in the USHPA Policy Manual, SOP 2.5. That SOP states:

5. 01 Petition Proposal

A. Any current member may present a petition to the USHPA President for the purpose of initiating a vote upon any issue. The petition must clearly set forth the proposed issue to be voted upon must be presented to the USHPA President not less than 60 days before the submission of the required sponsor signatures discussed below.

Now, first of all these pilots are not presenting a USHPA formal petition to the USHPA. They have signed a petition that has gone to each of their Regional Directors.

Second, the petition does not have the "...purpose of initiating a vote...," but rather is asking the pilots' regional directors to vote in a certain way on already scheduled votes at the CC and BOD meetings. It also asks, once again, for Mike Haley to resign his position as Competition Committee Chairman (this doesn't need a vote).

Forcing the USHPA BOD to vote on a issue by a formal petition is an extremely difficult undertaking, and I would never suggest that anyone try it. (It has been tried in the past.) It is much easier to convince one's regional director to bring up your item in a committee meeting. But, having said that, that regional director has to get the committee chairman to put that item on the agenda (not so easy, as we have seen).

But, having said that, nothing gets discussed, voted on, or passed, unless there are some strong champions on the BOD who actually attend the meetings, voice their opinions, and gather allies to prevail in the votes. 105 competition pilots have petitioned their regional directors to vote a certain way in the upcoming CC and BOD meetings on these issues, and they are perfectly within their rights to do so. I hope that the regional directors take the concerns of their constituent pilots into consideration.

At the last BOD meeting, a petition was sent into the BOD requesting that the BOD not adopt the proposed new NTSS calculations for the 2009 season. That petition when combined with the difficult work provided by Steve Kroop, Rob Sporrer, and others made it so the motion to adopt those procedures was stopped.

There is no need for competition pilots to place themselves in the straight jacket of SOP 2.5. They have a voice that can be heard at the BOD meeting, by contacting their regional director and asking them to vote against the proposal that is messing with the NTSS system. They will find their regional directors here:

Region 1: AK, OR, WA

Mark G. Forbes <<mgforbes>>;
Rich Hass <<lowenslo>>;
Mike Haley <<mphmikehaley>>;

Region 2: North CA, NV

Paul R Gazis <<pgazis>>;
Urs W. Kellenberger <<urs>>
Dave Wills <<dave>>;

Region 3 - South CA, HI

Bob K. <<bobk>>;
Rob Sporrer <<rob>>;
Brad Hall <<brad.reg3>>;

Region 4 - AZ, CO, NM, UT

Mark Gaskill <<airutah>>;
Ken Grubbs <<kengrubbs>>;
Leo Bynnum <<leo>>;

Region 5 - ID, MT, WY

Lisa Tate <<lisa.tate>>;

Region 6 - AR, KS, MO, NE, OK

Gregg Ludwig <<GreggLudwig>>

Region 7 - IL, IN, MI, MN, ND, SD, WI, IA

Tracy Tillman <<Cloud9SA>>;

Region 8 - NH, CT, ME, MA, RI, VT

Jeff Nicolay <<morningside>>;

Region 9 - DC, DL, KY, MD, OH, VA, WV

Luis Felipe Amunategui <<felipe.amunategui>>;
LE Herrick <<le_herrick>>;
Dennis Pagen <<pagenbks>>;

Region 10 - AL, FL, GA, MS, NC, SC, TN, VI, PR

Steve Kroop <<info>>;
Matt Taber <<fly>>;
Richard Heckman <<hekdic>>;

Region 11 - LA, TX

Gregg Ludwig <<GreggLudwig>>
Dave Broyles <<broydg>>;
Riss Estes <<parariss>>;

Region 12 - NJ, NY

Paul Voight <<flyhigh>>;

Region 13 - International

Richard Heckman <<hekdic>>;

USHPA Secretary reports on the BOD meeting

March 30, 2009, 8:37:47 EDT

USHPA Secretary reports on the BOD meeting

An unofficial report

Connie Locke|Dave Broyles|Dennis Pagen|Joe Greblo|Mike Haley|PG|record|Rich Hass|Steve Kroop|USHPA

Connie Locke|Dave Broyles|Dennis Pagen|Joe Greblo|Jon James|Mike Haley|PG|record|Rich Hass|Steve Kroop|USHPA

Rich Hass «richhass» writes:

Our first day of meetings started in a full-scale blizzard. Many of the directors are having a very tough time getting here. Several have been forced to cancel. My notes below are from the handful of committee meetings I attended. Please note, these are my own personal notes and are not vetted by committee chairs or anyone. The exact wording of motions, for example, should be close but the wording may differ when the chairs prepare their reports.

Site Committee

Mark Gaskill did an excellent job of describing his experience in working on the Point-of-the-Mountain project. Many of his ideas will be incorporated into the site development guide that Jon James has put a lot of work into. The Site committee will recommend adoption of the Site Development Guide.

Bob Kuczewski attended the meeting, asking for Site Committee support for adding the Torrey Hawks to the Soaring Council. The Site Committee did not agree with Bob's premise that the best place for resolution of hang gliding and paragliding issues is at the Soaring Council. There was a strong preference for both hang gliding and paragliding pilots to work within the framework of our own flying community and not involve public officials or members of the Soaring Council. The Site Committee turned down Bob's request for support.

Safety and Training Committee

Much time was devoted to the role of the accident reporting system and the need for confidentiality. Dave Broyles, chair, believes the system will only have integrity if 100% confidentiality can be assured. There are conflicts with the need to report accidents that may involve 3rd-party liability to USHPA counsel and USHPA's insurance carrier. These motions came out of this discussion:

PARAPHRASE of the MOTION: (Dave Broyles) Joe Greblo and Dave Broyles will direct the Executive Director to ask Tim Herr (USHPA lawyer) to review the safety reporting program and determine if USHPA can protect the integrity of the reporting program. (or words to that effect…) PASSED

PARAPHRASE of the MOTION: (Dick Heckman) Notification of requirement that instructors report accidents be included in renewal material. PASSED The term, 'Instructor Administrator' will be established and other terms dropped from the Standard Operating Procedures documents.

PARAPHRASE of the MOTION: To revise the titles for USHPA officials responsible for issuing ratings for a common terminology. The new term will be ‘Instructor Administrator’. The position of Special Observer is scheduled to be phased out at the end of the year. The effect of this change is that only instructors will be able to issue H1, H2, P1, and P2 ratings.

Executive Committee

The EC discussed the need to have a plan in place to address budgetary shortfalls in the event the economy takes a toll on membership renewals. Mark Forbes and I will prepare recommendations for potential cuts, should they become necessary. At the moment, USHPA is operating ahead of budget and there is no immediate danger.

The EC discussed the pros and cons of allowing USHPA meetings to be recorded by anyone. At Tim Herr's suggestion, the EC adopted the following resolution:

PARAPHRASE of the MOTION: (MF/LT) No recording devices can be used at USHPA meetings without unanimous prior consent of the participants at the meeting. PASSED by unanimous consent.

Regarding Torrey Pines, the EC is unhappy with the way the dispute has been handled, to say the least. The EC did not feel that it should focus on this issue at the Spring Meeting when there are committees (and an open session) where this should more appropriately be addressed--if it is addressed at all.

PARAPHRASE of the MOTION: The EC requests that Bob K. take his request to the appropriate committee within USHPA and ask the committee to review and make a recommendation to the full board if the committee deems it is appropriate. PASSED by unanimous consent.

Paul Montville asked for EC support in reallocating a portion of the marketing budget in order to establish a better financial arrangement for USHPA with the marketing coordinator. This change will create a retainer than can be terminated by either party.

PARAPHRASE of the MOTION: To allow the ED to reallocate the budget to allow for this change. PASSED by unanimous consent.

Finance Committee

There wasn't a whole lot to discuss at this meeting. We did consider one financial request:

PARAPHRASE of the MOTION (LT/BH) To investigate the cost and feasibility of digitizing the USHPA film archive. If it is deemed to be a reasonable and prudent cost, Finance Committee will make a recommendation to the EC. Passed w/o dissent.

Competition Committee

My complete, unabridged notes are as follows:

Dunlap PG National Meet—Both Jugdeep and Connie Locke have had a tough time communicating. JA has asked to have Connie dropped as a co-organizer and meet director. Connie Locke believes this comp will be in jeopardy if the local flying community is not involved. Connie Locke is that connection. Connie Locke does not want to be taken off and believes her commitment to the landowners and locals.

PARAPHRASE of the MOTION: (Dick Heckman) To reject both requests for changes to the Dunlap sanctioning application. PASSES w/o dissent.

PARAPHRASE of the MOTION: (Rich H./Dick Heckman) To Request that the co-meet directors agree to binding arbitration with the Urs K. and Dave Wills as to how the meet will be managed. Both parties must agree by noon tomorrow to binding arbitration and the binding arbitration must be substantially complete within one week. If the parties do not agree to participate in the mediation, the sanctioning will be pulled. PASSES w/o dissent. Mike Haley will call Jug and let him know what the CC has decided.

Competition Validity Discussion

In a discussion of Greg Babush’s proposal, Mike Haley believes points are only available from the top-15 pilots. Rob Sporer believes we need to listen to comp pilot feedback, not worry about points for the lower-tier pilots that aren’t affected by NTSS standings.

PARAPHRASE of the MOTION (Steve Kroop/Rob Sporer) Use the existing validity system through 2009 and until a new system is fully evaluated. Dennis Pagen suggests withdrawing the motion until the revised proposal can be fine tuned to adjust for counting the top 15 pilots only or a way to push the values down further in the rankings. Steve Kroop wants input from the competition community (pilots and meet organizers) before voting on a proposal.

Steve Kroop agrees to withdraw his motion.

Dennis feels the current system has too steep of a curve, there is room to move the curve down, bring more pilots into the calculation. (Steve Kroop agrees.) Dennis liked the Babush compromise except upon learning that the calc only counted the top 15 pilots.

PARAPHRASE of the MOTION: (Pagen/Hass) Table to validity issue until later in the meeting in order to give committee members an opportunity to fine-tune the Babush proposal. PASSES w/o dissent. Dennis remembers that Riss made a proposal which Steve modified. Dennis’ original proposal involved normalizing each meet to 1,000. Steve suggested normalizing the results for each day.

PARAPHRASE of the MOTION: (Pagen/Kroop) To choose the national hang gliding champion from a combination of King Mtn. and Big Spring based on the total sum of the daily score of the pilots. These daily scores will be normalized to 1000. The national champion in each class will be chosen from the combination of both meets provided; a minimum of 10 class 1 pilots compete in both meets; a minimum of 3 female pilots compete in both meets; a minimum of 5 class 5 pilots compete in both meets; otherwise the national champion will be chosen from the King Mtn. meet for 2009. PASSED w/o dissent but with 3 abstentions.

PARAPHRASE of the MOTION: (Pagen/Grubbs) To approve Josh Cohen’s scoring system for scoring the paragliding nationals provided; the definition of ‘fully valid’ shall be 900 points; and provided the sentence “for each event, the first 7…” shall be struck. PASSED w/o dissent.

PARAPHRASE of the MOTION: (Kroop) The Competition Committee will only accept sanctioning applications with a single meet organizer. The signor of the sanctioning application shall be the meet organizer, who has primary responsibility for the meet. PASSED w/1 dissenting vote.

Closing Comments for Day 1

Being an optimist, I am reasonably confident that the Comp Committee will find an acceptable compromise that can be voted on and implemented tomorrow. Steve Kroop isn't so sure. We were both at the same meeting. Steve was talking and I was listening, I should add, which may account for our different takes! Steve and others did a very good job of representing the feelings of the comp pilots, I should add. Yes, there continues to be mistrust and some confusion over what is being proposed but the big picture isn't all that far off, in my optimistic opinion. I really want to see this resolved with a common-ground solution when we go home tomorrow. USHPA looses if we don't.

Rich continues later:

The Competition Workgroup and Competition Committee was unsuccessful in getting a revised validity scoring system in place for several reasons (in my opinion). First, none of the counter-proposals were well prepared. They had elements of vagueness and there were some important elements that just weren't ready to go. If everyone had tried, they could have worked through these issues and prevailed but there was limited common ground and not much interest in working together. It is very unfortunate, in my opinion, as there was room for a win-win solution.

Discuss USHPA Secretary reports on the BOD meeting at the Oz Report forum   link»

Petition to the USHPA

February 28, 2009, 7:02:08 pm PST

Petition to the USHPA

A few of us have created the following petition. Please sign it.

Dave Broyles|Dennis Pagen|Gregg "Kim" Ludwig|Leo Bynum|Lisa Tate|Mike Haley|Paul Voight|PG|Rich Hass|Rob Sporrer|Steve Kroop|Tracy Tillman|USHPA

In the spring of last year, the USHPA competition committee formed a workgroup to determine if there were changes that could be made to our competition system that might help the association achieve its growth goals and increase participation in competition. While the notion of changing the competition system to grow the sports of hang gliding and paragliding seems far fetched, the possibility of increasing USHPA member participation in competition seem reasonable and a worthwhile endeavor. There is, however, a problem with the way the competition workgroup is proceeding with this project as outlined below:

  • The competition community (comp pilots, meet directors, meet organizers) was not included in the process of determining what problems may exist and how to address them. Proceeding in this way is a violation of section 1.4 of the USHPA competition rulebook.
  • The workgroup developed a proposed new system which essentially discards our exiting system and rulebook. This was done in a way that makes it extremely difficult to compare their proposal with our existing system. Requests for a redline document or an editable version of their draft proposal have been declined.
  • There was a comment period on the proposed new system but the comments have not been made public. Requests to see the comments have been rejected by the workgroup. Inquiries as to the process for incorporating the comments into the new system have gone unanswered.
  • The workgroup is working under the assumption that the USHPA BOD vote to authorize the workgroup to continue their efforts functions as an approval to change the competition validity system for 2009. This is in spite of the fact that the new validity system they proposed is universally disliked by the hang gliding and paragliding comp pilots and is believed to be detrimental to our ranking system and National Team selection.
  • There is an apparent conflict of interest in the workgroup. Since two of the workgroup's members are comp organizers and since the comp pilots were excluded it can be argued that workgroup's efforts are biased towards event organizers and against the competitors.
  • The workgroup appears to have erroneous preconceived notions about our competition system and competition pilots and their proposed system appears tainted by their prejudices.

If you agree that this conduct is not beneficial to the USHPA and to our competition system you must take steps to help stop it. Please click here and enter your name and USHPA number to be added to a list requesting the following actions (you do not need to be a comp pilot to participate).

  • Keep the existing validity system for 2009 and until an improved system, that is approved by the competition community, is developed
  • Task the workgroup to engage in an open discussion with the competition community to improve the validity system (there is a very good draft proposal by Greg Babush)
  • Instruct the workgroup to suspend its current course, follow our existing rules and work directly with the competition community to determine if there are any real deficiencies in our existing competition system and come up with real solutions.

Important: In addition to adding your name to the list above PLEASE contact your regional director(s) listed below and ask them to support the three actions above. This is a very important step since there is a USHPA BOD meeting coming up in March. Lastly, please ask your fellow pilots, whether they compete or not, to participate as well.

REGION 1 - AK, OR, WA
Rich Hass R 2010 (425) 453-7177 «email»
Mark Forbes R 2009 (541) 760-3231 (info) «email»
Mike Haley L 2009 (541) 899-1775 «email»
REGION 2 - North CA, NV
Paul Gazis R 2009 (650) 604-5704 «email»
Urs Kellenberger R 2009 (650) 802-9908 «email»
Dave Wills R 2010 (650) 324-9155 «email»
REGION 3 - South CA, HI
Rob Sporrer R 2009 (805) 968-0980 «email»
Bob Kuczewski R 2010 (858) 204-7499 (info) «email»
Brad Hall R 2009 (760) 438-7804 (info) «email»
REGION 4 - AZ, CO, NM, UT
Mark Gaskill R 2010 (801) 949-2803 (info) «email»
Ken Grubbs R 2009 (970) 879-7770 (info) «email»
Leo Bynum L 2009 (505) 255-1097 «email»
REGION 5 - ID, MT, WY
Lisa Tate R 2009 (208) 376-7914 «email»
REGION 6 - AR, KS, MO, NE, OK
Gregg Ludwig R 2009 (281) 788-6754 «email»
REGION 7 - IL, IN, MI, MN ND, SD, WI, IA
Tracy Tillman R 2010 (517) 223-8683 «email»
REGION 8 - NH, CT, ME, MA, RI, VT
Jeff Nicolay R 2010 (603) 542-4416 «email»
REGION 9 - DC, DL, KY, MD, OH, VA, WV
Felipe Amunategui R 2010 (216) 751-0347 «email»
L.E. Herrick R 2009 (304) 704-2331 «email»
Dennis Pagen L 2009 (814) 422-0589 «email»
Art Greenfield - NAA X (800) 644-9777 «email»
REGION 10 - AL, FL, GA, MS NC, SC, TN, VI, PR
Steve Kroop R 2010 (321) 773-2307 «email»
Matt Taber R 2009 (706) 398-3433 «email»
Dick Heckman R 2009 (205) 534-1461 «email»
REGION 11 - LA, TX
Gregg Ludwig R 2009 (281) 788-6754 «email»
Riss Estes L 2009 (512) 329-0790 (info) «email»
Dave Broyles L 2009 (972) 727-3588 «email»
REGION 12 - NJ, NY
Paul Voight R 2010 (845) 744-3317 (info) «email»
REGION 13 - International
Dick Heckman 2009 (205) 534-1461 «email»

Scooter Tow Syllabus

November 4, 2008, 8:05:45 PST

Scooter Tow Syllabus

And the feedback was?

Bill Bryden|Blue Sky|cart|Dave Broyles|Dennis Pagen|Greg Berger|Gregg "Kim" Ludwig|Lookout Mountain Flight Park|Pat Denevan|Rob Kells|scooter tow|Steve Wendt|Tracy Tillman|USHPA

Gregg Ludwig «GreggLudwig» sends:

Results of a Benchmarking Study to Identify and Unify Best Practices in Scooter Tow Instruction for Hang Gliding

by

Tracy Tillman and Lisa Colletti (Cloud 9 Sport Aviation) October 2006

Contributors:

Dave Broyles (Kite Enterprises), Greg Berger (Venture Flight Hang Gliding), Pat Denevan (Mission Soaring Center) Rob Kells (Wills Wing), Dennis Pagen and Bill Bryden ("Towing Aloft"), Michael Roberston (High Perspective), Matt Taber (Lookout Mountain Flight Park), Steve Wendt (Blue Sky Hang Gliding), Mark Windscheimer (Airtime Above Hang Gliding), USHPA ("Part 104 Pilot Proficiency System"), and USHPA Committees (Towing, Safety and Training)

Hang 2 General Syllabus (Scooter Tow)

Approx.% Progress -- Skills

Start -- (USHPA Membership Application)

10% -- Setup, preflight, simulator, ground handling, free ground runs, tow ground runs.
20% -- Ground-skim, straight flight on uprights, slight correctional turns, foot landings.

Hang 1 -- (Beginner Written Exam and Rating Application)

30% -- Review of preflight skills, emergency simulation, transition to base tube and somewhat higher tows, foot and wheel landings.
40% -- Progression to much higher tows, speed control, slight turns, very gentle stalls.
50% -- High tows, 30, 45, 90, 180, 360 degree turns on glide.
60% -- High tows, box and s-turn patterns on glide.
70% -- Higher tows, V speeds, and gentle stalls on glide.
80% -- High tows in straight and cross winds.
90% -- High tows, introduction to convective turbulence and soaring techniques.
100% -- Accuracy landings.

Hang 2 -- (Novice Written Exam and Rating Application)

Hang One Training Outline (Scooter Tow) WW Condor 330 or 225 (or other suitable glider) recommended. A large, light, slow flying training glider is recommended. Model and size used depends on conditions and height of tow. Common examples include but are not limited to: WW Condor or Falcon, Northwing EZY, Aeros Target.

A. Pre-flying skills.

1. Set-up and preflight of glider, harness, and equipment.

2. Flight control and tow release simulation on base tube and uprights, hanging in glider or simulator.

3. Ground handling.

4. Free running the glider w/o harness. (proper: AOA, acceleration, wings level, flare to stop)

5. Free running with harness, pulling glider into the air with harness.

6. Pre-launch check of glider and equipment, hang check, etc. (HIERTow checklist--or other)

7. Review of verbal and visual commands. (Ready; Take up Slack; Go, Go, Go; Abort, Abort, Abort-or other)

8. Tow ground runs (slow, short, no-flight "dry run" tows, for practice of commands and good launch and flare technique)

B. Low and slow ground-skim tows, upright position. .

1. Straight, low and slow ground-skim foot launch tows, upright position, with gentle deceleration for slow run-on foot landing, no release.

2. Repeat straight, low and slow ground-skim tows, upright position, with quicker deceleration for quicker flare foot landings, no release.

3. Low and slow longer ground-skim tows, with a very slight turn off-center, then correctional turn back to center, then land, no release. (optional, depending upon site and equipment used)

4. Repeat low and slow ground-skim tows with off-center maneuvers, slowly increasing amount off-center, on each side of center, then back to center, no release. (optionall)

5. Straight, low and slow ground-skim tows, upright position, with release and flare landing.

6. Straight, slightly higher than ground skim tows, upright position, with release and flare landing.

7. Straight, slightly higher than ground skim tows, upright position, with release and extra speed prior to flare landing.

8. Straight, slightly higher than ground skim tows, upright position, release, very slight turn off-center, then correctional turn back to center, then flare landing. (optional)

C. Pass Hang 1 written exam.

Hang Two Training Outline (Scooter Tow) WW Falcon (or other similar/suitable glider) recommended Training glider suitable for higher tows recommended

A. Transition to base tube and higher tows.

1. Review of pre-flying skills (see Hang 1) and emergency simulation (chute & hook knife use).

2. Transition to base tube while on low and slow ground-skim tow (optional, using Condor)

(a) Straight, low and slow ground-skim foot launch tows, upright position, momentarily moving one hand slightly lower then back up on upright, release and foot land.

(b) Repeat (a), using other hand, release and foot land.

(c) Repeat (a), moving one hand a bit lower on upright then back up, release and foot land.

(d) Repeat (c), using other hand, release and foot land.

(e) Repeat (d), moving one hand to base tube then back to upright, release and foot land.

(f) Repeat (e), using other hand, release and foot land.

(g) Repeat, moving both hands to base tube, then back to uprights, release and foot land.

(h) Repeat, keeping hands on base tube, no release, slow deceleration to belly/wheel land.

(i) Repeat (h), with slightly higher than ground skim tow, release, belly/wheel land.

(j) Repeat (g), with slightly higher than ground skim tow, release and foot land.

3. Normal foot-launched ground-skim tow and landing on uprights without release, to get used to smaller glider.

4. Normal foot-launched slightly higher ground-skim tow on uprights with release to flare land.

5. Some straight tows and flights on uprights, increasing acceleration and height with each tow, with release to foot land.

6. Transition to base tube while on glide.

(a) Higher tow, release, momentarily move one hand slightly lower then back up on upright while on glide, foot land.

(b) Repeat (a), using other hand, foot land.

(c) Repeat (a), moving one hand a bit lower on upright then back up, foot land.

(d) Repeat (c), using other hand, foot land.

(e) Repeat (d), moving one hand to base tube then back to upright, foot land.

(f) Repeat (e), using other hand, foot land.

(g) Repeat, moving both hands to base tube, then back to uprights, foot land.

(h) Repeat, keeping hands on base tube, belly/wheel land.

7. Cart or keel-assist wheel launch on base tube, release, belly/wheel landing on base tube. (optional)

B. High tows, slight turns, speed control, very gentle stalls.

1. Repeated straight tows on uprights, increasing acceleration and height with each tow to eventually achieve near maximum height tow, with release and straight glide to foot land.

2. High tow, release, stay on uprights, slight turn in one direction the other while on glide, foot land.

3. High tow, release, transition to base tube, slight turn and back, transition to uprights, foot land.

4. High tow, release, stay on uprights, increase speed to max glide then reduce to normal, foot land.

5. High tow, release, stay on uprights, decrease speed to min sink then increase to normal, foot land.

6. High tow, release, stay on uprights, decrease speed to very gentle stall, recover to normal speed, foot land.

7. Repeat #5, transition to base tube after release.

8. Repeat #6, transition to base tube after release.

9. Repeat #7, transition to base tube after release.

C. Turns.

1. Foot launch, with sufficient altitude after tow release, on uprights, turn 30 degrees left and right, then straight flight to land.

2. Repeat, with 45 degree turns left and right after release then straight flight to land.

3. Repeat, with 90 degree turns left and right after release then straight flight to land.

4. Repeat, with 180 turn left then right after release, then straight flight to land.

5. Repeat, with 360 turn left or right after release, then straight flight to land.

6. Repeat, with 360 turn left and right after release (if altitude permits), then straight flight to land.

7. Repeat #3-6 with transition to base tube after release, then transition to uprights and land.

D. Pattern tows.

1. High tow, turn crosswind for box pattern left or right, downwind, base, final, land.

2. Repeat box pattern in other direction.

3. High tow, turn crosswind, downwind, s-turns on base to lose altitude, final, land.

E. V Speeds and gentle stalls.

1. High tows for practice to achieve good speed control at various cardinal airspeeds on glide (most likely on downwind leg of box pattern), normal landing.

2. Repeat, with straight flight and very gentle stalls, normal landing.

3. Repeat, with straight flight and slightly more aggressive stalls, normal landing.

4. Repeat, with straight flight and aggressive stalls, normal landing. (optional)

F. Wind, gradient, mechanical turbulence.

1. Straight or pattern tows in smooth and light slightly cross winds.

2. Straight or pattern tows in smooth and somewhat stronger and more cross winds.

G. Introduction to thermal turbulence and soaring.

1. Straight or pattern tows in barely convective straight-in winds.

2. Straight or pattern tows in barely convective and slightly cross winds.

3. Straight or pattern tows in mildly convective straight-in winds. (optional)

4. Straight or pattern tows in mildly convective and somewhat greater cross winds. (optional)

5. Introduction to thermal soaring techniques after release. (optional)

H. Accuracy landing.

1. Three consecutive landings within 100 feet of spot.

I. Pass Hang 2 written exam.

Scooter Towing »

November 4, 2008, 8:05:29 PST

Scooter Towing

The USHPA connection

Blue Sky|Dave Broyles|Greg Berger|Gregg "Kim" Ludwig|Pat Denevan|scooter tow|Steve Wendt|USHPA|video

Gregg Ludwig «GreggLudwig» writes:

The Scooter Tow instructor clinic provider must have an appointment as a Basic or Advance instructor as well as  a Scooter Tow Supervisor or Scooter Tow Administrator and have attended a Scooter Tow clinic or be listed on the USHPA approved short list of providers. Steve Wendt is already an Scooter Administrator.

A funded clinic still has to be approved by the Tow Committee and the Executive Committee. This is the USHPA short list:  Dave Broyles, Greg Berger, Pat Denevan, Steve Wendt, and Mark Windsheimer.

We intend to post the "standard" syllabus developed by Steve and others, however, providers still have the option to submit their own syllabus for approval.

So here we have the man reputed to be the most dangerous and accident prone in hang gliding approved to instruct others in scooter tow techniques (see pictures and videos in the Oz Report, pictures taken by me). That's what you get when you have an organization like the USHPA.

My question here is does the USHPA really have a handle on what should be taught and how it should be taught? The syllabus below doesn't provide much of an answer.

If you want to become a qualified instructor with excellent technique I suggest you forgo this program, contact Steve Wendt directly and work out an instruction program with him.

USHPA and scooter towing

October 17, 2008, 10:20:49 PDT

USHPA and scooter towing

Have they screwed it up, as usual?

Blue Sky|Dave Broyles|scooter tow|Steve Wendt|USHPA

Has the USHPA contacted the scooter tow instructors when designing their program? It looks like anyone can put on a scooter tow clinic, is that true? Regardless of their experience?

Has Steve Wendt been brought into the program? The USHPA doesn't have the expertise to run such a program. Who are they relying on, if any one.

I noticed that Steve Wendt's photo was in the USHPA magazine article. Did that imply a connection or an endorsement?

Is there a standard syllabus for scooter towing instruction? Does Dave Broyles have any involvement with this?

Oz Report World Wide Site Guide mapplet

Thu, Jul 19 2007, 11:24:51 am EDT

Site Guide

Folks start entering their sites through My Maps

Gerry "Scare!" Grossnegger|Dave Broyles

Scare «Gerry» writes:

Congratulations to Michael Husmann for being the first one to use the World Hang Gliding Site Guide mapplet in Google Maps to submit a site (Börry, Germany), followed closely by Dave Broyles registering the Indian Creek Flight Park in Texas.

If you've already got the mapplet added to your Google My Maps page (see this article) it should update itself to the latest version ("script: 2007-07-17 17:31:07") automatically. If not, try the Reload link, or remove and reload the mapplet. The URL to enter is still https://OzReport.com/sites.mapplet

The latest version puts a small red place mark on your map when you use the "submit a new site" link, and you can drag it around and fine-tune it all you want before submitting it to the Guide. Please zoom in as far as it will allow and position the point of the marker as accurately as you can. As a bonus, there's a Google Map icon on it that will open that location in Google Earth, if you have it.

The World Site Guide mapplet has now been selected for inclusion into Google's directory, and is already in the "Popular" section, 4th page out of 10, position 92 out of 230.

(IMAGE)

Discuss "Oz Report World Wide Site Guide mapplet" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

USHPA »

February 21, 2007, 9:24:14 PST

USHPA

The chairman of the membership and development committee would like to hear from you

Dave Broyles|Paul Voight|Richard Heckman|USHPA

Richard Heckman «hekdic» writes:

At the upcoming BOD meeting, I will be chairing the Membership and Development Committee meeting. At the present time, we have 3 agenda items, a Sponsor Program to assist new members, a Mentor Program to assist members in achieving more experience, and the Poster Program proposed by Tommy Thompson. I will also be working with Paul Voight and the Instructor Support Committee, Riss Estes and the Planning Committee, and Dave Broyles and the Safety and Training Committee.

While my efforts will be concentrated in the above areas, I will be happy to bring any recommendations you may have on any subject of the Association's activities to the attention of the relevant committee. Please send any comments within the next 10 days or so.

Discuss USHPA at the Oz Report forum

Scooter Towing Hawaii

December 14, 2006, 7:14:40 PST

Hawaii

It started there.

Dave Broyles|PG|scooter tow

http://gravityhawaii.com/scooter_towing.htm

In 1989, Brian Dahl and I came up with the idea of the scooter tow rig for Paragliding and Hang gliding. We were given credit as the co-inventors of the scooter tow rig after we sent it into Hang Gliding magazine.

Dave Broyles «broydg» writes:

I am pleased to hear more about the originators of the motor scooter stationary winch system. I wrote an article in the April, 1994 Hang Gliding Magazine called "Scooter Mania" in which I credited Bryan Dahl with building the first scooter based stationary winch.

USHPA BOD items

October 4, 2006, 8:04:13 PDT

USHPA

A somewhat comical look at the upcoming BOD meeting

Dave Broyles|Dennis Pagen|Manfred Ruhmer|Peter Birren|record|Robin Hamilton|USHPA

Dave Broyles|Dennis Pagen|Manfred Ruhmer|Peter Birren|record|Robin Hamilton|Tracy Tillman|USHPA

A final updated version of the packet of material sent to the BOD members can be found at www.ushpa.aero. Click on the Members section and after signing in, click on Board Information, scroll to the bottom, it's there on the bottom.

Planning Committee Agenda Riss Estes, Chair, 1) Prioritize strategic plan action plans

That's it. One item. Thank, God. The strategic plan is spaghetti, a mess. I little bit for this guy, and a little bit for that guy. I assume that the strategic plan items will be prioritized on the basis on how much they contribute to the goal. I wonder how we determine that?

Safety & Training Committee Agenda Dave Broyles, Chair

Not a single item on the agenda about supporting instructors and how to get them ready to do a lot more training and to be a lot more successful. This is obviously not a priority. But this outsider's item is quite interesting:

Discussion of proposal by Gayle Smith and Peter Birren as follows.

A. Lower site designations from H3/P3 to H2/P2. So most sites are accessible to H2/P2 pilots.

B. Allow H3/P3 pilots to launch H2/P2 pilots.

C. Standardize training to include first mountain soaring flights or towing to soar flights.

D. Graduate new pilots the way every other sport does: Ready to participate in the sport. Not 10 hours and 1 full rating short of being able to launch and fly most sites.

It goes a small ways toward addressing the major area of drop out, after pilots get their hang 2.

National Coordinating Committee Agenda Dennis Pagen, Chair Tracy Tillman Sport Pilot Subcommittee, Chair

1) Sport Pilot Sub Committee Review

2) NAA Observers

Why do we care about Sport Pilot? Only for the tow planes. The tug pilots are required to have private pilot licenses, so we could care less about actual Sport Pilot licenses.

NAA Observers? The only two people who would care would be Robin Hamilton (and he gets his records through the BHPA) and me (I'm the only one dealing with the NAA, and I've already not registered two world record flights because I hate the NAA and don't want to pay $400). Who else is going for world records? Okay, Manfred. This item looks innocent. It isn't. It is a viper. Nasty and personal, it pits old enemies against each other. Vicious.

Year to Date Magazine Advertising Revenue August 2004-2006
         Total $  Change % Change
2004 $93,936 from 2004
2005 $85,577 ($8,359) -8.90%
2006 $82,277 ($11,659) -12.41%

Magazine ad revenue continues to decline and expenses continue to rise.

Year to Date Merchandise Income

Merchandise sales increased as a result of improved merchandise marketing. Merchandise is marketed more effectively using the membership renewal application. Order forms are inserted in renewal packets & flyers are revised more frequently.

Pilots are buying more USHPA junk (see reference to Car Junk on Car Talk, NPR).

Salary Expense / Payroll Allocation

The 2006 payroll allocation reflects the resource allocation required to support strategic plan initiatives.

I wonder just what strategic plan items we are talking about here. Perhaps Jayne or Martin can tell us.

Building

Year to Date savings on rent of $12,670 plus YTD rental income of $17,600 equals a YTD net benefit of $30,270 to the Association as a result of owning the office building.

It pays to own commercial property, but it is less expensive to rent residential.

Discuss USHPA at the Oz Report forum

A scooter tow accident/incident

July 10, 2006, 7:30:58 CDT

Scooter tow

The tow operator makes numerous errors, made obvious by the parachute.

Dave Broyles|scooter tow|Steve Wendt|USHPA|video

This accident/incident occurred in mid May north of Dallas at a clinic given by Dave Broyles, the USHPA safety and training committee chairman, for the instruction of USHPA certified instructors in scooter towing. Dave Broyles is the scooter tow operator:

Here is my review of what the problems were with this tow in chronological order:

1) This is a brand new student. Notice that he has to run reasonably hard to get the glider in the air. A good run, but why is this required? Wouldn't it be safer to have a set up that allowed for a much less vigorous run?

Why is the student required to run so fast? Because he is flying a WW Falcon 195, instead of a WW Condor.

2) Requiring this amount of speed, air and ground speed, makes it difficult for the tow operator to keep the student near the ground.

3) Student is pulled too high to begin with, and the student is already put in a dangerous position. With this level of experience the student should be no more than three feet off the ground.

4) By looking at the parachute opening you'll notice that after a few seconds the tow operator notices that the student is too high and backs off on the throttle releasing line tension. But instead of letting the student get lower, the tow operator quickly pulls the line tight again instead of letting the student descend to the proper low altitude.

The tow operator should have reduced line tension and left it reduced, getting the student back down to a safe altitude. But perhaps the tow operator was too concerned about the student hitting the ground, because his speed is too high because the glider is too small.

5) The tow operator continues to keep the student too high.

6) The student begins to go off to the left a little, but the tow operator does not reduce the line tension and does not bring the student down.

7) As the student continues to go off to the left more, the operator does not reduce the line tension. It is already too late. The student is too high.

8) When it is way too late the tow operator reduces the line tension as the glider crashes.

As I see this accident it is completely avoidable and completely the responsibility of the tow operator to make this operation safe. The student should not be relied on to do anything correctly. It is the tow operator's responsibility to create a safe tow. This was not a safe tow.

Steve Wendt «blueskyhg» writes:

That is simply a student who doesn't understand roll control . A slight roll occurred followed by the student falling into the turn , and he was cross controlling. The student exhibited no proper roll input whatsoever.

That wasn't a scooter incident, it was nothing but poor technique. That's why I keep people three to five feet off the ground on a Condor until proper body movement is established. I'm not saying that this incident can't happen to my students, but it hasn't. I try to eliminate it well before it becomes a problem.

As you know, in almost 17,000 tows now, I've never had a customer break a leading edge.

I also noticed that the operator of the winch decreased power quickly immediately after launch as you can see the line drop to the ground with a lot of slack. If that kind of inconsistent winch tension continued, it would also be harder for the student to have steady speed.

I couldn't see how the tow line is attached. But, if the tow line was only on the pilot, instead of using a keel attachment also, then there is more bar pressure and a slightly higher angle of attack , and that makes it harder for a student to control as a beginner.

It was a slight turn that wasn't corrected properly. In fact it was a turn that was completed uncorrected, even enhanced by poor body control.

How do we eliminate it? Use a Condor with the student's feet just two to three feet off the ground until the instructor has ensured that proper hip movement occurs.

Steve Wendt's Scooter Tow Clinic

March 7, 2006, 9:02:00 EST

Scooter

How did the participants feel about Steve Wendt's clinic and what did they learn?

Dave Broyles|John Matylonek|Michael Robertson|Pat Denevan|PG|scooter tow|Steve Wendt|USHGA|weather

John Matylonek «john» responds to the questionnaire from Dave Broyles, the USHGA Chairman for the Safety and Training Committee:

Did this program show you how to run a profitable small hang gliding business?

Since the point of the scooter tow clinic was primarily the optimum mix of technology and instructional methodology of Steve Wendt, I did not expect much formal presentation of business methods. However, various business tips and spontaneous presentations were offered regarding instruction, sales and service as a sidelight. It turned out that the participants were as much a part of the show as Steve Wendt. So, in that regard, in turned into conference - not a sage on a stage. That is why it was so successful.

I went away with many ideas regarding effectiveness of instruction, marketing, and how can I steer students to purchase equipment and remain in the program and also how to improve the quality of the business. Pat Denevan and Matt Taber in particular, are the masters at the business side of hang gliding. Both Pat and Matt know it is critical to not only provide efficient and effective, consistent and regular instruction but to also sell the equipment that will keep an operation afloat. I found the instructional discussions with Michael Robertson regarding visualizations, timing of new challenges, and new research on how brains learn very stimulating. For me, the blend of practical, theoretical and economic aspects of hang gliding instruction was perfect.

What new marketing ideas for hang gliding did you get?

The technology and this particular instructional method together opens up any field near population centers and even near major roads to view hang gliding first hand. As long as you remain low and slow, we can have hang gliding schools everywhere. Also, we need to stop calling it scooter tow. Call it "tow assisted" hang gliding, otherwise people will have visions of being pulled by a scooter!

What conclusions did you come to about equipment?

Less is more. A 90 CC tow engine is enough. Simple and inexpensive enough for any instructor with caution and common sense to operate it easily and effectively. It also is extremely reliable and simple as any winch system can be.

What conclusions did you come to about training with scooter tow?

The low and slow and incremental USHGA method of foot launch still applies with tow assisted instruction. I still believe that this method is best utilized in conjunction with a training hill, just because the kinaesthetic differences, complexities of airflow around terrain, and environmental cues (starting from low to higher) are great enough to be not transferable to mountain launches. But, if the pilot will be primarily a tow pilot than this can method can stand only too as many winch operators have shown. Hill launching than becomes a "special skill" for tow-trained pilots.

However, if one lowers the sights about the ultimate aim of tow assisted flight

- that it fills gaps and provides consistency and regularity in a comprehensive training program - than this method will be powerful way of speeding progress in instruction at all sites around the country. This will make instructors and schools more efficient at providing instruction to groups. As long as it is kept and low & slow - the complexity and potential dangers are minimized so that even instructional assistants can operate the equipment.

The main fault of all new instructors is the inability to control incremental steps in the program of instruction. In part, this is because of inability to control site conditions and the effort of physically assisting those beginning ground skims. Impatience and wishing to see results (on both the students and instructors part) leads to the tendency skip necessary fundamental steps. When they start to have accidents, bending aluminum and incurring expense and seeing how frustrated their students get, they intelligently quit. An impatient tow operator can still be tempted to solve control technique problems by adding power, so training is necessary in constitutes incremental steps. That's what I was paying attention to mostly. But this knowledge is minimal compared to using high power hydrostatic line retrieval winch system and doing high tows.

What Steve showed is that by under powering the system the tendency to rush the student in the air before gaining fundamental skills can be avoided. This particular use of the technology can help create the ideal situations so that students can improve in an incremental way, just like an ideal training hill that has all wind directions. But, it also is less work and frustration for the student since their legs are not being used in acceleration and carrying themselves and/or glider back the hill. This method allows some of the physical effort to be minimized so that students can concentrate on body movement and control (tiring enough for most students). This does not mean the student will not experience frustration and/or hang gliding will be open to all. After all, as instructors we are still setting up ideal, assisted and supervised learning situations. The trick is still getting people to take instruction well into their hang two stage in the mountains. The main reason people drop out of the sport now is they don't get enough support at this stage.

What did you like best about the clinic?

This has been the first clinic where high quality ACTIVE and Successful instructors shared their knowledge, wisdom, problems, and frustrations. It was one in which we all showed and DEMONSTRATED what we knew - as opposed to only sitting in a room talking about what we knew. It was truly more like a instructors professional conference, where we made spontaneous presentations of what works, what doesn't, and possible reasons why. The spirit was that of sharing and helping one another other become more successful.

I especially liked the personal discussions regarding instructor's relationships with manufacturers of equipment and other instructors. We have come to the point in hang gliding where cooperation not competition will keep the industry alive. Even my paragliding instructor buddies see the advantage of sending students to each other (from hang gliding to paragliding and vice versa) and/or using our specialized skills to assist each other in instruction and promotion.

What did you like least about the clinic?

That not everyone got the same immersion that I did and the weather interfered with first one. Since I participated in all four clinics I was able to see most of the situations in which the tow technology and instructional methods could be used to fill in most gaps in instruction - use of the 90 CC, 125 CC and even 225 CC (the one available to me) winched could be used appropriately. Also, not everyone got the benefit to hear Pat Denevan, Matt Taber and Michael Robertson talk about measuring quality, effectiveness and efficiency of instruction and marketing solutions.

If a clinic like this were not free, what would be a fair price to pay for it?

Making a truly sincere and promising beginning instructor pay for anything about professional development is a bad idea in this stage of hang gliding's decline. We need instructors. Simply deciding to make a go at teaching hang gliding is a sacrifice in itself. But, if a similar conference can be duplicated the way I experienced it - 8 days of high quality immersion in demonstrations, participation and presentation - I would pay $150 to $200 to do it again. You must remember, in part, I created my own experience because of my commitment to attend all the clinics.

The following questionnaire is to find out what exactly was covered in the clinic and what you think should be covered. Please note what was covered with a C, what you would like to have heard about with an L and what you don't care about with an X.

What information were you given about equipment for scooter tow training?

Was there a discussion about what scooters are appropriate?

Small, medium, large? - C

Constantly Variable Transmission (CVT) vs. manual shift - C

Centrifugal clutch vs. manual clutch. - X

Was there a discussion about where are they available?

New, used, wrecked? - C

Was there a discussion about scooter tow systems design and building?

Trailer, modular, trailer hitch mount, free standing? - L

Were line tension measurement and methods explained? - L

Was the value or lack of value of line tension measurement discussed? - C

Wheel drum building? - C

Was there a discussion about equipment maintenance? - C

Was the cost of various approaches to setting up a scooter tow operation discussed? - C

Was a type of rope suggested? - C

Were the advantages and disadvantages of various types and sizes of rope discussed? - C

Was splicing or tying knots in tow rope explained or demonstrated? - C

Was a turn-around pulley demonstrated? - C

Were mounting and use of turn-around pulleys discussed or demonstrated? - C

Was any source of turn-around pulleys suggested? - C

Was a tow line parachute discussed or demonstrated? - C

Were size and construction of tow line parachute covered? - C

Was the need for a tow line parachute explained? - C

Were retrieval winches discussed? - C

Were accessory vehicles such as ATV, motorcycle or bicycle discussed? - C

Was rope retrieval discussed? - C

Were glider and student retrieval discussed? - C

Was a stationary winch mentioned and how it compares to scooter tow? - C

Were various gliders for training discussed? - C

Did you get a suggested syllabus for a course of scooter tow training? - C

Was how to teach foot launch with scooter tow discussed? - C

Was active pitch control discussed? - C

Was active roll control discussed? - C

Was PIO discussed? - C

Was active yaw control discussed? - C

Were you shown how to train the student to release? - C

Were stages of learning and accomplishment discussed? - C

Was advancement through stages discussed? - C

Were appropriate wind speeds for training discussed? - C

Were methods for various wind speeds discussed? - C

Was cross-wind launch discussed? - C

Were high tows for training discussed? - C

Did you get a list or discussion of safety precautions for scooter tow training? - L

Were you shown standard tow signals? - C

Were you shown a standard towing procedure? - C

Were check lists mentioned? - C

Was failure to hook in discussed? - C

Were weak links discussed? - C

Did you get a list or a discussion of risks and dangerous practices in scooter tow training? - C

Were lockouts discussed? - C

Were rope or weak link breaks discussed? - C

Were release failures or failure to release discussed? - C

What recommendations were made for tow bridles and releases? - C

Were you shown various ways to rig tow bridles? - C

Were you shown how to prevent release failures? - C

Were you showed how to rig a safety nose line release? - C

Were you trained to operate a scooter tow system? - C

Were you trained about how to use the brake properly? - C

Were you shown how to prevent rope tangles? - C

Were you shown how to undo rope tangles? - C

Were you shown how to judge pilot angle of attack? - C

Were you towed with a scooter tow system? - C

Were there any suggestions about how to incorporate recreational scooter towing in your operation? - L

Were high tows discussed? - C

Was step towing discussed? - C

Were you given any ideas about how to get appropriate land for scooter towing? - L

If any of the above subjects were not discussed, did you get hand outs on the subjects? - L

USHGA Instructor Program

January 7, 2006, 9:22:05 pm AEDT

USHGA

The advanced instructors don't have to recertify

calendar|Dave Broyles|Fly High|Kari Castle|Paul Voight|PG|USHGA

Paul Voight at Fly High «flyhigh» writes in response to my article on Kari Castle (http://ozreport.com/10.5#2) :

In a nut shell:

1) Certify first time

2) Recertify one time

3) Recertify one more time. Upon this second recertification you will be dubbed "Advanced instructor" for life. Advanced instructors recertify by filling out a form from then on every three years. Any "old" instructor is grandfatherable to "advanced instructor", as they have recertified probably several times.

As a Regional Director and regular Board meeting attendee for the last twelve or so years, I have witnessed and, at times, been a part of the evolution of the U.S.H.G.A. Instructor Training Program (ITP, formerly ICP). I also happen to be an ITP Administrator. The program has evolved to a point now, where I believe it won't undergo many (any?) More changes in the near future. Therefore, this article should help explain how it now works, and clear up any confusion or misconceptions that may be lurking out there, (and things should run smoothly for a while!).

The notion that it is too hard to become an instructor is, in my opinion, inaccurate. Starting at the beginning, if you are an intermediate pilot or higher, and you want to get certified as a Basic Instructor, you need to attend a clinic. (I'll cover Advanced Instructors later.) Clinics are often listed in the calendar of events. The office also knows when and where they are occurring because a form from the Regional Director to the office is supposed to precede any clinic that is planned.

If you can't find a convenient clinic, plan B is to rustle up a few other people interested in certification or recertification (these clinics can be run concurrently) and then, hire one of the people on the ITP Administrator list to run a clinic in your area (possibly in conjunction with a local hang gliding/paragliding shop). Administrators don't generally run clinics unless asked; so waiting for a clinic to cosmically come to your area won't work. If you want one, make it happen (or get one to happen somewhere you would like to visit!).

Next, there are a number of required tasks that need to be accomplished before a candidate passes a clinic. First, you need to get a basic first aid card. Call the local Red Cross phone number and attend the next (1/2 day) class. Second, (at the discretion of the administrator), you may need to apprentice under (at least one) already certified instructor. A checklist of the tasks to be apprenticed will be provided. While both of these steps were designed as "prerequisites", they often are accomplished after the clinic (in a timely manner), at the discretion of the Administrator.

At the actual clinic, you will need to make some presentations, watch and critique other presentations, as well as benefit from any presentations made by the Administrator. Additionally, you will be exposed to teaching risk management (the Robertson's Rules of Reliability charts and handbook), and take (and pass) the U.S.H.G.A. Instructor test.

Last but not least, you must take and pass the U.S.H.G.A. version of the F.A.A. Fundamentals of Instruction (F.O.I.) test. While designed as a prerequisite, the fact that the ITP Administrators (and Tandem Administrators) are the Administrators of this test, the reality is that it is often administered at the clinics. The F.A.A. home study book, with all of the questions and answers, is available through the office (and many airports) … ask for "the red F.O.I. book".

The background to adopting this test is that it relieves the Administrators from having to spend the 1-2 days needed to cover the material, allowing the clinics to be shorter, and more focused on our specific sports instruction techniques. Successful completion of these requirements, along with a $15.00 rating fee, and you are a certified Basic Instructor, which enables you to teach the sport, and issue beginner and novice ratings.

The rating lasts three years, after which you need to attend a recertification clinic, in order to become recertified. The recommended length of a clinic is three days (two practical and one testing). A candidate (example - an instructor from another country) can, at the discretion of the Administrator, attend only the testing portion of a clinic, but he better be good! For recertification, two days are recommended (one clinic day and one testing day).

Now pay attention here, because here are the most recent changes (improvements) to the program. You can only become an "Advanced Instructor" at your third clinic (second recertification). The only difference between Advanced and Basic Instructors is that Advanced can issue intermediate and advanced ratings in addition to beginner and novice ratings.

Once you attain an Advanced Instructor rating, you (may) no longer need to attend recertification clinics. Instead of receiving a "need to attend a recertification clinic" letter from the office, you will receive a "recertification form" which requires you to provide proof of currency (five lessons taught per year, and a current first aid certification), to a Regional Director or an ITP Administrator, who will sign you off on said form. Send the form in with $15.00, and you're good for three more years. (If you are not current, you will need to attend a clinic to recertify.)

If you are a basic instructor, and are in a situation where you need to be able to administer the intermediate and advanced ratings, but haven't been in the program long enough to get your advanced rating, simply obtain an Observer appointment from an Examiner in your area. While not given out frivolously, Observer appointments are generally not commonly refused (unless you have a bad reputation!) And are a simple, cost free appointment.

The point here is that there is no downside to having to wait for your Advanced Instructor rating. The "value" of the Advanced Instructor rating has simply been changed (to enable you to recertify via form).

Lastly, there is the "Assistant Instructor" rating, which needs to be mentioned. This rating is available to novice pilots, and allows them to assist certified instructors with new students in low and slow flights at small training hills (very low ground clearance flights). They cannot issue ratings.

The requirements are the same as for obtaining the Basic Instructor rating (with the exception of needing the intermediate rating). Normally, upon attaining the intermediate rating, an Assistant Instructor can be "upgraded" to Basic Instructor through their ITP Administrator and a recommendation from the instructor they have been assisting.

I think that about covers the topic. The program is designed to produce high quality instructors, while minimizing the amount of time the instructor candidate needs to invest in obtaining, and maintaining, the rating. There is a sizable list of quality Administrators spread geographically around the twelve regions, all of whom are capable and willing to put on top notch clinics. Many are very willing to travel to run clinics.

I personally believe that this program is a good one. It should enable motivated individuals to become and remain certified instructors with relative ease. In the long run, this will allow the public to more readily and safely learn our sports, and continue on to become active members and proficient pilots.

Dave Broyles «broydg» writes:

A recent change is that advanced instructors who have been so for 1 recertification can show evidence of continuing instruction,( 6 students in 3 years) and be recertified by the regional director. For those who don’t meet this requirement, we are planning to set up a online recertification program that will allow an instructor to recert by going through a continuing education program online and passing a test. This is in the strategic plan

Discuss USHGA at the Oz Report forum

2005 USHGA Regional Director Election Results

December 20, 2005, 10:29:09 PST

RD Election Results

I'm hoping that Dick takes my seat.

Aaron Swepston|Bruce Rhymes|Dave Broyles|Davis Straub|Greg Berger|Gregg "Kim" Ludwig|Jayne DePanfilis|John Greynald|Lisa Tate|Rob Sporrer|Steve Kroop|Tad Hurst|USHGA

Jayne DePanfilis «jayne» writes:

In region 1, Mark Forbes was re-elected with 67 votes. Aaron Swepston received 35 votes as a write-in candidate, and Murdoch Hughes and Doug Beer received one write-in vote each.

In region 2, Paul Gazis and Urs Kellenburger were re-elected with 74 and 73 votes respectively. Write-ins Bill Cuddy, Ron Smith and Bruce Rhymes received 2, 1 and 1 votes.

In region 3, John Greynald was re-elected with 122 votes, as was Tad Hurst with 86 votes. Write-in Brad Hall received 58 votes, while Rob Soderquist, Larry Newby, Rob Sporrer and Stan Koszelak received one vote each.

In region 4, Jim Zeiset retains his seat on the board with 44 votes, while write-ins Greg Berger, Jennifer Beach and Steve Meyer received one vote each.

In region 5, Lisa Tate was re-elected with 25 votes.

Region 6 has been merged with region 11, and did not have an election. Regions 7 and 8 did not have an open seat this year, and will be decided in the fall 2006 election cycle.

In region 9, Tom McCormick won the seat vacated by retiring director Randy Leggett, with 25 votes. Brian Vant Hull and Jim Rowan received one write-in vote each.

In region 10, Matt Taber was re-elected with 150 votes. A newly-created position in region 10 was narrowly won by Davis Straub, with 91 votes. Dick Heckman received 90 votes. Write-in candidates Carl Burick and Steve Kroop received one vote each.

In region 11, Gregg Ludwig won the position from incumbent Dave Broyles, by a margin of 36 to 19. Mick Howard received one write-in vote.

A total of 680 valid ballots were received, representing about 9% of the eligible USHGA voting membership. The ballots were counted by Rick Butler, USHGA's director of information services. The regional directors take office as of January 1, 2006, and will serve for two year terms.

The USHGA Board of Director's and Staff extend a special thanks to past USHGA presidents and outgoing regional directors, Randy Leggett and Dave Broyles, for their exemplary service.

Randy Leggett was elected as a USHGA honorary director at the BOD meeting in Rochester in October and will be serving a two-year term. He was also recently elected as treasurer of the United States Hang Gliding Foundation (The Foundation) replacing Mark Forbes who resigned as Foundation treasurer. Randy is a member of the USHGA Site committee.

Dave Broyles serves as chair for USHGA's Safety and Training committee

SSA Convention

December 7, 2005, 5:49:48 pm PST

The sailplane guys

The sailplane guys get together in Texas.

Dave Broyles|sailplane

Dave Broyles writes:

I just found out that the SSA convention will be in Arlington, TX Feb. 2-4. A few of us should visit and keep up the good relations with the flying community. I hope I will see some of you there.

Discuss SSA at the Oz Report forum

Winches

Thu, Nov 17 2005, 6:00:04 am EST

The early history

Dave Broyles|Mike Haley

https://ozreport.com/9.233#4

Dave Broyles «d.broyles» writes:

Mark Stuckey is almost right. I actually had a new winch I bought at Cypress Gardens in 1976, made by the guy who later produced them for Bill Bennett Delta Wing Kites as the Bennett Mountain. I had this winch for twenty five years, first in the back of my boat, and then later after I discovered platform launch, on a trailer. It currently resides in Salt Lake City in the possession of texasleadsled, who is currently getting it ready for towing a new WW Sport2 175.

Mark is right, the winch was a little more complicated than the ATOL winch, because it had a negative feedback design to keep tow tension constant regardless of drum diameter, and a lever to let the operator adjust the tow tension instantly, but the ATOL design won out in the end because it was easier to maintain and was very well made.

Kudos to Forberger and Mike Haley for revolutionizing hang glider surface tow. It took a brave man to do the first platform launch with the rope just attached to the carabineer and around the pilot’s body. I did not have the imagination to think of trying this, and I didn’t have Mike Haley to try it.

Discuss winches at the Oz Report forum

Winches

Wed, Nov 16 2005, 6:00:04 am EST

The first Winch.

Dave Broyles|Mark "Forger" Stucky|Mike Haley

https://ozreport.com/9.005#5

Mark Stucky «markstucky» writes:

Tom Dolsky likely had the first hang gliding payout winch in Kansas, but he didn't invent the first hang gliding winch. Tom owned a machine shop and made his own winch based on the just-released Bennett Mountain winch (which was the first hang gliding payout winch that I know of).

Back then I was doing some static line towing (using my college friends who were unknowingly intent on killing me). I never towed with Tom's winch. We went out one winter day to do it, but the winds were strong and gusty. Osoba had a couple of scary launches and quick releases before we called it a day. He was flying a prototype glider that had flexible battens that used surgical cord to force them into a cambered shape. That was a novel idea but the airfoil would invert at negative angles of attack. They were using a conventional (at the time) control bar tow rope hookup.

The Bennett Mountain winch did have some success, but towing didn't really catch on until Jerry Forberger and Mike Haley in Texas invented platform towing using a similar but less sophisticated (I think) winch and a tow hook-up based on fellow Texan, Donnell Hewitt's center-of-mass tow philosophy.

Dave Broyles had an old Bennett Mountain winch.

Scooter Towing »

Tue, Nov 15 2005, 5:00:02 am EST

The Ohio experience.

cart|Dave Broyles|John Alden|Michael Robertson|PG|scooter tow|Steve Wendt

John Alden «jalden55» writes:

Scooter towing is in the e-air and working in Ohio. I found teaching on the hills back in the late seventies and early eighties to be very unproductive, and unreliable in spite of the fact that most Ohio pilots back then learned in that manner. Fast fwd to the 21st century.

Working with Michael Robertson convinced me that stationary towing is the best way to learn hang gliding. Articles in this publication about Dave Broyles's scooterzilla and talking with Steve Wendt about his experience with his Yamaha, combined with the generosity of a fantastic aviation promoter and airfield owner Wes Jones, helps get me back in the teaching saddle and Wings to Fly ltd (http://www.aldenaviation.com/) is born.

No need to reinvent the wheel here. I copied Steve's winch the first year and then Dave's winch the 2nd year. My Scootzilla, named by my scooter mechanic never knowing of Dave's, is just as ugly and just as functional.

I try to keep things real simple using barrel type releases and pulling off the shoulders as in aero towing. I don't use a turn around pulley. I just start with the winch close to the students, using radios, and start backing up as they progress, giving them a ride back to the launch area on a golf cart. Not only do the students not have to carry up they don't even need to carry back.

Students learn from the bottom up rather than from the top down as in tandem aero towed training. Lots of ground handling and perfecting take offs and landings from the start. In as little as two lessons some students have progressed from ground handling to boxing the field to stand up landings.

Have not had much luck with my big WW 330 Condor as it seems too tail heavy for everyone. But all the Falcons and the Target are great trainers and fun to fly gliders. These gliders, plus the ability to reposition glider and winch to accommodate changing wind direction, have made teaching hang gliding  and paragliding fun and practical. Usually after ten lessons students of scooter tow training are flying prone, working lift, launching off a cart, have a novice rating and are ready for hill soaring and aero towing.

I find scooter towing with a 250 cc Honda Helix based winch like Broyles pioneered to be a simple safe way to teach. It will even pull a tandem. It certainly can't match the quality of tow one can have off a hydrostatic winch but for those with a limited budget it's a close second. But it all comes to having a place to tow from. Thanks to Wes Jones and all the other aviation friendly land owners who let us fly.

Payout winch paraglider towing

Fri, Nov 11 2005, 5:00:02 am EST

After scooter towing

Dave Broyles|PG|scooter tow|Steve Wendt

Steve Wendt uses truck/payout/platform towing after he teaches his students using his scooter tow and on the hillside. Brad at Discover Paragliding «BradandMaren» writes:

But I would say the biggest reason for the switch from scooter towing to payout is the versatility of our payout winch. We can do either stationary towing, static towing, or payout with the system that we have. Although, we rarely do stationary, and only do pseudo-static when a tandem passenger is getting worried about the heights, (tow them along without letting out line to get them happy with the altitude and/or give the pilot the option to release).

For paragliders, while it is true there is no significant pitch control for the student to screw up, over or under tensioning can make a big difference in the angle of attack of the glider. A compounding factor on a scooter is that once the tension gets a bit too high, the glider immediately starts pitching back, resulting in moving slower horizontally. So the operator needs to not only reduce tension back to normal, he needs to reduce further to get the glider back overhead.

On a light wind tow, you have to add the momentum of the spool to the equation too. Release the throttle, the spool starts to slow, but the glider is still pitching back and increasing tension on the line. After a moment, the spool has slowed and the pilot begins to fall back under his glider, with a potential surge coming up. Now the operator has to get the spool rotating to the proper speed again, a moment passes. Too much? Maybe.

It takes quite a bit of practice to get it all smooth, and that's in a smooth wind, with a pilot that's not yanking brakes all over the place. Oh, did I mention thermals? :-) All that said, scooter towing works well with paragliders, but I so much prefer our hydraulically controlled payout winch. Constant tension, no lag in drum speed. (Scooter tow line speed is 15 to 30 mph, payout line speed is 0 to 10 mph.)

For our payout system, we have thoroughly customized a Ford F-150 to the task, allowing either one or two person operation of the system. For the very first flights, we use a driver with the tow tech sitting in the bed of the truck. There is really too much going on during the first few tows to be able to watch it all. We can tow the pilot up to about 150' on the first flights, have them release and just fly straight until they touch down. After a few flights, (normally about three), we switch to a spotter at launch, with the driver operating the winch too. The spotter, usually Maren, is instructed to 'chat up' the pilot on line. Basically telling me if the tow is going well or poorly for the few seconds that I don't have an easy view in the mirrors. (We are going to modify the mirror system this winter to make even that unnecessary.)

I find that operation the truck and the winch at the same time reduces my stress level a lot, especially compared to what we had with the scooter tow. Once the line tension is set, I don't have to worry about pitch on the glider at all. Not so with the scooter. I was constantly having to adjust the throttle to compensate for brake inputs, winds, thermals, PIO's, etc. Sometimes in thermals, the AoA could get quite high. :-( And those were small thermals. With the payout, we just blast through the thermals until a nice release height, only having to drive faster through the sink. (This is when we go inland for XC.)

Another big reason for the switch from scooter to payout is the venue where we tow. We used to have an 80 acre field with no predominant wind direction that could be quite frustrating. Eventually, we started scooter towing on the beach and found the laminar winds to be quite nice. After our first 'tow fest' event, where we brought in Enleau and Ann with their payout, we definitely saw the benefit. Higher tows, faster turn around, nobody driving over our line, and not having to worry about giving a beach comber the 'splits'. ;-) Since then, we have had a couple more 'tow fests' on the beach. Two payout winches, and a scooter tow at one event. Great fun, but we all enjoyed the payouts more than the scooter, by far.

Another thing to note is that it took quite some time to get our current system all de-bugged. We are currently on our second truck, our second beach towing site, and the fourth revision of the winch system. But, yes, it was worth it. Although we have no thermals to deal with/worry about, we have managed to tow advanced students and tandems to well above 4000' several times.

I have to add that even though we live in a mountainous area, I would still use a scooter tow if I didn't have access to our payout for training. Even with all the aforementioned hassles, it was easier and more productive that always driving to the training hill and hoping for nice winds.

(editor's note: Steve Wendt and Dave Broyles use scooters for instruction not for getting pilots high.)

Scooter and stationary winch based instruction

Wed, Nov 9 2005, 6:00:01 am EST

The sites doing it are highlighted in red.

Dave Broyles|Dennis Pagen|PG|scooter tow|USHGA

https://ozreport.com/hgdealers.php

Dave Broyles «broydg» writes:

Have been teaching hang gliding and paragliding with scooter tow for twelve years and am still doing so. I am the most experienced scooter tow instructor around. I developed most of the Scooter Tow training methods currently in use. Stationary winch training has been available for many years in Europe and that was my motivation for developing Scooter Tow here. The article, “Scooter Mania”, in the April ’94 Hang Glider Magazine was the seminal article behind the start of Scooter Tow training in the US, and an article I wrote, published in Cross Country Magazine created interested interest in Scooter Tow in the rest of the world.

http://www.kite-enterprises.com/ is my web site.

I am going on my sixth different scooter tow system design. The first tests of the latest system were at Leakey in 2004.

I also build scooter tow systems for others. Mark Windsheimer got his first system from me, and many others got their start from plans I provided and from information on my web site. Because I am not primarily profit motivated, I have not aggressively marketed the sale of systems, but I believe I have the best current Scooter Tow system design.

I provided training on teaching with Scooter Tow to Mark and a number of other instructors. I wrote and provided methodology on Scooter Tow training on my website, http://www.kite-enterprises.com/articles/trainscoot.htm, to everyone for free in 1995. I have maintained my website as a source on scooter tow information for ten years.

I provided all of the info on Scooter Tow and paraglider tow to Dennis Pagen for “Towing Aloft”

I have spent almost no time in the last five years promoting my accomplishments related to Scooter Tow, being primarily interested in doing what I can for safety and training for the USHGA. Apparently the good I have done and am continuing to do for training using Scooter Tow is being forgotten. I would not have this happen, because I still have something to give related to Scooter Tow and Scooter Tow training and I think that my contributions are worth being heard.

You have commented on the lack of eye appeal to some of my systems. As you know, “form follows function” but I have included a picture of a system based on a relatively clean full dress scooter just so you can see what using a scooter that costs five times as much as the junk yard dog scooters gets you. Of course, the junk yard dogs tow just as well.

|

Click on the image to see the bigger version.

It turned out that Mark Windsheimer and I train almost identically with scooter systems, except that he has one powered by a 750cc Honda. (no altitude problems for this bad boy). Both of us train Hgs quite successfully with scooter tow from the word go. I can’t argue that an automatic tension control system would be nice but it is not remotely necessary. It could be implemented with feedback on a scooter tow system, but why fix something that isn’t broke.

What would be very valuable would be some Ips oriented around scooter tow. Both Mark and I are IP administrators, and very experienced scooter tow instructors. We talked about doing some Ips together to teach our methods to new and renewing instructors. The skill level required for being an instructor/operator is rather high with a steep learning curve, self-taught. It would be nice if the new instructors didn’t have to reinvent the wheel.

It is ironic that on the Skysailing list, a number of people seem to think that scooter towing hang gliders is very difficult while scooter towing paragliders is easy. This is totally backwards. That is why there is a PG Tow Technician rating, but not a hang glider one

Caddo Mills airport, where I teach is a hot bed of soaring activities and many of my students get excellent thermal flights there. Currently the best HG/PG XC there, is a 34 mile flight by a South African PG pilot who flew with us for a few weeks.

Pat Prefers Stationery Winch

Sat, Nov 5 2005, 4:00:05 am EST

Steve prefers scooter tow

Dave Broyles|Pat Denevan|scooter tow|Steve Wendt|USHGA|weather

Pat Denevan «mission» writes:

The graphics for the Wall Street Journal article (https://ozreport.com/9.224#0) were done two years ago, the article came out last week.

We built a scooter tow after Dave Broyles article in Hang Gliding Magazine in 1994, but were not satisfied with its unpredictability with students and let it sit for years. When I heard about the Pittman winch at a USHGA board meeting it was the answer to many of the problems with the scooter tow. We have had our Pittman winch about four years.

Our original intention was to do Tandems for training, but the students weren't excited.

The difference between a scooter tow and the Pittman Hydraulic winch is pretty dramatic. With a scooter tow it is hard to tell when the students are not getting off because of the pilot flying too fast or not enough power. When I dial in the pressure with the hydraulic winch and they are still on the ground or not climbing I know it is them and not the winch power so I can wait until they relax and fly at trim.

I teach all the pilots who are new to towing, another instructor then takes those who can fly back to the winch. Judging conditions and new pilot skills and keeping them low enough for safety is a challenge for the first steps.

Steve Wendt «blueskyhg» writes:

My scooter system was right from the beginning. A top speed of 35 mph, rather than a scooter that did 60 mph allows you too pull students to low altitudes without over pulling. Yet, it had enough power in light wind to pull a 310 pound student into the air on the WW Condor.

It does require more skill and care as an instructor to teach hang gliding with a scooter tow system rather than the training hill. But my results are astoundingly positive for scooter use. I have a 4.5hp 50cc scooter that is geared properly for training, and I have a 125cc scooter for higher training. I don't use the system for tandem training.

If students are doing it wrong two feet off the ground, they don't go higher, and yes they can make mistakes, the same ones that happen on training hills. Low but consistent power to barely pull students into the air on slow gliders is the key, and having the glider trimmed properly off tow, and bridles hooked up properly for safe trim during tow is crucial for beginners. The WW Condor 330 and 225 are also gliders that make the task easier. I also close lessons when wind is more than about 7 or 8 mph.

I always know that it's the student technique or weather conditions for failures to get launched. I have allowed myself to be towed in a variety of conditions and power is never a problem. One of the major keys is the bridle hook-up. Much like aerotowing, if the bridle tow points are not placed in the proper position, then there are problems with pitch pressures. For a beginner, trim is the setting for run through takeoff, then slightly pulled in from trim after takeoff.

It's not scooter towing, bridles and instructors that work in this instructional method. But, proper scooter tow rigs, with the proper bridles and talented instructors that want to teach safely, can get the job done and more.

All I know is that after 6 years of full time towing and over 15,000 scooter tows, I feel that I can safely train better with my system, than on the training hill. I don't want a tensioning device, my eyes tell me everything. Remember, the student isn't thousands of feet away being pulled towards me. My students don't get over 10 feet off the ground until they master certain basic skills that will keep them safe.

There are potential problems with all methods of instruction, and there are solutions out there waiting for us to find.

The Tow Group can be found here where much discussion about towing takes place.

Gary Osoba »

Fri, Aug 19 2005, 8:00:02 pm GMT

The cross country pioneer, maybe

Gary

Dave Broyles|Dragonfly|Gary Osoba|Mark "Forger" Stucky|PG|record

Stucky Mark P Lt Col USAF TPS/ED «mark.stucky» writes:

Gary Osoba has always been a mystifying mix of brains, skill, and enthusiasm. I can't claim to have been around when he first started flying but I idolized him during my teen years in the mid-70's when he ran the Pliable Moose Company. I watched him fly for a year or so before I was able to buy my first Moose in '74. He would do things on a standard that you only see done in modern paragliding - moon walking forwards, sideways, flying backwards up the hill.

Gary was always working on the next great design. He flew some good designs, but has always made claims that were tough to substantiate. The Moose standard stood apart from other designs because it sported a sail that was sewn with straight stitches. Everybody else used zigzag stitching like the sail industry. Gary claimed some kind of scientific method was used and that the thread tension was matched to the specific stresses on the glider, making for a cleaner, more aerodynamic sail. When I asked one of the shop hands about it he kind of rolled his eyes and smiled. The Moose sails were nice sails but I don't think straight stitching had much to do with it.

The Thermal Shark (still my favorite glider name) - with cable tensioners on the forward leading edges to camber the tubes, a widened nose angle, and a chopped keel - gave improved performance over the standard Rogallo. The Shark also sported an upgraded frame with innovative features such as large diameter tubing, polypropylene doweling, and compound curved "knuckle-saving" base tubes.

The Pliable Moose ads mentioned that Gary was the first non-Californian to have an "A" rating at SoCal's Escape Country and gave the impression that he won big meets out west. I think he did win a meet out there around '73 and I remember seeing super-8 movies of him flying off Sylmar and doing 360s and apparently climbing in thermals. But when I accompanied the Moose team to Escape Country for the '74 nationals they were greatly outmatched by the new radial tip designs such as Wills Wing's Swallowtail and Haggard's Dragonfly. There was other flying to be had, however.

Gary and his side-kick Bill Frary did kick some butt in a spot landing contest at Palos Verdes, I don't think either of them ever missed landing on the Frisbee that covered a stack of money. Frary also gained something like 1500 feet of altitude (no altimeter or vario) over the Lookout at Elsinore in stable ridge lift conditions causing some to pronounce it as the first wave flight in a hang glider. (I showed my skill by not recognizing I was in heavy sink and doing a forced landing in somebody's backyard, the nose plate stuck in a tree, the rear keel on their fence, my body suspended several feet above their madly yelping dog.)

Gary's Diffusion Tip flex wing may have gotten a 10:1 L/D (years before the rest of the industry) but the compound bends in the leading edge were too difficult to maintain precisely without some exotic deflexor system and it was pulled from the market almost as quickly as it was released. (I had to hook in about eight inches in front of the control bar and fight to keep it flying straight.)

His last Moose design success was the Elite. Its 36.3 ft wingspan and 154 sq. feet of sail gave it a still-unheard of aspect ratio of 8.5! Once I learned to fly it, I loved its flying qualities and performance. It didn't enjoy mainstream success, but I think that was more a function of it coming from a relatively unknown company in Kansas that was unable to compete with the big-named brands on the west coast. There were also some nasty rumors about the "Killer Elite". I remember Dave Broyles measuring my glider on launch at Buffalo Mt, OK, and grousing about it being unsafe to fly. I don't think the Elite was more dangerous than other designs. There may have been a couple of crossbar failures but that was at the time when that was an industry-wide issue.

I was as much of a Moose "groupie" as I could be and I quickly picked up that Gary was not just the brains but also the PR man. He gave plenty of hints of technologies and glider designs that he was working on that would revolutionize the sport. Some of these were written about, some were only mentioned but I cannot think of a single case that came to fruition. I remember reading about a rigid wing that would be easy to assemble and got awesome performance. Perhaps he had some dreams of an Atos in the '70s but I never saw any hardware. He also mentioned radical non-polluting power sources for self launching, a theme he still mentions on occasion.

Gary was always the best pilot around. We could all soar and thought we were hot but he was more in tune with a glider than anyone I've seen. I'm sure there are many pilots like that nowadays but Gary spent hours soaring the Kansas hills and he didn't just boat around he worked on improving his skills. He could launch in soarable conditions without hands and could spot land on anything. He could scrape in close to the hill with his downwind wingtip inches from the slope and if it wasn't soarable would push out, do a 90° flat turn and somehow do a no-step landing into the wind.

The closest I ever saw anyone come to thermalling in Kansas was when I watched Gary from the LZ of the 140ft hill at Lake Wilson. He flew his Elite into a bubble and managed a 360 before disappearing from view. We excitedly jumped in a car and raced up the perimeter road, somewhat disappointed to find him on the ground a couple of hundred yards downwind of launch. I know of no other example of "XC" flying during that timeframe and I'm sure I would have known about it if it had occurred. I personally would never believe there was any real XC flying done back then especially on a Thermal Shark with around a 6/1 L/D and a 400fpm sink rate.

Gary has certainly accomplished some great flying in his career. He appears to publicly downplay setting aviation records yet seems to seek out records in niche categories that don't appear to have much active competition. He seems to thrive as a somewhat mysterious aviation icon flying one-of-a-kind aircraft.

For years I've bitten my tongue when I've read or heard some of Osoba's claims. I consider him a friend, but think I should speak up regarding some of the history being claimed.

On a separate note, August 7th was an eventful day for paragliders at Pine Mt., north of Ojai, CA. Tom Truax made a 94 mile tandem flight and Bo Criss, Dean Stratton, and I flew 118, 108, and 107 miles, respectively. I don't know how many times there have been multiple 100+ mile paraglider flights from the same site at the same time. The blade wings and ATOS pilots flew similar distances but turned north at Mojave towards Owens Valley while the paragliders continued on a northeast track until they intercepted Hwy 395.

Discuss "Gary Osoba" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

Bridle killed the hang glider pilot

Fri, Feb 11 2005, 1:00:02 pm GMT

Spinnaker shackles

Robin Strid

bridle|Dave Broyles|fatality|HPAC|release|Robin Strid|Rohan Holtkamp|safety|tow|USHGA|weaklink|Worlds 2005

"Special Pro Tow" https://OzReport.com/8.190#5

Other releases: http://www.hanglide.com/miva/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=LME&Category_Code=AE and http://www.birrendesign.com/LKAero.html

Scare «Gerry» writes:

There are several different types of bridles described, diagrammed, or pictured here: http://hpac.ca/tow/HPAC_Tow_Manual.asp#3.3. We would like to have more pictures too, and would also appreciate any comments or advice you might have. How is it done where you are?

Robin Strid died because the weaklink wrapped around one leg of his spinnaker shackle. The weaklink was too strong to break. The weaklink was made of multiple loops. At least, that's the story that I heard Rohan Holtkamp, who investigated the accident, present to the team leaders at the Worlds.

The ends of the legs of the shackle were thicker than the middle. The weaklink caught up on the thicker ends of the legs after the shackle was opened by the release cable. Look at the first article linked to above to see the fat legs.

One of the legs rotates when the release is opened and the weaklink has to slide over the thicker leg. I'm communicating with Rohan to get better answers to what happened to Robin and how to avoid this in the future.

Another release system: http://www.flycyprus.com/release.html

Dave Broyles (USHGA Safety and Training Committee Chairman) comments on the spinnaker shackle here.

I'll have much more on releases soon. Send me your thoughts on bridles and releases and any pictures of bridles.

Discuss "Bridle killed the hang glider pilot" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

USHGA - Executive Committee meeting »

Thu, Nov 4 2004, 11:00:01 am EST

The minutes of the monthly conference call meeting

Bill Bolosky|Bill Bryden|Dave Broyles|Finbar Sheehy|Jayne DePanfilis|Lisa Tate|Pat Denevan|Peter Birren|Ron Gleason|Russ Locke|USHGA

Liz Sharp was the secretary and wrote:

Monday, November 1, 2004

In Attendance: Randy Leggett, President; Lisa Tate, Vice President; Felipe Amunategui, Treasurer; Jayne DePanfilis, Executive Director; Liz Sharp, Secretary.

Visitors: Bill Bolosky, Past President; Mark Forbes, Past Vice President, Urs Kellenberger, Director Region 3, and Peter Birrens, Contributor.

Articles of Incorporation

Peter Birrens presented his argument that no changes are needed in the Articles of Incorporation. He thinks the addition of towing and powered harnesses are covered under as a secondary purpose under SOP 2-1 Primary Purpose. President Leggett and Past President Bolosky indicate that a change is needed because of the ambiguity of the language in Section 2.b. President Leggett notes there are 3 possible courses of action:

1) Revote to rescind the wording in the first vote and not change to the Articles of Incorporation;

2) Revote to rescind wording in first vote and to change the Articles per the change suggested by the Organization and Bylaws Committee Report of October 2; or

3) Revote to rescind the wording in the first vote and to change section 2.b of the Articles with new wording to be formulated.

The Executive Committee accepted Peter's offer to work with his committee of seven on the ballot wording for these three possibilities. Peter will email a draft to the Executive Committee plus Bill Bolosky and Mark Forbes by Monday November 29, to be reviewed at the next conference call. At this point, Urs and Peter departed the conference call.

Office Relocation

Office Relocation Committee Chair, Mark Forbes, is still waiting for specifics from Russ Locke. Lisa Tate will send Mark the paperwork she has from the Boise response to our 1988 RFP. Executive Director DePanfilis indicates that the move will not affect the people she is interviewing for potential employment. She now has a copy of the lease which extends our occupancy through October 31, 2005. Chair Forbes will update the Committee at next conference call.

Financial Review

The financial report reviewed is of September, 2004. Finance Committee Chair Bolosky notes that revenue is down for this month compared to last year, but expenses are down even more because of the short staff.

Membership is down 241 from last year at this time (not enough to cover the decline in revenue), but this decrease may also be a lingering artifact of combining the magazines Using the cash target equation, Bolosky notes that we are now $158,000 over cash target (not including Foundation donation which happened in October). Bolosky projects that we will be around $133,000 over the cash target by the end of the year (including the donation to the Foundation). $30,000 of that is earmarked for office relocation. Discussion ensued about purchasing our new location. The consensus is that keeping our assets in real estate instead of bonds is a possibility for the Relocation Committee to consider.

Awards Committee Meeting

Several people have contacted Awards Chair Len Smith about setting a date for the awards conference call. Executive Director DePanfilis has not yet heard form Smith.

Staffing

Somer Hughes, the leading contender for the database/IT position will be visiting Colorado Springs Friday through Monday, November 19 through 22. Another candidate that Dave Broyles interviewed has strong basic business skills and may be a candidate for a general business management position, supporting the Executive Director and the database/IT position. The Executive Committee approved the salary range suggested by the Executive Director. The Executive Director indicated she would like to fill both positions within the month.

Arrangements for the Executive Director's Annual Review

Because the Committee wishes to separate the Executive Director's annual review from the Spring Board meeting, President Leggett suggested a conference call format. There were no objections. Treasurer Amunategui suggested the Executive Director do a self evaluation first, loosely following evaluation formats that will be supplied by Bill Bolosky and Lisa Tate. Tate and Amunategui will work with DePanfilis on the final form to be submitted by the end of the year. This will be augmented with input from the Directors. No date has been set for the conference call.

2005 Annual Budget

The Executive Director has set a date of December 1 to complete the 2005 Annual Budget.

Scan Docs

Mark Forbes reports that there is just one more decade and a few months to complete the index and finish the OCR extraction. Also, the DVD burner he purchased was defective; it will be repaired with the latest and greatest features. DePanfilis will email to the EC a copy of the roll-out plan for the magazine DVDs that Ron Gleason developed.

ASTM F37 Light Sport Aircraft Committee

Executive Director DePanfilis reports that Sue Gardner was not at the recent meeting with Bruce Weaver and several other Sport Pilot committee members. She also reports there is confusion on our Towing Exemption request. She will contact Bill Bryden for his views and they will develop future plans.

Consultant for Strategic Planning Session at Spring BOD meeting

Finbar Sheehy (sp?), Pat Denevan's wife and Warren Shirtsinger (sp?) are possibilities. Dennis Wright, Executive Director of the SSA also has some names. Executive Director DePanfilis will develop a list, contact them, obtain promotional materials and send a report to the Executive Committee before the next conference call.

Discuss USHGA at the Oz Report forum

Uncle Bill Bennett dies in trike accident

Fri, Oct 8 2004, 12:00:00 am GMT

Along with Bill Moyes, a true pioneer in the sport.

Bill Bennett

Bill Bennett|Bill Moyes|Bob Wills|Dave Broyles|Delta Kites|fatality|Jayne DePanfilis|John Dickenson|John Fetz|Malcolm Jones|Mark "Gibbo" Gibson|Shawn Connery|USHGA

I spoke with Malcolm Jones at 2 PM PDT. He told me that Bill Bennett had died in a trike accident seven hours before near Lake Havasu, Arizona where Bill was living. Malcolm had spoken with Bill last night arranging for him to attend the upcoming Moyes Boys gathering at Wallaby Ranch at the end of October.

Malcolm said that what he had heard was that the trike had stalled on launch and cart wheeled in. It was a tandem flight and the flight instructor with Bill suffered a broken pelvis.

A fourth hand report: "This morning at the Lake Havasu Airport Bill was taking some instruction from a new, very low hour BFI (name unknown at this time). They had an engine out on take off, I don't know at what altitude. With 4,000 feet of runway in front of them they veered left and went in hard. Sounds like it was a panic situation and they may have pushed the bar out, stalled the trike and went over. The BFI sustained a broken pelvis. I don't know whose trike they were flying. If it was Bill's trike I know the machine as he bought it from a guy I know. Topdog trike with a 503 and a Gibbo Batwing. I flew that trike two years ago and really disliked the wing."

John Fetz «botmom» writes:

Bill Bennett, age 73, a founder of ultralight aviation, was killed in a crash of a powered trike today, Oct 7, 2004, at 07:30am. While taking off from Lake Havasu Airport, the craft lost some power on the climb out and crashed next to the 32 Runway, nose and left wheel impacting the ground. Bill was taking instruction at the time of the crash and the Instructor was taken to Las Vegas regional hospital with critical injuries.

According to Malcolm, Bill Bennett, Bill Moyes, and John Dickenson were all members of the same water ski club in Sydney. John showed Bill and Bill how to use a flat kite to fly behind a boat. They took off with it after that.

Bill and Bill started to compete with each other for the biggest record, mostly tow records, to see who could tow the highest. Bill Moyes started a kite company in Australia, and Bill Bennett came to the US and started Bill Bennett's Delta Kites, the first and at one time the biggest hang glider (kite) manufacturer in the US.

One of Bill Bennett's first employees was Bob Wills who later took the pattern for Bill's kite and started Wills Wing. Bill flew as the hang gliding wind dummy in place of Shawn Connery in one of the early James Bond flicks (Roger Moore in Live and Let Die (1973)).

Later he had a controversial period as the manager of Torry Pines in San Diego.

Dave Broyles «broydg» writes:

My first flights were in a Bill Bennett glider (water ski kite). I have very pleasant memories of Bill's service under me as treasurer to the USHGA, impartially and fairly, regardless of his business interests and personal opinions. I was greatly pleased by his integrity as a BOD member and officer.

Jayne DePanfilis «jayne» writes:

He was USHGA member number 210. He was a legend in our community and it was only recently, at the board meeting in Kitty Hawk that we viewed historical footage for the first time of Bill Bennett and Bill Moyes from way back when. Bill Bennett was planning to attend the Moyes Boys Reunion this month (of course).

Discuss "Uncle Bill Bennett dies in trike accident" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

USHGA BOD meeting

Fri, Oct 1 2004, 4:00:01 pm EDT

A few of the more interesting (to me) results from the USHGA BOD meeting.

Bill Bolosky|Dave Broyles|Lisa Tate|Ray Leonard|USHGA

The BOD meeting.

I'm not quite ready to present all of the most interesting results but you can slog through all the proceedings here.

At the end of the meeting new business items are brought up just as everyone is about to leave for their planes on early Sunday afternoon. As I have mentioned a few times in the Oz Report Ray Leonard, one of the Region 2 Directors, has not been attending USHGA BOD meetings. This is a legitimate reason to remove him from the BOD.

The BOD voted to remove Ray and then appointed Ed Pittman as a Regional Director along with Paul Gazis and Urs Kellenberger. Ray is still on the ballot, even though the printed ballot will identify him incorrectly as the incumbent. Jim Macklow is on the ballot opposing him.

I don't have anything personally against Ray at all, but I do think that elected Regional Directors should attend BOD meetings.

There was a change in the leadership (executive committee) of the USHGA BOD. The EC meets by conference call once a month. Their minutes are supposed to be available to the BOD and the membership (according to the written rules of the USHGA). Liz Sharp is apparently beginning to make them available.

Usually there no contest for membership on the Executive Committee as it is just a lot of work for no reward. The current EC (until tomorrow) was assuming that they would just change positions and stay cohesive, but it didn't work out that way.

Every position was hotly contested (well, maybe not Secretary). The platform of the contestants against the incumbents was basically that the EC needed to have better communication with Jayne, the Executive Director. The EC and the ED were definitely not getting along. Some very hurtful statements were being made in the EC meeting and the Financial Meeting.

Randy Leggett (current Treasurer) was elected by the BOD 11-9 over Dave Broyles, a former president. Lisa Tate, Region 5 Director, was elected Vice President over Mark Forbes 10-9, after two ties (an abstention appeared on the third ballot). Liz Sharp was voted back in as Secretary. Felipe Ammunategui was voted in as Treasurer over Bill Bolosky again 11-9.

So the EC now has two new members committed to being supportive of the Executive Director. We'll see if that is enough to keep her on board.

Discuss BOD at the Oz Report forum

The National Fly-In

Sat, Jul 31 2004, 3:00:00 am EDT

The old boys return.

Curt Warren|Dave Broyles|Davis Straub|Dustin Martin|John Hesch|Ken Brown|Kenny Brown|Kent Robinson|Kevin Carter|Lawrence "Pete" Lehmann|Mike Degtoff|Paris Williams|Pete Lehmann|PG|photo|Quest Air|Russell "Russ" Brown|scooter tow|USHGA|video

Friday:

Jim Reynolds, long time Pacific Northwest instructor and Wills Wing representative. Kenny Brown, US distributor for Moyes hang gliders, and Doodlebugs. Greg DeWolf, long time tandem instructor and currently working on a video instruction package for hang gliding. These are some of the folks that have showed up for the already well atended National Fly-In in Leakey, Texas.

With clouds and a few showers and a little bit of thunder during the day, lots of short flights were had with Dave Broyles doing most of the heavy lifting with this three scooter tows - one was working at any given time. Russell Brown and Pete Lehmann brought the Dragonflies up from Zapata arriving a little after noon. Curt Warren and Rod Brown had already been here for a few days giving trike lessons and doing some tandems.

The whole town of Leakey is behind the National Fly-In with $4,000 in prize money and lots of folks out at the airport watching the action and taking "discovery" flights. There is more spectator action than actual hang gliding and paragliding on this day with brief breaks in the clouds.

Saturday:

The San Antonio paper has good write up of the National Fly-In in Saturday's paper. They refer to Dave Broyle's scooter towing setups as "contraptions," which indeed they appear to be. The gathering of the grey hairs. Jim Reynolds gets quoted as well as Kent Robinson on the "magic" of free flight when he isn't breaking his arm or his pelvis..

The day starts off with both low and high clouds. The high clouds probably keeping the low clouds from building and turning into rain. In the afternoon the upper clouds gradually disappeared, and the cu's below got better and better as more and more pilots go into the air and started sticking.

I was not flying but running around taking photos of all the action. The hang glider aerotows, the paraglider scooter and truck tows. The tandem flights. It was great to have hang glider pilots and paraglider pilots together in one Fly-In getting into the air in so many different ways.

I saw Dave Broyles getting ready to take a tandem passenger and took a bunch of photos. Unfortunately, I caught the action. Dave had hooked the tow bridle to his carabineers behind the paying passenger who was hooked in in front of him.  When he took off with the wind slightly coming from his left he got the paraglider sideway:

Notice the line pulling from Dave's left side, the wind sock showing a light breeze from his left and the paraglider heading to his right.

With the bridle looking like it is crushing the head of the passenger, Dave and the passenger fall to Dave's right:

They get up and try again. This time the weaklink on the bridle snaps and flings back into the passenger's eye. For a few moments she has unstoppable tears. Dave finally sees the wisdom of putting the bridle on the passenger's carabineers instead, and they had a much better tow after Dave gets out of the harness and goes over to replace a fuse in the scooter tow (what a circus).

After the  short flight, the women is not all that happy with how things went. Personally, I didn't like the whole process, with Dave not appearing to be prepared and making poor decisions at the last minute about the bridle which he had left on another glider. He seemed a bit overwhelmed to me.

We all make mistakes in judgment, but you hate to see it affecting the wider public, and putting the innocents at risk. There were many spectators at the Leakey airport and hurting someone like this only hurts all of us. Dave is chairman of the USHGA safety and training committee.

Sunday:

The National Fly-In in Leakey is a community affair with lots of visitors to the airport and lots of support and organization from the local small town. There nothing around here for forty miles so anything at all is something. Sure there are lots of tubers down on the Frio River, but that's not something that can bring the whole community together.

It's great having a Fly-In at a small rural airport where every one can come and see the action and partake in trike flights, tandems, etc. as well as check out the crazies doing the flying. There is a small hill nearby but it is presently a 400 foot climb to the top. Fine for paraglider pilots.

On Saturday, launching after 3 PM and landing at fifteen minutes before 8 PM Mike Degtoff flew 101 miles making sure he got every last foot. He said that every cloud was working and had lots of light lift. He landed just north of the small town of Melvin, Texas. As he came over town, someone yelled out, he yelled back, and then more folks started coming out of their houses to yell at him.

Sunday started off with good cus forming very early. The speed gliding started with Ken Brown, Dustin Martin, Paris Williams, Kevin Carter, and others. It looks like Dustin won with a time of 63 seconds, 10 seconds less than the next fastest.

With the flying prospects improving Sunday got busy with hang waiters turning into pilots. Bomb drops and spot landings provided plenty of spectator action and it looked like it might OD early. Russell and Dustin were very busy on the Flytec and Quest Air Dragonflies.

Cross country flights started happening, but Paris and Kent misjudged the clouds and passing up 200 fpm landed 10 miles to the south of town. Pete Lehmann and I headed east on highway 83 in Falcons. I had Jim Reynold's Attack Falcon 170 with its too hard to use VG (I didn't use it) and a Moyes Matrix harness from Kenny Brown (Dustin use to fly it, and Kenny was flying it). 

I found 600 fpm east of the airport and climbed to 6,000' in a t-shirt, and it was very pleasant. Had to pull out to keep out of the clouds. Pete came up under me and I headed out cross wind along the highway always within reach of fields near the road. Pull in and go down is the rule even with an Attack Falcon, especially cross wind.

I headed out 5 miles out while Pete continued to core up under. He headed up wind at that point under the clouds while I headed along the road to find a blue hole that put me on the deck at 7.5 miles out. Pete got under the black clouds upwind and was able to go 15 miles, before turning around and coming back to escape the approaching storm.

The harness was quite comfortable. My hips weren't pinched, although like all cloth harnesses I found my legs were a bit squeezed, but not too badly. There was lots of padding and it was comfortable inside. I also found it easy to set the angle of the dangle and get up to land (but then I was landing a Falcon - which gives you so many more places to land than an ATOS VX).

Results:

Speed gliding:

Dustin Martin $400
Kevin Carter $200
John Hesch $100

XC:

Non floater:

Mike Degtoff $400
Paris Williams $200
John Hesch $100

Floater:

Pete Lehmann $400
Davis Straub $200

Spot Landing

PG:

Dave Prentice $200
Andy Austin $100
Rich Donovan $50

Non floater:

Dustin Martin $200
Kevin Carter $100
Ken Brown $50

Floater:

Dave Hayner $200
Abe Hutchins $100
Chris Chaney $50

Bomb drop:

Andy Austin $200
Dave Prentice $100
Rich Donovan $50

USHGA election results

Fri, Jan 16 2004, 5:00:05 pm GMT

the USHGA

Aaron Swepston|Bob Lane|Dan Bereczki|Dave Broyles|David Jebb|George Stebbins|James Linscome|John Greynald|Lisa Tate|PG|Ray Leonard|Rob Sporrer|USHGA

Mark G. Forbes <mgforbes@mindspring.com> writes:

The election is over and the ballots are counted. Here are the winners of the election for Regional Directors to serve two year terms beginning in January 2004. Elections are staggered, so some regions did not have a position open this year, since their Directors are in mid-term.

In region 1, the Pacific Northwest, Mark Forbes returns for another term, with 103 votes. Aaron Swepston had one write-in vote.

Region 2 covers northern California and Nevada, and this year it was a contested race, with four candidates for the two open seats. The winners were Paul Gazis (111) and Urs Kellenberger (100). Incumbent John Wilde was third with 52 votes, followed by David Beerman with 48. Ron Smith, Joel McMinn and Wally Anderson got one write-in vote each, while the other Regional Director, Ray Leonard got three votes. His term isn't up until next year, so he wasn't a candidate in this election.

Region 3, covering southern California and Hawaii, had two candidates running for two open positions. John Greynald returns for another term with 86 votes, while John "Tad" Hurst was elected with 69 votes. Others gaining a write-in vote were Larry Chamblee, Bo Criss, David Jebb, George Stebbins, Rob Sporrer and Josh Meyers.

Another contested race was in the mountains of the Southwest, where Region 4 incumbent Jim Zeiset won with 68 votes. Trailing were Jennifer Beach with 42 votes and Ed Bennett with 30 votes.

Region 5, encompassing Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, saw two new faces vying for the position after incumbent Frank Gillette declined to run again. Lisa Tate won the job with 56 votes, over Alan Paylor with 14. Andy Macrae got one write-in vote.

Region 6, covering much of the Midwest, re-elected Len Smith to his second term on the board with 27 votes. James Linscome received one write-in vote.

In Region 9, Randy Leggett returns for another term representing Middle Atlantic pilots with 53 votes. Lindscott Hall and Jim Rowan got one write-in vote each.

In the Southeast, Region 10 pilots re-elected Matt Taber to another term with 64 votes. Bruce Weaver and Bob Lane got one write-in vote each.

And finally, pilots in Texas and Louisiana returned Dave Broyles to the board as Region 11 director, with 50 votes. Dan Bereczki and Kelly Russell received one write-in vote each.

A total of 871 ballot forms were received, from 550 hang glider pilots, 226 paraglider pilots, and 95 bi-wingual pilots. Some of these were from pilots in regions without an election, so only the survey portion of the form was filled out. Some forms had no vote indicated, and in some cases the votes were cast for candidates that were not in the member's region. A total of 799 valid votes were cast in the election. This represents about 10% of the membership in regions that had an election this year. The highest percentage turnout was in Region 5, with 23.4% voting.

Special thanks to Bob Archibald at the USHGA office, who tallied the votes and compiled the raw data

Discuss "USHGA election results" at the Oz Report forum   link»

USHGA Regional Director Results

Fri, Jan 9 2004, 12:00:04 pm EST

Alan Chuculate|Dave Broyles|Jayne DePanfilis|John Greynald|Lisa Tate|USHGA

Big changes in the representation from Region two.

Jayne DePanfilis «jayne» writes:

The election results are official.
The following incumbents have been re-elected:

Mark Forbes Region 1
John Greynald Region 3
Jim Zeiset Region 4
Len Smith Region 6
Randy Leggett Region 9
Matt Taber Region 10

The following incumbents have not been re-elected:

John Wilde Region 2
Tim West Region 2
Frank Gillette Region 5
Alan Chuculate Region 3

The following have been elected regional director for a 2004-2006 term:

Paul Gazis Region 2
Urs Kellenberger Region 2
John “Tad” Hurst Region 3
Lisa Tate Region 5
Dave Broyles Region 11

Discuss USHGA at the Oz Report forum

USHGA BOD legal issues

Fri, Oct 10 2003, 4:00:06 pm EDT

calendar|Dave Broyles|Davis Straub|record|USHGA

Dave Broyles «d.broyles» writes:

I want to say that I really appreciate what you are doing to publicize the BOD meetings. I consider this incredibly valuable since a lot of the problem with the membership is that people have never really known what is going on, and assumed it is secret, which of course, for the most part, it is not. Closed meetings are required for some things where privacy laws come into effect, such as personnel reviews and hearings. But for all else, getting it all out in the open is going to be great.

I also wanted to mention that “(there is a legal requirement because as non BOD members can vote in committees, the voting members of the USHGA have to make the final decisions in general session).” Is, strictly speaking not correct. Even in a committee where only voting BOD members can vote, (It has happened, but not recently) committee actions have to be submitted to the BOD for acceptance by the full BOD to be considered actions of the BOD. If a committee meeting consists of the whole BOD, then the committee action is final.

Only certain things such as appeal hearings are final at the committee level as provided for in the SOPs. But in appeal hearings, I think that only voting directors will be allowed to vote. In so far as I know at this time too, any voting director can attend a committee meeting and vote whereas, non-BOD members have to have attended the previous meeting to be able to vote at the current meeting. This is pretty much up to the Chairman unless the President makes a specific ruling. (Which is how it came about that only voting BOD members were allowed to vote at committee meetings for a while. We had a president who didn’t like the committees to be influenced by the hoi-polloi.)

Incidentally, the original bylaws and SOPs required that the BOD ratify Committee Chairmen, much like the US Constitution requires the Senate to ratify cabinet members. Apparently, this requirement started being ignored around the 2nd time that Vic Powell was president, and was slipped out of the bylaws when they were updated several years ago. I, personally, as a former president, thought the requirement was good. The president could appoint but the BOD had to ratify. The president could dismiss a chairman without BOD approval. I was always careful to appoint chairmen I was sure the BOD would ratify and never had a problem. On the other hand if I didn’t like a chairman that the BOD did, I could get rid of him.

I would like to see this requirement restored to the bylaws. Unlike Gregg Lawless, I think the president has quite enough power already. “Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Is that how it goes?

Discuss legal issues at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

USHGA - eCommittees »

Fri, Oct 10 2003, 4:00:02 am EDT

Dave Broyles|Roy Mahoney|USHGA

Dave Broyles a couple of days ago sent out a message to BOD members and interested others announcing that he wanted to run his Safety and Training Committee through the internet. He felt that this was something new. He’d set up a mailing list and was ready to start running the committee through the internet.

Well, it’s great to see Dave come on aboard. The more committee chairman we get to buy into the communicate through the internet and run the committee through the internet model the better. But, Dave seems to have missed the fact that the USHGA BOD passed a resolution to do just this for all USHGA BOD committees.

Based on discussion that I had with Roy Mahoney, a vocal opponent of the powered harness vote, we proposed that the USHGA set up eCommittees on the USHGA web site using the already existing bulletin board system. It is proposed that all committee communications will occur through the committee forums on the USHGA web site. That way anyone can participate in the discussion.

If documents need to be exchanged (like Word documents with change tracking turned on) they will also be available through the USHGA web site and linked to the committee forums.

I’m sure hoping that all the USHGA BOD committee chairman get on board with the new forums and use them extensively to facilitate communication. This would definitely reduce the amount of e-mail that BOD members currently get from each other. E-mail can still be used, but much reduced in length and with links to forum topics.

Discuss committees at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

USGHA BOD

Tue, Oct 7 2003, 4:00:03 am EDT

Bill Bryden|Dan Nelson|Dave Broyles|PG|photo|USHGA

Dave Broyles, the chairman of Safety and Training, produced lengthy documents which significantly refined the revocation process. These had been reviewed by the USHGA lawyer, Tim Herr, to make sure that the process was fair, open, and also had the appearance of fairness. These documents were the new SOP (standard operating procedures) for how to deal with the revocation process and any appeals.

Dave was quite prepared before he got to the BOD meeting with his agenda and focused on the revocation process. He and Alan Chucalate are going to be responsible for finalizing the powered harness ratings requirements.

Bill Bryden reported on the Sport Pilot imitative. I was not happy to hear that heavy tug pilots will most likely be required to have a private pilot’s license. I feel that this is inappropriate because much of the material on the test is irrelevant to the tasks that they in fact have to be good at, and just represents a barrier to entry with little or not benefit. It will hurt our aerotowing program by reducing the number of tug pilots.

Bill was quite articulate and the USHGA is quite lucky to have him dealing with the FAA. He also had to recently deal with the FAA on ground based towing. He hopes to have any issues with the FAA re part 101 dealt with soon. Check out Bill’s report in the Oz Report forum https://ozreport.com/forum/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=6 in the report from the National Coordinating Committee on the FAA.

Dan Nelson presented an overview of a marketing plan for the USHGA and as the editor of the HG/PG Magazine was quite active on the Publications committee. It looks like the USHGA is committed to increasing the author and photographer remuneration for articles and photos in the magazine. This would be most welcome, as it is pretty paltry now. The increase won’t be great, but thee ay be other non monetary forms provided also.

The BOD expressed a strong interest in seeing a marketing plan and action plan to go with it. The idea is to increase both hang gliding and paragliding participants. Dan’s outline will be the start of the plan. You can find it (and critique it, which I will be doing) in the Oz report forum https://ozreport.com/forum/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=6 in the General Session topic.

I didn’t see Frank Gillette in any committee meetings (I popped in on almost all of them) and never heard him say a word in general session.

The fall 2004 BOD meeting will be near the Finger Lakes Aersports Flight Park in western New York. The question is will it be moved up a little to coincide with the National Fly In scheduled for late September. I sure hope so.

Discuss the USHGA BOD at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Photo/caption contest »

Mon, Aug 11 2003, 4:00:05 pm EDT

calendar|Dave Broyles|Davis Straub|photo

Dave Broyles «d.broyles» sends:

 

This picture was taken in ’74 at Enchanted Rock between Llano and Fredericksburg, near Leakey. The Glider was a Sunbird 18’ standard and I was the pilot. Notice long hair and no helmet.

Discuss photos at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Scooter Tow »

Fri, Jul 25 2003, 5:00:07 pm EDT

Dave Broyles|Davis Straub

Dave Broyles|Davis Straub|scooter

Dave Broyles «d.broyles» writes:

I immediately got an email from Croatia and another from Ecuador (wow, you have distribution) about Scooterzilla, so I got on the ball and wrote an article, heavily illustrated, on Scooterzilla at http://www.kite-enterprises.com/articles/scooterzilla.htm. This is meant to give detailed info about the system and how it works.

I also looked at http://www.kite-enterprises.com/articles/scootertow.htm which is the article “Scooter Mania” I wrote for Hang Gliding Magazine April, ’94. Lo and behold, I found that I copyrighted my article in which I coined the phrase “scooter tow” to describe my concept of a scooter tow winch.

Oh boy, my attorney is going to love this. From now on, anyone who uses the term “scooter tow” will have to put ©Dave Broyles after it, just like when anyone writes “Windows 95 Secrets” ©Davis Straub and Brian Livingston, except, of course, the Oz Report.

I also have another article on scooter tow training on my website, http://www.kite-enterprises.com/articles/trainscoot.htm which may be of interest.

(editor’s note: I wrote back to Dave, “I think you mean a trade mark. For that you need to register it. www.justtrademarks.com”) He wrote back:

Turns out that I published two scooter tow articles in HG Mag. The other in Sept, ’96, http://www.kite-enterprises.com/articles/spotland.htm was about a combination XC and spot landing contest from scooter-tow that I was able to put on in one afternoon during the summer of ’96.

I did a Google search for “scooter tow” and my website came up first. Not far down was a website http://gravityhawaii.com/scooter_towing.htm that correctly credited Brian Dahl with the invention of the motorscooter tow system in 1989. I’m not sure that they coined the name “scooter tow”, but Brian Dahl sure invented the system and he should be given full credit for the original idea.

Discuss scooter towing at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Scooterzilla

Tue, Jul 22 2003, 4:00:05 am EDT

Dave Broyles|PG

Dave Broyles|PG|scooter

I mentioned Dave Broyle’s scooter tow thingamajig in the previous issue of the Oz Report. Dave Broyles «d.broyles» writes:

I prefer to refer to this scooter as Scooterzilla because of its ability to tow a tandem paraglider or hang glider with over 400 lb. of pilot and passenger to thermalling heights with no difficulty.

 

It’s very casual appearance is to reduce the likelihood of theft and because I spend more time teaching than beautifying.

http://www.kite-enterprises.com/photogallery/aln_sctr.jpg

Discuss scooter towing OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Texas Open »

Thu, Jul 17 2003, 3:00:00 pm EDT

antenna|cloud|Dave Broyles|Dragonfly|general aviation|radio|Sam Kellner|space|weather

There may be only 387 folks in this town (the sign hasn’t been changed in ten years), but they are an enthusiastic bunch. We’ve had visitors out at the airport every flyable day and the snow cone ladies showed up today. I can hear the Flytec Dragonfly taking another passenger for a discovery flight over me head right now. I’ve got the trailer parked at the Mountain Laurel Inn in “downtown” Leakey.

Toda is the transition day after the hurricane came through. The skies slowly cleared and the cumulus clouds got friendlier as the day went on. We started flying about at about 3 o’clock and found cloud base to be about 3,000’ AGL with light winds.

Sam Kellner and Bob (he’s learning to fly) have been busy all week getting the airport ready for the big show. Apparently last year, even with the bad weather, the Texas Open was overrun with visitors. Sometimes too many General Aviation visitors, as they were causing a problem with launching.

This year the grass is mowed, there’s a headquarters trailer, the snow cones trailer, a tent for extra space to place hang gliders, and all the GA planes have been moved to behind the hangars giving us no obstructions on the grass runway. We’ve been launching from the apron to keep the stress down on the tugs which are starting in the grass.

The only radio for the airport is 2-m. It’s got a big permanent antenna thanks to Dave Broyles. The trailer’s got a phone line made active on Monday, so we can be sure that the Oz report gets out.

The weather outlook is for good conditions for at least the next three days so we should have an outstanding Texas Open.

Discuss "Texas Open" at the Oz Report forum   link»

USHGA – instructor certification revocation »

Sat, Jan 11 2003, 6:00:02 am GMT

Bill Bolosky|Dave Broyles|Hal Hayden

Hal Hayden writes:

Who gives out instructor's ratings in USHGA? I have a good friend who I finally convinced to take hang gliding lessons, and his instructor has turned out to be horrific! This guy sent his student (my friend) off a 1,200 foot hill as a first flight! Then, two lessons later, he decided to lead his students off the same site and broke his arm when he blew His own launch. He needs to have his instructor's ratings revoked and I will initiate this request.

Bill Bolosky <bolosky@microsoft.com> writes:

While there has been a historical perception that the USHGA is unwilling to revoke instructor certifications (and this may well have been the case in the past), we have the ability to do it, and have in fact carried out a revocation recently. I believe that the process that we used for the recent revocation is fair and evenhanded, and if we're sued I believe that it will stand up in court.

If someone has a bad experience with an instructor, they should first try to resolve the problem with the instructor directly. If that doesn't work, then contact the regional director, who has the authority to revoke instructor ratings. If that also doesn't work, they can take it to the Safety and Training committee. Dave Broyles, the Safety and Training chairman, has the authority to initiate proceedings to revoke instructor certifications, and in the right case he is not afraid to use it.

Discuss "USHGA – instructor certification revocation" at the Oz Report forum   link»

If I were USHGA President - marketing »

Mon, Dec 30 2002, 1:00:04 am EST

Dave Broyles|If I were USHGA President|USHGA|video

Dave Broyles «broydg» writes:

I don't like to mention that I once was president of the USHGA much anymore. I am sure that no one is impressed, and anyway it was 20 years ago, but as it happens, I do have something to say that relates.

While I was president in 1981, there was a strong faction of BOD members who held the position that marketing the sport and making it grow was bad for the sport. This group was articulate and influential, and thus stopped initiatives to market hang gliding to try to make it grow. Their arguments were pretty much the same as those now arguing against marketing the sport. Although I understood the arguments of both sides, as President I was not supposed to and did not support one faction over the other. I had my opinions, and for the most part kept them to myself. Besides, I did not have the hubris to believe I knew what was best for the sport, long term.

I am no longer president and I have 20 years of hindsight to go on, so I believe that my opinion counts. My first observation is that the leaders of the BOD anti-marketing faction from that time are gone from the sport. Not because of the failure of their position. They did stop the BOD from taking action on marketing the sport at the time. But because they just didn't have the legs to stay in the sport.

My second observation is that there are more flying sites in the Alps to which one can drive a car, than all the flying sites in the U.S. I believe this has two reasons. The first is that the sport has never been effectively marketed in the U.S., and the second is that our liability situation here is dramatically different, for the worse, than in Europe.

I believe that when you ask which came first, the chicken or the egg, flying sites are the egg, not the chicken. By that I mean, yeah, the very easy to develop flying sites happened as part of the sport, but that we need a growing participant base to trigger the development of more sites. It's simply a matter of economics. If it costs money and effort to develop a flying site, then there needs to be a participant base to provide the money and the effort, otherwise the sites won't be developed.

Further, if we want to improve the liability situation, we need numbers both to develop the political power and to be able to get effective and reliable sources of insurance. Conspiracy theorists aside, the real reason we have trouble getting insurance is because our numbers are so small that there is not a sufficient numerical base for the actuaries to make statistically reliable judgments about the risks involved. Larger numbers of participants would work to fix this problem.

I fully agree with Aaron that the gap of marketing between what we have done and what would destroy the sport is so large that we have more chance of the world being destroyed by a meteor strike than hang gliding being destroyed by over-marketing.

Further, I do believe that if we don't figure out why participation in hang gliding is shrinking, the sport is doomed in twenty years to go the way hang gliding did in the early years of aviation.

Things we need to consider are:

1. Finding out how to attract young people into the sport.

2. Providing more incentive for instructors to teach and schools to exist.

3. Making hang gliding yet safer without removing the cachet of it being a high risk sport. (People are attracted to high risk sports. They just don't want them to be dangerous.)

As an instructor, I provide incentives to young people to learn to fly. (1/2 price lessons and guide them to good entry level used equipment.) Still, the majority of my students are over 35. We need to find ways to make hang gliding more attractive than video games. I am sure that marketing can do this.

We need to give instructors more respect, more opportunity to make a living wage and less exposure to liability risk. There is little business incentive to be a hang glider instructor, (remember the joke, "The way to make a small fortune in hang gliding..., is to start with a large one.") The sport needs to find some way to help these struggling small businesses to better market themselves, to teach better, to run better businesses and to insure themselves against liability risk.

Trying to help the solo instructors and small schools may not sit well with the large schools, but expecting the few large "successful" schools to provide us with all the new pilots is mathematically unrealistic. Business models in other sports seem to show that if the small schools are more successful, then the big schools will benefit even more.

Number three is a little tricky. All instructors know that as Tex said "the best marketing they had encountered was from news broadcasts on accidents. Apparently the phone used to run hot after such broadcasts." But when pilots get killed and their pilot friends realize that "Yes, this sport is dangerous." people drop out of the sport. A year sabbatical from flying because of a broken arm or leg can cause the same thing.

We need to figure out a way to encourage the average pilot to fly a safe, pleasant to fly glider rather than a hand me down comp glider or the latest rocket ship. We need to make sure they have safe helmets and safe, easy to use harnesses. We need to insure that the pilots understand risk management and know how to avoid potentially dangerous or lethal situations. And we need to do this while promoting the sport as being even more exciting than the "X Games".

The important thing about the above list is that we need to understand that the success of the sport means more flying sites and more fun, not less of either.

Texas Open »

Mon, Apr 8 2002, 12:00:02 pm GMT

Dan Bereczki|Dave Broyles|Texas Open 2002

Dan Bereczki <dan@danbarb.org> writes:

The 2002 Texas Open is proud to announce that Dave Broyles has accepted the Meet Director position. Dave has many years experience flying, towing and competing inTexas and around the country. Dave's leadership of the Texas Open 2002 will ensure an outstanding competition and an excellent flying weekend in the beautiful Texas Hill Country.

Check out the Texas Open website at http://danbarb.org/txopen for more details.July 19-21, 2002.

Discuss "Texas Open" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Superfloater »

Wed, Mar 20 2002, 2:00:05 pm EST

Dave Broyles|Gary Osoba|record|sailplane

Dave Broyles|Gary Osoba|John "Ole" Olson|record|sailplane

(?-i)John "Ole" Olson|Dave Broyles|Gary Osoba|record|sailplane

Dave Broyles|Gary Osoba|John "Ole" Olson|record|sailplane

Dave Broyles «broydg» writes:

After an email from Nick Chitty who mentioned the idea of a SuperFloater web site, I stole a few things from the Oz Report and my web site and created a website for the SuperFloater at www.kite-enterprises/superfloater. I have requested an article from Nick about his record flight.

I would appreciate contributions about the SuperFloater and other ultralight sailplanes, both articles and pictures along with any impertinent suggestions about improvements.

I will probably write about my Superfloater flight experiences between the time after I wrote the HG Mag Superfloater article and the present, including the death defying flight of Gary Osoba and myself towing the SF with the Ptug 30 miles fromWichita to back to the Sunflower Aerodrome atYoder,KS. We undoubtedly have the SuperFloater XC aerotow distance to goal record. This article will also appear on the website.

Could I ask all of the SuperFloater owners to send me their name, address, email, phone number, SF serial number, colors, etc. I will put them on the web site.

Superfloater fixes »

Mon, Mar 18 2002, 2:00:06 pm EST

Dave Broyles|Hal Hayden|Max Broadway|PG|sailplane

Max Broadway «maxb» writes:

As a former sailplane pilot now into hang gliding, I have been reading with interest the discussions on the superfloater. Would that I could have a test fly! However, I digress.

Prior to gliding days, I used to motorcycle a fair bit. After a few hours "in the saddle", the seat foam of the Yamaha I was then riding would compress solid, and at that point I'd have been just as comfortable sitting on a solid steel beam for all the cushioning from road shocks it provided. I noted that, once I started flying sailplanes, the same would occur.

Seats in the IS28's I flew for nigh on 10 years were made of the same poly foam as on my motorbike, and the ex-armchair cushions provided by the gliding club to alter pilot positioning were of the same kind. I am fairly short for a bloke at 5' 7", and nearly always had to rely on extra foam to reach the glider rudder pedals.

Initially, it was fine, but 2 hours in the seat and it was Numb Bum for sure! However, some pilots began to realise that the risk was greater than just Numb Bum - there is also potential risk of spinal damage from the deadly combination of fully compressed foam and a hard landing. I understand paraglider pilots may also suffer the same risk.

At that point, confor foam was often promoted, and offered a solution to the problem. See: http://www.seatfoam.com/prod01.htm for more info. Perhaps this is similar to the hi-tec "dynafoam" Nick quoted, or the Temper/Astronaut foam mentioned by Steve in issue 55 of your report?

I know from seeing samples that confor foam comes in differing densities which could be utilised to maintain seat cushion thickness for differing pilots, and this also may be a useful characteristic for maintaining C of G on superfloaters and the like.

Hal Hayden «hal» writes:

Dave Broyles is right - the Superfloater flies very much like an ultralight taildragger. He allowed me to fly one of his soon after he got two of them in 1995 nearAustin and it was a blast. It was a very light late winter afternoon and I was truck-towed to about 1200 feet. I felt comfortable both on tow and after release. The SF felt very secure and predictable and I was able to crank it right around to work the small weak thermals that day. Landing was straightforward, too. (I did have quite a bit of 3 axis time, including sailplanes.)

Now that I have some land with a runway and hanger, I am considering adding a SuperFloater to my flying toy collection. Are they still being made? Probably not. I'll have to start looking for nice second-hand one.

Learin’ to fly

Sun, Mar 17 2002, 12:00:05 pm EST

Dave Broyles|Dragonfly|Gilbert Griffith|sailplane

Dave Broyles|Dragonfly|Gilbert Griffith|sailplane|scooter

Gilbert Griffith «gilbert» writes:

Here's an idea which may save budding Superfloater pilots some time and trouble. If there is aerotowing going on, as you would probably have with a Superfloater around, how about the tug pilot taking the hang glider pilot up in the Dragonfly for a short flight of dual instruction so he can try out the stick and rudder? I believe the handling and flying speeds would be similar to the Superfloater and a half hour flight early in the day before towing starts would be enough for most pilots.

billy vaughn «billyfly» writes:

I've been flying hang gliders for 16 years, and teaching on and off all the while, and I thought your readers might be interested in another option for a hang glider pilot working into a Superfloater. I trained on a Max Air Drifter ultralight with a certified USUA BFI.

The Drifter is a taildragger and helped teach me three axis flying and to "lead with my feet." For me, the Drifter proved to be a perfect "trainer" for the Superfloater, and having an instructor who is also an experienced hang glider pilot (Rawling Davenport) helped immensely.

In fact, the Superfloater is in many ways easier and simpler to fly than the Drifter. So far I've got about 10 hours on the Superfloater, and once I transitioned to it, I've not flown power at all. Towing as you know is a simple transition as well for anyone with some aerotowing experience, and thermalling seems intuitive.

Dave Broyles «broyles» writes:

What comes first, the chicken or the egg? The SuperFloater is much like a primary glider, but the paradigm has changed. We no longer train like they did in the first part of the 20th century.

For a hang glider pilot who wants to learn how to fly the SF, some two place time in something like an Aeronica Champ, a J3 Cub or a true 3-axis ultralight like a Dragonfly would be appropriate. The handling of these aircraft is similar to the SF. Then, I would suggest using some form of surface tow such as Scooter tow with the SF to get feel for the aircraft and some towing skills.

For a pilot who has flown sailplanes the SF is no issue.

For a private pilot, surface tow to give the pilot a feeling for the aircraft and the understanding of how to use the airspace appropriately for a glider rather than a motored aircraft would be the best transition.

For those who can afford it, a few hours in a sailplane learning to aerotow would help.

I let a number of pilots with varied qualifications fly my SFs. None had any problems. I would not let anyone who has not soloed 3-axis fly them however. Now that I have only the one, I hardly let anyone fly it. It is irreplaceable.

Can’t spin that Superfloater

Sat, Mar 16 2002, 2:00:00 pm EST

Dave Broyles|Mike Degtoff|William Wixon

Dave Broyles «broyles» writes:

My personal SuperFloater seems to be impossible to spin; however, a light pilot with a thin seat back might be able to spin it if the CG was back far enough. The adjustment of the CG is done with the thickness of the seat back. The stock seat back is really only suitable for someone of average weight or less. For a pilot of my weight, 195 lb., the thin seat back clearly improves the sink rate.

I did a polar with my Ball Graphic Comp and came up with a min sink of 167 and a max L/D of just about 16/1. This was based on a single run though and may not be real close. I worked a couple of thermals with Mike Degtoff on his new Stealth several years ago, and it seemed that Mike had a few feet per minute on me.

To turn the SF on a wing tip, it is absolutely essential to give opposite aileron to hold up the inside wing. I get a better sink rate thermalling a little faster, eg. 24 mph to 26 mph. I am certain that a yaw string will help flying the SF. I find that it is rather easy to have it crossed a little when not paying attention to the yaw string.

I have hit turbulence that has thrown me around in my SF, but I am pretty sure that the large tail surfaces fairly far from the wing give it a lot of stability.

William Wixon sends in this photo, that I imagine that John Heiney took it.

Super Superfloater

Tue, Mar 12 2002, 3:00:07 am EST

Carbon Dragon|CIVL|Dave Broyles|Gary Osoba|record|sailplane

Carbon Dragon|CIVL|Dave Broyles|Gary Osoba|John "Ole" Olson|record|sailplane

(?-i)John "Ole" Olson|Carbon Dragon|CIVL|Dave Broyles|Gary Osoba|record|sailplane

Carbon Dragon|CIVL|Dave Broyles|Gary Osoba|John "Ole" Olson|record|sailplane

Dave Broyles «broydg» writes:

The Superfloater is supposed to have a yaw string. Mine does. The little hole in the aerotow release block is for a vertical wire with a loop in the end to attach a yaw string. I would include a nice digital picture of this, but it's out in its trailer at the airport.

I found the SuperFloater to be really easy to fly. What happened last weekend which I didn't expect, was that while flying a Grob 103 with an instructor, (which was my first sailplane flight in 25 years, the previous one being a demo flight of 30 minutes in a 2-33) the instructor gave me the controls early in the first tow, and never touched them again through 3 tows, releases, flights and landings.

Since I remember my first sailplane flight, 25 years ago as VERY difficult on tow, and not that great through the rest of it, I can only assume that flying the SuperFloater, totally self taught and without any supervision is still great training for flying the real thing.

Incidentally, in so far as I know, the current Class 4 record is held by a SuperFloater at 90 kilometers! I keep planning to break this record before something better does it, but life intrudes. Incidentally, the real, but unrecognized (through a gross miscarriage of justice) Class 4 records are held by Gary Osoba in the Carbon Dragon. (Much longer than 90 km.)

(editor’s note: yes, this is the only Class 4 record. And, yes, it was a real miscarriage of justice when CIVL took Gary’s records, fairly set, away and didn’t move them to Class 4.)

Red Bull Wings Over Aspen

Fri, Sep 1 2000, 7:00:00 pm EDT

Aaron Swepston|Chris Muller|Dave Broyles|Jim Lee|John Borton|John Smith|Ken Brown|Kenny Brown|Mike Barber|PG|video

The speed gliding came off well in spite of continued difficult launch conditions. The winds seem to come over the back and on launch they are ninety degrees. Mike Barber mushed in on launch cutting his elbow, and doing some minor damage (maybe more) to his Litespeed. He launched nose high (and has in the previous two practice rounds). It was trickling in when Mike launched.

Everyone else had good runs. I got to see a most of the runs, and Kenny Brown's was by far the best looking: fast, low, quick turns. John Borton said that he felt bad about his run, getting out of line right away and coming in too high on the last straight shot.

Dave Broyles put a Garmin GPS on Ken Brown, and we got a 3-D view of the track using DeLorme's Topo (the vertical has been exaggerated by a factor of four – but this is still a very steep course):

 

Results:

John Borton

01:49:29

Ken Brown

01:51:97

G.W. Meadows

01:53:54

Aaron Swepston

01:57:97

Andy Whitehall

02:03:19

Chris Muller

02:03:81*

Jim Lee

02:05:66*

Rich Cizauskas

02:30:04*

John Smith

05:53:91**

Mike Barber

05:27:87***

* Two three second penalties for being too high on two gates
** Disqualified for the day putting a tip through the grass on a turn. Actual time was 1:54:50
*** Didn't fly

Kenny had a camera on the keel and we'll get a great pilot point of view video when it gets aired on USA network, October 14th, 11 AM, on Core Culture, right after WWF wrestling.

Oh, the paragliding? Called off due to winds and forecast of rain later in the day. So far, no rounds have been flown. Looks like the aerobatics is called off also for the day.

The sky had quite a few clouds early in the morning, and later in the morning there was 100% high gray clouds. Didn't notice any rain.

No tow meet in Texas?

Thu, Jan 13 2000, 11:00:02 pm GMT

Dave Broyles|David Williams|John Borton|Michael Williams|Steve Burns

John Borton, <CompCommittee@aol.com>, writes:

Davis, you first mentioned the Lone Star Championships in OZ Volume 3, Number 121. You have followed up in later reports including one of your most recent. This meet was scheduled to be held in Hearne, TX later this year. As you reported, the Request for Sanctioning was conditionally approved by full Competition Committee at the last BOD meeting.

I a sorry to report that the group who requested the sanctioning (Michael Williams, David Broyles and the Houston Hang Gliding Club) have officially withdrawn their request. Steve Burns of Austin Air Sports may or may not carry on the torch.

I spoke with Steve about him submitting a new request and he was interested but felt that the logistics of getting Committee approval at this late date were perhaps too cumbersome (my interpretation -- I don't wish to put words in his mouth).

As it stands, there is no Request for Sanctioning approved or pending for a meet in Hearne.

Discuss "No tow meet in Texas?" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Upcoming US competitions »

Tue, Oct 26 1999, 10:00:04 pm GMT

Brad Koji|calendar|Chris Arai|CIVL Bureau|Dave Broyles|Dennis Pagen|G.W. Meadows|GAP|Gene Matthews|GPS|James "Jim" Zeiset|Jamie Shelden|Jim Lee|John Borton|Kendrick "Ken/Kenny" Brown|Lawrence "Pete" Lehmann|Liz Sharp|Malcolm Jones|Michael Williams|Paul Klemond|Pete Lehmann|Quest Air|Ray Leonard|Rob Kells|Russ Locke|Russell "Russ" Brown|Scot Huber|USHGA BOD|Wallaby Ranch

At the USHGA BOD meeting last weekend, the competition committee decided (sort of) on the class A competition schedule for the next year. I've included the Chairman's (Russ Locke's) report below, with my comments. Undoubtedly I will make a few mistakes and there will be a need for a few updates to this preliminary report. As I write this I'm a passenger in my truck heading south on Interstate 5 in southern Oregon, and I can't get any further clarifications at this time.

Worldwide Competition Committee Report Fall Bod Meeting, October 21-23, 1999

Attendees: (in alphabetical order by last name) Mark Ferguson, Rob Kells, Paul Klemond, Ray Leonard, Dennis Pagen, Liz Sharp, Jim Zeiset, Jim Lee, Pete Lehmann, Dave Broyles, Gene Matthews, John Borton, John Greynauld, Jamie Sheldon

Voting Requirements: Long Term Committee members (per 10/18/99 Russ Locke Memo). Ken Brown (Ken sent voting proxy to Committee Chair), Mark Ferguson, Rob Kells, Paul Klemmond, Ray Leonard, Dennis Pagen, Liz Sharp, Jamie Sheldon, Jim Zeiset Pete Lehmann (Added John Greynauld at this meeting)

Minutes of Meeting: Old Business:

Speed Gliding WTSS System (Dennis & GW) - Done (see following)

Pagen 6/3/99 memo: First I believe, as does GW that the Canadian meet should count toward team selection because we have so few speed gliding meets. I also think the Preworld meet in Greece should count. Before you worry about it, note that the selection system I'm going to suggest will devaluate the Greek meet because it will have so many pilots that the US competitor will have less chance to gain points.

The system I suggest we use simply consists of using the WHGA round score system (it awards points of a different amount for each place on each round). Pilots who have three or more scoring flights are allowed to drop their lowest. Their total score is the average of their remaining scores. Pilots with less than three rounds will also receive their average score, but will not take precedence over pilots with 3 or more rounds until he has more than twice the 3 round pilot's score.

Because we haven't established a hierarchy and we always will have fewer speed gliding meets than X-C (I think), I don't believe we need as complex a system as for the X-C team. The WHGS scoring system drops off rapidly below first place which is why I use the half score value. Hopefully this system will induce pilots to compete in as many rounds as possible. On the other hand, it behooves you met directors to try to get at least 3 rounds so that a pilot can qualify (at least this year) at one meet. This is an abnormal situation. In future years, pilots will have more meets to choose from (and two years to do it). We may wish to change the number of scored rounds considered in the future.

Posting results on the USHGA Web Page (Russ) - On hold until validity #s decided.

New Business:

CIVL Stuff International Meet Schedule (see Attached)

Glider standards for Class Draft from CIVL (including Dennis' amendment) was discussed (see attached). Rob Kells formed subcommittee including GW Meadows, Jim Lee Pete Lehmann and Dennis Pagen. The subcommittee met to review the proposed glider standards for competition. Several changes, deletions and additions were proposed. These amendments were given to the CIVL Delegate (Dennis) to present to the CIVL Bureau and the technical committee in charge of this matter on behalf of the United States.

Editor's note: You can find Dennis' original proposal on the CIVL discussion board (http://board.fai.org/). Dennis was responding to an initiative from Austria made at the CIVL meeting earlier this year that would try to keep competition flex-wing glider closer to certification standards.

Class 2 vs. Class 4 The Competition Committee instructs our CIVL Delegate to inform the CIVL that we believe all definitions should remain tied to foot launch ability and land ability.

Editor's note: While it's not quite clear what this means (at least to me), it appears to be part of discussion about whether some Class II gliders (Swift and Utopia, for example) are pushing the envelope of foot launch ability as demonstrated at the World Championships this year in Italy. Do these gliders really fit into the CIVL definition of hang glider (for competition class and record purposes)?

This discussion also seems to sidestep the issue of farings and their use in competitions, although it may address them in an indirect fashion as a component of a limit on glider weights. Hopefully someone who actually attended the meeting will be able to give your over burdened editor further clarification on just what instructions the USHGA gave to Dennis on this issue.

Request to spend $1,100 to have the GAP 4.0 system altered to included miles (and other English measurements). No funds are available for this activity at this time.

Editor's note. I've passed along the request from the Race 4.0 author (Achim Muelller) for support from theUSHGA for the software which is used to score hang gliding competitions using the GAP system. The USHGA has not provided any support for the development of this program while numerous other countries have.

Now, as you'll see below, the USHGA will mandate use of the GAP scoring system, which for all practical purposes mandates our use of the Race 3.2 or 4.0 program. What if the author of the program asks that we not use his program without supporting it?

Hang Gliding World Championship's Report (verbal by Jim Lee and Jim Zeiset). Problems with team participation - recommendation to follow the rulebook in this case. Lack of strong Team Leader appointed prior to the Meet allowed other problems to surface between the Team pilots.

Editor's note: As I was on the US World (or is it National?) team this year, you'd think I'd have some idea about what the real problems were. I personally thought things went pretty well. The rigid wing component acted as a team (flew on the same frequencies, had our drivers picked each other up, worked out strategies). We had sufficient resources, and got good support.

The whole team could have used another retrieval driver (none of the five flex-wing pilots arranged for a driver and rejected arrangements we made to help them), and perhaps the whole team could have flown on the same frequency, but with nine members no one proposed that. I wonder what following the rule book means in this case. Perhaps I'll find out.

I felt that Chris Arai did an outstanding job for the team arranging for our lodging at the Villa Dama during the Worlds.

World Paragliding Championships. US Team withdrew because of safety reasons and the fact, not perception, that common sense and reasonable operational procedures were being circumvented. The Competition Committee directs our CIVL representative to strongly protest the events surrounding this meet. Team Leader to supply the CIVL rep with all pertinent data.

Editor's note: The disaster that was the World Paragliding Championships has been previously reported here in the Oz Report. You'll find Paul Klemond's story at http://www.kurious.org/usteam99/Fiasco.htm.

GAP vs. 1000 point systemDecision by the committee to apply the existing rulebook validity to 99 meets recognizing that there are rescoring impossibilities within the GAP system.

Editor's note: G.W. Meadows used the GAP scoring system for the pre-Pan American meet in Dinosaur, which devalued the meet a bit. GAP gives fewer points that the 1000 point system, so this may devalue future meets.

Speed Gliding WTSS Publish current standings. After discussion, it was decided that the current cutoff for the 2000 Team will be June 19th, 2000. The current scoring system will be in place through the 2000 Team. Between now and the cutoff date the system for deciding that a particular meet will count towards the Speed Gliding World Team will be:

1) That the meet is published in hang gliding magazine at least 30 days in advance (counting from the first of the month of the particular issue). 2) The meet must be approved by the Speed Gliding subcommittee consisting of GW Meadows, Rob Kells and Ray Leonard.

Class A Sanctioned requests (Hang Gliding):

Sandia Nationals, Late June - approved by committee.

Editor's note: This meet (formerly the Sandia Classic and not held last year after Brad Koji's death the year before) is now scheduled for late June, after years of bad weather in early June in Albuquerque. There was considerable earlier dissention regarding making this meet being turned into a Nationals (Sandia is no place to start your competition career), but looking at the other competitions, you've got to wonder which one could really be a "Nationals."

The front of the mountain at Sandia sucks big time in strong conditions or with a north wind. The proposal has been to add the launch at the towers, which can only make things worse. I can only hope that by moving the meet till later in the year, that conditions will mellow out, like they did this year at Dinosaur.

I hope that we can get an honest assessment of the likely conditions from the meet organizers, and an early description of their plans. Hopefully I will be able to get a copy of their proposal to the USHGA. As a long time supporter of the Sandia Classic, I would like to see this come off as a successful event, but I also want to report on the real situation.

Lone Star Championships - After discussion with committee, dates were changed to 8/13 - 8/20 and Jim Zeiset was added as Meet Steward - approved by committee.

Editor's note: No further word yet on this one. It is a tow meet, obviously, but just where? Russ Locke will send me a copy of the proposal by fax soon.

Notice that there isn't any word here about a meet at Quest Air (more on this later), and what about the Pan American meet at Dinosaur? I am following up on this as .I write this.

Contact info: Michael Williams, <michaelj.williams@ss.ps.ge.com>, 281-457-7878

No Sanctioned requests were received for Paragliding Meets.

Editor's note: I wonder why there aren't any requests for Paraglider meets.

Rulebook Changes

Editor's note: You are going to have to follow along with your USHGA 1999 Competition Rulebook to see what the following minor changes mean.

1) 1.4 Eliminate: "Any and all changes . at least 30 days prior to the board meeting. (process not followed) 2) 6.2B change "Observation" to "Obstruction." (typo) 3) 6.3E Eliminate all reference to "pins" and substitute "reported landing location" 4) 6.4B Change "recorded to the nearest 1/10th" to recorded to the nearest 1/10th of a mile or less". (GPS clarification) 5) 6.5 Change "Australian 1000 point per round formula described below." To "GAP system." Also change to read, "Each pilot's daily score will be computed according to the most current version of GAP available, but at least as current as that used in the previous year." Eliminate all 1000 point scoring references. Change "After examination of turnpoint photos.. " To read, "turnpoint verification. "Eliminate sentence "To provide uniformity." (new scoring system) 6) 6.6 Change to read, "Round Validity will be determined by GAP." (new scoring system) 7) 6.8A Change to read, ".valid task board photograph on film if used,." (gap upgrade) 8) 6.8C Change "pin placement" to read "landing verification" (gap upgrade) 9) 10.5B & C Eliminate in entirety. (reflects current processes) 10) 11.5B & C Eliminate in entirety. (reflects current processes) 11) 12.2B.1 Change to ".ranking used shall be the ranking as of 45 days prior to the start of the competition. (upgrade pilot selection system) 12) 12.2B2 Eliminate "as of the date. start of competition," and add the underlined in "procedures as outlined in section 12.5 and 12.B1., but substituting." (new selection points system) 13) 12.5B After ".throughout the year." Add, "except when ranked 45 days prior to a World Meet." (new pilot selection system) 14) 12.5D2b Change ".any placing." to read "..first place.." Change "..except that." to ".and.." (new selection system) 15) 12.5D3 Eliminate all starting with "The tenth place pilot would earn." and ending with ".24 WTSS points earned."" Replace with "All other pilots earn points based on the following formula: (Pilot's total score/Winners total score) X ( Winners points - 10% bonus). (new pilot selection system) 16) 12.E1 After ".pilot's ranking." Add "according to the most current PIRS ranking." Eliminate "The equivalent. ranking year, with" Add capital "T" to "the." (new pilot selection system) 17) 12.5F1 Change "USHGA 1000 point" to "GAP" Eliminate all numbers under "Full points." (new scoring system) 18) 12.5F2b Change "Divide the winner's points by 4,680 to obtain the validity factor." (new validity system) 19) 12.5F2c Eliminate.(replaced by 12.5F2b) 20) 12.5F2. Eliminate the example and the exception and replace with another example. (replaced by 12.5F2b 21) ?? Make sure there is a requirement for the World Team to have a Team Leader appointed prior to the meet. 22) Change all references of "World Team" to "National Team" and all references to "WTSS" to "NTSS."

Editor's note: This is the result of a proposal from Paul Klemond. He just felt it was kind of strange to call the US Team the US World Team instead of the US National Team. I'll have to make a few changes on the ranking spread sheets about this.

23) 12.2B Replace "Competition administration subcommittee chairman" with Executive Director or Team Leader." 24) 12.5B Change "At least two such meets must be from the most recent year" to "No more than two meet results may be considered from the prior year (Ranking will still be calculated on an calendar year basis, but the World Team selection window will be extended to 45 days prior to the Meet) (clarification) 25) 12.4A Replace "World Team Sub Committee" with "Team Leader." (current practices)

Committee would like to thank Jim Lee, Chris Arai and Paul Klemond for all their work on the needed changes to the competition rulebook.

Changes considered, but not approved:

1) Request to require wheels in competitions. After short discussion, request was voted down unanimously.

Editor's note: Notice how Russ had to emphasize the unanimous part. Well, I'm used to holding unpopular positions. You have to start some where. I figure with zero votes, I can only get more the next time (maybe at the CIVL meeting).

2) Requests to establish a Class 2 Speed Gliding Structure. Nothing prevents a Meet Organizer from doing this anyway. No action necessary.

3) Mark Ferguson and Paul Klemond requesting Meet Steward status be approved for the following pilots: Paul Ferguson, Dan Olsen, Scot MacClowary, Ken Hjorgensdon???? All four approved by Committee

Action Item(s):

1) Chair to make sure the current rankings are published in the Magazines. By 12/31/99

2) Chair to send approved Class A competitions to Editor. By 10/31/99

3) Office and Chairman to create Speed Gliding World Team Account

4) Chair, with email help from Committee members, to draft a purpose statement to be placed in the beginning of the rulebook. Chair to email to committee members and to be done by end of year to be included in the new rulebook. By 12/31/99

5) Get Speed Gliding Ranking on USHGA web site. Chair & Office By 12/31/99

6) Write up statement that covers situations with dual nationality of pilots. Dennis Pagen By 12/31/99

List Of Enclosure(S): (indicate responsible person, followed by a complete description of action, followed by action completion date)

Editor's note: These are paper documents, so I'll report on them as I receive them.

1) CIVL Competition Dates 2) Proposed Hang Gliding Safety Standards 3) Sandia Meet Proposal 4) Lone Star Meet Proposal 5) Quest Air Meet Proposal 6) Wallaby Meet Proposal

Reconvened meeting to discuss Wallaby and Quest Air meets.

In attendance (* = voting members): *Liz Sharp, *Mark Ferguson, *Russ Locke, *Pete Lehmann, *GW Meadows, Gregg Lawless, *Dennis Pagen, Russ Brown, *John Greynauld, Gene Matthews, *Jamie Sheldon, Jim Lee, John Borton, *Rob Kells, *Jim Zeiset, *Ray Leonard

Discussed several alternatives.

Motion by Pete Lehmann to vote to accept the Quest Meet OR the Wallaby - not both. Seconded by John Greynauld. After Discussion, Roll Call Vote Q=Quest, W=Wallaby, A=Abstain

Editor's note: Both G.W. Meadows (meet to take place at Quest Air) and Malcolm Jones (Wallaby Ranch) submitted proposals for meets to occur at the same time, the week after Sun 'n Fun in late April. Because both individuals wanted their meet to be the one with these dates, a vote was needed to decide which meet got the dates. At least that is how I read this.

Pete Lehmann = Q, Dennis Pagen = W, GW Meadows = Q, Jamie Sheldon = Q, John Greynauld = W, Liz Sharp = A, Mark Ferguson = Q, Rob Kells = W, Ray Leonard = W.

Wallaby bid is approved, 5-4 (1-A)

Editor's note: Wow, close vote! One thing, which you'll notice is the obvious conflict of interest that G.W. Meadows had in voting for his proposal to be accepted by the committee. This is clearly unacceptable. He should have recused himself.

Only two of the people voting in this committee on these meets actually attended at last one of them – Jamie was at the Quest Air meet only last year. Dennis was at both meets. The overwhelming consensus last year among the competition pilots that attended both meets was strongly in favor of the Wallaby Ranch meet.

G.W. Meadows reproposed his Quest Air bid with "to be announced dates" - not to interfer with other approved Class A sanctioned meets. Proposal approved 9-0 with 1-A.

Editor's note: It looks like G.W. will propose to have his Atlantic Coast Championships at Quest Air right after the Wallaby Open with one day in between. I'm very pleased if this is the case.

Discuss "Upcoming US competitions" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Gary Osoba speaks: Don't fly at Speed To Fly »

Thu, Jun 17 1999, 3:00:01 pm GMT

Chris Arai|Dave Broyles|William "Gary" Osoba jr.

Gary has rewritten the following article, so it is now co-authored.

The essence of Gary's approach was to evaluate the relative value of 3 different factors as they impact XC speeds and/or distances. How important is:

1) Flying at the correct Speed-to-Fly? 2) Flying with a good tailwind component? 3) Flying the best Microlift route?

Using a polar construction from data I have flown on my Exxtacy, exact figures for various combinations of these factors were derived by Gary. As we huddled inside a hangar with graphs laid out on the tail surface of Dave Broyles' Superfloater, the wind howled at 30-40 mph outside. The results provided by these analyses were sometimes surprising, and quite revealing.

In this installment, the first of the above three factors is reported on.

A few years back I wrote an article for Hang Gliding Magazine, as a rebuttal to Chris Arai's earlier article on Speed To Fly. It was called, Speed to Get There First. The purport of that article was that the penalty for going a bit slower on glide in between thermals than the optimum speed was quite small, and the benefit of decreased risk was quite large.

In other words, first the curve of optimum inter thermal speed was quite shallow, and significant departures from the optimum speed did not have great effect on the total time over the task. Reducing the inter thermal speed significantly raised the altitude that the pilot entered the next thermal with.

While I felt the arguments in the article were convincing, I believe that Gary has added a number of interesting additions and quantitative refinements to the argument that would make it difficult for any competition or cross-country pilot to ignore the argument.

The polar for an Exxtacy tells us that the best speed to fly between thermals, assuming that your climb rate in next thermal is 600 fpm, is 42 mph (the accompanying sink rate is 318 fpm). If your climb rate in thermals over the course is consistently 600 fpm, your average speed over the course (excluding final glide) would be 27.5 mph. (The best speed to fly speed can be determined by drawing a line on a polar chart from the Y-axis at 600 fpm tangent to the Exxtacy polar.)

If you were to fly at 36 mph between thermals (214 fpm sink rate) instead of 42 mph, then your average speed over the course would be 26.5 mph, 1 mph less, on average. While this is certainly enough of a difference to make the difference in a race, it is a much smaller difference than the difference in your inter thermal glide speeds. (It is about 15% of the difference in glide speeds.).

The reason that you can significantly slow down your inter thermal speed (by 6 mph) and only lose one mile an hour off your overall speed, is that you spend less time thermaling because you have entered the thermals higher by flying slower between them. Entering the thermals higher also means that you are taking less risks. In the most extreme case, you enter the thermal at an altitude high enough to climb back up from and the other guy never makes it to the thermal at all. He's sitting on the ground, watching you fly on by.

In our example, if you were to hit three equally spaced 600 fpm thermals over a course of about 27.5 miles, you would enter them 900' higher flying at 36 mph than you would flying at 42 mph.

Of course, in the real world entering the thermals 900' higher each time would often put you in a stronger part of the thermal with faster climbs.

One measure of the decreased thermaling time and decreased risk is the reduction in time spent thermaling per mile of course covered. If you were to fly at 42 mph between thermals you would spend 0.76 minutes thermaling per mile on course. At 36 mph between thermals, you would spend 0.61 minutes thermaling per mile.

Another way to look at it is this: every time you fly a cycle of 4 climbs and glides, the pilot flying the strict speed to fly will have to find and fly a 5th thermal. If he happens to miss any single thermal in the string of 5, he's on the ground.

Finally, we have assumed that each thermal on the course gives you a climb rate of 600 fpm. But how safe an assumption is this? As Gary pointed out, one of the problems with classic speed to fly theory is that it is deterministic, while the atmosphere is stochastic. So a more correct approach with a speed to fly theory would be a probalistic one. Examining the impact of this mathematically yields results, which are quite counterintuitive.

With classic speed to fly procedure you set your speed ring to 600 fpm for the expected climb rate in the next thermal and fly at the indicated speed.

Let's assume that you are able to reach a new thermal after each glide but that at that point you have to climb in what you find, and that the thermals you encounter do not have the same strength, which is more of a real-world assumption. And you find some thermals that you have to climb in are say 300 fpm thermals, then your speed to fly speed is reduced. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that half the thermals have a climb rate of 600 fpm and half at 300 fpm, you might reckon that you should set your speed ring at 450 fpm (splitting the difference). This is not the case.

In fact, to optimize your speed you need to set your speed ring much closer to 300 fpm than to 600 fpm; in this case, 400 fpm would be correct. With an equal distribution of different rates of climb you'll find that the proper speed to fly calculation gives you a lower speed than if you just took the averages of the speeds to fly determined from each climb rate. This is not because of the previously mentioned benefits of flying slower than the strict speed to fly due to the shallow nature of these curves, but in addition to it. This solution is driven simply by the laws of probability. Here are the correct probalistic settings, given the above assumptions, for some different values of thermals with equal likelihood of occurrence.

200/600= 300 fpm, 200/800= 320 fpm, 400/600= 480 fpm, 400/800= 533 fpm, 300/500= 375 fpm, 300/800= 436 fpm

How does all of this apply to the Wallaby Open?

During the Wallaby Open the pilots in the lead flew fast between thermals. Winning any given task required beating the next guy by a few seconds. Did they fly at best speed to fly speeds?

The Wallaby Open was an example of a meet in which most of the days required all out racing to get to goal first. On most days, there was little chance of going down before goal (at least for the top performing pilots), so it was pretty clear that you could fly at the optimum speed and not worry about making the next thermal.

The top pilots were racing right next to each other, and as long as they gauged their actions against the other top pilots, and all acted in concert, then it didn't matter much just what they did. As top pilots they still tried to optimize their speed, so it was unlikely that other pilots behind them would engage in radically better actions that would allow them to overtake the leaders, perhaps undetected, and scoot by them at the end.

Often the leading pilots formed the first gaggle, as most pilots left the start gate at the same time, and those who went out earlier were easy to catch. The strategy involved leaving thermals soon after they began to weaken, and if one pilot left, all leading pilots would go with him in order to stay in the same conditions.

Any speed a leading pilot set between thermals was monitored and often matched by the other pilots in the first gaggle. There was too big a penalty for letting the guy get away from you. If your glide ratio and climbing ability wasn't up to those of the leading pilots you soon found yourself falling back and not longer able to stay in the same conditions as the lead gaggle. You lost the great advantage of having great pilots help you find and center on the next thermal.

It is my recollection that while we flew fast, we often didn't fly at speed to fly speed, but somewhat less. So monitoring speed to fly speed was less important than matching your actions against those whom you were flying against. You were most concerned about staying with them, then trying to out climb them, then hopefully out gliding them while staying at the same speed as them. Letting them speed ahead, get to the next thermal first, and get above and eventually away you was your biggest concern.

Discuss "Gary Osoba speaks: Don't fly at Speed To Fly" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Self-towing in Kansas

Fri, Jun 11 1999, 6:00:02 pm EDT

Dave Broyles|video

cart|Dave Broyles|video

Jule Lorenzen writes:

I live near the middle of Kansas, where the wind blows most all the time and many spring and summer days feature cloud streets lined up across the sky as far as the eye can see.  I started flying hang gliders in 79, and immediately began dreaming of ways to get into the sky.  By 80 I'd come to the logical conclusion that a remote control static winch might be a pretty cool thing to have, especially since there were very few pilots in my area and my friends and family were not very interested in what they saw as helping me risk life and limb by driving my various tow rigs.  Static line and payout winches were yet to be proven as reasonably safe even to most of the hang gliding world.

Well the dream of self launched flight never died so after having designed and built various trikes and payout reels with good success I decided to tackle making the dream come true.  In 95 I bought a four channel RC radio and started making plans.  I decided to try to use a Honda CB 350 that was sittin' around the place, a clean, nice running bike with a broad power band and plenty of it.

I knew at the time that there were machines easier to build from, Dave Broyles had shown the way with his neat use of variable speed belt drive scooters, but the manual shift 350 was what I had and I knew it'd be an interesting challenge to make it work.  I adjusted the spokes to move the rear wheel far enough over to squeeze a 1" wide spool next to the tire and built a line guide next to the front wheel with a frame tying the wheel to the kick stand so I could stake it down solid. 

Next I mounted a metal toolbox on the handle bars in which to mount the receiver, servos, micro-switches, relays etc.  I decided to use compressed air to do some of the hard work, like clutching and shifting because I could control the action with pressure and volume, so I mounted a used freon tank, a 12V air compressor, a pressure switch and a car battery for extra juice to the rack and sissy bar that were on the 73 vintage bike. 

I mounted a CB radio on the winch to listen to the motor and a noise-maker hooked to the neutral-light circuit so I could "hear" when I was in neutral.  Using solenoid operated air valves and air cylinders to actuate clutch and shifting was fairly straight forward (but by no means easy).

Three servos run two micro-switches each: one for ignition and starter, one for shifting up and down, one to run the clutch and a little device I call the neutral stop, run with an automotive door locking solenoid, which allows me to find neutral whether coming up from 1st, or down from 2nd. The throttle is run directly with the fourth servo.  NOT a simple machine but when finished I'd be able to do everything but steer the bike from at least 3000' away (the length of my tow line).

Next I turned my attention to the transmitter, which I dismantled and reorganized in order to have the controls at my fingertips with hands in flying position.  I fly suprone (seated inside the bar) so I mounted the transmitter on my right where I could reach it easily and read the battery power meter at a glance. 

Just for fun I built an ignition switch with key that works just like your car, which is mounted, along with the shifter, on the aft edge of the transmitter facing me. The throttle is mounted at my right index finger and the clutch lever at my left index finger with my hands in flying position.  The biggest difficulties were getting the antennas communicating clearly, ground to ground at distance, and overcoming radio interference from the bike itself. 

This took me quite a bit of time working on and off (mostly off) the next couple of years.  This spring finally saw the success that perseverance often brings, when trying my latest set of antenna brought glitch-free operation and successful test flights of 4-500' in 3/10s of a mile tow distance with light winds. 

It is a very strange feeling to operate a machine that's 1/2 mile away from you but it's beginning to feel routine.  Running the throttle is all I'm doing once the launch run is started, so it's not as complicated as it sounds.  I can quickly and easily adjust tow pressure as wind or thermal conditions change. 

I've yet to break a weak link while testing.  It's really funny to watch video of me launching from my cart, motor noise coming from the glider, but no motor.  Video from the winch end shows the winch starting up, clutching, shifting and towing me up in the background all sans operator!  Definitely fun stuff!

Now the dream is to make the next generation of self-launching winch simple, compact and easy to use.  (Notice I didn't say cheap, that could only come with mass production.) Anyone interested in acquiring a machine of this type or having me modify your current static winch to self-launchability call : 316-654-3148, or e-mail to «self_launch»

Discuss "Self-towing in Kansas" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Ultralight Soaring Championships coming soon

Thu, May 20 1999, 10:00:01 pm GMT

Dave Broyles|Davis Straub|Ultralight Soaring Championships 1999|William "Gary" Osoba jr.

Gary Osoba sent in the following notice about the upcoming ultralight soaring championships to be held the first week of June (starting Tuesday,June 1st) near Wichita, Kansas. I'm going, and hang glider and paraglider pilots are invited. I say, let's go there and show the sailplanes a thing or two. I know that Harry Sudswicher is bringing his Millenium.

The 1999 Ultralight Soaring Championships for Ultralight Sailplanes is scheduled for the first week in June, 1999. As in the first three championships, these will be held in conjunction with a fun fly-in for all types of soaring craft at the Sunflower Aerodrome near Wichita, Kansas.

Like before, we welcome an assortment of PG's, Flex Wings, Rigid Wings, ULS's and SP's to share the sky. The facilities are ideal for both auto and aero-towing on a paved main runway of 8000' X 200' wide. There is a parallel runway, which is useable for ground towing as well. The airport is strictly dedicated to soaring activities without intrusion from general aviation. As in prior years, we have arranged for no charge in using the facility, no charge for flying in the Championships or the fun-fly. We do encourage as many as possible to bring their own tow rigs, and to share them freely with fellow pilots during the activities.

Last year Dave Broyles brought his aero-Ptug and supplemented the ground tows with free aero-tows. Davis Straub will be bringing his tow system. There should be at least four ground tow systems and hopefully one or two aero-tow systems this year.

The conditions here in early June can be very good, indeed. As an example, we held a three day meet last year and the best of the three days had some 1000 fpm climbs (averaged over entire climb) and a 10300' AGL cloud base. Of course, the year before we had to cut one day's flying short due to some Kansas brand over development which led to super cells and multiple tornadoes, so we get our share of poor weather as well. Nevertheless, a splendid time is guaranteed for all!

Most importantly, this is a very laid back gathering with the primary emphasis on camaraderie. I'm not sure there's another meet like it in this regard, and it reminds me of the very first HG meets in the beginning of the sport. This is not a big meet, just maximum fun.

Schedule

Tuesday and Wednesday, June 1.2: Practice and fun flying. Thursday through Sunday, June 3-5: ULS Champs and fun flying.

In the event of poor weather on any day, I will try to loosely organize some presentations on soaring, XC, and design related topics with the attendees participating. I'll have some material ready to present as well. There is a space museum 15 minutes away with one of the largest collections of US and Soviet spacecraft in the world (the Apollo 13 capsule, multiple other craft). Wichita is the air capital of the world where 80% of general aviation aircraft are produced. Cessna, Beechcraft, Learjets, and Boeing's sister plant to Seattle.

Location

Sunflower Aerodrome- Take Hwy K-96 30 minutes NW of Wichita, Kansas. Exit at the town of Yoder, take paved county road south approximately 1 mile, take paved county road west 1 mile into development; continue on that road to its end, turn south for two blocks, enter airport property at hangars.

Facilities

Camping is allowed on the site and there are bathrooms and showers. No other amenities as this is an old abandoned airfield, don't expect paradisiacal appointments. Inexpensive rooms are available in nearby Hutchinson and Wichita. Contact me <go777@fn.net> for specifics.

Discuss "Ultralight Soaring Championships coming soon" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Scooter towing »

Thu, Apr 1 1999, 5:00:02 am GMT

Bill Bryden|Bob Hannah|Dave Broyles|David "Dave" Kinlan|John Burk|Kevin Cosley|Michael Robertson|scooter tow

A number of folks using scooter tows wrote in to say how happy they were with their setups. Dave Broyles, who is credited by Dennis Page and Bill Bryden in their Towing Aloft book (page 124) with developing scooting towing, wrote:

I thought I might give you a little history on this method. I published an article "Scooter Mania" about my motor scooter based winch in HG Mag in April of '94. I sent a video and plans out to probably 50 people including Bob Hannah, Kevin Cosley and Michael Robertson over the next few years.

When I lectured on towing at the Tacoma Dome in February of 1995, I had been doing solo primary instruction with a scooter tow system for over a year. I became interested in the method after a pilot who had learned to fly on a stationary winch in England told me a little about it. After I got the idea that it could be done, and how to make an inexpensive winch from a motor scooter, I developed my own training method from the USHGA program for hang glider training on a hillside.

You are right about the efficacy of the method. Scooter tow stationary winch based instruction is the most productive training method I have used. I have been teaching both hang glider students and paraglider students this way.

Incidentally, this method of training requires much more technique than hillside training. An instructor using these methods without some understanding of the technique is really likely to get a student in trouble.

If you compare the scooter tow pictures in Towing Aloft with the picture I took of Michael Robertson’s setup, you’ll see that the book gives quite a different impression of scooter towing then the one I got from watching Michael tow up the Ranch folks. The scooter has disappeared from Michael’s trailer and the operator is sitting watching the students fly towards him.

I wasn’t at all impressed with what I’ve heard and seen before about scooter towing and Towing Aloft wasn’t a big booster either.

David Kinlan in Johor Bahru, Mayalsia was pleased to be in contact with folks doing static winches and step towing. He wrote:

My friend Evert Wessels in the Netherlands has been designing and building static winches including hydraulic winches for many years, specifically to step tow. We have been step towing for 8 years. A hydraulic winch is the Holy Grail of winching, costs a fortune to build, but is like towing on rails.

John Burk, another Ontarian like Michael, but in Kitchener, instead of 40 miles outside of Toronto wrote:

Come on up to Teviotdale International and we will hook you up to our scooter winch so you can bob for pasture. Lots of runway and grass for that wide open feeling without the dust devils, but be prepared for some of the most scenic farmland you have ever seen, not to mention landing strips everywhere.

You’ll find John at http://www.soga.on.ca.

You can find Michael Robertson athttp://www.flyhigh.com.

Discuss "Scooter towing" at the Oz Report forum   link»