See the posting under General Discussion Access to Launch During Forest Service Closure for the thread of discussion.
The question is whether the club should invest time, energy and money to re-open two former launch sites, Big Tujunga and Mount Lukens, which are now only available to XC pilots from Kagel.
Big T and Lukens as Launchable Sites
Moderator: Chip
-
JT
A lot of views but no votes?
Is anyone else interested? Three votes "yes" is a majority but a rather apathetic showing with so many H2 and H3 members that probably would benefit from a new, nearby site or two.
-
JT
)-
DigitalBishop
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 12:56 pm
- Location: Reseda, CA
We should always take advantage of any and all oppertunities to open / re-open launch sites.The sad fact of the matter is we as a club stand a very realistic chance of losing our current flying site due to development. There are those of us who believe that its just a matter of time.
We need to make a strong effort on not only opening up Lukens and Big T as primary sites, but other potential sites as well..... Any ideas?
We need to make a strong effort on not only opening up Lukens and Big T as primary sites, but other potential sites as well..... Any ideas?
-
DigitalBishop
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 12:56 pm
- Location: Reseda, CA
Just out of curiosity. What launch sites are there for the Kagel LZ? I know there is Tower and Tower 2. If I'm wrong someone will correct me.
Main launch is for H2 and above. That much is clear. What are the names of the other launches and what conditions do they present that they're closed off to H2s?
Main launch is for H2 and above. That much is clear. What are the names of the other launches and what conditions do they present that they're closed off to H2s?
Jamie Krasnoo
There are two real launches for the Kagel LZ. The "Normal" launch on top of Kagel Mountain, and the Towers. It is also possible to launch from the "2200", but you have to hike up, it is a long glide for low-end gliders to the LZ, and you have to drive through Camp 9 to get there. It is also possible that the launch now has too much brush on it. The old 1500 launch is completely overgrown, is too far/low to get to the Kagel LZ unless you go straight there, or get right up, and has no bailout that we could use with regularity.
That leaves just the two launches. Kagel you know about. Towers has a couple of issues. First, in any West wind it is unsafe. Yet standing on launch, it seems fine. The wind blows in. But, it is actually in a rotor. If you launch in a West wind, you are in for a wild ride. Second, it is a cliff launch, or nearly so. Most of our lower airtime pilots don't have that experience. Third, even in a "normal" SE wind, the launch is back in a hole, and the air can be nasty. Fourth, if the wind is strong, then the shape of the launch makes it very difficult to ground handle your glider. There are probably other issues, but these are the ones that come to mind.
These are some of the reasons that the Towers Launch is a H4 or H3 with a signoff. Heck, I've been flying for nearly 25 years, and I get nervous launching there unless everything is just right. And I will not launch there if the wind is even a touch West. Or even due South, for that matter!
The perfect conditions are ESE at about 4mph or so. Enough wind to make the launch clean, but no more. More wind than that gets tricky on launch, and less wind means you have to deal perfectly with the cliff launch. Less is better than more, though, usually....
That leaves just the two launches. Kagel you know about. Towers has a couple of issues. First, in any West wind it is unsafe. Yet standing on launch, it seems fine. The wind blows in. But, it is actually in a rotor. If you launch in a West wind, you are in for a wild ride. Second, it is a cliff launch, or nearly so. Most of our lower airtime pilots don't have that experience. Third, even in a "normal" SE wind, the launch is back in a hole, and the air can be nasty. Fourth, if the wind is strong, then the shape of the launch makes it very difficult to ground handle your glider. There are probably other issues, but these are the ones that come to mind.
These are some of the reasons that the Towers Launch is a H4 or H3 with a signoff. Heck, I've been flying for nearly 25 years, and I get nervous launching there unless everything is just right. And I will not launch there if the wind is even a touch West. Or even due South, for that matter!
The perfect conditions are ESE at about 4mph or so. Enough wind to make the launch clean, but no more. More wind than that gets tricky on launch, and less wind means you have to deal perfectly with the cliff launch. Less is better than more, though, usually....
Fly High; Fly Far; Fly Safe -- George
Towers Launch
Thanks George,
It sounds dangerous. Still it would be valuable to keep it as an optional launch site for use when conditions permit. Strict guidelines could be imposed on H-2s and H-3s.
It sounds dangerous. Still it would be valuable to keep it as an optional launch site for use when conditions permit. Strict guidelines could be imposed on H-2s and H-3s.
-
DigitalBishop
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 12:56 pm
- Location: Reseda, CA
I don't want to make it seem that the Towers Launch is no good. On the right days, with good launch skills, it is a fine launch. The problem is that the issues with the site aren't that obvious, so one does need to have a bit of training, very good launch skills and most importantly, the willingness to back off if it isn't right. (Heck, that's one of the most important hang gliding skills in general!)
Fly High; Fly Far; Fly Safe -- George