A Long, Low Final Glide

Did you lose something? Find something?
Post Reply
User avatar
JD
Posts: 1682
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:05 am

Post by JD »

Stoned Again!
stebbins wrote:So, you knew in advance that you had a limp. You knew in advance that the wind is from the East in the upper LZ most days. You knew in advance that you were going to break the rule. Yet you seem to think that's ok. It is not.

You had many other options:

1) Don't fly
2) Land in the wash
3) Land in Big T wash (You were there, right?)
4) Recognize that if you land correctly, a cross puts no extra strain on your leg.
5) Land according to the rules and "suck it up"

You felt you could go XC with the leg, but that you couldn't land with a cross wind in your designated LZ? That makes absolutely no sense. If your leg is too injured to land in the upper LZ with a cross without breaking the rules, it is too injured to risk on an XC flight. How you choose to risk your leg is your business. How you deliberately and with forethought land in the SHGA flight park is the club's business. This clearly wasn't an accidental rule-breaking.

I apologize if this seems aggressively written. I couldn't think of a softer way to say it. It isn't my intent here to say anything other than "Hey, my friend, you know better than this. Please don't do that!" But I did feel it needed to be clearly stated, if nothing else, for some of the newbies.

Nice flight. Just remember that if someone can't land in the upper LZ and still follow the rules, they should be landing in the wash or not flying at Kagel. (There are, of course, exceptions. This clearly isn't one of them.)
Now George,
This act of knee-jerk reactionism is every bit as uncalled for as the completely unwarranted and baseless attack I received on this forum for my video of landing on the perimeter of Everyday Mike's LZ by Lake Elsinore by noneother than "Cold Turkey".

Let's see? So you knew your nosecone was lose during your flight? And you knew that flying a double surface glider with a detached nosecone could possibly cause the wing to over-inflate at speed and result in loss of pitch control, yet you continued your flight even though you had the option to land immediately? But instead you went over the back while your flapping nosecone was cutting holes into the top of your sail thus making it less safe? Right?

Let the first stone be cast...................

Oh, give me a break! Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! This is the only time I have ever crossed the cones and it was not by very much and I admitted it myself. I am not among those who make it a habit of this practice. At least one of my recent videos shows me clearly landing down the middle in a 90-degree crosswind from the East so it isn't like I don't know how to do that.

But I did not recall that the wind blows from the East most days. And you apparently knew my memory better than I did?

And my leg began acting up after I sat upright in my harness to prepare for a safe landing. And you knew all the salient facts of this flight based upon a few hastily typed remarks?

Shall I continue? O.k. I will. Based upon the quantity and quality of unsolicited messages that people send me from around the world at YouTube and other forums, my videos have done more to promote this sport and our fine flying site over the past six months than you can possibly imagine or ever lay claim to from your entire hang 5 existence. Now, get the Hell off of your high horse before it topples over and lands on you and we'll see who has a limp next.

Cheers,
Jonathan
User avatar
stebbins
Posts: 649
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 9:02 am
Location: Palmdale, CA

Post by stebbins »

NMERider wrote:Stoned Again!
stebbins wrote:So, you knew in advance that you had a limp. You knew in advance that the wind is from the East in the upper LZ most days. You knew in advance that you were going to break the rule. Yet you seem to think that's ok. It is not.

You had many other options:

1) Don't fly
2) Land in the wash
3) Land in Big T wash (You were there, right?)
4) Recognize that if you land correctly, a cross puts no extra strain on your leg.
5) Land according to the rules and "suck it up"

You felt you could go XC with the leg, but that you couldn't land with a cross wind in your designated LZ? That makes absolutely no sense. If your leg is too injured to land in the upper LZ with a cross without breaking the rules, it is too injured to risk on an XC flight. How you choose to risk your leg is your business. How you deliberately and with forethought land in the SHGA flight park is the club's business. This clearly wasn't an accidental rule-breaking.

I apologize if this seems aggressively written. I couldn't think of a softer way to say it. It isn't my intent here to say anything other than "Hey, my friend, you know better than this. Please don't do that!" But I did feel it needed to be clearly stated, if nothing else, for some of the newbies.

Nice flight. Just remember that if someone can't land in the upper LZ and still follow the rules, they should be landing in the wash or not flying at Kagel. (There are, of course, exceptions. This clearly isn't one of them.)
Now George,
This act of knee-jerk reactionism is every bit as uncalled for as the completely unwarranted and baseless attack I received on this forum for my video of landing on the perimeter of Everyday Mike's LZ by Lake Elsinore by noneother than "Cold Turkey".

Let's see? So you knew your nosecone was lose during your flight? And you knew that flying a double surface glider with a detached nosecone could possibly cause the wing to over-inflate at speed and result in loss of pitch control, yet you continued your flight even though you had the option to land immediately? But instead you went over the back while your flapping nosecone was cutting holes into the top of your sail thus making it less safe? Right?

Let the first stone be cast...................

Oh, give me a break! Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! This is the only time I have ever crossed the cones and it was not by very much and I admitted it myself. I am not among those who make it a habit of this practice. At least one of my recent videos shows me clearly landing down the middle in a 90-degree crosswind from the East so it isn't like I don't know how to do that.

But I did not recall that the wind blows from the East most days. And you apparently knew my memory better than I did?

And my leg began acting up after I sat upright in my harness to prepare for a safe landing. And you knew all the salient facts of this flight based upon a few hastily typed remarks?

Shall I continue? O.k. I will. Based upon the quantity and quality of unsolicited messages that people send me from around the world at YouTube and other forums, my videos have done more to promote this sport and our fine flying site over the past six months than you can possibly imagine or ever lay claim to from your entire hang 5 existence. Now, get the Hell off of your high horse before it topples over and lands on you and we'll see who has a limp next.

Cheers,
Jonathan
Let's see.

When I made a choice I risked what? Me!
When you made one, you risked what? Our flying site.

When I made my choice, did I viloate any rules? No!
When you made yours, did you violate any rules? Yes!

You claim not to remember that it blows from the East in the LZ most of the time. Have you been looking? Everyone who flies there more than a few times and pays even minimal attention knows this. Perhaps you didn't. But that says something about your attention, not my assumptions.

As for your leg acting up after you were setting up your approach, I quote from your post: " Normally, I would never do this but I had a bad limp in my left leg and needed to line up my approach into the wind which was crossing from the East. " One cannot determine if one has a limp unless one has walked on it first. If you had said "my left leg started to feel pain when I set up to land", that would have been different. Nonetheless, the other points would still stand.

As for inflation and loss of pitch control, I actually didn't know that. I still don't think so. I wonder where THAT came from. I DID know that it would flap. And I had no idea that it was cutting my glider until I landed. I asked around. Several of the most knowledgeable HG folks around were absolutely amazed that it would do that. Excuse me for now figuring it out in flight, when neither Kraig Coomber or Joe Greblo knew it could happen!

Please stop risking our flying site deliberately and unnecessarily. This isn't about me, it isn't about you. It is about not violating the trust that the neighbors have placed in us, and thereby risking our flying site.

Maybe it is time to republish the "History of the SHGA Rules" or whatever it was called. The 200 foot rule has an important set of reasons behind it.

And BTW, it is NOT safer to land by setting up behind the cones when it is cross, despite what some may say.

I refuse to get sucked into the personalities. Stick to the facts.

1) You broke the rule.
2) You stated publicly that you did it on purpose.
3) You gave your reasons.
4) Those reasons don't make sense to me, so I stated so publicly.
5) You responded with a personal attack.
6) Your response contained innaccuracies.
7) The personal attack portion of your response was irrelevant to the topic.

1-3 are enough for a reprimand from the BOD if they agree with #4.

Repeat offenses are enough for sanctions. I hate sanctions. I hate rules. But I hate risking our flying site even more.

Will the BOD do anything? I have no idea. I'm not even suggesting that they do. I'm suggesting that as an adult, you start acting like one.


BTW, if I'd witnessed the event I would have talked to you privately and politely. I've done it with others many times. But a public statement that you broke the rule, along with a public "but it was ok" statement, requires a public response. Perhaps I could have done a better job.
Fly High; Fly Far; Fly Safe -- George
User avatar
JD
Posts: 1682
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:05 am

Post by JD »

stebbins wrote:............Shall I continue?..............
Be my guest. Your reputation precedes you. In the meantime, I suggest that you take a look at all of the undisclosed rule infractions that collectively take place amongst the members of this club before choosing to single out and publicly chastise any single member who has been working very hard at his own time and expense to promote this very club. You have now done yourself and this club a tremendous disservice by calling unwarranted attention to one minor event and blowing it grossly out of proportion. Nobody even saw this other than myself, Joe, Daryl and Tom. No neighbors were outside. No news reporters or choppers were in the air. It was a non-event. But rather than sending me a private message, email or phone call, requesting that I edit my post and perhaps even my video, you chose to use this forum to launch your G-Dubaya-esque counteroffensive against my one-man axis of evil. Give me a break. :roll:
User avatar
max
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 7:26 pm
Location: LAWNDALE CA.

Post by max »

Jonathan didn't I warn you about the video police I'm sure you're thinking I was kidding but look at the bright side at least you hat enough memory to record your landing by the way waaaaaaaack......
PS don't be discouraged keep on shooting those videos, I'm sure George just had a bad day
Smile now Cry later
MAX
TomS
Posts: 157
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:26 pm

Post by TomS »

Jonathan, I've seen so many violations of the 200 foot rule. In my opinion , the biggest mistake you made was saying you violated the rule.
I enjoy your videos.
OSCAR
Posts: 489
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 4:47 pm
Location: LONG BEACH,CA
Contact:

Post by OSCAR »

I liked the original unedited version myself . and I agree with Max by the way nice waaack buddy :wink:
greblo
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 11:22 am

Post by greblo »

Jonathan;
As a club member, I appreciate what I think you were trying to say in your post. That is, "I broke a club rule, and I don't plan on letting it happen again!" Thank you; enough said.

JOe
User avatar
stebbins
Posts: 649
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 9:02 am
Location: Palmdale, CA

Post by stebbins »

NMERider wrote:
stebbins wrote:............Shall I continue?..............
Be my guest. Your reputation precedes you. In the meantime, I suggest that you take a look at all of the undisclosed rule infractions that collectively take place amongst the members of this club before choosing to single out and publicly chastise any single member who has been working very hard at his own time and expense to promote this very club. You have now done yourself and this club a tremendous disservice by calling unwarranted attention to one minor event and blowing it grossly out of proportion. Nobody even saw this other than myself, Joe, Daryl and Tom. No neighbors were outside. No news reporters or choppers were in the air. It was a non-event. But rather than sending me a private message, email or phone call, requesting that I edit my post and perhaps even my video, you chose to use this forum to launch your G-Dubaya-esque counteroffensive against my one-man axis of evil. Give me a break. :roll:
So now, given that your arguments fail, you change the subject from your rule-breaking to whether I should have noted that rule-breaking.

Look, I would have been perfectly happy to let you know privately. But you posted publicly. Perhaps I should have asked you privately to change the post. I really didn't (and don't) want this to become this big a deal. But with respect to Joe Greblo, your original post didn't say "I broke the rule, I wont' do it again", but "I broke the rule, and because my circmstances are special, that's ok". If you'd said the former, I'd have sent you a public note of congratulations for recognizing the mistake and deciding to fix it. I've posted like that before for others.

--- Small section excised and sent privately ---

Please think about how this looks to outsiders before you post.* I understand your enthusiasm for the videos and your good flights. I congratulate you for the flights. But please, don't violate the rules or the law, and if you do so inadvertently, please don't post in such a manner that outsiders might think this is accepted practice, "wink wink, nudge nudge." It is not accepted practice. Cloud flying, airspace violations, flying over the houses West of the LZ. All are unacceptable.

One other item: Please confine your personal attacks to the subject at hand. If you read my posts you'll see that anything that could be construed as a personal attack was directly related to the violation and your argument for it. The same cannot be said for the replies back to me. I gave you the courtesy of keeping my criticism on-topic. Please do the same.

And despite disagreeing hugely with GW's politics, I like him tremendously, and have great respect for him. Nyah. ;-)

I'm done with this junk. I really need some airtime. I'm glad somebody is getting some. I just wish it was me.


* I agree with you about one thing. I should have sent my comment privately. My reasoning was that since you posted publicly, a public reply was needed. I should have asked you privately to edit it instead. And only if you didn't should I have made my public post. Mea Culpa. But that doesn't mitigate the violation or the attitude about the violation. It just means I make mistakes too. My apologies for the public nature of my comments. No apology for the comments themselves, which I stand by.
Fly High; Fly Far; Fly Safe -- George
User avatar
stebbins
Posts: 649
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 9:02 am
Location: Palmdale, CA

Post by stebbins »

NMERider wrote:
stebbins wrote:............Shall I continue?..............
....
BTW, the "Shall I continue" came from your post, not mine. I will assume you misquoted accidentally.
Fly High; Fly Far; Fly Safe -- George
User avatar
JD
Posts: 1682
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:05 am

Post by JD »

Ah!
The
Joys Quoting
Multi-
Of
:twisted:
User avatar
dhmartens
Posts: 938
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:36 am
Location: Reseda

Post by dhmartens »

The only problem I saw was you adjusting the camera 500' agl. It looked like it altered your heading a bit. I had a pulled quadricep from hiking, gym, and yes running out fast landings so I too favor that leg for landings which can be done easily with a slightly early flare and a 2 step landing. I angled one of my landings into the wind slightly for added head wind but I did this in the far end of the wash. I choose to fly too with a slight injury but plan my landings better to accommodate it. The best part of this video was it brings back that rally bad sinking feeling you get when you're getting way too low.

Doug
User avatar
JD
Posts: 1682
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:05 am

Post by JD »

dhmartens wrote:..............The best part of this video was it brings back that rally bad sinking feeling you get when you're getting way too low.

Doug
In retrospect it was a good thing I didn't have the camera pointed forward in front of the Little T/Trash ridge because it appeared to me that my glide path had me intersecting some of the high points in the landscape ahead of me. Although that was an illusion, an altitude compensated GE image would put me 44 meters lower at landing than what you see here..................
Image

Click the image for a larger version
Last edited by JD on Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Christian
Posts: 238
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Pacific Palisades

Post by Christian »

Obviously you publically noted your error as an alert to others. Rather
generous and in the tradition.

Hot air keeps hang gliders up. Good to remember that when encountering strong lift from Stebbins.
User avatar
stebbins
Posts: 649
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 9:02 am
Location: Palmdale, CA

Post by stebbins »

NMERider wrote:
Ah!
The Multi-
Of
:twisted:
As I said, I assume you misquoted accidentally. I laughed at this post. Nicely done. Amusing.
Fly High; Fly Far; Fly Safe -- George
mercturns
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 8:33 am

Post by mercturns »

George..... Brother..... Leave it be...............Please!!! As I've discussed with you before, there's a better way and time to make your point. Once again you've put yourself right smack-dab in the middle of the crosshairs. I feel it my duty, as a one of your best buddies and a extended flying family member too pop ya in the forehead and wake your ass up.....get you refocused on a bigger and better topic....... Well.....maybe not a good idea at this time.
Jonathan..... keep up the quality entertainment....it's good stuff. And if by chance you happen to slip over on the wrong side of the cones.......well.... call yourself a bad boy & send yourself to your room with no dinner/or blog time & promise nerver to do it again.....
Now see....that was'nt so hard......................

I Love All Of You Guys....like brothers of course!

Jim
Wayne
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:15 am
Location: up the street

Post by Wayne »

yea, what merc said.

wayne
abinder
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 2:19 pm
Location: El Segundo & Sylmar

Post by abinder »

I promised myself that I wouldn't chime in, but I can't help it.

Stebbins get a life and get off your 'high horse'!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
User avatar
stebbins
Posts: 649
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 9:02 am
Location: Palmdale, CA

Post by stebbins »

I will say one more thing and then shut up. This is to those of my fellow Kagelites who think I'm too hard on Jonathan, or that I’m being a jerk. Many of whom I consider to be my friends.

I care more about your ability to keep flying at Kagel and about your personal safety than I care about how you all feel about me. (As I've demonstrated repeatedly in person and on this forum.) This is not the case for Jonathan. He acts as if he cares more about his ego than he does about you all. (As has been demonstrated repeatedly.) So is really your friend, eh? The ‘pleasant guy' that might lose your site, or the jerk who works to protect it?

Am I a annoying about it? Maybe. Am I abrasive about it? Probably. Am I right about it? Most likely. Maybe you don't always agree with me. Maybe you agree, but think my approach is wrong. That's cool. If you think there is a better way, then use it. Heck, I'd love to hear it! But anyone who thinks that I do this stuff because I like it has their head where the sun doesn't shine. I hate it. I do it because I do <b>not</b> wish you to lose your flying site. I do not wish you all to have to drive to Garlock or Elsinore, or Crestline every time you want to hang glide.* (And in other cases, I've done it because I don't want my friends hurt or killed. Many of you remember the most recent of those discussions.)

As I told people before when a certain aerobatic pilot was risking our site: <I>He's not your friend if he cares more about showing off or about his ego than he does about your ability to keep flying here at Kagel. </I>

(Anyone who thinks Jonathan hasn't risked the site - at least somewhat - email me and I'll provide short info. I will not post it here - That's part of what he did that was at issue.)

Think what you want about me, I'm done, except for this story, which I’ve posted before:

My wife, J, was doing nose-wire duty at a comp at Sandia in New Mexico. (A near cliff launch.) The person launching came up and refused a hang check. J said something like “Are you sure you don’t want a hang check?� The pilot said, “I’m sure.� (Not very politely.) J said something like “I really think you should take a hang check.� The pilot got very irate and said “Alright!� as he flung himself aggressively at the ground. Being unhooked, he impacted said ground with great embarrassment.

Maybe she was being a jerk. But I’d rather have that kind of person as a friend than one who worries about my feelings instead of my life. Or one that worries about my feelings instead of my flying site. It is possible to do both for many people. But it isn’t possible with some. And J’s method was far more likely to stick in that pilot’s memory!
Fly High; Fly Far; Fly Safe -- George
User avatar
JD
Posts: 1682
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:05 am

Post by JD »

stebbins wrote:.................My wife, J, was doing nose-wire duty at a comp at Sandia in New Mexico. (A near cliff launch.) The person launching came up and refused a hang check. J said something like “Are you sure you don’t want a hang check?� The pilot said, “I’m sure.� (Not very politely.) J said something like “I really think you should take a hang check.� The pilot got very irate and said “Alright!� as he flung himself aggressively at the ground. Being unhooked, he impacted said ground with great embarrassment.........
My favorite, untold part of that story is how J later married that pilot and is now raising a family with him. :P What a saint!

stebbins wrote:..............(Anyone who thinks Jonathan hasn't risked the site - at least somewhat - email me and I'll provide short info. I will not post it here - That's part of what he did that was at issue.)........

My email address is in the club directory in the member portion of our web site, and I am really looking forward to learning what secret charges, George's Grand Jury has complied against me that he intends to present in his indictment before the club's BOD when it next convenes.

Public insinuations of this nature smack of a 'witch hunt' mentality and scapegoating. They also bring down out club's image in the eye of the hang gliding community at large. It saddens me to read such things on a public forum. I have been advised that members of a neighboring club have been reading this thread. Take a look a its hit count which is disproportionate to the generally sleepy tone of the SGHA forum in general. As I recall, there is a thread regrading the club's declining membership. Is this really the image we want to present to prospective new members and renewing members?

In the interest of the greater good of the SHGA I am going to ask Chip if this thread can be deleted. I see no useful purpose in its furtherance or longevity. In the meantime I have over 3 hours of audio and video to edit from yesterday's flight at Crestline. I really had a blast and I'm sorry that George and everyone else from the SHGA wasn't there with me to share the joy.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Dietch
Post Reply