Anyone try paragliding?

[Michael 182]

I'm taking lessons next week. Anyone here try it? Is being a pilot any
advantage at all?

Michael

[Steven Barnes]

It'll get you chicks. Go buy the most expensive watch & jacket you can find.
The girls will come running.

By the way, I've got a watch to sell you....


"Michael 182" > wrote in message
...
> I'm taking lessons next week. Anyone here try it? Is being a pilot any
> advantage at all?
>
> Michael
>
>

[William W. Plummer]

Michael 182 wrote:

> I'm taking lessons next week. Anyone here try it? Is being a pilot any
> advantage at all?

Years ago my CFI told me "If it's not regulated by Pt 91, don't fly it."

[Michael 182]

"Steven Barnes" > wrote in message
m...
> It'll get you chicks.

Damn, I should have done it 27 years ago, before I got married.

Michael

[Flyingmonk]

LOL

[W P Dixon]

Well,
Being a pilot will help due to the fact you have been in the air
before;) And one good thing, if the engine stops your parachute is already
open, bad thing...if the parachute fails you will be the world's biggest
lawn dart ;) HAHAHA But heck I'd go for it!!!

Patrick
student SPL
aircraft structural mech

[tuttie]

Michael 182 wrote:
> I'm taking lessons next week. Anyone here try it? Is being a pilot
any
> advantage at all?
>
> Michael

I used to teach paragliding and have some not-so-positive opinions on
the subject...

1. You are under a wing that can and does collapse. In fact, in any
sort of thermally conditions you *will* experience a partial to full
deflation.

2. Check out the flying envelope---stall at around 25, fastest cruise
at around 35. Flying range is only about 10 or 15.

The forward motion keeps the wing inflated. Two problems with this: A
reversal of air (due to a gust, for example) causes the wing to
deflate. And Two, the necessity for a greater forward speed, say to get
down out of excessive lift, is almost non-existant. This has caused
paraglider pilots to use marginal techniques to penetrate excessive
forward winds.(intentional partial deflations, for example).

3. Paragliders are not designed to take terminal velocities like
parachutes. If you collapse and then fall a distance, the lines could
rip right out of the canopy (or snap themselves).

4. Pargliders that are used for training are often not well maintained.
Fabric is worn from UV light exposure and leaks air. This causes the
paraglider to loose lift and stall at a higher than normal speed. Lines
stretch over time and cause the aerodynamics of the canopy to change.

Ok...that's the bad news. On the plus side is:

If you fly in laminar air--say at the beach--where there is no thermal
activity and the winds are fairly predictable, and you fly with newer
equipment under a competent instructor you have a great chance of
having some great fun.

Sorry about the warnings but I watched a few people die on these things
and just thought you'd like to go into it with your eyes open.

Have you considered Hang-gliding? It's much safer!


Antonio

[Morgans]

"tuttie" > wrote
>
> Have you considered Hang-gliding? It's much safer!

Really? I am surprised. Cites?
--
Jim in NC

[Michael 182]

"tuttie" > wrote in message
oups.com...

>
> I used to teach paragliding and have some not-so-positive opinions on
> the subject...
< snip>
>
> Antonio
>

Very good info. I may reconsider... Thanks,

Michael

[tuttie]

I cannot cite specific statisitical data, if that's what you mean. I
can only respond anecdotally that hang gliders have a much greater
flying envelope--stall at about 25 and have forward speeds up to 70.
They have a rigid frame and therefore are not dependent on forward
motion to retain a wing shape. They also fly a whole heck of a lot
better as far as glide ratios and handling go. You are also surrounded
by a metal frame which affords a little protection in case of impact.
They have been around a lot longer so the training regimen is well
established. It also takes more training to fly them ... which, I'm
guessing, translates to better piloting.

Paragliding is sort of like a carnival ride---slow and pleasant while
you sit upright like you are in a swing. Hang gliding is much more
exciting because of the speeds, greater glide ratios, and the prone
position. In the prone position you don't really see the glider above
you because you are suspended beneath it. It gives you the feeling
like you are a bird or Superman as you lean this way or that way and
get an immediate response to your inputs. It is really great to soar
with the seagulls along the beach, feel the temperature changes in a
thermal, or smell the fir trees as you swoop over top them. Fun
flying!!


Antonio

[Stefan]

tuttie wrote:

> I used to teach paragliding and have some not-so-positive opinions on
> the subject...
....
> If you fly in laminar air--say at the beach--where there is no thermal

On hot summer days, the sky above the Swiss Alps is literally filled
with paragliders. Summer days over mountains... not exactly what you
would call a no-thermal situation. Despite, there are very few
accidents, in fact, there are even years without any accident at all.
Modern equipment is very safe, if it is well maintained. Paragliding is
very safe, if done carefully.

Stefan

[Antoñio]

I was witness to a paragliding accident in which an expert parachutist
(over 1000 jumps) died. The winds were about 5mph right about sunset.
He experienced a wingtip deflation and spiraled in to slam his face on
a rock.

When I got to him he was attempting to breath and air was excaping
through his forehead. I gave him CPR for about an hour before the
paramedics arrived.

Now go tell the family of that young man that Paragliding is "safe" .

Sorry my friend, but if you think thermaling in the alps is "safe" you
may be dead wrong some day.

Antonio

[Stefan]

Antoñio wrote:

> Sorry my friend, but if you think thermaling in the alps is "safe" you
> may be dead wrong some day.

Paragliding is not less safe than other aviation activities. There is
still a risk in everything you do, of course.

Stefan

[Dylan Smith]

In article . com>, tuttie wrote:
> 1. You are under a wing that can and does collapse. In fact, in any
> sort of thermally conditions you *will* experience a partial to full
> deflation.

Really? The paragliding people around here go out and *soar* their
paragliders quite deliberately in thermal conditions. They get some
pretty good altitude gains too. Sometimes they make us glider pilots a
bit envious because they can launch straight into the lift. If we're
using the winch, if there's no lift in the immediate vicinity of the
airfield we are stuffed...

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[Greg Farris]

I hope my contribution is not counter-productive, but I also have a friend who
was injured paragliding, and could easily have been killed. He hurt his back
in a hard landing, after a deflation - he lived , but won't be doing any more
sporting activities. What scares me about it is, according to his account of
the incident, there was a:) nothing he could have done to predict or prevent
this event, and b:) nothing he could do about it once he was caught in it.

This is different from aviation, where virtually everything that is likely to
befall us is the direct result of our actions, and we have, at least
theoretically a:) the possibility to preclude them from happening, and b:) the
possibility to recover from many situations, even after we have allowed
ourselves to get into them.

I have no business (or desire) in trying to scare someone away from something
that millions enjoy, and that I know little about - but that helplessness
doesn't sound like fun to me. I won't be joining you up there, even if the
open air must be exhilirating.

G Faris

[John Galban]

Stefan wrote:
> Anto=F1io wrote:
>
> > Sorry my friend, but if you think thermaling in the alps is "safe"
you
> > may be dead wrong some day.
>
> Paragliding is not less safe than other aviation activities. There is

> still a risk in everything you do, of course.
>

Interesting that this should come up today. I was watching a show
on TLC last night with a video shot from a paraglider that crashed. I
wasn't aware of their susceptability to turbulence. At the beginning,
the pilot and ground crew seemed concerned because the previous day
there had been turbulence that caused some scary moments. Right after
the pilot reported that conditions seemed better, he hit some
turbulence. It appeared that one side of the canopy collapse, sending
him into a hard spiral from which he could not recover. Eventually,
he had to cut away the canopy and deploy a reserve. He ended up
crashing into a tree. Funny part : Right after he told his buddy that
he was in a tree and would probably break his leg if he fell, the lines
gave way and down he went. He didn't break his leg.

Overall, I was surprised that the canopy could collapse so easily
because of turbulent air. I've skydived several times (similar
looking system) and have never heard about this. Here in Central AZ,
skydivers are always jumping, even when the 110F+ temps are creating
some nasty convective turbulence. What is it about paragliding that's
so different. All I've noticed is that the paraglider canopy looks
thinner and is often pointed at the ends.

Just wondering,

John Galban=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Stefan]

Greg Farris wrote:

> the incident, there was a:) nothing he could have done to predict or prevent
> this event,

I simply don't buy this. He made a mistake. Modern paragliders don't
"just collapse".

> and b:) nothing he could do about it once he was caught in it.

If high enough, modern paragliders will recover, and if everything
fails, responsible paraglider pilots wear a security chute. If not high
enough, though... well, then you're in about the same situation as in a
low spin.

I don't know about the place you live, but where I live, there are
usually a lot more paragliders in the air than aircraft. Despite this,
at the end of each year, there are more dead aircraft pilots than dead
paraglider pilots. Of course, if you see die your best friend, you don't
care about statistics.

Stefan

[Stefan]

Greg Farris wrote:

> the incident, there was a:) nothing he could have done to predict or prevent

I simply don't buy this. He made a mistake. Modern paragliders don't
"just collapse". His mistake may have been as simple as flying in
unflyable conditions.

> this event, and b:) nothing he could do about it once he was caught in it.

If high enough, modern paragliders will usually recover. and if
everything fails, responsible paraglider pilots wear a security chute.
If not high enough, though... well, then you're in about the same
situation as in a low spin.

I don't know about the place you live, but where I live, there are
usually a lot more paragliders in the air than aircraft. Despite this,
at the end of each year, there are more dead aircraft pilots than dead
paraglider pilots.

As I said, there is always some risk in every flying. And if you see die
your best friend, you don't care about statistics, of course.

Stefan

[Antoñio]

Yes. And if you had ever been in a paraglider yourself in a thermal
you would know that you often experience partial deflations. It is not
visible from the ground looking up, but it does happen and often.

Of course, some are trained enough to deal with partial
deflations..and some chutes are more resistant to them than others.

My statement stands though: If you thermal in a paraglider you *will*
experience deflations.

Antonio

[Antoñio]

The paraglider is not the same machine as a parachute, as you have
noticed. It has a higher aspect ratio (width to length ratio, for you
non-pilots) which gives it a greater glide ratio. Greater glide ratio
equates to greater instability in a paraglider. Instablility, in this
case, is the tendency of the paraglider to collapse under, for example,
the varying the front-to-back air pressures of thermal activity.

Paragliders are not designed to take terminal deployment -- that is, a
full-fall deployment. They are made of lighter materials in the sail
and lines. They can come apart at terminal velocities.

Paragliders have more cells to inflate and are not nearly as stable as
parachutes.
Once inflated, parachutes tend to stay inflated while paragliders do
not. Any small end-cell deflation in a paraglider can cause a
spiraling down condition. Unless the pilot is on the ball and shifts
pressures to the deflated side the spiral develops to a point where it
is unrecoverable. This happens in matter of seconds.

Finally, the shape and condition of the paraglider is critical. This
shape changes over time as the material wears and the lines stretch or
the fabric becomes more porous. The flight characteristics of a worn
paraglider can make it positively dangerous regardless of the
conditions.

Antonio

[Stefan]

Antoñio wrote:

> Yes. And if you had ever been in a paraglider yourself in a thermal
> you would know that you often experience partial deflations.
....
> My statement stands though: If you thermal in a paraglider you *will*
> experience deflations.

Of course, I agree on this. But a partial deflation is not the same
thing as a collapsing canopee. A partial deflation is not inherently
dangerous. (More precisely: It is dangerous, if you're not adequately
trained, as are all aviation activities.)

Stefan

[Antoñio]

Stefan wrote:
> Anto=F1io wrote:
>
> > Yes. And if you had ever been in a paraglider yourself in a
thermal
> > you would know that you often experience partial deflations.
> ...
> > My statement stands though: If you thermal in a paraglider you
*will*
> > experience deflations.
>
> Of course, I agree on this. But a partial deflation is not the same
> thing as a collapsing canopee. A partial deflation is not inherently
> dangerous. (More precisely: It is dangerous, if you're not adequately

> trained, as are all aviation activities.)
>
> Stefan

You say it is and it is not dangerous in the same paragraph. You don't
seem to realize that a full collapse begins with a wing tip deflation.
A deflation can go unrecognized even by an expert until it's too late.


You also failed to reply to my comment about ever having been in a
paraglider. Have you ever actually flown a paraglider?

I once flew a paraglider off of a 6000 ft mountain at about 10am when
the thermals were not yet developed. I launched, and had been flying
about 30 seconds when I noticed the relative wind pick up *beneath* me.
I looked down because I though it was kind of odd.

What I didn't realize was that I was falling and picking up speed. I
looked up just in time to see my paraglider reopen on its own. I was
very lucky it held together.

Later, my friends who had been watching my launch described my chute as
"a wadded ball of aluminum foil".

So don't tell me that paragliders don't collapse! =20

Antonio

[John Galban]

Anto=F1io wrote:
> The paraglider is not the same machine as a parachute, as you have
> noticed.
<snip>

Thanks for the thorough explanation. I appreciate it!

John Galban=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Dana M. Hague]

On Sat, 21 May 2005 22:04:19 -0600, "Michael 182"
> wrote:
>Very good info. I may reconsider... Thanks,

Michael, don't let all the scare stories scare you. Yes, paragliding
has its risks, just as does GA. Like GA, those risks can be reduced
by good training and careful decision making, and also like GA, can't
be eliminated. It's all about flying within your limitations and the
limitations of the aircraft.

I have around 200 hours now in _powered_ paragliders (following around
600 hours GA). Powered paragliding (PPG) is about the most fun I've
had in the air, and the motor gives the flexibility to avoid the
thermic conditions required to keep an unpowered paraglider or hang
glider aloft. A year or so ago, I looked at the statistics. The
number of PPG pilots in the U.S. isn't all that large and data is hard
to come by, but as near as I could figure, the fatality rate per hour
is about the same as GA (though the risk of a minor injury is higher).
Unpowered paragliding is somewhat (but not horribly or unacceptably)
worse.

To answer your original question, GA experience does help as general
background... not so much at first, or for the actual flying, but if
you continue with it there's some stuff that you won't have to relearn
(aerodynamics, airspace, regs, etc.)

-Dana
--
--
If replying by email, please make the obvious changes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Dyslexics Untie!

[Larry Dighera]

On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 19:59:55 -0400, Dana M. Hague
<d(dash)m(dash)hague(at)comcast(dot)net> wrote in
>::

>Powered paragliding (PPG) is about the most fun I've
>had in the air ...

A subscription to this magazine will give one an idea of the state of
the PPG art: http://www.ultraflight.com/

[BDS]

"Dana M. Hague" <d(dash)m(dash)hague(at)comcast(dot)net> wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 21 May 2005 22:04:19 -0600, "Michael 182"
> > wrote:
> >Very good info. I may reconsider... Thanks,
>
> Michael, don't let all the scare stories scare you. Yes, paragliding
> has its risks, just as does GA. Like GA, those risks can be reduced
> by good training and careful decision making, and also like GA, can't
> be eliminated. It's all about flying within your limitations and the
> limitations of the aircraft.

With a big emphasis on "the limitations of the aircraft". One huge problem
with a paraglider is that the wing can be compromised by turbulent air or
thermic action at the worst possible time, during your approach to land.
When you're 30 feet above the ground and your wing is suddenly 50% collapsed
due to localized turbulent air or a nearby thermal lifting off, no amount of
training is going to help you deal with the 30 foot plummet you are about to
experience because there isn't going to be time to recover.

One very important thing to keep in mind is that conditions that a GA pilot
wouldn't normally give a second thought to can be very significant to an
aircraft like a paraglider or an ultralight, especially when your legs and
feet are your landing gear.

[private]

"BDS" > wrote in message
...
> "Dana M. Hague" <d(dash)m(dash)hague(at)comcast(dot)net> wrote in message
> ...
> > On Sat, 21 May 2005 22:04:19 -0600, "Michael 182"
> > > wrote:
> > >Very good info. I may reconsider... Thanks,
> >
> > Michael, don't let all the scare stories scare you. Yes, paragliding
> > has its risks, just as does GA. Like GA, those risks can be reduced
> > by good training and careful decision making, and also like GA, can't
> > be eliminated. It's all about flying within your limitations and the
> > limitations of the aircraft.
>
> With a big emphasis on "the limitations of the aircraft". One huge
problem
> with a paraglider is that the wing can be compromised by turbulent air or
> thermic action at the worst possible time, during your approach to land.
> When you're 30 feet above the ground and your wing is suddenly 50%
collapsed
> due to localized turbulent air or a nearby thermal lifting off, no amount
of
> training is going to help you deal with the 30 foot plummet you are about
to
> experience because there isn't going to be time to recover.


Well spoken description of a significant risk. IMHO this risk increases
with the higher performance PGs. It claimed one of the very best PPL/HG/PG
(several time national champion) pilots I have known.

> One very important thing to keep in mind is that conditions that a GA
pilot
> wouldn't normally give a second thought to can be very significant to an
> aircraft like a paraglider or an ultralight, especially when your legs and
> feet are your landing gear.

From personal experience my preference for free flight is hang gliders.
While they are a flex wing they have a ridgid frame and have much better
penetration and fly more like a traditional wing. Soaring them is a truly
exqusite experience. Current models are well developed and proven designs,
and even intermediate types offer good performance.

[Dana M. Hague]

On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 01:05:00 GMT, "BDS" > wrote:

>With a big emphasis on "the limitations of the aircraft". One huge problem
>with a paraglider is that the wing can be compromised by turbulent air or
>thermic action at the worst possible time... no amount of
>training is going to help you...

True. However, the training I refer to includes how to avoid these
conditions, often (at least by powered paragliders) by flying in the
calm air of early morning or evening.

>One very important thing to keep in mind is that conditions that a GA pilot
>wouldn't normally give a second thought to can be very significant to an
>aircraft like a paraglider or an ultralight, especially when your legs and
>feet are your landing gear.

No argument there.

-Dana
--
--
If replying by email, please make the obvious changes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Don't put it off, procrastinate today.

[Dana M. Hague]

On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 06:10:53 GMT, "private" >
wrote:
>Well spoken description of a significant risk. IMHO this risk increases
>with the higher performance PGs. It claimed one of the very best PPL/HG/PG
>(several time national champion) pilots I have known.

The higher performance PG's are definitely riskier to fly. However,
the performance of even entry level PG's has gotten so close to the
performance models that most recreational pilots stick with the basic
models nowadays.

>From personal experience my preference for free flight is hang gliders.
>While they are a flex wing they have a ridgid frame and have much better
>penetration and fly more like a traditional wing. Soaring them is a truly
>exqusite experience. Current models are well developed and proven designs,
>and even intermediate types offer good performance.

The flying is very different; certainly a HG has better performance...
but you lose in portability, and the higher speed adds its own element
of risk. Actually, HG and PG accident statistics are pretty similar.

-Dana


--
--
If replying by email, please make the obvious changes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Don't put it off, procrastinate today.