Don't you guys have something similar for your aircraft? It strike me as insane that it seems to be accepted that a "dangerous" or "critical" phase of the launch, with few options for recovery, exists. 1st Nov 2011 23:49
When I used to do static towing, we were always very careful to keep the nose low until you had a safe altitude for a stall recovery, after which you could push the bar full out and zoom up to a few thousand feet at a stupendous rate and angle of climb. I don't think that any aspect of this launch sequence is unrecoverable.
In some ways, aerotowing should be safer - I have never done it, but wouldn't have expected that pilots would ever need such high climb angles as we used for static-towing. However, gusts of wind, pilot induced oscillations or other factors could cause less experienced pilots to get into unrecoverable situations if they weren't picked up on in time. Even then, the tug operator should be able to release the tow cable (as can the pilot).
One very significant difference between hang-gliding and most other forms of flight, is that 99% of the training is carried out solo. Although dual flights are possible, and useful for things like stall appreciation, on a hang glider you're PIC from the first flight - which will be a very short, straight one. However, inevitably every pilot is 'tested' sooner or later by something unexpected coming up, and that test is also generally experienced whilst flying solo.
I did see two static-tow accidents where student pilots froze and stalled out at altitudes of perhaps 30 and 60 feet, without much injury. I was fairly amazed by the second accident, as I initially thought that it didn't look survivable and the glider was wrecked. Both pilots quit immediately afterwards.