This post was originally in ParaglidingForum.com. You can read the whole thread here. I've added a couple of links to posts I wrote during the competition and to the YouCaring fundraising sites for the pilots that had accidents, plus there is a little more editing in this version.
.....................
I'm surprised there hasn't been more said about the suitability of the Flynns launch and the two accidents of pilots Eric Reed and Jason Ely.
As James Bradley notes, the Flynns launch is about 1200ft from the valley floor. The launch window was indeed small - perhaps 45 minutes each day before the thermals were trashed by the wind.
45 minutes is not a lot of time to get seventy pilot launched, especially when some days there were multiple factors that led to long gaps in launchable conditions
1. It was clear watching wind techs and early pilot that it was hard to climb out on all days
2. Having 20+ pilots ridge soaring in front of and below launch is a sure cause of delay to other pilots
3. Thermal cycles were erratic - sometimes ten minute gaps with no wind at all, which would have resulted in a certain bomb out
4. As the day progressed, thermal cycles would become so strong that no one would launch in the cycle either, only at the beginning or end
All these factors led to very frustrating launch situation for many pilots. If you were in the top 15 and had 'launch priority', it was fine - you could jump the queue, pick the best good cycle before the winds picked up and climb out.
If you missed a cycle, tangled your lines, started a little late, or any other reason for not getting off launch out cleanly, then chances were the thermals were shredded by the wind by the time you could launch, making even getting to the large start circles an hour long flight.
Even for the best pilots, these conditions were challenging. One Enzo pilot I talked to spent 45 minutes one day below launch height before being able to climb out.
In my mind, there is no question that choosing Flynns was the major contributing factor to the two accidents, both of which could have resulted in fatalities. There is also no question in my mind that Flynns is not a suitable launch for a competition with this many pilots.
There was surprisingly little said about the accidents by the organizers at the comp. The obvious decision to use multiple start gates was not made until the final flyable day, and then it was blown out. And tasks down-range into the strengthening valley wind were still set, seemingly not heeding the learning that the combination of a low launch and quickly strengthening winds would encourage people to fly into wind, close to the terrain, which was the cause of the first accident.
The interesting thing about Flynns was that the actual conditions close to launch were not extreme. We fly in much stronger thermal cycles in some of our southern California sites. It was the combination of crosswinds, low altitude and weak then suddently turbulent thermals (typically 1m/s or less for the first thermals close to launch) which made it dangerous.
In the light of the dismal safely record of paragliding and handgliding in the USA in 2015, I feel obligated to go on record raising this as an issue, especially as part of it is that I suspect the safety concerns are lesser, the higher in the sport you go, because of the personal levels of self confidence of top pilots and organizers.
My bigger concern is despite the safety notice issued by USHGPA above, that there is a slipping of the dialogue about safety in our sport. At the competition I didn't really hear much discussion about either accident, or the suitability of Flynns. Part of this stance is personal: I was an eyewitness to my friend and fellow pilot Ziggy Muhlhauser dying in a accident in May.
I don't want to rain on anybodies parade - it was a fun week of great flying - and yet there are serious lessons here that I think warrant further discussion or responses.
Personally I won't be going to the Owens again if the launch site is Flynns and the comp has the same amount of people. The simple reason is that this site in a competition environment doesn't meet my own personal safety standards and personal flying risk management.
.....................
I'm surprised there hasn't been more said about the suitability of the Flynns launch and the two accidents of pilots Eric Reed and Jason Ely.
As James Bradley notes, the Flynns launch is about 1200ft from the valley floor. The launch window was indeed small - perhaps 45 minutes each day before the thermals were trashed by the wind.
45 minutes is not a lot of time to get seventy pilot launched, especially when some days there were multiple factors that led to long gaps in launchable conditions
1. It was clear watching wind techs and early pilot that it was hard to climb out on all days
2. Having 20+ pilots ridge soaring in front of and below launch is a sure cause of delay to other pilots
3. Thermal cycles were erratic - sometimes ten minute gaps with no wind at all, which would have resulted in a certain bomb out
4. As the day progressed, thermal cycles would become so strong that no one would launch in the cycle either, only at the beginning or end
All these factors led to very frustrating launch situation for many pilots. If you were in the top 15 and had 'launch priority', it was fine - you could jump the queue, pick the best good cycle before the winds picked up and climb out.
If you missed a cycle, tangled your lines, started a little late, or any other reason for not getting off launch out cleanly, then chances were the thermals were shredded by the wind by the time you could launch, making even getting to the large start circles an hour long flight.
Even for the best pilots, these conditions were challenging. One Enzo pilot I talked to spent 45 minutes one day below launch height before being able to climb out.
See this post for video of the first weak climb.
Eric Reed's accident happened just minutes after this video, just below launch.
Eric Reed's accident happened just minutes after this video, just below launch.
There was surprisingly little said about the accidents by the organizers at the comp. The obvious decision to use multiple start gates was not made until the final flyable day, and then it was blown out. And tasks down-range into the strengthening valley wind were still set, seemingly not heeding the learning that the combination of a low launch and quickly strengthening winds would encourage people to fly into wind, close to the terrain, which was the cause of the first accident.
The interesting thing about Flynns was that the actual conditions close to launch were not extreme. We fly in much stronger thermal cycles in some of our southern California sites. It was the combination of crosswinds, low altitude and weak then suddently turbulent thermals (typically 1m/s or less for the first thermals close to launch) which made it dangerous.
In the light of the dismal safely record of paragliding and handgliding in the USA in 2015, I feel obligated to go on record raising this as an issue, especially as part of it is that I suspect the safety concerns are lesser, the higher in the sport you go, because of the personal levels of self confidence of top pilots and organizers.
My bigger concern is despite the safety notice issued by USHGPA above, that there is a slipping of the dialogue about safety in our sport. At the competition I didn't really hear much discussion about either accident, or the suitability of Flynns. Part of this stance is personal: I was an eyewitness to my friend and fellow pilot Ziggy Muhlhauser dying in a accident in May.
I don't want to rain on anybodies parade - it was a fun week of great flying - and yet there are serious lessons here that I think warrant further discussion or responses.
Personally I won't be going to the Owens again if the launch site is Flynns and the comp has the same amount of people. The simple reason is that this site in a competition environment doesn't meet my own personal safety standards and personal flying risk management.