Wills Wing
Flytec

Oz Report

topic: release (23 articles)

Aerotow Barrel Release Test Flight

Mon, Jan 31 2022, 9:23:18 pm MST

Do they release with no tension?

aerotow|BHPA|equipment|Mark Dowsett|release|tow

The vast majority of hang gliding aerotows are conducted using a barrel release yet it is rumoured that hang gliding associations around the world (the BHPA are said to be one of these) do not approve of them. The concern is that barrel releases do not meet the requirement that they must operate when there is no tension on the tow line. The exact wording from the BHPA Technical Manual states: "The release must operate and release the line under conditions of zero line tension, so if for example a speed oscillation has developed the glider pilot can drop the line before the next surge". (BHPA_Tech_Manual_20.pdf)

I set out for Cambridge Aerotow Club, based at Sutton Meadows, to test whether my modern barrel release meets the BHPA release requirement. The reason for this test is that pilot equipment and procedures for the 2022 Great British Aerotow Revival must follow the BHPA Technical Manual and most aerotow pilots in the UK and around the world use barrel releases. I always fly with two barrel releases (as it still allows you to release in case of a snag) the one I am testing is actually my back up, my usual main barrel release is the push/pull bungee type that was made by Mark Dowsett (instinct.pro).

Please note that this isn't an endorsement of all barrel releases, just a demonstration that my back up barrel release operates in accordance with the paragraph outlined above. This was was taken from the current version of the BHPA Technical Manual at the time. This document is updated regularly so I take no responsibility for this information being up to date and this is in no way a blanket endorsement of barrel releases as such. Barrel releases, like all releases, have good and bad attributes. If someone can develop a perfect release that has no vices then I would be happy to test it out.

Discuss "Aerotow Barrel Release Test Flight" at the Oz Report forum   link»   »

Barrel release forces »

September 12, 2016, 7:16:56 MST

Barrel release forces

Curved or straight

Richard Thorp <rthorp> writes:

I have been laid low with sinusitis for the past week – so thought I would do a release force test on my barrel release – something that I have been wanting to do for a while:

I use the top black one in the picture - I forget the source of it but it is a thin wall aluminum barrel 3/4in inside diameter with a stainless steel curved pin. The tension is limited by a single loop of the fishing line I have used as a weaklink since Hempstead. I do not have a good way of measuring forces – I used a lever and baggage scale. To the best I can determine the weaklink was failing around the 200lbf mark, so all the tests done were probably between 150lbf and 200lbf

Anyway. At this “high” load of 150 – 200lbf, the top black release takes a VERY VERY strong pull to open it. It always opened, but the release force is MUCH higher than I am comfortable with. You have to be sure to grip it properly when releasing. I can really see how a first attempt could potentially fail. It could be helped with a larger diameter ring around it so that if you slide your hand down the line there is a better shoulder to pull against.

I have another barrel release – the lower one with the red line. This I made myself with thick wall Al tube 3/8in inside diameter and a straight parachute pin. This is very similar in geometry to the ‘Getof’ release I have seen around – and is a design I like. The combination of the straight pin that has a better mechanical advantage and the smaller tube means the release force is much smoother and very easy – 2 fingers can easily operate it.

So – what is the conclusion?. Well this is a personal question of risk tolerance, but for me I feel the 3/4in design is very marginal. I am now not wanting to use it as my primary and have to fight with one hand off the bar to effect a release. I also can see very little sense in using it as a secondary release – secondary releases will be used under high stress situations and often with an unpracticed hand with the release in an awkward position. For approx $10 and 10 minutes work I can make up a much better alternative.

Just food for thought.

Personally, with hundreds of launches, I have not had any problem with the smaller blue version of the curved pin barrel release. Thanks to Larry Bunner.

Discuss "Barrel release forces" at the Oz Report forum   link»

"The Ollie" Push/Pull Barrel release

Wed, Sep 25 2013, 2:15:03 pm GMT

No tension

release

http://instinct.pro/TheOllie

A barrel release (aka ProTow) that can be released both under tension and not under tension! The retractable bungee cord helps for releasing in either direction, while under tension the bungee keeps the barrel from slipping back and causing a premature release and if you need to release while there is no tension on the tow rope, the bungee can be stretched to pull the barrel away from you, allowing the release pin to flip which then allows the tow line to exit out the barrel.

Discuss ""The Ollie" Push/Pull Barrel release" at the Oz Report forum   link»

"GETOFF" Primary Release

January 25, 2012, 9:59:48 PST

"GETOFF" Primary Release

Enough with this aerotow

Antoine Saraf|Joe Street|release

Antoine Saraf <<antoinesaraf>> writes:

Joe Street, a Canadian Pilot, makes this release. Contact: <racingtheclouds>

I purchased and tested first the LMFP and then the Steeve primary releases and I can say this one is by far the best. I changed releases several times and searched for something more reliable because I encountered difficulties releasing at high loading, as other pilots have reported on the web. You can actuate this release at no load and at high load for much less effort (direct load/actuation effort=15+). Don't know why but, to date, it is the cheapest too!

Brainstorming a reverse the pro-tow release

March 3, 2011, 8:41:05 EST

Reverse the pro-tow release?

Put the pro-tow on the tow line?

Quest Air|release|video

Antoine Saraf <<antoinesaraf>> writes:

I asked myself for a new paradigm in pro aerotow release. Why not using a barrel release on the tow line rather than on the pilot ?

No more equipment required for the pilot except its own weaklink. You can release without any tension by pushing. No more drag for the racers.

Maybe we have to think all together about new material: a little bit more resistant, new shape to protect fingers, and the release itself new webbing on the harness more on the middle. Let's go for a brainstorming !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edyCX5_Fb6E

Already lot of answers here and there with this "new" idea. Brainstorming is necessary. I have not already tested the release setting like this. I'm searching all the defects first.

Your questions:

1-To put the release quite on the center you should have a new loop on the harness or need a  bridle between the 2 loops of the harness to install a weaklink

2-Release could be quickly bumped on the bad ground except if you manufacture it with stronger material (maybe steel rather than aluminum for the barrel, and Kevlar for the webbing) or something else to find..

I'm quite concerned about two issues:

It's maybe not a good idea to do an action to release on one element which is attached on the tow rope and leaving fast after release: If something from the pilot hang on with the release (pull over, glove..) you haven't weaklink anymore to help.

If the release junction is too close to you, maybe the tow rope with the release could wrap around the speedbar or front wires. We could have a bridle from the harness to the weaklink with a certain length to avoid it.

Discuss "Reverse the pro-tow release?" at the Oz Report forum   link»

New aerotow release from Lookout

Fri, Feb 13 2009, 4:21:01 pm GMT

Gone is the spinnaker shackle

aerotow|release|safety|tow

https://OzReport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14903

The business end of the release is a major improvement over existing spinnaker designs--the smooth release pin has no sharp edges or catch points--plus will not lock under heavy loads and will still release even if there's no pressure at all in the system. The handle pull is designed to remain on at all times during the tow so the pilot does not need to let go of the basetube in order to activate release, a safety improvement for those situations for a quick bail.

See the pictures at the URL above.

Discuss "New aerotow release from Lookout" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Airborne Sting 3 - 168 »

Fri, Jan 30 2009, 7:36:36 am AEDT

The bigger version

Airborne Sting 3|Australia|Gerolf Heinrichs|news|release|site

Somehow I missed it that Airborne had released a bigger version of the Sting 3, 168 squares. I then went looking on the Airborne web site to see if there was a press release or any notice of the new glider. Couldn't find it.

Then I began to wonder, was I just clueless. Maybe I just don't remember. But I went back and looked at the Oz Reports archive, and there was nothing about the 168 version.

I had the opportunity to fly the Sting 3 154 last spring while it was being developed and had a great time with it. I had heard that there might be a be a bigger version later, but I was surprised to see it on the Airborne web site after being clued into the fact that one existed.

I made a stop over at the Airborne factory earlier Thursday morning when I took my car into get a new water pump at the garage next door. I spoke with Rob Hibbard and all the Duncan brothers. I told Rob that he had to be sure to get the word out to me and to other hang gliding news outlets (are there any other?) about whatever developments were coming out of Airborne. That their promotion was just too sketchy.

I was at the Moyes factory on Tuesday and said the same thing (and Gerolf more than agrees). I also heard a rumor, maybe I heard this wrong, but that Gerolf is going to develop a new Moyes intermediate glider. I guess to replace the Sonic and/or XT. Maybe we'll hear more about that later.

Discuss "Airborne Sting 3 - 168" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

Bridles, releases, 2m antennas

Thu, Apr 3 2008, 4:30:03 pm PDT

Bridles

Purchase a few pieces of useful gear from the Oz Report

bridle|release|antenna

https://OzReport.com/bridlescables.php

Or https://OzReport.com click Store, Goodies.

I've decided to keep a small inventory of a few useful, but lightweight, items that can be easily and quickly shipped to pilots who need a slick aerotow bridle/release or a simple to install and powerful antenna. The items can be purchased on-line and I'll get them right in the mail to you.

For example:

Bridle, Spectra or Vectran for Pro tow, $15.

Click on above to view a higher resolution image. The top one is the Spectra, the bottom, the Vectran.

Go here: https://OzReport.com/bridlescables.php.

Discuss "Bridles, releases, 2m antennas" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

Bow string release »

Fri, May 6 2005, 2:00:01 pm EDT

Releases even when there is no force on the line

Some pilots have mentioned their desire to have a bridle release that doesn't rely on there being any force on the tow line at the time of release. The barrel releases will actually release with one hand with just the weight of the tow line at one end. But if you want a release that will release no matter what, then you, like Diver Bob, who showed this trick to me, can use a bow string release like the one that archers use.

You can find this kind of release here and here.

Discuss releases at the Oz Report forum

Quest Air Wichard (spinnaker) Releases

Fri, Feb 25 2005, 5:00:02 pm GMT

Bobby Bailey's mods to the spinnaker shackle

"Awesome" Bob|Bobby Bailey|Campbell Bowen|Linknife|photo|Quest Air|release

Awesome Bob at Quest Air <questair@mpinet.com> writes:

At Quest we have had virtually no aerotow release issues. We do have a standard configuration that is different from many of the ones previously discussed on the Oz Report.

Campbell Bowen and I did some testing recently. We tried every possible combination of possible failures that have been mentioned in the Oz Report and were not able to get our system to fail. Keep in mind that many pilots and other flight schools are using this or a very similar system in the US.

The wichard shackle that is used in the Bailey style brake handle and cable release is modified in several ways to align it properly, also grinding the edges down slightly on the "lip" of the opening gate prevents the weaklink from hanging up after opening.

We twisted a weaklink on a release until it was very tight and it still released every time. We we don't see any way when using braided spectra tow lines and hooked to a V-bridle (our configuration) or protow that twisting would be possible. It is possible if there is a three ring circus or Linknife attached to a line coming off the V-bridle.

Additionally, the way we attach and align the wichard on our brake handle and cable type configuration, the wichard release will open with absolutely no load on the release.

Bobby Bailey designed this system twelve to fifteen years ago and it has been used here at Quest with virtually no problems, and with a secondary release in place there is always a way to release from tow.

We have a very descriptive guide with photos on aerotowing and the necessary equipment on our website at www.questairforce.com under Aerotow FAQ.

Discuss "Quest Air Wichard (spinnaker) Releases" 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»  

Flytec Championship - day one »

Fri, Apr 16 2004, 3:00:00 pm EDT

We're off to a great start.

www.flytec.com

Maybe the results are up there now.

We've got a few days of east winds and with the forecast for onshore flow on the west coast, we figure that the ticket would be to go to the west, downwind, and then fly over there in the convergence or at least lighter winds. The competition pilot survey calls for somewhat earlier launch than we've been doing lately, and with the forecast for no clouds, it means the rigids, which start earlier than the flex wings, may have a tougher time.

We start launching at 12:45 for a 1:30 Pm start time. The flexies have three 15 minutes intervals starting at 2 PM in order to keep the classes separate.

Alex Ploner got his ATOS VX last night and it looks great in the air today. He climbs right to the top. There are three Tsunami's also flying with us. We all climb up together to 4,000 as the flexies get ready to launch.

There are a few wispy cu's which were not in the forecast over launch, and later the clouds will fill in just before the rigids got to goal. The task is to head down wind 32 miles to to Chin, and then south southeast 25 miles to Zephyr Hills airport. We put a five mile goal radius around the airport at the last minute as they were doing big drops there and there was supposedly a lot of air traffic due to Sun 'n Fun.

Didier Mithun, from France, Kraig Coomber, and I are on the task committee and we'll have our hands full finding places to land for the next few days. There are plenty of little grass fields throughout Florida, but it would be nice to have permission to land at them. I flew over one today that had a sign mowed in the grass pointing toward Sun 'n Fun.

Jamie Shelden had an exciting flight today as she was at 3,400' when her pip pin on her corner bracket came out enough to release her side wire on her ATOS. By unintentionally stalling the glider at 1,400' she was finally able to grab the wire. Then she very carefully circled down holding the wire and landed in the big field below her.

Jamie getting ready.

After the rigids got out on course and found the strong easterly winds, the flexies started lining up. We had a twenty five mile entry start circle, so you have seven miles from Quest before you hit the start circle.

Despite the lack of clouds , there was reasonable lift to 4,000' and all the rigids struck together. Even the Swifts would come back and join us. It was gaggle flying. Take no chances flying. This is what happens with the race start in a place like Florida on a blue day.

Ten miles out from the first turnpoint, I break away with two other pilots, who then chicken out and turn back - must have been the force of gravity emanating from the gaggle. I press ahead over a long stretch of trees finding lift and doing okay. Some folks find lift to my north, ninety degrees to the course line, but I foolishly don't join them. Pressing on, as they climb, I'm down to 700', three miles in front and scratching at the turnpoint. I go from the front to the back as I dig my way out of the hole I've dug for myself.

Christian from Air has fixed up my ATOS and I am loving it. I had been really disliking it over the last few weeks, and he has turned it around completely. It actually has a little bar pressure now, which is quite reassuring.

The wind is still out of the east even over on the west side of the state. There are clouds forming up just too far away to get right to them, as they are upwind. Pilots are struggling against the wind to move southeast toward the goal. As they get close to the goal circumference, they get to the clouds and lift becomes plentiful, especially after they make goal. I unfortunately press too hard to catch up and land short.

Now with the sky filling with clouds the flex wing gliders start coming along the course line and find plenty of lift to get most of them to goal.

Brian in the Swift crosses the goal circumference at 4,000', and is able to work his way back to Quest to land, Junko in her Swift also tries to make it back over the Green Swamp and lands in a wildlife sanctuary along highway 471, the only road through the swamp.

Discuss competition at the Oz Report forum

Static towing

Mon, Jan 5 2004, 7:00:01 pm GMT

static towing and retractable bridles

bridle|competition|crossbar|harness|Hay|job|Len Paton|release|safety|towing|weaklink

Len Paton <lenpaton@westserv.net.au> writes:

It's great that you've refreshed your thoughts on static towing. I've always found it so relaxing compared to aerotowing. Less intense, less effort, less anxiety. I have always felt I have more control and feel much more secure close to the ground.

You might understand why most car towers at comps feel a bit perplexed when days are cancelled because of gusty conditions. I was astounded last year (or was it the year before?) when somebody in the safety committee at an Australian competition (who was aerotowing) commented to me a few days after a day was canned, that "we were more concerned about the pilots static towering than ourselves". I'm not sure it was a cop-out, but … an interesting comment.

Apart from knowing your thoughts about canning marginal days, (from our attempt to have a pilot vote last year at Hay) I think people on the safety committee should have some experience in the towing systems present at the comp. They will also be less influenced by pilots with a "hidden agenda" who are using an alternate towing system. At least the discussion at Hay last year may have brought to the fore many pilot's concerns. For a couple of years it looked like overly cautious safety committees were going to spoil some good competitions.

Retractable bridle systems: Some pilots have developed good systems that "hitch" or lock themselves in the extended position until the bridle is given a shake (or usually the response after release). I have seen pilots significantly distracted trying to pull their bridles out to full extension as the driver takes the slack out of the rope.

Also these pilots are reluctant to reduce the starting tension from the nominal 15kgs before launch in light and variable conditions, leading to some dodgy launches.

One fellow pilot has thought out a positive locking system to prevent the bridle retracting until the VG has been pulled for the first time. A loop attached to the end of the retract bungee is passed thru a small hole (or slot) in the side of the central crossbar fitting. This is pinned on the other side of the cross bar fitting by a pin attached to the nose by a light piece of chord, without any slack. As the VG is pulled, the loop is pulled off the pin, pulls back thru the cross bar fitting and allows the bungee to do its job.

I use an adapted Moyes type system: one-to-one, with the 4 metre bridle feeding thru a ring out in front. After I release I have only this bridle hanging from my waist which is easily stowed before the start gate. My release involves a link knife in the top position, just in front of my hang point. A weak link passes thru a link knife and is attached to the keel via a "quick link" (oblong metal loop with screw gate).

The link knife is attached to my VG rope using a small D shackle. An extra foot off VG rope is pulled back thru to allow the link knife to sit over the weak link without tension. Pull the VG a couple of inches which retracts the link knife and cuts the weak link. Of course this is not my main fail-safe weak link.

I have a 120kg weak link out in front between the bridle and towrope. In fact I have 5 ways to get off: 2 voluntary and 3 involuntary. The link knife release up top; a "curved pin in a tube" on my waist (very light and small); the main weak link out front; a 60-70% weak link that the link knife cuts and another 60- 70% weaklink incorporated with the belly release. They need to be greater than ½ the front weaklink because the bridle is not doubled back on itself.

With these options I thought the extra redundancy of a Jack knife was unnecessary and haven't transferred it across from my old CG1000 harness.

Discuss "Static towing" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Parachutes at the clinic

Sat, Jun 21 2003, 2:03:06 pm EDT

competition|Florida|parachute|release|video

Mark Windsheimer <AirtimeHG@aol.com> writes:

In May of this year I ran a small parachute clinic for some pilots that had attended the Comps in Florida. This Clinic was held in Golden Colorado.

In the Clinic we had a couple of Metamorfosi chutes and many others. One of the Metamorfosi had a factory pack on it. When the pilot tried to deploy it he ended up with the lines and Diaper tied in a knot about 3 feet from the skirt of the canopy. This clearly happens as the pilot is about to release the diaper into the air, from a spinning situation. Since we were filming each throw we could look back and clearly see what happened. The canopy size would have been seriously compromised by this knot.

(editor’s note: Perhaps you can share this video with Angelo as he has been so nice to share his with us. By the way, Angelo is off at a competition and won’t be answering e-mail for another week.)

The other Metamorfosi opened cleanly as the staged diaper should have. All of the bag systems (even those with the handle on the bottom of the bag) had no problems. I attribute this to the pilots getting their chutes repacked at least once a year, with fresh rubber bands, or stows.

I have been working with parachutes in Colorado since they first arrived on the Hang Gliding scene. I owned the first reserve for Hang Gliders in Colorado. I have seen both diaper and bag failures. But in most cases from what I have experienced, the bag system seems to give the pilot a better chance to get the chute into clean air in violent situations.

One of the keys to a proper working system is proper maintenance. The Metamorfosi that failed was only a year old. But the Canopy decided to come out before the lines were fully staged. The Diaper defiantly allowed this to happen easier.

Discuss parachutes at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Parachutes at the clinic" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Midwest Regionals – the final day

Sun, Jun 15 2003, 6:03:00 pm GMT

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

http://www.flytec.com/mwregionals

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

http://www.hanggliding.com/

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Flex wings today:

Place Name Glider Finish Total
1 OLSSON Andreas Moyes Litespeed 4 15:14:44 971
2 WILLIAMS Paris Aeros Combat 15:14:46 948
3 HAGEWOOD Robert Aeros Combat 2 15:15:05 922
4 PRESLEY Terry Moyes Litespeed 4 15:48:23 627
5 PAGEN Dennis Moyes Litespeed 15:52:04 599
6 GRZYB Krzysztof Icaro MRX700 15:52:43 592
7 GOODMAN Bubba Moyes Litespeed 4 16:05:37 520
8 SAYER Wayne Moyes Litespeed 3 382
9 CIZAUSKAS Rich Wills Wing FusionSP 188
10 MORRIS Dan Wills Wing Talon 134
11 BOUMEESTER Rik Aeros Stealth 129
11 BURICK Carl Airborne Climax 129
11 DUGGAN Dan Icaro MR700WRE 129
14 GILLETTE Rhanor Wills Wing Ultra Sport 0

Flex wings total:

Place Name Glider Total
1 WILLIAMS Paris Aeros Combat 4462
2 OLSSON Andreas Moyes Litespeed 4 3912
3 PAGEN Dennis Moyes Litespeed 4 3572
4 PRESLEY Terry Moyes Litespeed 4 3498
5 GOODMAN Bubba Moyes Litespeed 4 2961
6 GRZYB Krzysztof Icaro MRX700 2785
7 HAGEWOOD Robert Aeros Combat 2 2579
8 SAYER Wayne Moyes Litespeed 3 2039
9 MORRIS Dan Wills Wing Talon 1550
10 BURICK Carl Airborne Climax 1505
11 BOUMEESTER Rik Aeros Stealth 1278
12 CIZAUSKAS Rich Wills Wing FusionSP 1226
13 DUGGAN Dan Icaro MR700WRE 751
14 GILLETTE Rhanor Wills Wing Ultra Sport 550

Rigids today:

Place Name Glider Time Total
1 BRANDT Dave AIR Atos 1:41:37 938
2 GLEASON Ron AIR Atos C 1:44:48 831
3 BROWN Russ Flight Designs GhostBuster 1:46:26 802
4 STRAUB Davis AIR Atos C 1:43:56 799
5 LAMB James AIR Atos C 1:56:50 780

Rigids total:

Place Name Glider Total
1 STRAUB Davis AIR Atos C 4875
2 BROWN Russ Flight Designs GhostBuster 4518
3 GLEASON Ron AIR Atos C 3646
4 BRANDT Dave AIR Atos 3200
5 LAMB James AIR Atos C 2990
6 BOWEN Campbell Flight Designs Axxess + 2026

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

Other parachutes

Thu, Jun 12 2003, 2:03:02 pm EDT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Envelope Deployment Bags vs Diapers

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

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

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

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

Kevlar and Spectra vs Nylon

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Speaking of Swivels

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Aerotowing PGer’s

Fri, May 16 2003, 12:00:05 pm EDT

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

Hans Bausenwein <Hans@aerosport.de> writes:

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

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

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

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

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

Mike Dillon <mikedillon@flightconn.com> writes:

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

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

Gordon Rigg writes:

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

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

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

SPAM, et. al. »

Thu, May 8 2003, 4:00:07 pm EDT

release|SPAM|technology

Ezine-Tips.com <support@ezine-tips.com> writes:

On the same day that EarthLink announced its new challenge-response anti-spam service, MailBlocks sued it for patent infringement, alleging that EarthLink was using the technology it had patented for sender verification.

MailBlocks has also sued the makers of Spam Arrest, ChoiceMail and Matador, all of which also use challenge-response that requires senders to verify their addresses before delivering their email.

The full MSN press release:
"Goodbye, Spam: MSN Employs Innovative Technologies, Education To Reduce Unwanted E-Mail

http://ezine-tips.com/articles/management/20030508.shtml

http://ezine-tips.com/articles/management/20030507.shtml

http://spamnews.com/

Discuss "SPAM, et. al." at the Oz Report forum   link»

The best flex wing glider?

Tue, Apr 29 2003, 4:00:08 pm GMT

Australia|competition|economy|Gerolf Heinrichs|Jerz Rossignol|job|Paris Williams|release

Gerolf Heinrichs <gerolfontour@aon.at> writes:

Come on, Paris, what are you trying to perform here. I really thought, you are better than that.

Robert Handmart draws a few funny conclusions upon recent competition results and the mellow, part-time Buddhist Paris spits the dummy and draws some funny conclusions himself. If anyone, it would have to be me to be upset from Handmart's article: I was named the mad guy, who needs to be tamed, not you!

You feel you can't speak for Manfred, but half a sentence later you feel free to quote me out of context. How do I deserve to get dragged into all this?

You say you feel compelled to set a few things straight. Well, then set them straight, but not twist them around the other way.

Oleg, my best friend - without fault (but lighter leading edges ;-) I was nearly in tears reading that heartbreaking story. I only wonder if that can help any ordinary pilot - e.g Robert Handmart - to make a buying decision.

And then that Paris Williams-Index - the number of pilots placing Top-10 on a specific product divided by the total number of these gliders in the meet - what is that? Some kind of manufacturer efficiency index? Or just an artificial perspective to make your favourite manufacturer look a little better?

Davis, please, you got to help me here. Applying that nonsense index (proportionally) to the Rigid's result would make market leader.

(editor’s note: If we picked the top three rigids (to reflect that fact that there are fewer rigid wing pilots overall) then the percentages would be Air ATOS 8%, Icaro 2000 Stratos 50%, Tsunami 100% in the Wallaby Open).

A. I. R. looks like the looser there, while the Tsunami and Stratos appear to be the successful gliders! Even a rigid wings moron like me can see: that's not quite right! The Atos is still the measure in this class.

Paris, I honestly think there are better ways to calculate the popularity of a certain glider type, its commercial success or its competition attractiveness. How about this:

Relative popularity: number of gliders flying (in a specific comp, area or in general) / total number of gliders flown.

(editor’s note: The difficulty here is getting the respective values for the numerator and denominator. At least Paris could get those values for his index.)

Commercial success: number of gliders sold times profit per sold glider.

(editor’s note: Even if they know them, I don’t think the manufacturers wish to release these numbers.)

Competition attractiveness: number of first places achieved by any pilot on a specific glider model minus number of first places achieved by the respective factory pilot (this subtraction is not to upset Manfred or Oleg, but to evaluate who else can do something on a specific glider model but the top guns). As far as I understood, it is exactly this point which Robert Handmart was trying to bring up.

A last note on your remark about prices! What are you trying to tell us here? That Aeros, Icaro, Moyes or any other manufacturer should deliberately reduce the price, so the pilots could be more happy? Haha, you make for a poor American capitalist.

The very basic principles of economy teach us: the price of nearly every product in a free market is governed by its manufacturing and marketing costs on one hand and by the market competition on the other side. There is really only one reason why a manufacturer would be selling his products for a cheaper price: He simply can't find enough buyers at a higher price!

Robert Handmart <rhandmart@yahoo.com> writes:

Paris, I understand that you are best friends with Oleg now (as you probably were with Manfred then) and we all perfectly understand your motives for talking Aeros up as good as tolerable. I recall last season in Australia you tried the same for Icaro.

Now, you are certainly a much better pilot then me so I don't really dare to advise you in matters of flying, but when it comes to subjects like marketing and decision making according to my job I should be the expert among the two of us.

While a tourist pilot like me might base his decision about his next glider buy, on criteria like convenience (who trades in the old glider?), group dynamics (all my friends have one like that!) or fashion aspects (I want to look as cool as Paris), a serious competition pilot can't really afford to make a "sympathy decision". He would rather have to follow a rational chain of thought like this:

With hardly any exception in the last few years in every important competition Manfred and Oleg managed to be the highest placed competitors on their company’s glider. May the reason be that they simply always have better gliders than their respective team mates (an opinion which I favour), or that they just fly their gliders better (which you seem to believe) - in any case it would be illogical for another top pilot who has serious ambitions to win, wishing to be on their manufacturers team, because like that he will very, very likely always only be able to come second - at best.

In the case of Moyes this seems different. Gerolf (without any intention to hurt his feelings now) seems a better designer than a pilot. We find a number of examples where other Moyes pilots have repeatedly beaten him, some of them even claiming to have out performed him. Thus, as a matter of logics, if you have ambitions to be a winner you can't get around the inevitable conclusion: being on a Litespeed gives you - I am sorry - currently the best chances to win!

However, the concept of decision making naturally implies that you do have a choice. This is for instance not the case, if you have not enough money to afford the glider you want. Then you might have to settle for the best (maybe cheapest) offer you can accomplish. This of course might dramatically limit your chances to reach your original goal: winning the major competition!

I hope this thought was "straight" enough for you to follow through :)

(editor’s note: Can we tell which flex wing glider is the best glider by looking at competition results? And exactly which results would we be looking at? First place? The cumulative times to goal? The comparative performance of the same pilot on different gliders (say Jerz or Paris)?

I have published work earlier which I believe showed that rigid wing gliders perform better than flex wing gliders. But the difference was so large that this is comparatively easy to show and to attribute the difference to the glider and not to the pilot.

To show differences in performance between flex wing hang gliders requires much more sophisticated tools and methods than the ones I was using. Paris’ quick and dirty indicator obviously has its rather severe limitations. But so do the other methods and lines of reasoning displayed above arguing against Paris.

My guess is that the top topless hang gliders are very close in performance and that their differences are swamped by the differences in pilot skills and attitudes.)

Discuss "The best flex wing glider?" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Young DraachenStein

Sun, Apr 27 2003, 2:00:03 pm EDT

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

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

by Tracy Tillman and Lisa Colletti

(from Reality Check cartoon series)

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

Hot Comps

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

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

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

The Dragonfly Cup

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cloud 9 Field and the Draachen Fliegen Soaring Club

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

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

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

(Cloud 9 Field hanger and DFSC club house.)

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

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

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

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

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

(Tracy and Lisa with one of their Dragonfly Tugs)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Discuss competition at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

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

Retractable bridle »

Tue, Nov 19 2002, 7:00:02 pm GMT

bridle|Peter Kestel|release

Peter Kestel <peter_kestel@webone.com.au> writes:

This design has been tested in the field & works very well. It is the latest evolution of a design that has seen the input from many pilots. It is a 1:1 system that uses a front cord release. Variations of the design allow for 2:1, however the release cord must then be tied onto the base bar, & pulled in separately. This is because the release cord must end up being the same length as the bridle if they are both to be pulled in together. I am only too happy to answer any queries.

Discuss "Retractable bridle" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Release, release »

Tue, Apr 2 2002, 3:00:03 pm EST

Bob Lane|Quest Air|Release

Bob Lane«questair» writes:

Last year before the comps I designed a new much smaller shoulder release that has a flatter and smaller piece of tubing. I gave one to Paris and Bo to test right away, we noticed that there is much less of a chance of a accidental release due to the shape of the tubing used when dragged across the basetube.

I have had them on all three of my harnesses for over a year with no problems. All the of the pilots at the competition wanted one when they saw it last year but I only had enough materials to make around 20 of them. Now I have made a bunch of these and have the materials to make tons more if needed and are now available at Quest Air right now for $19.99

I also strongly recommend that pilots towing only from the shoulders have one release on each shoulder incase of a snag.

The Forbes Flatlands - settings records

Sun, Jul 5 1998, 7:56:15 pm EDT

competition|Forbes Flatlands|job|picture|record|release|site|Tascha "Tish the Flying Fish" McLellan|Tim Cummings|Tove Heaney

It's been beautiful, sunny, and not too cold here in Seattle that last few days, but in the southern hemisphere it's the first of July (sun time), and the Forbes Flatlands are underway in New South Wales, Australia, just outside the semi-charming farming town of Forbes.

The Forbes meet is one of the major Australian competitions, and Forbes was the site of the last winter's World Hang Gliding Championships. You can always expect a number of European pilots, along with a few Americans, to show up to fly at Forbes, and in the other major competitions in Australia.

Tim Cummings maintains a web site that gives daily reports on the competition. You can check it out at http://www2.eis.net.au/~tim/forbes99/index.html. Tim has done an excellent job, and he is writing up a press release everyday on the results.

This year the Forbes meet has been designed to let the top competition pilots break the existing world records for triangles and out and returns. They have responded with a vengeance, especially the women pilots. Check out Tim's site for the latest records. Tish, Tove, Rohan and others are blazing through the skies.

Tove Heaney, who set the women's distance record last month in Manila is doing very well and is currently in 9th place, a couple of points behind her husband Grant. I happened to catch a picture of her last year at Hay (that's Conrad Lotten in the middle, and Oleg Bondarchuck on the right):

Discuss "The Forbes Flatlands - settings records" at the Oz Report forum   link»