And in that case, I would definitely see the Base system as an extremely sensible option, because we have the possibility—especially if we have a collision in the air, two gliders meeting, we know this from PWC—where one gets caught with their glider to the harness of the other; at that moment, the lower one could unclip, tack, their rescuer deploys, they fly off alone, the upper one takes their glider with them to land, the perfect gear is back together and, yeah, the situation is resolved relatively easily.
Podz-Glidz, the Lu-Glidz podcast. Stories from the cosmos of paragliding.
Today with Stefan Ramersdorfer and
I'm Lucian Haas.
Who still remembers AvaSport? The Bulgarian harness manufacturer was a major player in the scene for years and even a pioneer in some areas, for example with its robust agro harnesses with a Base-system. In this setup, the main glider is automatically detached when the rescue is pulled. However, at the end of 2020, AvaSport had to file for bankruptcy and disappeared from the market. Only the Base harness series still exists today—or rather, exists again, now under the Change Gravity brand. Behind it is the Swiss Stefan Ramersdorfer, better known in the scene as Rami. Together with former AvaSport employees, the agro and safety trainer restarted production of these harnesses in 2022.
Why? Because as a passionate agro pilot, he doesn't want to miss out on what he calls the luxury and safety of a Base system. In this 141st episode of Podz-Glidz, I'm talking to Rami about the Base system. We're covering the basics, the pros and cons, who actually needs something like this, the limits, but also the future of this technology. Because in Rami's view, Base systems could be a sensible option even for lying harnesses, especially in the competition scene.
Other topics also come up. It's about risk management while flying, systematic training, the important role of mentors, the shift in the agro scene, and paragliding as a lifestyle. I met Rami, by the way, in his Change-Gravity shop in Wolfenschiessen. That's in the Engelberger Tal, where in June 2024 I was able to look after the home and the cats of a flying couple for two weeks. That gave me the opportunity not only to explore the area a bit from an aviation perspective, but also to record two podcast episodes. The previous episode, Flugsau, was also created there.
If you like Podz-Glidz, then support my work on it. As a patron. You can find out how it works so easily on the Gleitschirm-Blog Lu-Glidz, specifically on the "Fördern" page.
Stefan, are you a risk-taker? I'd say only to a certain extent. Only to a certain extent. That means for some things, yes, for others, no. Or what do you mean by to a certain extent? I think a certain
You have to take risks in life to move forward. But the risk should stay within a manageable framework. I like to use the traffic light system for that. The green zone is the comfort zone, that's where we operate, that's what we can do. The orange zone, well, there's a certain risk there. But that's where we can develop further. And the red zone, that's actually risk management. Yes, high risk, we don't really want to go there. And I see myself preferably somewhere in the green or orange zone. I'd like to avoid the red zone. How often have you been in the red zone?
I'd say that when it comes to flying, I've been in the red zone maybe once or twice at most, but certainly not more. And the more I flew, the more experience I was able to gain, the better the whole thing actually became. I was able to reflect on myself more and position myself accordingly in terms of risk management.
Now, you're a very experienced agro pilot and also an agro trainer and such. And for, let's say, an average pilot, what agro pilots do always feels like it's in the red zone. Why do you say you were only in there at most once?
Because I believe that even in agro-flying, there is a very systematic structure to the whole thing. If I follow that structure properly and create a certain structure for myself, develop a training plan, then I can actually train the whole thing within a very safe framework. I can also work out the corresponding conditions—meaning, I can get myself a rig that offers me additional safety, with multiple rescue devices and a large protector. I can also look at the flight area and make sure I go to an area where I have safety, meaning I can fly over water.
I have a good buffer where I have open fields, even if something goes wrong. I can pull a rescuer and come down safely with them. Awareness of the rescuer—I see all of that as essential factors in how I can actually minimize the residual risk. And because of that, I don't see it as some kind of high-risk area at all.
Is that the art of agro-flying? Does it actually lie in risk management?
I absolutely think so, because of course there are many pilots—I'm thinking especially in this day and age, we have YouTube, we have YouTube, we have YouTube, we have YouTube, we have YouTube, we have YouTube, we have YouTube, we have YouTube, many tutorials etc. But you also see a lot of images, reels, and so on on social media, for example. You often only see the good stuff there and get the feeling, yeah, that's relatively easy. Come on, I'll go out and fly too, I'll just pull, I'll try that too. Then it goes wrong, maybe I didn't pay enough attention to the box placement, I'm in a bad area, I have an old rescue that doesn't work properly, I have a piece of gear that isn't supporting me etc. And immediately we have a situation that triggers a mental block and consequently hinders further progress.
But if I keep those things in mind and can avoid the mental block, then I believe I can fly relatively relaxed and make my progress that way.
If you look at normal pilots and then at agro-pilots, would you say that just by the systematic way that most agro-pilots, let's say, approach flying, they are actually automatically the better pilots—maybe not even technically, but in terms of mindset?
I wouldn't say they are consistently better pilots. There are also many pilots in the agro sector who might have a bit of an inflated ego. Still, I think you fly completely differently. You have a completely different awareness, for example, of your rescue equipment, which might not be there at all for a recreational pilot, for a so-called "normal" pilot. A reserve glider is something I just carry around, but I actually never need it. And an agro pilot, of course, has a completely different relationship with that. Also the understanding of the matter, if a glider collapses.
In agro-flying, we're used to it rustling in the fabric sometimes, to it getting a bit more turbulent.
Of course we want that. We initiate the maneuver deliberately, and we know it can also go wrong. Whereas with thermals, it can sometimes come out of nowhere. But I think, precisely in that situation, when something comes out of nowhere and the fabric rustles, you might twist 180 degrees, or a flap occurs—I believe it's certainly the case that a pilot who has already flown maneuvers can handle the situation much more calmly and remain correspondingly more capable of taking action.
I was once at SIV training in Gerlitz. And there were three girls there who were training for agro. They said they never like thermals. They only ever want to do agro because thermals would be too unsafe for them, because they feel so helpless, because they just don't have the control. Is that maybe something where a normal pilot, in a certain way, because they expose themselves more to the unknown and are open to it, might actually be the better pilot?
That could certainly be the case. I just think it's also about how you ultimately deal with the overall situation. I mean, I think it's great if the girls say, "Hey, I don't personally feel ready. It stresses me out if anything unforeseen happens," and they accordingly opt out of that area of flying. Personally, I find that very sensible. You can then work on it with appropriate coaching or by going out with other pilots, etc. Maybe build up an understanding so that the girls eventually feel comfortable in thermals and that it's no longer so completely uncomfortable for them.
But I believe that's exactly where acro flying offers an extremely good basis. I had a colleague myself who did his training, then went down to Mornera in the Ticino in the spring, pushed himself through some really intense thermals, had shock moments one after another, landed and said, okay, shit, now I guess I have to learn how to fly first. The consequence was that he came back, did an SIV training, started flying acro, and was able to build an understanding with that. That's when I realized, even if it works sometimes, even if it pushes me away somewhere and so on, now I can handle that and now I'm going back to flying thermals.
How did you actually get into acro flying? I personally did my training in 2013, finished my license in the autumn, and then it was clear to me that the next step was an SIV training. I wanted to know how the glider behaves in uncontrolled situations. Of course, spirals, stalls, and also my first sat were included in the program, and at some point, yeah, I flew the sat, got hooked on the whole thing. I wanted more of it. I looked at my flight instructor back then and said, hey Thomas,
would it be possible for us to do a bit more? He said, hey, look, if you want more, you have to build a solid base first. Start by stalling, now you have to learn the stalls by heart. And I was like, yeah, but hey, exactly those maneuvers. Stalls, no, I hate a stall. No, that's something unstable, something uncontrolled. He said, yeah, and now it's up to you to make the unstable something stable and the uncontrolled something controlled. And when you have that under control, then you're ready to fly acro. Okay, I pushed through it, for better or worse, and eventually found my way and started having fun with it.
By now, I think I can really say that I actually have more fun when the glider is under me or somehow crumpled over me, than just when it's open and flying above me. Have
Did you get this hint, like, now you have to practice stalls? Did you then say, okay, I need to book another SIV training and another SIV training to practice all these stalls? Or did you practice stalls on your own? I
I actually took the path—let me put it this way—I certainly used the time in the existing SIV training to keep working on the stalls. I felt relatively safe, then went back and neglected it a bit, but then picked it up again on a trip to Spain. I was in Organia for the first time in my life and really, yeah, in German terms, I screwed up my stalls. I had my first experiences with stalls and autorotation there and had a really unpleasant situation. Seriously. I only got out relatively deep, luckily without a rescue.
And in the evening, I have to say, that was the great thing—Paul Takac would come to me and say, Stefan, we have to look at what happened today. What happened there was really on the edge, but look, I'm happy to give you a few more tips and tricks on how that might work better. And that's how I was actually able to steadily improve my level. Furthermore, joining the Agro-Club here in Central Switzerland certainly helped me a lot too, because there was again a community where exchange took place. You'd watch a video you'd recorded yourself with the GoPro and analyze it.
I also constantly reflected on it myself, analyzing the videos for hours. And that's how I was able to drive my own progress independently. Looking back today, I really have to say I find a certain amount of support almost essential, or at least it helps extremely. You make progress much faster because if you have to learn everything from your own mistakes, then everything just takes longer and maybe things go really wrong at some point. And I believe that can be avoided because there are plenty of people who have the experience and can provide that support.
Is that something where the freestyle scene basically has an advantage over this, let's call it, cross-country flight scene or normal flight scene, because there you see each other much more as a community. You meet up, when you're doing ten runs a day, you constantly meet in the lift or at the top, you can constantly talk to each other. But you're also used to talking about how you fly. And you really want the other person's criticism because you want to get better at that point. What did I mess up there? Why didn't I fly the entry into whatever maneuver properly? Then there's the experienced person who says, hey, watch out, wait two seconds longer or whatever.
Yeah, I'd say there's been a certain shift over the last few years. Looking back at when I started, it was still a very strong community; you were extremely involved, you worked together, you went out together when doing runs, you were together on the track, you went up to the launch site together, etc. I think that's changed a bit over time. That's just my perception, but people started getting more to the point: I have to train now, I have to fly now, I don't have time to sit in the track with you or grab a quick coffee to look at it, it was just about moving forward, forward, forward.
I think that's why the community has somewhat fractured; it used to be more common for a colleague to come up and pat you on the shoulder and say, "Hey, I saw that, do it differently, otherwise it could get dangerous." And today, it might even be the case—because that basic understanding might not be there anymore—that they just say, "Hey, cool job, you almost had to throw in the rescuer," yeah, "Hey, mega cool," which I actually find a bit ambiguous. On the other hand, I think there are also opportunities because of that.
So I mean, what I've built over the years came a lot from self-study, which is maybe a point where people today don't want to invest as much time or energy into something anymore. For me, it was an addiction, a passion, or is it still. And I think that's exactly where I see a bit of... yeah, it was also an opportunity for me where I said, hey, instead of just playing the friendly coach every weekend. I come to the Nakro training actually to fly myself, and ultimately the weekend is over and I've only done three flights over the whole weekend, and the rest of the time I was there supporting people, analyzing,
...supporting them with material and so on. And eventually, that led to the result of, yeah, okay, why don't you turn this into a profession? Use your skills and offer that to people, but in a way that you still have your free time and still get to fly, because that's still a matter of the heart.
We can talk about your company Changed Gravity in a moment. I'd like to stay on the topic of the agro scene for now. You said that has changed a bit. What's causing that?
That's hard to say. I have the feeling it also comes a bit from the fact that, on one hand, the diversity of interests people have today has become extreme. You have to bike, you have to go paragliding, you still have a partnership you're invested in, which also requires time. You have a job, a top-paying job, that you also want to keep. And so, there's maybe a lack of time somewhere for the community, because if I go flying then, I want to fly, fly, fly. Then I don't have time to sit under a tree somewhere with my guys and watch a video or just say a few words, exchange some news, and have a beer.
And I think it makes a relatively big difference that maybe the socializing itself isn't quite the same as it used to be. I hope that changes a bit again. That would be nice for the scene.
Does this lack of socializing somewhat increase the risk?
I believe that in the agro sector, the risk certainly increases a bit. It doesn't have to, though; it depends very much on the pilot, how well they can assess themselves, and how they can handle it. I see it more as the progress suffering, in that it takes me correspondingly longer to perhaps reach a goal. That I might suddenly need 150 or 200 stalls instead of 100 to master a stall, because the reflection just isn't there. And as soon as I can reflect on myself, or someone else can reflect on me,
I learn an incredible amount just from the conversation itself. And I believe that's exactly what I see as the core point of the whole story.
That means an intelligent pilot would actually always look for a slightly more experienced buddy, someone they can learn from and ask for help again and again. And they actually use that, by going to them and saying, "Hey, explain to me, what did I do wrong there?"
I absolutely believe that. And we can see that in a very good example. We have a pilot here in the valley who flies. He got his license a year and a half ago. In the meantime, yeah, he's doing an extreme amount of flights. I mean, in the first year alone, he completed 1,700 flights. That's immense; it's a number that almost no one can imagine. But at the same time, he was involved in the community, he sought out that exchange, he asked more experienced pilots for support, he asked to have a maneuver explained to him. He sits down in the evening, analyzes his videos, and by now, the kid flies way better than I do myself.
And so, I wouldn't say I'm a top-tier acro pilot now, but it's absolutely, what is actually the best example of this, it helps, it helps extremely. And you can achieve extraordinary results with it.
achieve. Maybe I've even met him already, because one evening when I was flying here at the Brändler, I think I flew twice. In that time, he somehow went up and down, up and down, five times. Then I asked him how fast he actually manages those laps and what his record is. How many runs he did here in a day—he says his record would be 26 times. Correct,
that's exactly
the kid. So very exciting. Then I also thought, 26 times. I can't pack my glider that fast to keep running back to the track and getting back up there. But if you're sufficiently motivated and have the drive, then...
Absolutely. So I think, of course, motivation has to be at the core of it. And he brings an extreme amount of motivation with him. I mean, just thinking about it, when an acro training session takes place in Beckenried over the lake on the weekend, and that training starts somewhere around nine, you'll meet him here at six in the morning, right at the Brändln, and he's already doing four or five runs before heading off to the acro training over the lake. And then, when... when work finishes at five or six in the evening, he drives back into the valley and flies until nine at night. Of course, what he does is certainly very excessive.
Yes, the great thing here is that the winch can theoretically run 24 hours a day because you operate it yourself. And then you can still hop into the winch at nine in the evening if it's still light out and go for one more flight. When you look at these acro pilots, on one hand, there's the flight technique they have that you have to learn. What role does the equipment you have actually play in acro flying?
I believe the equipment plays a very decisive role. You can very quickly become overwhelmed by gear, or you might have equipment that isn't suitable for it—that just doesn't provide the necessary basis. That's the case with the glider, but it's also the case with the harness. And I think those are very essential points in this.
To what extent is the equipment also relevant for safety?
I find it very, very important because I'm thinking right now, dedicated harness equipment built for acro flying is essential. You know you have correspondingly thicker protectors installed, you have at least two rescues installed, which in my view is very essential. You also have completely different bracing, you have different straps installed, you have different supports installed. I had a colleague myself, a good colleague, who once started with a,
I think it was even the ease of it; he started flying with an Emily Rhythmic SAT, and then had to take painkillers every night because his ribs hurt so much he could barely stand up. And yeah, then the point was reached pretty quickly that the material you're using just isn't optimal. The same goes for the glider. I mean, there are gliders that don't work for maneuvers. There are gliders that work well and are tame, accordingly. But then there are also gliders that are extremely demanding. And I think the right choice is already very...
essential. If a normal pilot says they want to start doing agro flying somehow, at what point would you say they need to take care of the equipment, specifically the harness? People say today that there are great low-B harnesses with which you can start agro flying today, and you can learn all the maneuvers—including helicopters and everything else, at least not the super high-dynamic ones—you can learn them all perfectly with those. But at what point should you actually say, okay, an agro harness is really required now?
So I believe that as soon as the decision has really been made—I want to fly agro and I want to commit to it—I think it's actually very good if you deal with a harness right from that point. Of course, in the beginning, you can fly with a standard harness and, as an additional safety measure, I'd take a front container on the front. That certainly covers the safety aspect for now. Ultimately, however, I won't be able to avoid switching to a different harness sooner or later. And of course, it helps me if I do that as early as possible so that I can get used to the harness.
And I think the first step should always be the harness, and only then should the glider follow. Especially when I see pilots today, aspiring agro pilots, who are partly already out there on an agro glider but still using a training harness, I feel that's the wrong order because you have to get used to everything. And the worst combo you can do is change everything at once, because then you have no overview at all. What's the reason now? Is it me? Is it the harness? Is it the glider? Exactly.
That means you would recommend, okay, start learning, then maybe fly a Low-B if you're interested in agro, then keep the Low-B for now, but get yourself an agro harness, and once you're comfortable with the whole system and have mastered the first maneuvers and stuff like that, then you can eventually consider maybe a real freestyle and then maybe at some point getting a real agro glider.
Absolutely. So I think that's exactly the right way to go—saying, hey, with a glider I already have, with a Low-B glider, something like that, where I'm training my maneuvers, I'll switch the harness and get used to that combo again, then I can keep training, and as soon as I've reached a certain level, I'm ready to switch. I'd even say today, rather to a heavily loaded Agro glider than a Freestyle glider, because the development has moved a bit in a different direction, especially with the Freestyle gliders, where I'd say today that a large Agro glider can certainly help more than a classic Freestyle glider.
Why? Well, I think it's because we have few freestyle gliders that were actually developed for maneuver flying. There are many freestyle gliders that are actually extremely... they have good performance built in, they have a certain stretch, etc., and in my view, that's only somewhat suitable for learning maneuvers with. They're great for flying on the dune, for doing jumps, for flying wing-overs, but as soon as it gets into negative maneuvers, they're often more "toxic" to fly than if I were to take a heavily loaded agro glider.
Now, there are also different variants of Agro harnesses. Typically, however, all Agro harnesses have two reserves in them, which you would probably definitely recommend flying with two reserves at all times when flying Agro.
Absolutely, absolutely. I think two reserves are indispensable; we have many maneuvers where a hang-up can occur, and accordingly, it goes into autorotation, and we all know, in autorotation, a reserve deployment isn't unavoidable, definitely, and then I'm extremely glad if I have a second reserve in there. Especially if I maybe fall into the lines, into the fabric, then I'm glad, absolutely grateful, that I have two options with me. Now
Then there's the, I'll call it the extreme version, the so-called BASE harness, where you basically have a third rescuer that's built in such a way that you can basically detach from your main glider automatically, and then the parachute, the rescue parachute, is triggered automatically, and that one is also typically steerable as a surface, so you can fly back to the ground just the same, but your interfering main glider is automatically deactivated. Is that actually something you would say, if someone is seriously doing BASE, that's a must?
I wouldn't necessarily say it's a must; from my perspective, it's a luxury I can afford. It's just, well, I'll take the comparison from road traffic: I can get from A to B in my Golf, but maybe it's a bit more fun in a Ferrari or a Bugatti, and I can take the corners a bit faster, etc. Or I take a Mercedes and have a certain amount of extra comfort. I also have safety systems built in, and I think that's exactly how you can compare it a bit.
Basically, I think a harness with two reserves, a dedicated agro harness, is absolutely sufficient. But I can also get the additional option with the BASE, and thus, especially for certain situations, I actually have a significantly less intense version. So, I'd say, ultimately a much more pleasant solution.
At the very beginning, you mentioned this traffic light system—red, yellow, green. Would you say that if you fly with a Base harness and then perform agro maneuvers, you're basically shifting that traffic light a bit? The maneuver you mentioned, with two rescuers in the harness but without the Base, would you perhaps still assess as yellow if you say you still have this additional option to actually separate from your main glider? With the Base system, that automatically lowers the risk even further, and then it becomes green?
No, I definitely wouldn't confirm that at all. I think the BASE harness, well, it offers additional options, it helps me in certain situations, but ultimately my risk management should remain exactly the same. Because there are also situations where I can't use a BASE system, and thus I'm reduced to the two reserves I have with me again. Where can't you use a BASE system? If I'm tangled in the lines or in the fabric, then I can't detach the canopy because the lines are hanging on me, and the BASE glider is ultimately only triggered by detaching the canopy. If the canopy doesn't get away from me, then the BASE system won't trigger either.
And so I'm reduced back to the two underseat rescuers I have with me. And I believe that, accordingly, the risk management should be set up exactly the same way as if I were out with a completely normal acro harness. I set my box exactly the same, I set my altitude management exactly the same, the risk management in the maneuvers, etc. I simply have the advantage that if I fall into an autorotation, for example, I don't have the danger of a rescuer entanglement; instead, I can pull a handle, it kicks me sideways out of the autorotation, my Base glider opens, and then I go to land.
Everything's very relaxed. On the other hand, training over water is also a relaxed option, of course. Personally, it even helped me because I actually pulled the rescue earlier than I would with normal reserve parachutes, because I was aware that, somehow, the base glider just doesn't fly quite as well as a paraglider now. So, if I notice I'm getting into a problem somewhere, I separate as quickly as possible, because then I can still land dry on land with the base glider and have my harness and my other two reserves dry; only the main glider goes into the water, the boat gets it out, I can lay it out and let it dry, and in the meantime, I refold my base canopy and an hour later I'm back on the mountain and keep flying, whereas otherwise, with a water landing, the weekend would be over.
These days, a lot of agro is also practiced over land. You mentioned Organia earlier, a typical spot where there's no water at all, but you just have the beautiful mountain fed by the valley wind, where you can keep soaring up, turning down, whatever, then you soar back up and can start the next run immediately, but it all takes place over land. Would you say that if you're training over water, you can more easily do without a base canopy than if you're training over land?
Yes, or yes and no, I'd say. I'd say it offers certain advantages in both situations if you have a BASE canopy with you. Over water, we certainly have the situation where we have an open area, we actually have the optimal conditions, we don't have power lines in the way, we don't have trees, no houses, it's just water. So everything is very, very relaxed. And exactly over land, the BASE system helps us extremely accordingly. That I, where I, if I come down with a standard rescue, somewhere, regardless of whether, let's say, Beamer might still have the option that I can steer or the Ogallo system,
The Rundkreuz canopy definitely not at all, and then I'm just at the mercy of the elements and in the worst case, I land somewhere on a house roof, the church tower, or somewhere in the trees, and in the worst case, I might even end up sizzling somewhere on a high-voltage power line, which is not cool at all. And I think the Base system obviously offers massive advantages there. But you also have to be prepared to jettison your main glider. Is that so hard?
to have that readiness?
I don't think that's entirely without issue. Especially in the early stages of BASE systems, there were accidents because the pilots weren't actually ready to jettison their canopy. And I think that's also an issue in today's materialistic society we live in, where maybe the thought is, "Yeah, but do I really want to throw away my baby, and then the glider hits a tree and gets damaged?" And yeah, I think you have to say very clearly, "Hey, I'm in an emergency situation and right now it's about me as a pilot, as a person, and what happens to my gear is actually secondary."
Apart from this potential psychological hurdle, does a BASE system have any other disadvantages for the pilot?
I think what's really important is certainly the maintenance of the whole system. The system, as the name already suggests, is a system. It's not simple; it's not just a few straps, but a complex system. And accordingly, the system requires a certain amount of attention, a certain, yes, a certain amount of upkeep and maintenance so that it functions properly in extreme cases. And I believe that is certainly one of the main disadvantages in today's use or in the current state of how we have built the system.
And that's where the thoughts certainly go further. How can we, how do we perhaps move away from the three-ring system somehow? Because the three-ring system is an excellent system that has proven itself extremely well in skydiving for years. It has also proven itself for us. There has been an evolution, especially now in the paraglider sector. The system has been developed further and further. But it still has its pitfalls and requires a certain amount of expertise and attention.
Now, many listeners probably won't know what a three-ring system is. Could you briefly explain it?
A three-ring system is the classic release mechanism we use to separate the canopy from the harness. So, in other words, to detach the main glider from the harness. Instead of regular carabiners, we have a shackle as the final ring—actually, as the last of the three rings—where the main glider is attached. This shackle, in turn, is put into a loop with another ring. Through this ring, another loop goes through again, but without a ring this time. And that way, with each loop, we reduce the force, and thus on the last one, on the so-called loop, as we call it, on the closure loop,
which is secured with the pin, we have extremely low forces on it. Even if we ultimately have 6-7 G somewhere, a relatively high force of 700-800 kilograms pulling on the main glider, we have extremely low forces on the safety pin and can still trigger the system through this.
So, this is basically, maybe a wrong image, but something like a rope pull system in that form; the forces are reduced with every ring you pull through the other ring with a loop like that, so the holding forces that ultimately end up on the last pin are reduced.
Exactly, exactly.
And because of that, with a three-ring system, you can pull on the handle at any time even under high G-forces, and you don't have any major resistance left. Exactly, and we
don't need an extremely robust pin or anything, because I think that's also a hurdle that arises technologically at some point.
Wouldn't something like that also be suitable for a normal lanyard harness?
I definitely see the possibilities in that as well. But I have to say again, we're back in that area; I think we'd first have to look at the system for that.
make it low-maintenance, be able to implement it like that, and above all, have the awareness that it doesn't work in every case. So I think right now, if I look at it, we already have many—let's say, lying harnesses for example with two rescue compartments used in the PWC—and in that case, I would see the BASE system as an extremely sensible option because we have the possibility, especially if we have a collision in the air, two gliders meet, we know this from the PWC, one gets caught with his glider on the other's harness, at that moment the lower one could unclip, bam, his rescue goes off, he flies alone again, the upper one takes his glider with him, lands like that, perfect, the material is back together.
and yes, the situation is solved relatively easily. Especially since we're fighting against collapses, entanglements, autorotation, or twists in most cases, and in that instance, a BASE system works brilliantly and helps extremely. And I think exactly where we can say we already have two rescuers with us, I think it could certainly be an option to say that a rescue system is actually a BASE system, in whatever form or combination, but certainly something where I can detach, and as a second option, I still have a normal, classic rescuer with me,
when all else fails.
There are already separation carabiners today. Actually, you might not be able to have a system that's completely automatic, where you just have one handle to pull, but you can simulate a lot of that. You can also separate from your main glider nowadays. Is that something you would say, that you'd recommend people look into integrating those separation carabiners—in whatever form or design—into their Strecke harnesses, just to have it as an option at least? Does that make sense?
I think in any case, regardless of what kind of option it is, having an option to disconnect the glider is absolutely sensible. Because I see that in the SIV training as well, when the participants throw emergency parachutes with us, the highest requirement or the hardest part of the whole thing is always preventing the main glider from flying, somehow killing it, so that I can get cleanly under my rescue and don't have some kind of partial shear position and thus an increased sink rate. And I think, accordingly, I find a disconnection system extremely valuable.
A separation system can be the simplest thing in the world, a cutter knife, I cut the main glider away, okay, all done. But ultimately, that's also an issue again, of course, I have to deal with the system, I have to maintain a system, because we're talking about a separation system again and it requires certain actions, procedures that have to take place in a stress situation. And the fact that these procedures happen completely unconsciously, that's exactly the difficulty I see. So I also had quick-out carabiners on my first acro-guard gear. And I remember well, I actually threw the rescue canopy as a test and ultimately, even with quick-outs, it took over 50 seconds just to get my main glider off.
And that's a long time. I think, especially when we talk about long-distance flights, I have thick gloves, I have a cockpit, etc., instruments—it's all somehow a bit difficult to operate in that moment. And maybe I'm also hindering myself with the thick gloves and so on, not to mention that we all know a person in a stress situation simply no longer has full cognitive capacity or full ability to act. And I think those are some essential things that need to be taken into account.
Have you ever thought about what such a system might look like, what would be simple enough to install into classic cross-country aircraft—aircraft, I keep saying, cross-country aircraft? Thoughts are...
There. There are already some sketches. What could work? What would be a way? Ultimately, the implementation is never entirely simple because there are so many factors to consider. Thick gloves, thin gloves, winter, summer, water, sand, all sorts of things that influence how such a system ultimately has to be designed or what it actually has to be able to withstand. And also the question again, what is the market ready for? What are the pilots ready to invest in such a system? Ultimately, we know there are automated separation systems from the parachute field.
But they are immensely expensive. And now, for me, the big question is: if I look at it today, with the glider, price is an issue, but with harnesses, it's usually still a bit bigger of a topic. If we go there now and say, okay, we have a harness that costs €2,000 today, and now it suddenly costs €3,500 because it has the separation system integrated. Is the customer still willing to pay for that, for a system they might never need in their life? And I think that's the balancing act that has to be considered. Especially as a small business or an individual, like I actually am,
because it quickly becomes about high sums, high investments, and you have no guarantee of where it's headed.
And did you just say, if I understood you correctly, you'd say that pilots might be more willing to pay a bit more for a glider than for a harness. Why is that?
I just feel like the pilot always has the sense that the glider is the main thing. And I see that especially in the acro scene. There are many pilots who fly around with really heavily worn harnesses. And when I look at them, I think, hey guys, come over, I'll give you a good price, but the main thing is that he's flying around with something good again. But in the meantime, while they had the harness in use, they had five or six gliders that they just flew through, that they flew into the ground. The gliders were replaced; nobody really discussed the cost there, more or less.
But when it comes to the harness, yeah, a harness is like a necessary evil, something I just need so that I can fly. And I think that's maybe a bit of a wrong focus, because the harness is an elementary part of the equipment of the overall system we're out there with.
Harnesses are generally treated a bit, I'd say, like the stepchild. With the gliders, it's prescribed—if it weren't prescribed, the question would be who would always do it—but it says you have to bring it in for a check every 24 months, and then they look exactly at whether the line lengths are correct and all that, and the seams are checked and so on. Who does that with the harness? That
that's exactly the right question and I think it's a very valid one. And purely from my experience, I've seen a lot of that, especially during K-checks for SIV training; there was even a case where you really had to say, "No, sorry, you can't use this harness this weekend, it's not safe." We then had to organize a new harness express so that he could fly, but it's exactly such a major point. You check the main glider, you regularly send the reserve for repacking and inspection. But until now, hardly anyone has really looked after the harness, and ultimately, the best main glider and the best-maintained reserve won't mean anything to me if the straps on my harness come undone or even tear.
And I also believe that a lot can be done preventively, because we have fixed components of the harness and we have flexible components of the harness. The seat board, for example, is what the straps and the fabric run through. It often happens that a seat board gets damaged somewhere, gets a kink, a tear, something, and then the main strap assembly of the harness starts to chafe. If I can recognize and address that early on, I only have to replace the seat board and nothing happens. If I'm unlucky and fly around like that for half a year, either the strap is so worn out that something actually happens, or I notice it—maybe because I was just at the dune with my standard harness and now I'm getting the sand off—I notice it and go, oh shit, something happened.
And if I then go to a manufacturer or a repair shop, it can often be the case that it's irreparable damage.
How often do you check your harnesses?
I check my harnesses very regularly. I actually do a purely visual inspection every three months. At least once a year, the harness is completely taken apart. Seat board out, rescue out, protector out, everything that can somehow be taken out, out. Then it's turned upside down and completely washed. I also see that as an essential point, both the cleaning and generally the handling of the harness. Actually, the harness is the most heavily stressed component or the most heavily stressed assembly of our entire system.
Because we take care of the main glider, we treat it with kid gloves. We also maintain our reserve glider, we inflate it regularly, etc., making sure no moisture gets on it. And the harness, well, we bomb ourselves into the landing field with that, and at the launch site, we toss it into some corner. Then it gets a bit of dirt on it again. Oh yeah, I even scrape along the ground directly into the track, etc. All those things where I think, hey guys, no please don't. And that's especially an issue with cleaning. Dirt gets into the pores, dirt gets into the fabric.
And so, of course, I have much higher wear and tear on the whole thing.
Let's jump around the topic just a little bit. We're staying with harnesses, though. You have your own company, Change Gravity, and you also sell Agro harnesses through it, which originally came from AvaSport or were an AvaSport development. But AvaSport eventually stopped existing, yet you keep producing. Tell me the story. How did this connection to AvaSport come about, and how did you basically become the heir to AvaSport in a way? At least as far as the Agro harnesses are concerned.
Well, actually, there's a principle behind it, and a colleague of mine is to blame. Even in my first years of agro-flying, or rather in the beginning, I had to have a harness. That was back in 2014. A colleague said, "Hey, there's still an AvaSport harness standing here, come on, take that, those are the best harnesses there are." Okay, yeah, I trust you, I'll take it. And I really have to say, that harness saved my ass once in a really, really beautiful way. Specifically because of the design with a wide-opening reserve compartment, because a mistake happened on my end—I had something in the reserve pack that wasn't my own fault.
It also led to me looking into the reserve parachute topic more. I had to throw the rescuer, it pulled away, I had the empty inner container in my hands and thought, shit, this isn't going to end well. Luckily, it opened wide and the rescue fell out of the compartment and deployed. It wouldn't have been enough for a second rescue. That's how it all went on. I was actually really convinced by the product. Then the question of the Base system came up; I spent over two years looking into the Base system, talking a lot with the guys from Flugsau etc., who had it back then.
That's how I was able to get my first Base System and gradually dove deeper into the details. I also established closer contacts with AvaSport itself and tried to pass on the knowledge to colleagues and others. As a result, the Base System became more widespread in Switzerland again. I personally worked very closely with AvaSport, providing feedback and so on, which also led to me receiving certain prototypes and giving feedback again—it was a great collaboration. I was very happy with the products; they were always manufactured to a very high standard but reduced to the essentials.
It should be functional, it should be safe, it should be sustainable, well-made, but without any unnecessary bells and whistles that nobody needs. Then 2020 came around and suddenly I got the news that we unfortunately had to withdraw from the market. That was a shock at first. I was always really happy with the products, I knew many pilots who were also very happy with them, and then it became a question of what we can do with it. Everything worked out well and we found solutions on how we can move forward,
how I can actually bring the product back to the market under my name and how we can continue to produce it with the same quality and sustainability etc., because I believe those are the essential components of the GUR stuff as well. We can proudly say it's everything made in Europe, except for a small part of the base system that isn't manufactured in Europe. That's about the rings of the three-ring system; they come from the USA. Otherwise, from the thread to the fabric for the cover, to the webbing, to the eyelets, to simply everything, it's everything made in Europe.
And I think that also defines the quality behind it. Having the whole thing continue to be assembled in Bulgaria, manufactured in Bulgaria under fair conditions—I think that was always a major goal. If it continues, it should continue just as it was. It shouldn't change anywhere.
So I understand correctly that the end of Avasport is basically, virtually, an economic consequence of the Corona crisis.
Yes, not just that, but that was certainly like the icing on the cake somewhere. It just wasn't sustainable anymore, and accordingly, you have to find other solutions.
Well, Avasport used to have a very wide range of harnesses, all kinds of them, from beginner harnesses, long-distance harnesses, agro harnesses, and so on. But you don't carry all of those anymore; instead, you say you only have the agro harness that you have manufactured, right?
Exactly, so that's not actually just due to the switch from Avasport to Change Gravity, but that was already a very conscious decision by Avasport beforehand. I had many discussions and many conversations with them regarding this and I can absolutely understand the decision because, ultimately, the market is extremely lively today, there are many big players on the market, and that also means you have to keep up, you have to keep moving forward. Due to the fact that Avasport also has its origins in parachuting, they are actually very focused on robust, durable, and massive materials, which is naturally no longer the sought-after product in the paraglider scene today.
Other manufacturers have evolved massively, and that's why they made the conscious decision to say, "Hey, we're focusing on the Acro harnesses; we still have a kids' harness on the side that we can keep producing, but we don't want to enter areas like lie-down harnesses, lie-down seats, or school harnesses—we're actually taking those out of the range."
Yes, I think the competition has also become much larger over the years. If you look at how many paraglider companies—as brands—produce and even develop their own harnesses today, whereas they might have had them made by some contract manufacturer back in the day, where they were just branded. But nowadays, many of the big ones, like Advance, Nova, Ozone, BGD, etc., all have their own harnesses now. Air Design too, which wasn't the case before; back then there were a few large harness manufacturers, Avasport was one of them, and they basically had a large part of the market for themselves, but then they probably just collapsed from that point on.
That's certainly one of the reasons. I mean, Avasport in particular had a very large production where private labeling was a major part of the whole story, as they produced for many other manufacturers as well. Of course, especially with the shift toward the Far East, there was a change somewhere; production was relocated, and suddenly there were other options, or the larger manufacturers simply set up their own production facilities. And I think, ultimately, it's quite astonishing to me how many manufacturers we actually have on the market today.
Whether it's the paragliders, the harnesses, or the reserve parachutes, the market is huge and, yeah, I often wonder if everyone can actually survive in there. And that's certainly a good question that constantly occupies my mind.
What I find interesting about it is, I started back in 2004, so I've been involved as an observer for at least 20 years now. And for 20 years, I think, you keep reading that there has to be this major market consolidation at some point, that there can't be so many different paraglider brands. And then there are always individual paraglider brands that give up and disappear from the market, but apparently, exactly that many new, small designers—who used to work for a brand—then start their own brand, and so on. And in the end, there are no fewer.
Absolutely. So for me, the big question is also: how long can this actually keep going? Of course, everything always depends on the know-how and the experience you bring with you. And I believe that's exactly why there will certainly always be someone somewhere who says, "Hey, I've been designing for other companies for years, now I'm coming out, I finally want to be free, I want to be free from any specifications and just be able to go my own way, pursue my vision, and now I'm just going to give it a try." And I think the paraglider scene is a very, especially in the professional area, a very passionate scene, where it's not about...
...I'm making millions in profit now and can just sit back and watch the money roll in, but it's about the fact that I want to contribute something, I want to keep pushing my thing forward, I want to progress. Ultimately, whether I can live off of it or not is actually a bit secondary.
Are you talking about yourself too? So, is Changed Gravity—or at least the harness division of Changed Gravity—basically, how should I put it, a labor of love? Absolutely.
So I think there's really a lot of passion involved in that. It's just nice to see that it can keep going. Ultimately, in terms of the numbers we produce or deliver, we're far from it being economically interesting for anyone. But at the end of the day, it's also there—it's just a passion, it's fun to test things out, and now maybe play around with new trend systems again, make attempts, and maybe even fall properly from the sky myself again and have three wheels out for once.
It's just exciting to see what comes out of the development process, yeah.
You're just talking about development and these maybe new possibilities. Does that mean it could be that at some point Changed Gravity comes to market with a novel type of harness? That could certainly...
be, I absolutely don't want to rule that out. I think, yeah, we've sort of settled into the market to some extent now, we're slowly becoming a bit more present for people, we're of course trying to continue living out our core points, our philosophy, we've managed to stabilize production to some degree again, we've been able to build up certain stock levels, and now, I believe, the time has come to go back into development to see what comes out of it. And yeah, accordingly, it's absolutely not ruled out.
From
From the way you're describing it, I can hear that, okay, you probably couldn't live off the harness trade alone. Now, towards the end of the podcast, you can do a bit of self-promotion. So, what else do you do and what can people get from you, other than maybe buying a base harness from Changed Gravity and getting some great advice? What else can they get from you?
For me, it's obviously, and definitely as you said, living purely off harnesses—that's currently, mainly because it's a niche of a niche of a niche, absolutely illusory to aim for any kind of profitability there. Accordingly, I naturally have other pillars. One pillar or area is certainly further education in many different fields. For me, the goal is clearly to lead pilots toward independence with support, because I believe it's the same with paragliding as it is with driving a car.
You get your license and then you know where the throttle is, where the brake is, where the clutch is, but you don't have the experience yet. And now, either you gather that yourself and are ready to invest a lot of time, or you can get it from an instructor by attending a course. And I think that is exactly one area where I really enjoy being active, passing on my experience and my knowledge, specifically in the area of SIV training, but also in the area of material-specific courses, basepack courses, reserve parachute pack courses,
general equipment workshops, where it's simply about teaching people what they can actually check on their own equipment, what they can do themselves, how to handle it if I have a torn line on vacation, etc. I don't always need a repair center right away; I can do a lot myself. This is certainly an area we want to push forward as well, and it brings a lot of joy because you can see the development in people and you're also very close to them.
As a small side area, we of course also offer tandem flights. There, it's certainly the case that the focus is also on quality. It's not just about offering a flight; it's supposed to be an experience. What is also a very exciting area for me personally is the cooperation with other partner companies or companies around us, specifically here in the valley, collaborating with Flugsau, for example, where I also serve as a test pilot, where I'm also allowed to provide my feedback constructively, etc., where again, a bit of...
...a bit of pocket money, to see if you can maybe go on a week of flight vacation again or go out for a nice meal. That is very, very great, exactly. And yes, I think that's it. We'll see where ChangeGravity goes in the future. You have to
as a good pilot who wants to be involved in and live off of flying in some way, do you also have to be a bit of a lifestyle artist?
I definitely think so, I definitely do. I mean, the idea that I'm going to become a multimillionaire in the paragliding sector—I think you can just throw that out the window right now. It doesn't achieve anything.
Sure, it is also a bit, yeah, I think it's completely, paragliding is a lifestyle. The more intensely you do it, the more intensely you get into that lifestyle. And that's a very simple, very, yeah, uncertain lifestyle at times, where, yeah, where I maybe don't even fully know what's happening the day after tomorrow. Just like it is with flying. Yeah, today I still think the weather will be perfect the day after tomorrow. Tomorrow morning, the weather suddenly looks completely different for the day after tomorrow. And I have to be able to deal with that. And that's certainly quite a life story, yeah.
Is that uncertainty something that fascinates you? Or is it actually because you said at the beginning that you're not really a risk-taker, but rather you try to control it? What is it like, then, to immerse yourself in a lifestyle that actually demands a very high willingness to take risks, and having to deal with that uncertainty accordingly?
I think the framework you build for yourself can also be extremely important here. If I have an expensive car, say I still have loans running, an expensive apartment I have to finance, etc., then it's probably going to be relatively difficult to navigate that, and I'd also have a high risk. But if I'm willing to adjust my lifestyle accordingly to my work—I live relatively simply, I have a cheap location where I have my shop, I don't have to fly on vacation four or five times a year, but it's also enough for me to cycle down to the lake.
and then I'm happy. If I can set things up that way, then it's also a form of risk management, where my residual risk is kept at a minimum. And I believe you can shape that yourself,
however you want. Would you have a kind of base system for your life? If you say it's not working, then I'll just pull a line somewhere now and my current change-gravity system flies away, but is there something else carrying me that I can then land safely with again?
I absolutely believe it. On one hand, of course, my entire environment, which is certainly an extreme base system for
is,
what also keeps me going, what supports me. That is very, very valuable. And on the other side, it's certainly also good to know, I learned a trade once, I gained a lot of professional experience over ten years as a service technician. I can go back to that anytime, even if it's not in paragliding. Today, experienced, good mechanics are in demand, and accordingly, I have my backup plan. And if it doesn't work out, then that's how it is, we just go back.
Alright, Stefan, I hope you don't have to pull your base system at this point, unless it's voluntary. And otherwise, I definitely wish you much success with Change-Gravity, with everything you offer there, from harnesses to SIV training, consulting, and everything else. And thank you very much for your story. Thank you so much, Lucian.
Podz-Glidz is the podcast of the paraglider blog Looglides. If you'd like to get more of it, then please become a supporter of both projects. Podz-Glidz and Looglides are available ad-free and without a paywall. However, there is a lot of time, a lot of work, and quite a bit of cost behind them. As a supporter, you help ensure that both projects can continue to offer and develop for the paragliding scene. You decide the amount you give yourself. My non-binding suggestion is 60 euros a year, or about 5 euros a month. All the information on how your contribution reaches me can be found on the website looglides.blogspot.com. There, you'll find the "Support" menu item. Looglides is spelled Lu-Glidz.
I want to say thank you to all the supporters. The next episode of Podz-Glidz will be out in two weeks. Until then, don't fall from the sky. Ciao.