Liability insurance

I stand corrected.

Ian


At 14:36 10 June 2004, Michael wrote:
Ian Cant wrote
And while ultralight hang-gliders may have a little
less liability damage potential than a Nimbus

A lot less. It's much slower and much lighter, and
probably is
capable of delivering no more than a quarter of the
energy on impact
that a Nimbus can deliver.

they are flown by unlicensed pilots

Not true. Those pilots are licensed by USHGA. Sure,
the
instructional program is not under FAA control. However,
my
experience as an instructor both in an FAA-controlled
environment
(gliders and airplanes) and in a non-FAA-controlled
environment where
a sport association issues licenses and has a liability
insurance
program (parachutes) leads me to believe that FAA involvement
in the
training program does not add any safety or proficiency
value - only
increased cost and bureaucracy.

under loosely controlled conditions.

Are they any less controlled than the conditions at
a privately owned
grass gliderport? My (admittedly few) lessons with
a USHGA instructor
suggest otherwise.

It seems that the two risks might be comparable.

It doesn't seem that way to me at all. Clearly the
gliders involved
are not capable of causing near as much damage, and
the proficiency of
the pilots is probably about the same.

Michael