You can read my interpretation of the incident in the video description

Indepth description and analysis in the description of the short version of this video. kzbin.info/www/bejne/g5alhamtaqaef9k

Gopro mice was broken, so no sound

No, that was no ler rotor, he fell out of the lee side of the thermal. The same would have happened much higher up

Hi Dave! How are you! Yep! I remember both the flight, landing in Myrkdalen, and the plesent ride back to Voss with you and your family. You were going to or had just completed a very long triathlon?

@@deddle yes keeping well thanks. Was off to do Bergan/Voss Ironman Triathlon really enjoyed it. Not been back to Norway for a few years. Are you still flying regularly?

@@norsemandave2030 Yes I still fly, but not as frequent as i used to. I hope to get more hours now as i just moved to Andorra. Mainly to work remote, but also great mountains both for flying and hiking. It rains a lot less here😅. Are you still doing Triathlons?

@@deddle no stopped doing triathlon and took up ultra running both in UK and Norway. Though after a work related injury not done so much. Andora also a lot warmer than Voss I should imagine

Normally you want to do circles stay inside the lift and gain alititude. The problem here is that I'm too close to the ridge where the warm rising hot air gets mixed with turbulence from the ridge. A better choice would be to go for the lower part of the ridge where I could enter the lift 100 meters above the top.

You are welcome to try with your A-glider😜

@@deddle I might try flying in that region sometime with my Alpina...when is the best time to fly XC there btw?

@@philk.6034 Generally the North is better in spring and early summer when the temperature of the sea is closer to the air temperature. In the summer, when air is warmer than the sea, you will find the cold air from the sea flows in from the sea and creates a cold stabile airmass from 0 to 5-600 meters. The key is to start as high as possible, and stay well above the inversion. I was there during a heatwave, and local pilots warned me it would be stable, but starting at around 900 meters worked. Beware of TMA airspace above 1800 meters. I would call the Airport in Tromsø and ask for more alititude.

@@philk.6034 Takeoff 1: 69.233925,19.529169 Takeoff 2:69.201913,19.700024

@@deddle Thank you very much for the explaination and the tips! I might be in there next summer... The described problem in the vid also happened to me on my first big XC flight. I was expecting lift at the bigest peak of a ridge but found turbulences instead. I stayed in it hoping for lift, but just got thrown around. After it ripped my stabilo line, I escaped and found a smooth thermal close by lower on the ridge. However, it had a happy ending and I kept flying for another 1h40min to close a 140 km FAI triangle, my first 100k+ 🙃 That bit was scary though....

Disappointing? 🤪

@@deddle Well, I don't think I could watch if it was actually strong. And NO, I ain't strappin' in to show off my ego, lol!

@@deddle Disappointing, in a way, yes. But, I watched the whole thing, gave you a thumbs up AND am pushing the algorithm as we type!

@@kevindunlap5525 It was certainty enough turbulence for me to need a pair of fresh boxers😂

@@deddle Then that was too much turbulence for me!!

I sure was lucky here! I think you are spot on. I've climbed thermals along many steep hills, but this one was different. The stand alone peak creates a nasty rotor that extends much further above the peak than you might expect.

Take a moment to read my own analysis of what happened in the video description. I learned a lot from other people's mistakes posted on KZbin, and I'll share my own mistakes to return the favour.

@@deddle Dear Erlend Rongen; In Hang Gliding we have a process for rating pilots and many sites are controlled by the Pilots. They determine a Minimum Pilot Rating to have access to the site. I have no experience with soft wings or if they have a rating system. As I watched your video, I was terrified. I believe you were extremely lucky to have not been injured or worse. Courses/Clinics should be held so that pilots can learn before they attempt more advanced flights. Aspects of flying should be learned on the ground, not by trial and error. I have listed some of the basics: At all times during your flight a safe landing area must be within reach. You have to know all about your craft and the air in which you maneuver. Understand micrometerology in small, localized areas around hills, valleys and Mountains. Areas of predictable sink or turbulence need to be avoided. I loved flying and enjoy watching the videos. I do not want to hear about avoidable accidents. God Bless Practice safe flying!

@Rick Rasmussen Hi Rick I appreciate your concern and your comment. I believe that the beste way to improve is by analyzing and reflecting on both my own and other people's mistakes in order to figure out what specifically can be improved next time around. I have shared my thoughts on this particular case in the video description if you are interested a more granular understanding of what happened. If you have specific feedback on the analysis or what specifically you would have done differently in this situation, I will appreciate your comment. Condescending comments suggesting the pilot is incompetent and should know better is not very useful. Nor does it encourage pilots to share their mistakes and let other people participate in the learning process. -Erlend

I agree with your conclusion not to fly close to the top of this sharp ridge like I did here. However, it is not as simple as "ridge always produce crazy turbulence like in the video" That is exactly what makes these spots so dangerours. These spots are usually a predictable source for a strong thermal to cloudbase. Often they are not even that turbulent. And this is what makes these spots so dangerours. You can make them part of your XC-Strategy, and for years you wont even have a scary situation. But infact it is playing the most dangerours version of russian rulette. Few people are crazy enough to play a 1/6 chance of.. a terrible outcome. We know the odds are against us. But when the chance is say 1/250 and we dont see any examples of bad outcomes, we mistake it as a safe practice. I post this video as an example that it is NOT a safe practice. It does not mean you should never take that thermal, but you should take the thermal altleast 75 meters above the peak, where the potential turbulence has consolidated. Any other people have suggestions? Please share:)

Hi, sorry for my late reply. This was in july 2014. There was a heatwave that year. Usually mid summer is not that great because cold air from the sea will create inversion. I started at maximum possible altitude and I was lucky. The best time is most likely May-june. Check out @rophin on instagram. He made som awsome flights just now😎

@@deddle Thank you!

I have quite a bit of experience doing this, so it was a surprise at the moment it happened. I have around 1000 hrs and this strong turbulence only happened once. Your point is still valid. Flying close to the unconsolidated thermal is just not a good idea in the long run, and I think this episode proved just that.

What can we learn from this? A bit of turbulence and bumps is normal in thermals. However this felt like flying into vacume. It was a free fall sensation! Up until this event i had tanken a lot of thermals close to the mountains and grotten away with strong but manageable turbulence. But whenever there is a small risk, you will have a different outcome if you play the game many times. My technical mistake was to follow with break input like we usually do when flying into a down draft. It helps keep positive angle of attack and avoids the collapse. But when flying into a 0 g downdraft that lasts for +1 second, it can also result in a stall. This is what actually happened here. Solution: Bigger downdraft more break to keep a positive angle of attack. But dont go too far on the breaks, even when you feel like you hit a vacume. When i realized i was in trouble i held my rigt breake and managed to spin 180 during re-opening and turn downwind away from the peak. How the air behaves: Obviously i was at the wrong place being that close to a thermally active peak. After this happening i have updated my model for how air behaves close to a thermally active peak like this one: I try to compare the air mass with the top of a campfire. You will see the sparks make erratic moves as they leave the top of the flames. As the smoke rises a few meters higher you will see the smoke rising in a more consolidated column of warm air. The peak is the heat source that creates the thermals. As air rises from the base to the peak it gets heated more and more and gets more bouyant. At the peak we can assume the air is at the hottest compared to the surrounding air mass. And it is also where the vertical speed and turbulence will be the strongest. As we rise above the peak, there is no longer heat added. The thermals will gradually mix with surrounding air and become a more consolidated thermal. How to avoid it? Dont go for the highest peak. Find a lower one where you can take the thermal 100 meters above the peak.

@@deddle I totally agree with you. Its funny describing a turbulence as "triying to fly in a vacum" jajahahahahaha You seem like a smart pilot and still that happened to you. I want to think this things wont happen to me because i can break my wing and get it in a super high angle of attack where air flows more from underneath and it makes it more resistant but as you explained if the turbulence is big maybe that is also bad because you make the wing more susceptible to stall. Maybe in that kind of turbulence where you enter a downwash column of air is better to let the wing surge in front and take some air speed with the risk of a frontal...

@@sergiourquijo4000 exactly! We solve 99٪ of entering a downdraft perfectly by applying a quick and firm brake input to restore a positive angle of attack. The bigger the loss of g‐force and break pressure, the larger and more firm brake input to keep the wing open. But only until a certain point! When the air beats back in your wing, how far down do you want to have pulled the brakes? I had my brakes too far down after the "vacume feel" and stalled the wing. Based on this we may propose a revised principal: The stronger downdraft, the more brake input I give, but only until a certain point so that my wing will not stall.

A good lesson. Thank you for the video.

.... Der sich in diesem Fall auch seitlich bildet, weil recht schmal...

Exactly