| View previous topic :: View next topic |
|
sg
3 thumbs up
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
Posts: 11030
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 10:29 am Post subject: |
 #41 |
Hogging the air in front of launch for too long is rude and annoying.
But launching into and flying right at another pilot is just dumb and risking life and limb.
Lets not confuse being considerate with right of way rules and good airmanship.
_________________
H4, AT, FL, TFL, AWCL, CL, FSL, RLF, TUR, X-C
Aeros Stealth III 142
| Thomas Jefferson wrote: |
| All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. |
|
|
|
|
Rob McKenzie
3 thumbs up
Joined: 04 Nov 2007
Posts: 414
Location: San Bernardino, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:35 am Post subject: |
#42 |
| sg wrote: |
Hogging the air in front of launch for too long is rude and annoying.
But launching into and flying right at another pilot is just dumb and risking life and limb.
Lets not confuse being considerate with right of way rules and good airmanship. |
But isn't the whole concept of having right of ways are that they're a way for us all to be guided well in advance in the correct way of being considerate and having good airmanship? If things progress to the point where a midair is about to happen without strong evasive action then we don't simply pull up right of ways to determine the correct deviation, although it still must be considered in making the call as to what to do. Every tight situation is unique and no set of rules can guide the pilot as to what is the best action. Right of way rules are often very gray, and often even contradict each other. In split second maneuvering intended to avoid a catastrophy the pilot should do whatever is necessary to maximize the odds of a safe outcome.
The right of way rules are more for guiding the pilot that should yield as to communicating an appropriate time in advance that he will indeed yield. It all boils down to being predictable.
Perhaps even the name "right of way" is misleading. The word "right" can connotate a simple and unmistakeable attribute suggesting a pilot should hold steadfast to his "rights" regardless of the fact that it is leading to a narrowing of options. Maybe we should call them something like "guidlines for predictable manoevering". This means that the intent of our flying should be that others around you can tell just by your location and bank angle, what you are likely to do next.
I also believe the whole goal in flying around others is to fly in a way that as much as possible allows others to fly as if you we not even there while still manoevering to work the lift to maximize your soaring. Like the indian that can walk through a forest and not leave an impression.
Here's the personal challenge I find. First I start with the premise that I should feel that if I have made another pilot uncomfortable I may have perhaps flown in a way that I need to change. But we all have our own personal comfort zones. It could be that the pilot who felt discomfort that I was there would be uncomfortable unless I was more than a mile away. So the trick is to accommodate others up to a point but at some point, their inability to join into the flow of traffic is something you just can't help, so don't feel as though you made an error. For example, if lift permits, I'll widen a circle to let someone into the lift, but I also expect a fair amount of ability of this pilot to see and take the opportunity I am giving him. If he isn't taking the opportunity, due to his discomfort at getting that close, well at least I tried and I don't feel bad that he is uncomfortable that I am there. With sensitive enough equipment, even the best indian's trail will be visible.
I gotta say some of the most enjoyable flying I've ever done is when a tight group is flying well together. Here is a link to a report on perhaps the most profound example of this in my 33 years of flying. I apologize if that I was flying a bag that day offends anyone. What is a bag? It's a type of hangie that folds while flying instead of after flying.
http://www.flytandem.com/temp/gaggle.htm |
|
|
|
sg
3 thumbs up
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
Posts: 11030
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:43 am Post subject: |
#43 |
| Quote: |
| This means that the intent of our flying should be that others around you can tell just by your location and bank angle, what you are likely to do next. |
Well, in this case, the PG pilot made his intent clear by how he flew. He made it clear he wanted to launch right at and fly into an HG  Mission accomplished 
_________________
H4, AT, FL, TFL, AWCL, CL, FSL, RLF, TUR, X-C
Aeros Stealth III 142
| Thomas Jefferson wrote: |
| All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. |
|
|
|
|
Wingspan34
2 thumbs up
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 5652
Location: Central NY
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 12:31 pm Post subject: |
#44 |
| Rob McKenzie wrote: |
| What is a bag? It's a type of hangie that folds while flying instead of after flying. |
But I still don't know what a "hangie" is. Worst of all, I am imagining it as something partially stuck in the fur, near the back end of my dog, after he squats.  
Other wise known as a "dingleball" (or is that dangleball?). |
|
|
|
fly n mater
3 thumbs up
Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Posts: 725
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 1:44 pm Post subject: |
#45 |
| Wingspan34 wrote: |
Other wise known as a "dingleball" (or is that dangleball?). |
I've always heard it as dingleberry or cling-on. |
|
|
|
Wingspan34
2 thumbs up
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 5652
Location: Central NY
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:26 pm Post subject: |
#46 |
| fly n mater wrote: |
| Wingspan34 wrote: |
Other wise known as a "dingleball" (or is that dangleball?). |
I've always heard it as dingleberry or cling-on. |
Yup! Those sound familiar, too. But,still, no one seems to want to define a "hangie". It must be something pretty darn nasty. |
|
|
|
fly n mater
3 thumbs up
Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Posts: 725
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:36 pm Post subject: |
#47 |
| Wingspan34 wrote: |
| ... But,still, no one seems to want to define a "hangie". It must be something pretty darn nasty. |
Aw, come on Wingspan. I think the reason that no one has said is because they think you are joking, as do I. 
Mater |
|
|
|
spekkinout
3 thumbs up
Joined: 29 Jun 2007
Posts: 593
Location: BC Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:46 pm Post subject: |
#48 |
I've been wondering what Wingspan does if someone mentions his beener isn't hooked in, or uses some other similar short form slang.
Call me a plumber, if not a hangie, I don't care. Geez, get over it.  |
|
|
|
Wingspan34
2 thumbs up
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 5652
Location: Central NY
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:54 pm Post subject: |
#49 |
| fly n mater wrote: |
| Wingspan34 wrote: |
| ... But,still, no one seems to want to define a "hangie". It must be something pretty darn nasty. |
Aw, come on Wingspan. I think the reason that no one has said is because they think you are joking, as do I.
Mater |
Why in the WORLD would I joke about such a potentially serious(?) topic as to what a hangie is?
 |
|
|
|
Rob McKenzie
3 thumbs up
Joined: 04 Nov 2007
Posts: 414
Location: San Bernardino, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 4:17 pm Post subject: |
#50 |
| Wingspan34 wrote: |
Why in the WORLD would I joke about such a potentially serious(?) topic as to what a hangie is? |
This is much like flying too aggressively around a new pilot. Though others seem to understand and have no problem with the term "hangie", perhaps I have posted in a way that is outside your comfort zone. I apologize for that.  Maybe we can meet half way? We'll keep circling our posts with some slang and maybe you can accept some, but of lesser cruelty. What term might you suggest? Just "hang"? Or maybe "ragwing"?
Just so you understand my environment, I am an equal opportunity destroyer. I'm bi and enjoy it. Quad, if you toss in trikes and sailplanes. The site I frequent is a friendly mix of bags and hang gliders. It's quite a good feeling being around such a large group of pilots that nearly all have so much self confidence in what they personally choose to fly that the occasional poke in the ribs, when in fun, is a bonus to the flying enjoyment.  |
|
|
|
Wingspan34
2 thumbs up
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 5652
Location: Central NY
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 4:43 pm Post subject: |
#51 |
There you go. Thanks, Rob. I get it now.
I know a few slang terms for both hang gliders and paragliders but out of respect and an interest in not offending (however many) biwingwal pilots here, I (more or less) always use respectful terminology in reference to PGs.
And part of that involves that you can't "see" a person's attitude when they are posting a message, you can only read the words. I too have kidded my PG friends with minor linguistic jabs, and they know, from my demeanor, at the time, that I wouldn't mind a return poke in fun.
Now when it comes to discussion of questions regarding the pros and cons of PGs vs HGs, . . . I shoot straight and don't pull punches. And I'll tell anyone who promotes or aggressively endorses the sales and use of paragliders that I personally look very negatively on the fairy tales often used to make them sound like all-round nifty, safe, and easy to fly "aircraft".
That's me being straight forward and honest. And thanks for stepping up, yourself. I can now grant a little more respect.  |
|
|
|
Jason
3 thumbs up
Joined: 02 Jan 2007
Posts: 7531
Location: Stapleton, Colorado
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 4:43 pm Post subject: |
#52 |
| the two or three times Ive flown there I haven't had any issues withi oblivious pilots. I hope it stays that way, I really need to fly there more often, but alas, I always go to SD |
|
|
|
fly n mater
3 thumbs up
Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Posts: 725
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 6:26 pm Post subject: |
#53 |
| Rob McKenzie wrote: |
In the original post, a hangie was flying toward a PG pilot who was laid out and wall built and created a course that would keep the PG on the ground then that's the first error. The PG inflating into the hang is the second.
|
I'm going to have to call you on this Rob. Why did you spin this to make it sound like it was the HGs fault when I clearly didn't state this in the initial post? The PG didn't inflate into the HG, he flew into it/its path. There is a very big difference between the two versions.
Mater |
|
|
|
pecofly
2 thumbs up
Joined: 27 Oct 2007
Posts: 238
Location: Penticton British Columbia
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 6:28 pm Post subject: My 2 cents worth!! |
#54 |
Here I go .
You watch out for me and I,ll watch out for you because the real BOTTOM LINE is!!!!!!!!!!
Even if you are in the right, if you do have a mid air, it,ll probably be.... that you are DEAD RIGHT!
And that sucks!
Kinda like the guy at the pedestrian crosswalk, who figures he is in his right of way to walk in front of traffic. Whack!! Ooopss , sorry didn,t see ya!
Well we all know that buddy was in the right, RIGHT??
Wrong!!!
When you are at the crosswalk, you must signal your intention to walk and then before you walk you absolutely must be sure that your intentions have been recognized and respected.
If the driver gives way then you go.
If he doesn,t then you wait.
Seems simple to me.
PeteR. |
|
|
|
TomGalvin
3 thumbs up
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 3546
Location: ............... Pagosa Springs, Colorado
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 6:29 pm Post subject: |
#55 |
| Rob McKenzie wrote: |
| Just so you understand my environment, I am an equal opportunity destroyer. I'm bi and enjoy it. |
So you are both a floppy and a stiffie? |
|
|
|
fly n mater
3 thumbs up
Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Posts: 725
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 6:38 pm Post subject: |
#56 |
I totally agree with you pecofly.
But the question now is why did Rob change the facts?
I said the hg was in front of launch working the lift and getting up. When the pg launched and flew into the hg's flight path.
Rob said that the hg was flying to inhibit the pg's ability to launch and thus the pg pilot inflated into the hg.
BIG difference in the facts and people not reading the whole thread wouldn't get the truth. So the question, why change the facts?
Mater |
|
|
|
pecofly
2 thumbs up
Joined: 27 Oct 2007
Posts: 238
Location: Penticton British Columbia
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 6:48 pm Post subject: Busy launche suggestion |
#57 |
Just another thought
Maybe a flag or something could be flown whenever someone is in launch mode for those very busy sites.
Where Pedro and I are from, we fly with radios and simply tell each other our intentions.
Maybe all you folks flying where traffic is a big hazard, mutual communication might be appropriate.
Rules of the road are necessary.
Radios are cheap!
Do a visual!
Ask your buddies,in the air and on the ground for an all clear.
bLAH BLAH BLAH!!!!!!!
PeteR. |
|
|
|
pecofly
2 thumbs up
Joined: 27 Oct 2007
Posts: 238
Location: Penticton British Columbia
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 6:51 pm Post subject: Don,t worry, be happy!! |
#58 |
Another saying I,ve heard is
Ya can,t fret about what didn,t happen.
Lets learn and move on.
PeteR |
|
|
|
Wingspan34
2 thumbs up
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 5652
Location: Central NY
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:08 pm Post subject: |
#59 |
| TomGalvin wrote: |
| Rob McKenzie wrote: |
| Just so you understand my environment, I am an equal opportunity destroyer. I'm bi and enjoy it. |
So you are both a floppy and a stiffie? |
Depends completely upon the availability of Viagra.
(Sorry, sometimes I just can't pass by a comedic opportunity  ) |
|
|
|
Wingspan34
2 thumbs up
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 5652
Location: Central NY
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:35 pm Post subject: |
#60 |
| fly n mater wrote: |
I totally agree with you pecofly.
But the question now is why did Rob change the facts?
I said the hg was in front of launch working the lift and getting up. When the pg launched and flew into the hg's flight path.
Rob said that the hg was flying to inhibit the pg's ability to launch and thus the pg pilot inflated into the hg.
BIG difference in the facts and people not reading the whole thread wouldn't get the truth. So the question, why change the facts?
Mater |
At times a person's individual bias paints different pictures than those actually witnessed, or read. Everyone can be effected by this. I've read a number of threads, and rather than go back and find a specific reference, I'll go with my best memory of what I remember reading. My memory is not always correct. But I've noticed this occasional problem and now nearly always look back to be sure my impression is correct.
And being a PG or biwingwal pilot, one may have encountered many situations where a HG pilot CLAIMS(?) (as you have, mater) that one thing happened, but as this other pilot saw it, it was the PG that was in the right - or not in the wrong. Such experiences can at times color an interpretation.
In my flying career, I've been more pissed off at fellow HG pilots, by far, than PG pilots.
And being a bit aggressive myself, I'm pretty sure I've ruffled some feathers now and then. Still, I never do anything that I think will cause any other pilot serious concern. Unless, of course, it involves someone who likes to "play".
Two good pilots, who know each other well, can get very close and just grin ear to ear at each other (in nice smooth conditions). Do the same with someone you don't know, and you can terrify them. (I wonder how I know that? ) |
|
|
|
|
Unanswered
Highest rated...
Topics
