Any landing involves a wide range of problems. In order to reduce the probability of an accident, all these problems should be taken into consideration every time, and particularly when landing out.

    It is not always easy to evaluate a suitable landing field from a distance of three or four kilometres or even further, but there are a few ways by means of which things can be made easier.

    First of all, before attempting landings in unfamiliar locations, a pilot should practise landing where he or she feels at home, on his own landing field. A good exercise, familiar to all pilots but often underestimated, is that of trying to centre a target point that can be seen during the approach. Another exercise that can be performed on one's home landing-field is landing without using all the available space.

    Of course, the normal safety rules should be followed scrupulously. In these exercises, what we should try to achieve is not flying two metres above the trees on the edge of the field, but rather the security of being able to reach the position that we are aiming for, at the desired height and speed. So there is no need to skim over the neighbouring rooftops, or pick apples from the nearby orchard...

    Once we have gained extensive experience on our home landing field in various aerological conditions, we can start thinking about landing fields that we have never seen before, and the variables that have to be taken into consideration for the choice of a field and the approach.

    I would say that the fundamental factor is the size of the field, determined by the obstacles around and inside the field. Then there is the slope, and, only in third place, wind direction and speed. Another important point to be considered - when this is possible - is the vicinity of other possible landing fields. We will see why later.

    In actual fact, the importance of these factors varies from case to case. Wind direction is not a fundamental point if the wind speed is from 0 to 5 km/h, but it becomes crucial when, due to the limited space available in a given landing field, we need all the help possible in order to "hit the target". For similar reasons, if the wind speed is 35-40 km/h, only a very small patch of ground is necessary for landing, and our descent will be almost vertical. But if the landing field is surrounded by large obstacles, such as houses, industrial buildings, or dense, tall trees, the fact that such obstacles produce turbulence means that the further away they are, the better it will be.

    Another situation consists of landing on a slope. In this case, whatever the strength of the wind, the landing direction is determined purely by the slope. We will look at this subject more thoroughly later on. It is important, and it requires detailed consideration.

    Paraglider pilots may smile on reading how many factors have to be taken into account when landing with a hang-glider. Of course, as the performance of a wing increases, the amount of space necessary for manoeuvre also increases - though the efficiency of a hang-glider can be reduced during the landing approach by means of flaps, spoilers, drogue chutes etc. At the same time, a higher-performance craft gives you more choice, because you can glide further.

    In actual fact, there are very few places in which it is impossible to find a suitable landing field, given sufficient advance warning and enough altitude.

    Let us take a closer look at the factors considered up to here. The size of the landing field can be evaluated from an appreciable distance, and with sufficient experience (acquired by means of the exercises mentioned above), a pilot will soon learn how to estimate the amount of space necessary to make a safe landing.

    The useful area of a landing field is strongly affected by the obstacles around or on the field. While buildings, trees and ditches are obvious from a long way away, electric cables, telephone cables, cable hoists, wire fencing and vertical irrigation pipes are far harder to see. This is why, if we can choose between a single isolated field and another with alternative fields around it, we should opt for the latter. In that way, if, late in the approach to landing, we notice unexpected obstacles, we can opt for another nearby field - to which we shall have already given at least a quick look.

    Suspended cables are the hardest obstacles to see and the most dangerous, particularly if they are carrying electricity. It is obvious that they should be identified by searching for their respective poles or pylons, because the cable itself is far less visible. Once the pylons have been identified, they will become points of reference during the approach. If the field is so small that we have to make our final approach at a height lower than that of the pylons, we may have to fly alongside the cables. In this case, it is important not to watch the cables, but we should just determine their direction and make sure that we don't get too close. In other words, if we are flying parallel to the cables, we should not be looking to one side, at right-angles to our direction of flight, but much further ahead, as if to compare our direction of flight with the direction of the electrical cables (indicated by the position of two successive pylons). The angle between the direction of flight and the direction of our line of sight should, in my opinion, never be greater than 30°. This is because we tend to direct our wings where we are looking. If our gaze is fixed on an obstacle, we will tend to fly straight towards it.

    The idea of approaching a field by flying under the cables that border it should be considered only if there are no alternatives. In this case, a pilot flying with a kingpostless glider such as the Laminar Zero7 will be at an advantage when compared to a pilot who has a metre or more of king post above him. Not to mention a paraglider pilot who has a wing eight metres above his head.

    In such a situation, our speed during the final approach should not be too high. If, when we are near the cables, we discover an area of uplift, we have to be able to rapidly increase our speed in order to lose height. For the same reason, when we are flying a glider, we have to be ready to release the brakes or, even better, perform symmetrical folds ("big-ears").

    While this sort of approach is definitely inadvisable for a hang-glider, it is even more so for a paraglider. However the paraglider's excellent landing characteristics makes this sort of decision highly improbable.