On Mar 19, 3:14*pm, wrote:
"I think understand, Tommyto is Derek Copeland using one of his
hundreds of aliases. "

Let us get at least this part straight - my name is Thomas Vallarino,
not Derek Copeland and I do not even know the gentleman.

Well, that's incredibly good news for many reasons.

"My measurements suggest the exact opposite - that increasing the
acceleration REDUCES the maximum AOA."

You can believe whatever you want to.

Hard engineering data ALWAYS trumps calculations and predictions no
matter how logical they seem. I'll believe measured data instead of
calculated results any day.

"Just think about it. Why does the tail go down into the ground at the
beginning of the launch, despite full forward stick?"

And why does it stop there? It hit the ground, right? Now you have
hard acceleration and NO rotation. As the speed increases, the pilot
continues to hold full down elevator which increases in effectiveness
with the square of the airspeed.

As the glider leaves the ground, the inertial rotation will begin but
if the acceleration continues, the elevator effectiveness will also
continue to increase with the square of the airspeed. Rotation can't
happen instantly because the glider has mass and rotational inertia.
In fact, the pilot has to start backing off the down elevator to allow
the glider to rotate into the climb.

Now, contrast this with a slow acceleration. The glider staggers into
the air and the nose-up inertial couple starts the rotation but the
low speed and acceleration doesn't provide adequate control. The nose
rises as the pilot struggles to control it with inadequate
airspeed.....

I've collected stories on this type of accident for decades and they
ALWAYS happen with slow acceleration.