All,

I presented at the SSA conference this last winter on the efforts of our club to build XC soaring pilots. This has been an emphasis for me for many years (hence my moniker SoaringXCellence), to the point I went and personally bought a G103 just so I could provide the training (since been sold, congratulations Coastal Soaring).

In the last 12 years the Willamette Valley club has gone from an average of 50-60 active pilots, to over 80 (we finished the last year with over 120, out of Portland Oregon!!)

I attribute this growth to the support the club now gives to members that want to go XC. Fifteen years ago we did NOT permit club gliders to be flown XC. This meant that potential XC pilots had to get their own ship before attempting ANY XC flights. Quite a deterrent! We had a few syndicates but most XC flights were in single owner ships. It was the only way to participate.

Several years ago several of us began an XC soaring Special Interest Group (SIG) in the club and met frequently to discuss flights and generally support each others efforts (we agreed that we would retrieve for each other as needed). Several of the club officers were in that group and slowly steered the direction of the club to embrace and allow XC flight.

We now have 3 single-place ships that are set up and available for XC flights (another if you count the SGS 1-26) and there is competition for their time on any reasonable soaring day. We have a Twin Astir for dual XC flights (as well as the Blanik 1-23, which I do take XC!).

The result is that from 2004 to 2014 we have grown from 6 pilots trying OLC to over 20 on any given year. We also have champions in the region 8 Sports class (congratulations, Joe Steele) that only begin flying 4 years ago.

I'm still the primary XC training instructor and could fill my time with XC students most days the field is open.

Another factor in the growth is a special training program called the "5-pack". This is a program that provide more than just a single "sled-ride" flight where skills can be developed and a more complete exposure of the sport can occur. For a cost of $450 the student gets a 3-month club membership, 5 tows to 3000 feet, aircraft rental and instructor for up to an hour. The 3-month membership allows the student more time to complete the flights (rather than just one weekend). This year we are currently restricting the number of 5-packs due to the instructor's student load. We can't handle more at the moment! I think we're teaching 10-15 currently. This is in addition to the other club pilots moving through the training from Student to Commercial.

We have about a 70-80% conversion of the 5-pack to a full club membership. Most are still with the club after 5 years.

SO that's the Willamette Valley effort to grow the XC pilot pupolation. I'd like to hear other efforts and ideas.

Sorry for the long post,

MB

MB -

Does Willamette Valley assign an instructor to a student in some fashion, or are you on a purely-rotation basis for instructors? Also, I understand that Tow Pilots may get compensated for towing... Are instructors compensated somehow as well? You seem to be doing well compared to some other clubs in your region (like my local club near Seattle); and we'd love to hear more about your operations.

In my experience one of the issues leading to a lack of XC pilots is that basic training (especially in club environments) tends to be a very drawn-out affair. First, weekends and good weather limit the number of days people are interested in flying (or, in some clubs, interest in running field operations despite student interest). Second, there are often major inconsistencies between instructors; who are often volunteers that mean well, but have little incentive to work on unified instructional standards or close cooperation with fellow CFIGs or their students. Many clubs (including my local one) use rotating instructors, so students must constantly re-adapt to different instructing styles and methods. Plus, in that system, each instructor has to spend a flight evaluating where the student is at before new instruction can actually take place.

Also, many clubs operate on a "first-come, first-served" basis for training.. I've seen that lead to instructors doing 8-10 flights in a day, but each student only getting 1 flight. This is horrible for everyone: it wears out the instructors _and_ it doesn't give the students much of a learning opportunity. Furthermore, students feel like they've wasted their entire day for only a small return on their investment of time... And time is a big deal these days for most folks - regardless of your age or income-level.

Bottom-line: Soaring is already at a handicap when compared to other activities, because it requires you to build several layers of skills before having lasting fun experiences (i.e. staying loft for long periods, going XC, flying badges, and generally feeling independent & confident). We don't need to insert extra barriers that slow down the opportunities for learning and involvement.

--Noel

> Noel wade wrote:
>one of the issues leading to a lack of XC pilots is that basic training (especially in club environments) tends to be a very drawn-out affair


Noel, you are quite right barriers and inconsistent instruction is the name of the game in most club environments, but there is a way around this problem. Contiguous instruction over a short period of time achieves best results. Course instruction would achieve this but the objection is always we don't have the resources to run week long courses. So don't run week long courses run the course over a number of weekends and reduce the tow height to 1,200-1,500 feet or better still run a winch operation. Another refinement would be to charge up front for the course and add as an option a small fee to cover the first years membership. The benefits:

Consistent instruction
Rapid advancement
Guaranteed attendance by both instructors and students
Ground school in the non flyable periods
Students learn the operation and the benefits of group cooperation
Instructors and Students are guaranteed their time is not wasted
I am sure you can add a few more

Andy Gough

Andy - Yes I have many of the same thoughts & opinions. You talk of charging a fee: I think some people are overly-concerned about making soaring "cheap", but this is a false approach when there are so many less-expensive hobbies out there (including R/C plans and paragliding/hang-gliding). I think we should try to keep costs reasonable; but c'mon people, a Cessna with an instructor costs around $200/hr these days!

Even if costs rise some from their present levels, Soaring is way more money-efficient than that. Its just way less time-efficient, due to the manner in which many clubs/field-operations are run. I've got no problem with the idea of throwing up a (low) fiscal bar for entry, if it enables better operations or training. And requiring an upfront commitment (such as you're proposing) helps discourage the folks who aren't passionate and motivated. HOWEVER, if you offer such a program and get a commitment from students then you *must* be able to follow through with it. And you have to make sure that people feel they're getting their money's worth or you've done more harm than good. Providing that value takes organization and dedication, though - and securing those commitments from people in an existing embedded culture is tough...

On a separate note, I'm still working on earning my CFIG but I am surprised folks don't use varying tow-heights based on the phase of instruction the student is in. For example: I think instructors should consider 4,000 to 5,000 foot tows when they're working on things like rudder coordination, steep turns, stalls, slips, and slow-flight. Give the student a long-enough flight to practice maneuvers 2 or 3 times in a row (similar to many SEL airplane training flights, which are often 1 - 1.5 hours in length and involve practicing a maneuver a couple of times in succession). When training changes its focus and the landing pattern becomes a point of emphasis, there's certainly a strong case for pattern-height tows and/or winch-launches. In fact, there's even a case for setting aside some part of the day's operations to let a student and his/her instructor do these practice landings back-to-back (i.e. they land, pull up to the front of the line, and immediately take another pattern tow).

--Noel

Just to mention the baby elephant with very big ears that is circling just above pattern altitude:

www.glidercfi.com and http://www.condorxcsoaring.com/

Re: "isn't that exactly what the European 20M class is for?"

BIll, as that's a racing class which to me is an even more demanding set of instruction, that wouldn't be a feasible instruction means for volume processing of co-pilots. I think you may mean that such a class would foster more dual XC soaring in general. That I'd agree with esp. given the aging pilot population (older pilots flying with a safety pilot), and more people enjoying two seat flying, I know I do..... so long as they don't smell bad....

It still comes down to bringing together at least 4 variables at once: two pilots, weather and ship availability. The tightest constraint I see is the PIC who would do the mentoring, paid or not. How to incent more of them to provide time in this role?

I wonder if the old hands in XC have forgotten how big the issue of safely landing out looms in the mind of the aspiring XC pilot?

My perspective is that efforts to foster XC should focus on thoroughly preparing novices to land out (in fields and at unfamiliar airports). XC novices are not babies. We will take the initiative to learn all the other fine points of XC and to initiate all the necessary changes in club guidelines and structure. Your coaching is invaluable, and we will ask for it once we get the XC bug.

I'd love to do more simulated landout training in my area like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAOCd18Bv8Y

Everything about XC beyond land outs seems very doable to me. I'm an XC pre-novice until I'm prepared to safely land out. Get me over that hurdle and I can manage the rest.

And from what I gather in my area, the restrictions on using my club's aircraft for XC followed from bad experiences with landouts in the past. QED

As I understand the 20M racing class is the hope it to pair rookie racing pilots with veterans.

On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 6:46:25 PM UTC-6, Kemp wrote:
> Re: "isn't that exactly what the European 20M class is for?"
>
>
>
> BIll, as that's a racing class which to me is an even more demanding set of instruction, that wouldn't be a feasible instruction means for volume processing of co-pilots. I think you may mean that such a class would foster more dual XC soaring in general. That I'd agree with esp. given the aging pilot population (older pilots flying with a safety pilot), and more people enjoying two seat flying, I know I do..... so long as they don't smell bad...
>
>
>
> It still comes down to bringing together at least 4 variables at once: two pilots, weather and ship availability. The tightest constraint I see is the PIC who would do the mentoring, paid or not. How to incent more of them to provide time in this role?

On 7/16/2014 6:46 PM, son_of_flubber wrote:
> I wonder if the old hands in XC have forgotten how big the issue of safely
> landing out looms in the mind of the aspiring XC pilot?

Maybe some, but not all/this guy! I've long thought "the off-field-landing
hurdle" probably THE most significant one "on the normal road to XC soaring
competence."

> My perspective is that efforts to foster XC should focus on thoroughly
> preparing novices to land out (in fields and at unfamiliar airports).

I completely agree...and my training (very informally, but also very
effectively) did. My "pre-XC" training consisted entirely of: 1) instruction
(patterns/spot landings/verbal advice); 2) reading/brain-picking; and 3)
imagination. The first glider I ever saw in a field was the one I'd just
piloted there; it had not been one of the day's goals at takeoff time.

> XC
> novices are not babies. We will take the initiative to learn all the other
> fine points of XC and to initiate all the necessary changes in club
> guidelines and structure. Your coaching is invaluable, and we will ask for
> it once we get the XC bug.

I suspect "the magic poll" would overwhelmingly concur your attitude is
"ideal" and "just what the XC Soaring Doctor ordered." It reflects my own when
I was convincing myself thermals weren't airport-centric...an attitude in my
case probably somewhat self-constructed and instructor-influenced. My primary
CFIG was a very matter-of-fact sort who tended to see humor in the very many
self-inflicted situations almost certain to accompany XC soaring. He certainly
laughed a lot at my eager, silly questions!

> I'd love to do more simulated landout training in my area like this:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAOCd18Bv8Y

"Go for it!" if you have the opportunity...but know such training & exposure
is far from necessary, to safely learn - and apply! - the basics: rudimentary
navigation; always keeping a perceived safe landing field within conservative
reach; being mentally prepared to USE that area (sooner, rather than later,
should that little voice in your skull begin talking to you); applying what
your instruction conveyed to you about "the proper way[s]" to asses how any
approach is progressing; spot selection, speed control; etc.

> Everything about XC beyond land outs seems very doable to me. I'm an XC
> pre-novice until I'm prepared to safely land out. Get me over that hurdle
> and I can manage the rest.

And - though there's many ways to "get there" - you can probably get yourself
over "that hurdle" much more easily than you may presently imagine. All it'll
take is being a hair below "prudently making it back to your home-base
pattern" height, and not connect with expected lift. (BTDT! As have many
others, I suspect...) In safety, pattern, and actual landing terms, everything
was a non-event. In MENTAL terms, not so much! And all I'd set out to do that
day was (very briefly, and one time only) get one thermal beyond the home
base, simply to convince myself that thermals DID in fact exist in that region
surrounding my home-base training area (i.e. go from "pre-novice" to
"experienced"). Everything worked as I'd imagined, planned and discussed with
my instructor, except that the SECOND thermal I needed to get back home didn't
exist (a timing thing - a new, blue, stable airmass was literally on my tail
as I chased my first cloud-n-thermal beyond the training area). I was more
embarrassed than alarmed at the turn of events, especially when my
instructor/crew brought ME the brewskis on the retrieve (saved until after
reassembly at the airport), a whopping two or so road miles from the training
field.

> And from what I gather in my area, the restrictions on using my club's
> aircraft for XC followed from bad experiences with landouts in the past.
> QED

"Sigh." In my observational experience an all-too-common reaction to what
usually is some blend of
inadequate-instruction/poor-interpersonal-dynamics...rather than "upping
everyone's game," the easy/coward's/predictably-self-defeating way out is
chosen. Having been a member of three clubs in three widely separated regions
of the country, insofar as encouraging tyro XC in club equipment is concerned,
two "did things right" and one "applied the frightened turtle approach.".
Fortunately the turtle club was my SECOND club experience, by which time I
owned a 1-26. Still, their (understandable, but deplorable) attitude made me
hesitate a season or so before joining that club. (Happily, things/they
changed not too long after my job took me to my 3rd club.)

YMMV.

Bob W.

MB,

Thanks for the talk you gave at Reno. It was good and would have really dovetailed well into what Kemp and I were going to talk about with the XC Mentoring that we have done. I agreed that Hugh and Gordo had just done something amazing and deserved a stage to talk about that.

As Kemp mentioned, we really need to get the Dual XC capable fleet active. I know of too many amazing ships for XC training that sit idle in their trailer almost all of the time. Insuring them commercially is essentially not viable, so just give away the knowledge for the betterment of soaring.

Noel, for your club issues around instruction, do the instructors get paid? While I am a fan of low cost instruction, our instructors all charge for their time and we don't have any lack of willingness to pay for that time. The payments are direct to the instructor, not through the club and I think that works. Instructors are free to set their own rates, although we have a special deal for instructors to get free monthly membership if they limit their rates and are available on the field a couple of days a month.

One frustration I have in trying to motivate and introduce XC to people is a lack of interest/motivation. I've asked about interest in XC, send out forms to collect information from interested pilots on what they want to learn, but very few take the initiative to self assess and highlight elements that they want or need to work on.

There are exceptions to that of course. Those people are usually making huge leaps forward once strapped in the front of the Duo and being forced to think two or three moves farther ahead than they've ever been thinking in a club ship like a 1-26.

The answer for me is to continue to throw the offers out there and really pour the energy into those people that show initiative and promise. Ignite that fire. For others that are somewhat interested, I still try to get them up with me and show them what a 30 mile final glide is like when they've never been 6 miles from the runway before. You never know who might suddenly get the bug from seeing life beyond a 2-33.

One important thing. You don't need to be a CFIG to teach XC soaring. If the person is a licensed pilot, there is almost no benefit to the CFIG aspect. You need to be a good teacher, but the certificate is mostly irrelevant unless the person really needs to log instruction time for some reason. I think we rely too heavily on our limited CFIG for what really is mentoring.

Morgan

On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 7:46:50 PM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:
> I wonder if the old hands in XC have forgotten how big the issue of safely landing out looms in the mind of the aspiring XC pilot?

Whoa, wait a minute - what does XC have to do with landing out? Last time I checked, there is NO guarantee that a local flight in a glider will end up on an airfield! And if you look at NTSB accident reports (thank you Tom Knauff!), a surprising number of "local" instructional and solo flight end up "aux vaches"! What you are saying is that our (USA) training system does not put enough emphasis on a basic skill in flying gliders - the technique for picking a suitable landout field and accomplishing a safe pattern, landing, and recovery of the glider to the home field. THIS SHOULD BE DONE BEFORE GETTING YOUR LICENSE! It is not some fancy skill reserved to those lucky glassholes who disappear for hours on end (but sometimes need to be retrieved from some lonely field, having to buy dinner for the ravenous retrieve crew).

> My perspective is that efforts to foster XC should focus on thoroughly preparing novices to land out (in fields and at unfamiliar airports). XC novices are not babies. We will take the initiative to learn all the other fine points of XC and to initiate all the necessary changes in club guidelines and structure. Your coaching is invaluable, and we will ask for it once we get the XC bug.

If your instructor didn't begin preparing you for the inevitable landout prior to solo, and continue until your checkride, then he has done you a great disservice (but is probably typical of most US instructors who themselves have never landed out) and reflects the FAA's complacency in our poor training requirements. If the Silver badge was a requirement for a glider PPL (like in Germany) that would probably change - but I don't see that ever happening in the US!


> Everything about XC beyond land outs seems very doable to me. I'm an XC pre-novice until I'm prepared to safely land out. Get me over that hurdle and I can manage the rest.

Get yourself over "that hurdle". Read everything about landouts you can find (many club sites have information), talk to pilots who have done them, practice accurate patterns until you KNOW you can land your glider over an obstacle into a short field, walk the fields around your gliderfield and imagine landing in them, pick out fields you would land in while driving your car or even on local flights. If you can get some dual time in a motorglider or lightplane to scout out landable fields and check out your decision process, all the better.

> And from what I gather in my area, the restrictions on using my club's aircraft for XC followed from bad experiences with landouts in the past. QED

See above. A serious glider pilot has to do the homework himself. Then go out and fly! If you have a plan and follow it (which includes always having a suitable field picked out EARLY enough to really check it out) then the actual landout is actually kinda fun...I'ts cool to get out of your glider in some quiet little field and realize you are probably the first person to ever land a plane there - and then get to explain to the locals how "the wind quit"!

OTOH - A rushed landout is ABSOLUTELY TERRIFYING! BTDT. Have a plan, and when the time comes, execute it.

Kirk
66
(My last landout was on 2 July, in a nice cut wheat field in southern Illinois - it's on OLC if you want to see how it evolved - US flight #82 for that day, in Google maps you can see the field I landed in and the pattern I flew to get into it.)

On Thursday, July 17, 2014 12:26:40 PM UTC-5, kirk.stant wrote:

> Kirk
>
> 66
>
> (My last landout was on 2 July, in a nice cut wheat field in southern Illinois - it's on OLC if you want to see how it evolved - US flight #82 for that day, in Google maps you can see the field I landed in and the pattern I flew to get into it.)

Better yet, download the .igc file and watch it on GlidePort - Really neat!

http://glideport.aero

Kirk
66

On Thursday, July 17, 2014 11:26:40 AM UTC-6, kirk.stant wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 7:46:50 PM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:
>
> > I wonder if the old hands in XC have forgotten how big the issue of safely landing out looms in the mind of the aspiring XC pilot?
>
>
>
> Whoa, wait a minute - what does XC have to do with landing out? Last time I checked, there is NO guarantee that a local flight in a glider will end up on an airfield! And if you look at NTSB accident reports (thank you Tom Knauff!), a surprising number of "local" instructional and solo flight end up "aux vaches"! What you are saying is that our (USA) training system does not put enough emphasis on a basic skill in flying gliders - the technique for picking a suitable landout field and accomplishing a safe pattern, landing, and recovery of the glider to the home field. THIS SHOULD BE DONE BEFORE GETTING YOUR LICENSE! It is not some fancy skill reserved to those lucky glassholes who disappear for hours on end (but sometimes need to be retrieved from some lonely field, having to buy dinner for the ravenous retrieve crew).
>
>
>
> > My perspective is that efforts to foster XC should focus on thoroughly preparing novices to land out (in fields and at unfamiliar airports). XC novices are not babies. We will take the initiative to learn all the other fine points of XC and to initiate all the necessary changes in club guidelines and structure. Your coaching is invaluable, and we will ask for it once we get the XC bug.
>
>
>
> If your instructor didn't begin preparing you for the inevitable landout prior to solo, and continue until your checkride, then he has done you a great disservice (but is probably typical of most US instructors who themselves have never landed out) and reflects the FAA's complacency in our poor training requirements. If the Silver badge was a requirement for a glider PPL (like in Germany) that would probably change - but I don't see that ever happening in the US!
>
>
>
>
>
> > Everything about XC beyond land outs seems very doable to me. I'm an XC pre-novice until I'm prepared to safely land out. Get me over that hurdle and I can manage the rest.
>
>
>
> Get yourself over "that hurdle". Read everything about landouts you can find (many club sites have information), talk to pilots who have done them, practice accurate patterns until you KNOW you can land your glider over an obstacle into a short field, walk the fields around your gliderfield and imagine landing in them, pick out fields you would land in while driving your car or even on local flights. If you can get some dual time in a motorglider or lightplane to scout out landable fields and check out your decision process, all the better.
>
>
>
> > And from what I gather in my area, the restrictions on using my club's aircraft for XC followed from bad experiences with landouts in the past. QED
>
>
>
> See above. A serious glider pilot has to do the homework himself. Then go out and fly! If you have a plan and follow it (which includes always having a suitable field picked out EARLY enough to really check it out) then the actual landout is actually kinda fun...I'ts cool to get out of your glider in some quiet little field and realize you are probably the first person to ever land a plane there - and then get to explain to the locals how "the wind quit"!
>
>
>
> OTOH - A rushed landout is ABSOLUTELY TERRIFYING! BTDT. Have a plan, and when the time comes, execute it.
>
>
>
> Kirk
>
> 66
>
> (My last landout was on 2 July, in a nice cut wheat field in southern Illinois - it's on OLC if you want to see how it evolved - US flight #82 for that day, in Google maps you can see the field I landed in and the pattern I flew to get into it.)

In the UK, the Bronze Badge program was XC preparation as is the SSA Bronze Badge http://www.ssa.org/BadgesAndRecords#Bronze

At my first UK club, we were fortunate to have a small grass private strip nearby to allow an initial 'off field' experience as part of the Bronze completion.

Frank Whiteley

On Thursday, July 17, 2014 1:26:40 PM UTC-4, kirk.stant wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 7:46:50 PM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:
>
> > I wonder if the old hands in XC have forgotten how big the issue of safely landing out looms in the mind of the aspiring XC pilot?
>
>
>
> Whoa, wait a minute - what does XC have to do with landing out?
..
Sure, a landout for me at this stage grows more inevitable with every flight. But novices make a very conservative estimation of final glide to pattern altitude, they only fly upwind of the airport, they stay above 'the funnel' etc..


>What you are saying is that our (USA) training system does not put enough emphasis on a basic skill in flying gliders - the technique for picking a suitable landout field and accomplishing a safe pattern, landing, and recovery of the glider to the home field.

I'm not saying that at all. Maybe that's true on average, but I've trained extensively with some of the best CFIs in the USA. Several are active or former XC pilots. I understand the theory very well and I habitually evaluate landout fields from the air and the ground.

But I've also done an hour of simulated landout training in a LSA with a CFI who has done many landouts. I learned that that kind of training is invaluable. The experience started to integrate the book learning and discussion into concrete flying ability. Several people suggest that I should do that integration on-the-fly on my own in a field some day. That's what they did. Good luck pal!

I've read Tom Knauff's opinion that many active XC pilots are unprepared to land out and over-confident in their ability to land out. I've read Tom's opinion that simulated landout training in a motorglider is very cost-effective training and that people make huge gains in their ability to select good fields and properly set up patterns with just a few hours of practice, and that simulated landout training justifiably increases confidence and reduces mistake-inducing land out stress.

I've spoken with a top shelf CFI from the UK who emphatically states "training to land out in a motor glider is the ONLY sensible approach". The CFIs who have access to motorgliders probably agree with that, and those who don't have access to motorgliders naturally say that "simulated landout training is good" but not necessary.

I've done an hour of simulated landout training in an LSA and based on that experience I'd like to do more in the rather difficult to landout region where I fly. I think that if that sort of training was more generally available and promoted, that it would increase the number of pilots interested in XC.

BTW, I've also done a few hours in a Duo with a top-shelf XC pilot at a world class soaring location. The general thrust of this thread is to make those opportunities more available, and I would certainly like to see that happen. It is something that I would like to do more of in the future, but that level of flying is so far above my level that it hardly seems relevant at that the moment.

On Thu, 17 Jul 2014 16:33:14 -0700, son_of_flubber wrote:

> BTW, I've also done a few hours in a Duo with a top-shelf XC pilot at a
> world class soaring location. The general thrust of this thread is to
> make those opportunities more available, and I would certainly like to
> see that happen. It is something that I would like to do more of in the
> future, but that level of flying is so far above my level that it hardly
> seems relevant at that the moment.
>
To back up what Frank said: I learnt, and still fly at, Cambridge Gliding
Club in the UK, which has a very strong XC culture. At a guess more
members go XC than don't and it is expected that club gliders will go XC:
on a good day its quite common to find both our ASK-21s flying 80-100km
out and return trips if the students are close enough to solo to benefit
from the experience. Yes, many of our instructors are good XC pilots. I
went solo after 6 months (learning off the winch in ASK21 and G103a with
a Puch for spin training), converted to the club's SZD Juniors and spent
the next 12 months getting my Bronze badge and, along the way, picking up
Silver C height and duration legs as well as the soaring flights needed
for the Bronze XC extension. Then I did the navigation, field selection
and field landing practise training in the club's Schreibe SF-25 TMG.
These are not pass/fail exercises: you do it until both you and the
instructor are happy you can navigate and handle a landout. The first
good day after that I was briefed and sent off in a Junior to get Silver
distance by flying the 68 km to Rattlesden and landing there: friends
brought the trailer and we de-rigged and trailered the Junior back. I was
monumentally slow - took me 3.5 hours to get to Rattlesden, but I did get
there and was able to retrieve one of that crew a month or so later when
he flew the same course.

IMO this is a near ideal way to learn the basic XC skills: going for
Bronze and Silver more or less straight after soloing keeps the momentum
going and, equally important, gives the new glider pilot something
achievable to aim for instead of getting bored flying round the field and
then wandering off to try something else.

Meanwhile, a student can be learning to stay up while flying round a
course by flying mini-triangles round the home field while working on the
Bronze badge. This can be done without getting out of gliding range of
home and is a far more useful way of building hours and XC skills than
aimless bimbling about near the field. Its more fun too.

Using a TMG is a very good way to do navigation and field landing
exercises as it flys at a similar speed to a glider and a good instructor
will know how to reduce the power enough to get a good approximation of a
30:1 glide ratio for field landing practise. The student will be familiar
with the glidepath control since the SF-25, like many other TMGs, has
airbrakes.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

"BTW, I've also done a few hours in a Duo with a top-shelf XC pilot at a world class soaring location. The general thrust of this thread is to make those opportunities more available, and I would certainly like to see that happen. It is something that I would like to do more of in the future, but that level of flying is so far above my level that it hardly seems relevant at that the moment."

***but that level of flying is so far above my level that it hardly seems relevant at that the moment.***

I think the last sentence is an important one to address. Working with the right mentor or instructor, there are so many ways to advance from whatever your current state is.

One of the key things I go through with anyone that I am mentoring is a basic assessment of their skills/weaknesses and things they want to work on. As Kemp mentioned, if their thermalling and speed to fly skills aren't up to the task, you leave that out of the equation and focus on strategy. I will often work with people that need better thermalling skills or speed control. The key is to just pick a few things to work on actively and then passively absorb a lot of the other activity all while enjoying an XC flight that you might not do yourself.

It's good to understand what you aren't ready to do by yourself or that maybe you can't absorb a massive amount all at once, but I do see a lot of people that stand a lot to gain from working with a mentor/instructor well before they think they are ready.

Sounds like you've done quite a bit of prep compared to what I'm used to seeing.

Morgan

On Thursday, July 17, 2014 6:33:14 PM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:

> Sure, a landout for me at this stage grows more inevitable with every flight. But novices make a very conservative estimation of final glide to pattern altitude, they only fly upwind of the airport, they stay above 'the funnel' etc..

Sure they do - right up to the day they don't and end up in a field ;^)

It's kinda like skiing - how long do you stay on the bunny slope? And when you move to the more challenging trails, do you ever fall down? Landing out (and not necessarily in a field - any un-planned landing really counts and with a good glide computer an airfield can usually be kept in range) is the soaring equivalent of falling down - if you don't do it you are not pushing yourself!

Unless, of course, you are (as Pez would describe) a twirlybird - but I don't get that impression!

> >What you are saying is that our (USA) training system does not put enough emphasis on a basic skill in flying gliders - the technique for picking a suitable landout field and accomplishing a safe pattern, landing, and recovery of the glider to the home field.
>
>
>
> I'm not saying that at all. Maybe that's true on average, but I've trained extensively with some of the best CFIs in the USA. Several are active or former XC pilots. I understand the theory very well and I habitually evaluate landout fields from the air and the ground.

Great!


> But I've also done an hour of simulated landout training in a LSA with a CFI who has done many landouts. I learned that that kind of training is invaluable. The experience started to integrate the book learning and discussion into concrete flying ability. Several people suggest that I should do that integration on-the-fly on my own in a field some day. That's what they did. Good luck pal!

Even better - you sound more prepared than most XC pilots I know!


> I've read Tom Knauff's opinion that many active XC pilots are unprepared to land out and over-confident in their ability to land out. I've read Tom's opinion that simulated landout training in a motorglider is very cost-effective training and that people make huge gains in their ability to select good fields and properly set up patterns with just a few hours of practice, and that simulated landout training justifiably increases confidence and reduces mistake-inducing land out stress.

Totally agree...and would add that even Condor has a lot to add to training for landouts - our local scenery even has a designated landout field in it..


> I've spoken with a top shelf CFI from the UK who emphatically states "training to land out in a motor glider is the ONLY sensible approach". The CFIs who have access to motorgliders probably agree with that, and those who don't have access to motorgliders naturally say that "simulated landout training is good" but not necessary.

Unfortunately, in the US two-place motorgliders are rare - but lightplanes are not. A low and slow flight around the local area checking out potential landout fields is almost as useful - which you have also done...


> I've done an hour of simulated landout training in an LSA and based on that experience I'd like to do more in the rather difficult to landout region where I fly. I think that if that sort of training was more generally available and promoted, that it would increase the number of pilots interested in XC.

You sound almost over-prepared. Landing out safely is a process, since you can't know ahead of time where it's going to happen and check out every possible field. Once you have that process nailed - go!

But I also think "fear of landouts" is used as an excuse by many pilots, who simply do not want to venture away from the home field. What percentage of US glider pilots actually fly XC? It's not really about money - 1-26s are cheap and in some ways are great XC gliders (can land anywhere and the retrieves tend to be short).


> BTW, I've also done a few hours in a Duo with a top-shelf XC pilot at a world class soaring location. The general thrust of this thread is to make those opportunities more available, and I would certainly like to see that happen. It is something that I would like to do more of in the future, but that level of flying is so far above my level that it hardly seems relevant at that the moment.

I've heard that so many times. "Why doesn't someone with lots of experience take the time to hold my hand and take me XC?". Because those guys are going XC, that's why! It's not that complicated - get a glider, make sure the varios work, put air in the trailer tires, then go! You learn by doing.

Kirk
66

Thanks for your enlightening post that discusses real solutions to growing club membership, rather than whining about why membership is declining. I talked to one airline pilot yesterday who was his club's chief tow pilot, instructor and mechanic who couldn't fly on the weekends because of his job. Yet they still demanded that he pay the same dues as everyone else! He resigned.
Tom

On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 7:28:38 PM UTC-5, SoaringXCellence wrote:
> All,
>
>
>
> I presented at the SSA conference this last winter on the efforts of our club to build XC soaring pilots. This has been an emphasis for me for many years (hence my moniker SoaringXCellence), to the point I went and personally bought a G103 just so I could provide the training (since been sold, congratulations Coastal Soaring).
>
>
>
> In the last 12 years the Willamette Valley club has gone from an average of 50-60 active pilots, to over 80 (we finished the last year with over 120, out of Portland Oregon!!)
>
>
>
> I attribute this growth to the support the club now gives to members that want to go XC. Fifteen years ago we did NOT permit club gliders to be flown XC. This meant that potential XC pilots had to get their own ship before attempting ANY XC flights. Quite a deterrent! We had a few syndicates but most XC flights were in single owner ships. It was the only way to participate.
>
>
>
> Several years ago several of us began an XC soaring Special Interest Group (SIG) in the club and met frequently to discuss flights and generally support each others efforts (we agreed that we would retrieve for each other as needed). Several of the club officers were in that group and slowly steered the direction of the club to embrace and allow XC flight.
>
>
>
> We now have 3 single-place ships that are set up and available for XC flights (another if you count the SGS 1-26) and there is competition for their time on any reasonable soaring day. We have a Twin Astir for dual XC flights (as well as the Blanik 1-23, which I do take XC!).
>
>
>
> The result is that from 2004 to 2014 we have grown from 6 pilots trying OLC to over 20 on any given year. We also have champions in the region 8 Sports class (congratulations, Joe Steele) that only begin flying 4 years ago..
>
>
>
> I'm still the primary XC training instructor and could fill my time with XC students most days the field is open.
>
>
>
> Another factor in the growth is a special training program called the "5-pack". This is a program that provide more than just a single "sled-ride" flight where skills can be developed and a more complete exposure of the sport can occur. For a cost of $450 the student gets a 3-month club membership, 5 tows to 3000 feet, aircraft rental and instructor for up to an hour. The 3-month membership allows the student more time to complete the flights (rather than just one weekend). This year we are currently restricting the number of 5-packs due to the instructor's student load. We can't handle more at the moment! I think we're teaching 10-15 currently. This is in addition to the other club pilots moving through the training from Student to Commercial.
>
>
>
> We have about a 70-80% conversion of the 5-pack to a full club membership.. Most are still with the club after 5 years.
>
>
>
> SO that's the Willamette Valley effort to grow the XC pilot pupolation. I'd like to hear other efforts and ideas.
>
>
>
> Sorry for the long post,
>
>
>
> MB

Good going MB. Have you considered adding Condor simulation training to your program?

In Australia, it is normal to mix some XC dual coaching in with the usual training. In my experience, the Duo helps open students eyes to what they will be able to do in the not-so-distant future.
Jim

I am curious. How many people in this discussion were hand held every step of the way of starting to fly XC or just went out and tried it for themselves? I wouldn't be surprised if many if not most of us taught ourselves by going a little further each time. For some pilots this is a thrill, for others a fear. Is it possible that XC pilots self-select by just going and trying it and those who wait for dual and a steady hand to help each step of the way might not often turn into life long XC pilots?

Please don't be offended by these questions. I am just asking because at least here in Utah, my observation is that the only XC pilots I know taught themselves. Those who are waiting for someone to take them.......are still waiting.

Bruno - B4

On Fri, 18 Jul 2014 14:53:54 -0700, brunovassel wrote:

> I am curious. How many people in this discussion were hand held every
> step of the way of starting to fly XC or just went out and tried it for
> themselves? I wouldn't be surprised if many if not most of us taught
> ourselves by going a little further each time. For some pilots this is
> a thrill, for others a fear. Is it possible that XC pilots self-select
> by just going and trying it and those who wait for dual and a steady
> hand to help each step of the way might not often turn into life long XC
> pilots?
>
I don't know how this ties in with usual US experience, but its normal
practise at my club in the UK.

- shortly after soloing I got my first XC ride in the club's Grob Acro
during our Regionals. The deal was that we got back seat in a comp.
flight and formed the Grob retrieval crew for the rest of the Regionals.
Seemed like a good deal.

- after soloing and converting to an SZD Junior I worked on the UK
Bronze badge: 50 solo flights, written and flying tests including
spot landings as the last checks before it was issued. During this
I'd also done Silver C height and duration legs.

- navigation, field selection, field landing exercises in an SF-25 TMG
plus 1 and 2 hour soaring flights got me the Bronze XC endorsement.

- within a week of getting the XC endorsement I was briefed and sent off
to do Silver C distance in a Junior: navigate the 68km to Rattlesden and
land there for a first taste of landing at an airfield I'd never seen
before. This was my first solo XC.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

On Friday, July 18, 2014 3:53:54 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> I am curious. How many people in this discussion were hand held every step of the way of starting to fly XC or just went out and tried it for themselves? I wouldn't be surprised if many if not most of us taught ourselves by going a little further each time. For some pilots this is a thrill, for others a fear. Is it possible that XC pilots self-select by just going and trying it and those who wait for dual and a steady hand to help each step of the way might not often turn into life long XC pilots?
>
>
>
> Please don't be offended by these questions. I am just asking because at least here in Utah, my observation is that the only XC pilots I know taught themselves. Those who are waiting for someone to take them.......are still waiting.
>
>
>
> Bruno - B4

Bruno, I know of successful XC pilots who individually took one or the other of these approaches. It works either way but I tend to believe a few dual XC's is the better approach if that opportunity is available.

Then too, there's more than one way to learn. I listened very carefully to experienced XC pilots and read dozens of books before taking off on my own - less successfully at first and then progressively better with experience..

OTOH, some of those pilots who got dual XC training but spent little time with books or listening to veterans struggled for quite a while before they achieved anything significant. People are different.

As a side comment, almost all the information I came across was rather good at teaching one how to go fast or far in reasonably good conditions but less informative about how to recognize and manage situations that are starting to go bad. Most early XC flights are a series of recoveries from bad situations. I can see a lot of benefit from including this training.

On Friday, July 18, 2014 2:53:54 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> I am curious. How many people in this discussion were hand held every step of the way of starting to fly XC or just went out and tried it for themselves?

My path:

6 hrs Total Time: Solo (SGS 2-33, Elmira)
19 hrs TT: First flight of 1 hour or more - Sliver altitude (SGS 2-33 Frederick, MD)
41 hrs TT: Silver duration, Silver Distance (SGS 1-26, Estrella, AZ)
43 hrs TT: First outlanding (SGS 1-34, on a highway between Hobbs and Odessa, TX)
95 hrs TT: First contest flight (LS-3, Ionia, MI)
420 hrs TT: Diamond Goal (LS-4, El Tiro, AZ)

My first cross-country flights we on a soaring safari with my Dad and brother from the Mojave back to the east coast after picking up the first family glider - a 1-34. I guess I just got pushed out of the nest. I was lucky to have some early flights in gigantic western thermals and even so managed to land out. There was some coaching, but not a lot as I look back on it. It was just assumed that the goal was to go somewhere. Progressing through the badge system seemed like what you were supposed to do.

Club flying greatly slows the process down it seems to me - the general availability and 1-hour time limits on club ships.

I agree that 20-meter 2-seaters should be a huge benefit to helping people make the leap sooner rather than later. Getting a lot of 2-seaters to a Nephi-type event paired with people on the cusp of XC flying and experienced XC pilots could be a real boost.

9B

On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 12:41:40 PM UTC-7, noel.wade wrote:
> MB -
>
>
>
> Does Willamette Valley assign an instructor to a student....

Noel, et al,

I've been on the road all week and not able to respond to questions or comments in a timely manner, my apologies.

The WVSC does not exactly assign students, the chief instructor just asks who can take another student and that's where they go! We have a policy that students that are flying before 12PM can take three flights or one hour. That works pretty well in the morning before the lift begins. The students can get in at least a couple 3000 tows and a pattern in the hour. If they hang areound the rest of the day they may get in one or two more. We're open 4 days a week, Wed. Fri. and weekends. Students that can do their flying on Wed. or Fri. can really make progress as the demand for ships is lower on those days.

As I said, this year we are constrained and are not accepting more students until some of the pre-solo students have soloed. Instructors are "normal" members of the club, they pay dues and work Ops days. They are also independent in most of their financial dealings with their students. The exception is the 5-pack where payment comes from the club. Last year I went over the $600 IRS limit (with 5-packs) and got a 1099 from the club!

I think most instructors in the club are charging $35 per hour and the population is happy with the rates.

Regarding XC use of club planes, we also require that all pilots have a Private certificate and complete the Bronze badge before attempting solo. I also think that many complete the duration leg of the Silver badge before heading out XC.

As I noted in the OP, I bought a higher performance dual-seat glider just so I could teach the XC elements "for real". Once the club got a ship that was able to be used, I sold mine.

Regarding the use of Condor, I've had great success in the past year getting student using Condor and making great progress. I bought a copy of Frank's book at the convention and am still trying to get into it, I'm a professional flight instructor, it's my daily job, and this time of year we fly from sun-up to sun-down at the flight school. I don't get much reading time!

I have used a C-150 to do area flights, getting students looking at the potential land-out sites and just getting a broader view of the world.

Another long post but I was just catching up!

MB

On 7/18/2014 3:53 PM, wrote:
> I am curious. How many people in this discussion were hand held every step
> of the way of starting to fly XC or just went out and tried it for
> themselves?
<Snip>
>
> ...I am just asking because at
> least here in Utah, my observation is that the only XC pilots I know taught
> themselves. Those who are waiting for someone to take them.......are still
> waiting.

Assuming by "self-taught" you mean something along the lines of absorbing
basic instruction goal-oriented essentially toward one's ticket, during which
perhaps the mentioning of badges and a broad-brush intro to the basics of XC
flight/landing concepts occurred...along with the obvious expectation that of
COURSE every trainee would eventually go XC, then self-taught worked for me.

The only mental hurdle of any significance in my mind was the off-field
landing aspect, and the thought of hand-holding never occurred to me, even had
it been a possibility in the early 1970s (which it wasn't). A person either
elected to fly XC or chose not to, and I recall being surprised that there
were people who chose NOT to go XC. I didn't realize there were until after I
had my license...and by then it struck me as quite odd!

The concept/possibility of "hand-holding-based XC training" reminds me of
something engineers (my degree) are often accused of in the
manufacturing-oriented industries with which I'm familiar. Namely, engineers
need managers/sales-types/whomever around to pry from their designing,
grasping hands the widgets...or else said widgets would never go into
production, design perfection being arguably endemic to many engineers.
("Better" is the enemy of "good enough.")

Might there be a similar effect at work in some wannabe XC pilots where the
concept of "learning perfection" is substituted for "design perfection?" One
can always learn more, but "forever learning" can also inhibit learning's
application. At some point, "Just do it!" makes sense. Distance falls out in
the wash once Joe Pilot knows how to safely pick fields.

Bob W.

On Saturday, July 19, 2014 12:58:48 AM UTC-4, BobW wrote:

> Might there be a similar effect at work in some wannabe XC pilots where the concept of "learning perfection" is substituted for "design perfection?"

I view my pronounced and long-recognized tendency to 'gold-plate' (aka 'design perfection') as a personality asset in the domain of soaring. It is only tedious for onlookers.

If I was making a product to sell, I would need to push it out the door. But as long as I'm making rapid and steady progress (log book shows decrease in tow release heights and increase in average speed), I see no drawback to my systematic and incremental approach. It's not for everyone.

If you have the personality type that is systematic and not easily bored, gold plating works well in a self-paced hobby. Sure, some people have more 'go for it' in their personality mix and we need to structure and facilitate their progress or they will get frustrated and quit.

An old hand wisely pointed out that I should savor all of the stages of learning to soar (for example, the 1-26 phase) and not be in a rush. It's all fun.

On Saturday, July 19, 2014 8:47:55 AM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:

> An old hand wisely pointed out that I should savor all of the stages of learning to soar (for example, the 1-26 phase) and not be in a rush. It's all fun.

Well said! Keep us posted on your progress (the ups and the downs - which are usually more interesting!)

Cheers,

Kirk
66

To follow Andy's lead:

Apr 86 - intro flight in a G-103. I flew the entire flight; takeoff,
aero tow, pattern, and landing. Prior Air Force with lots of formation
time... Soloed on 6th flight.
Nov 86 - Commercial add-on and started giving rides in a Twin Lark
Mar 87 - Winch checkout and giving rides in Twin Lark at Bond Springs,
NT, Australia
Jul 87 - Bought my first glider, a Mosquito B
Apr 88 - Second glider, an ASW-19b
Sep 88 - Started towing gliders
Mar 89 - Silver Badge
Sep 89 - Gold Badge
Jan 92 - Third glider, an LS-6a
Nov 94 - Diamond Badge

Some time in late 87 a friend, Fred Taylor, who also had a Mosquito
invited me to join him in riding the leading edge of a cold front west
of TSA, Texas Soaring Association. ...And the hook was set. Nowadays,
I don't bother taking off unless it appears I can go somewhere. It's
been a heck of a ride and it ain't over yet!

Dan Marotta

On 7/18/2014 7:16 PM, wrote:
> On Friday, July 18, 2014 2:53:54 PM UTC-7, wrote:
>> I am curious. How many people in this discussion were hand held every step of the way of starting to fly XC or just went out and tried it for themselves?
> My path:
>
> 6 hrs Total Time: Solo (SGS 2-33, Elmira)
> 19 hrs TT: First flight of 1 hour or more - Sliver altitude (SGS 2-33 Frederick, MD)
> 41 hrs TT: Silver duration, Silver Distance (SGS 1-26, Estrella, AZ)
> 43 hrs TT: First outlanding (SGS 1-34, on a highway between Hobbs and Odessa, TX)
> 95 hrs TT: First contest flight (LS-3, Ionia, MI)
> 420 hrs TT: Diamond Goal (LS-4, El Tiro, AZ)
>
> My first cross-country flights we on a soaring safari with my Dad and brother from the Mojave back to the east coast after picking up the first family glider - a 1-34. I guess I just got pushed out of the nest. I was lucky to have some early flights in gigantic western thermals and even so managed to land out. There was some coaching, but not a lot as I look back on it. It was just assumed that the goal was to go somewhere. Progressing through the badge system seemed like what you were supposed to do.
>
> Club flying greatly slows the process down it seems to me - the general availability and 1-hour time limits on club ships.
>
> I agree that 20-meter 2-seaters should be a huge benefit to helping people make the leap sooner rather than later. Getting a lot of 2-seaters to a Nephi-type event paired with people on the cusp of XC flying and experienced XC pilots could be a real boost.
>
> 9B

On Friday, July 18, 2014 10:58:48 PM UTC-6, BobW wrote:
> On 7/18/2014 3:53 PM, wrote:
>
> > I am curious. How many people in this discussion were hand held every step
>
> > of the way of starting to fly XC or just went out and tried it for
>
> > themselves?
>
> <Snip>
>
> >
>
> > ...I am just asking because at
>
> > least here in Utah, my observation is that the only XC pilots I know taught
>
> > themselves. Those who are waiting for someone to take them.......are still
>
> > waiting.
>
>
>
> Assuming by "self-taught" you mean something along the lines of absorbing
>
> basic instruction goal-oriented essentially toward one's ticket, during which
>
> perhaps the mentioning of badges and a broad-brush intro to the basics of XC
>
> flight/landing concepts occurred...along with the obvious expectation that of
>
> COURSE every trainee would eventually go XC, then self-taught worked for me.
>
>
>
> The only mental hurdle of any significance in my mind was the off-field
>
> landing aspect, and the thought of hand-holding never occurred to me, even had
>
> it been a possibility in the early 1970s (which it wasn't). A person either
>
> elected to fly XC or chose not to, and I recall being surprised that there
>
> were people who chose NOT to go XC. I didn't realize there were until after I
>
> had my license...and by then it struck me as quite odd!
>
>
>
> The concept/possibility of "hand-holding-based XC training" reminds me of
>
> something engineers (my degree) are often accused of in the
>
> manufacturing-oriented industries with which I'm familiar. Namely, engineers
>
> need managers/sales-types/whomever around to pry from their designing,
>
> grasping hands the widgets...or else said widgets would never go into
>
> production, design perfection being arguably endemic to many engineers.
>
> ("Better" is the enemy of "good enough.")
>
>
>
> Might there be a similar effect at work in some wannabe XC pilots where the
>
> concept of "learning perfection" is substituted for "design perfection?" One
>
> can always learn more, but "forever learning" can also inhibit learning's
>
> application. At some point, "Just do it!" makes sense. Distance falls out in
>
> the wash once Joe Pilot knows how to safely pick fields.
>
>
>
> Bob W.

Fear of out landings just didn't occur to me as a student pilot. The "airfield" at lake Elsinore, CA was smaller, rougher with bigger weeds than the surrounding farm fields (This was in the early 1960's.) so land outs actually seemed safer than coming back to the home field.

Then, as now, there were a minority of pilots who loudly declared that anyone who went XC was "crazy" - unfortunately some were instructors who made sure their students felt that way too. That got me thinking that all instructors should be required to have at least some XC experience to weed out the anti-XC types.

On Saturday, July 19, 2014 9:47:59 AM UTC-6, Bill D wrote:
> On Friday, July 18, 2014 10:58:48 PM UTC-6, BobW wrote:
>
> > On 7/18/2014 3:53 PM, wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > I am curious. How many people in this discussion were hand held every step
>
> >
>
> > > of the way of starting to fly XC or just went out and tried it for
>
> >
>
> > > themselves?
>
> >
>
> > <Snip>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > ...I am just asking because at
>
> >
>
> > > least here in Utah, my observation is that the only XC pilots I know taught
>
> >
>
> > > themselves. Those who are waiting for someone to take them.......are still
>
> >
>
> > > waiting.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Assuming by "self-taught" you mean something along the lines of absorbing
>
> >
>
> > basic instruction goal-oriented essentially toward one's ticket, during which
>
> >
>
> > perhaps the mentioning of badges and a broad-brush intro to the basics of XC
>
> >
>
> > flight/landing concepts occurred...along with the obvious expectation that of
>
> >
>
> > COURSE every trainee would eventually go XC, then self-taught worked for me.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > The only mental hurdle of any significance in my mind was the off-field
>
> >
>
> > landing aspect, and the thought of hand-holding never occurred to me, even had
>
> >
>
> > it been a possibility in the early 1970s (which it wasn't). A person either
>
> >
>
> > elected to fly XC or chose not to, and I recall being surprised that there
>
> >
>
> > were people who chose NOT to go XC. I didn't realize there were until after I
>
> >
>
> > had my license...and by then it struck me as quite odd!
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > The concept/possibility of "hand-holding-based XC training" reminds me of
>
> >
>
> > something engineers (my degree) are often accused of in the
>
> >
>
> > manufacturing-oriented industries with which I'm familiar. Namely, engineers
>
> >
>
> > need managers/sales-types/whomever around to pry from their designing,
>
> >
>
> > grasping hands the widgets...or else said widgets would never go into
>
> >
>
> > production, design perfection being arguably endemic to many engineers.
>
> >
>
> > ("Better" is the enemy of "good enough.")
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Might there be a similar effect at work in some wannabe XC pilots where the
>
> >
>
> > concept of "learning perfection" is substituted for "design perfection?" One
>
> >
>
> > can always learn more, but "forever learning" can also inhibit learning's
>
> >
>
> > application. At some point, "Just do it!" makes sense. Distance falls out in
>
> >
>
> > the wash once Joe Pilot knows how to safely pick fields.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Bob W.
>
>
>
> Fear of out landings just didn't occur to me as a student pilot. The "airfield" at lake Elsinore, CA was smaller, rougher with bigger weeds than the surrounding farm fields (This was in the early 1960's.) so land outs actually seemed safer than coming back to the home field.
>
>
>
> Then, as now, there were a minority of pilots who loudly declared that anyone who went XC was "crazy" - unfortunately some were instructors who made sure their students felt that way too. That got me thinking that all instructors should be required to have at least some XC experience to weed out the anti-XC types.

At when I was in the UK, an FAI Silver C was a prerequisite. I wonder if EASA has mucked that up. That is so far detached from the FAA as to be almost unthinkable.

Frank Whiteley

> > Then, as now, there were a minority of pilots who loudly declared that anyone who went XC was "crazy" - unfortunately some were instructors who made sure their students felt that way too. That got me thinking that all instructors should be required to have at least some XC experience to weed out the anti-XC types.

Bill Daniels

> At when I was in the UK, an FAI Silver C was a prerequisite. I wonder if EASA has mucked that up. That is so far detached from the FAA as to be almost unthinkable.
>
>
>
> Frank Whiteley

The FAA has been considering revising glider flight instructor experience requirements upward for a number of years but just what form that will take will have to wait for the official NPRM. I do know that XC experience as a prerequisite is at least under discussion.

I've tried to dig through the EASA pilot experience requirements to find a referencible document without any luck. I expect EASA requirements will mirror German requirements which do require XC for even a private pilot certificate.

On 7/19/2014 7:47 AM, son_of_flubber wrote:
> On Saturday, July 19, 2014 12:58:48 AM UTC-4, BobW wrote:
>
>> Might there be a similar effect at work in some wannabe XC pilots where
>> the concept of "learning perfection" is substituted for "design
>> perfection?"
>
> I view my pronounced and long-recognized tendency to 'gold-plate' (aka
> 'design perfection') as a personality asset in the domain of soaring. It
> is only tedious for onlookers.

No tedium here, simply a question that popped into my skull.
>
> If I was making a product to sell, I would need to push it out the door.
> But as long as I'm making rapid and steady progress (log book shows
> decrease in tow release heights and increase in average speed), I see no
> drawback to my systematic and incremental approach...
<Snip>
Excellent - if it works for you, keep after it!

> If you have the personality type that is systematic and not easily bored,
> gold plating works well in a self-paced hobby. Sure, some people have more
> 'go for it' in their personality mix and we need to structure and
> facilitate their progress or they will get frustrated and quit.
>
> An old hand wisely pointed out that I should savor all of the stages of
> learning to soar (for example, the 1-26 phase) and not be in a rush. It's
> all fun.

Indeed!

Bob W.

At 23:23 19 July 2014, Bill D wrote:
>
>> > Then, as now, there were a minority of pilots who loudly declared
that
>=
>anyone who went XC was "crazy" - unfortunately some were instructors who
>ma=
>de sure their students felt that way too. That got me thinking that all
>in=
>structors should be required to have at least some XC experience to weed
>ou=
>t the anti-XC types.
>
>Bill Daniels
>
>> At when I was in the UK, an FAI Silver C was a prerequisite. I wonder
>if EASA has mucked that up. That is so far detached from the FAA as to
be
>almost unthinkable.
>>
>>
>>
>> Frank Whiteley
>
>The FAA has been considering revising glider flight instructor experience
>requirements upward for a number of years but just what form that will
take
>will have to wait for the official NPRM. I do know that XC experience as
>a prerequisite is at least under discussion.
>
>I've tried to dig through the EASA pilot experience requirements to find
a
>referencible document without any luck. I expect EASA requirements will
>mirror German requirements which do require XC for even a private pilot
>certificate.
>

The XC flight is not the same as an IGC Silver distance flight - you can
fly a licence qualifying 50km without getting out of gliding range of your
airfield.

The BGA Silver badge requirement for instruction is not a legal or
regulatory requirement of course, it's a BGA choice & is likely to continue
under EASA.

Before I offer my 2¢, let me first say congratulations to MB on a job well done. I would argue that all of our sport's problems (mostly membership and participation) would be solved if every club had a 'MB,' and equally important, for those clubs to support their MB's efforts.

In the USA, we do pretty well in attracting new members, but we are pathetic at keeping them. Why? Because most clubs focus on the wrong thing: low-cost basic training. But we ignore, and in many cases discourage, the progression to cross-country soaring. If clubs offered good equipment and training, and the freedom, support, and encouragement to fly further and farther, we would go a long way in growing our clubs' rosters by not losing the members we already have.

Soaring is a product, and it competes with other products for our target market's interest. Flying a 50-year-old glider above the airport may be fun for a year or two, but without a new challenge (that doesn't come with a $20,000+ entry fee) most are going to quit the sport.

Chris Fleming

On Sat, 19 Jul 2014 06:47:55 -0700, son_of_flubber wrote:

> If you have the personality type that is systematic and not easily
> bored, gold plating works well in a self-paced hobby. Sure, some people
> have more 'go for it' in their personality mix and we need to structure
> and facilitate their progress or they will get frustrated and quit.
>
> An old hand wisely pointed out that I should savor all of the stages of
> learning to soar (for example, the 1-26 phase) and not be in a rush.
> It's all fun.
>
Have you added flying mini-triangles to your repertoire yet?

By that I mean a small 3 or 4 turnpoint task with your airport at its
centre and legs or around 12-16km (8-10 miles), so the entire task counts
as local soaring and that you can easily go round more than once during a
flight. You'll find that flying round mini-triangles teaches you skills,
particularly if you use them as practise for staying high while going
faster, that you won't get from flying between randomly picked thermals.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

On Sunday, July 20, 2014 6:54:17 AM UTC-4, Fox Two wrote:
> Before I offer my 2¢, let me first say congratulations to MB on a job well done. I would argue that all of our sport's problems (mostly membership and participation) would be solved if every club had a 'MB,' and equally important, for those clubs to support their MB's efforts.
>
>
>
> In the USA, we do pretty well in attracting new members, but we are pathetic at keeping them. Why? Because most clubs focus on the wrong thing: low-cost basic training. But we ignore, and in many cases discourage, the progression to cross-country soaring. If clubs offered good equipment and training, and the freedom, support, and encouragement to fly further and farther, we would go a long way in growing our clubs' rosters by not losing the members we already have.
>
>
>
> Soaring is a product, and it competes with other products for our target market's interest. Flying a 50-year-old glider above the airport may be fun for a year or two, but without a new challenge (that doesn't come with a $20,000+ entry fee) most are going to quit the sport.
>
>
>
> Chris Fleming

Post Mills (Vermont) Soaring has a Glasflugel 304C. This glider has brought a number of new pilots into our club, but remains highly available. After a season or two sharing the 304 with other pilots, the hook is set and people go on and buy their own sailplanes. In this respect, it has been very successful.

Evan Ludeman / T8

St Louis Soaring Association is taking the XC task (pun intended) seriously:

- Just acquired a sweet Grob Astir CS (with radio, varios, & good trailer) specifically for members to take XC and chase OLC points.
- Is upgrading XC-suitable our fleet; we now have a 1-34, G-102 Club III, and the Astir CS for XC (all with trailers available), and for the read die-hards a couple of very basic 1-26s (one with an open canopy for that "Otto Lilienthal" experience!). In process of equipping all the fleet with radios and audio varios, and looking at providing some sort of power outlet for simple PDA/PNA/Phones.
- Has purchased several simple IGC loggers (FR300s) and encourage members to use them on every flight - and post to OLC.
- Have a G-103 and ASK-21 available for dual XC coaching (with a new Cobra trailer just in case!)
- And finally - we have a club OLC contest going this season: For the private owners (8 are participating), we each chipped in $100 to the pot, and the club is matching that; the pilot with the best 3 OLC plus scores (flights this year originating from our field, H07) takes it all....! For the pilots flying club ships, no ante up front is needed, but the club is putting up the same as for the private owners - $800 for the winner who uses club ships from our field.

No surprise - Lot's of interest in XC and OLC at our club now!

Kirk
66

On Sunday, July 20, 2014 7:15:06 AM UTC-4, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Jul 2014 06:47:55 -0700, son_of_flubber wrote:

> > An old hand wisely pointed out that I should savor all of the stages of learning to soar (for example, the 1-26 phase) and not be in a rush.
>
> > It's all fun.
>
> >
>
> Have you added flying mini-triangles to your repertoire yet?
>
>
>
> By that I mean a small 3 or 4 turnpoint task with your airport at its
>
> centre and legs or around 12-16km (8-10 miles), so the entire task counts
>
> as local soaring and that you can easily go round more than once during a
>
> flight. You'll find that flying round mini-triangles teaches you skills,
>
> particularly if you use them as practise for staying high while going
>
> faster, that you won't get from flying between randomly picked thermals.
>

A qualified yes. I'm working on coring thermals quickly and flying fast on headings. The local terrain and lift/sink is asymmetrical. I can play 'how far can I fly beyond that ridge line and still get home' going E W or S. There is a similar decision point to the north caused by a zone of dependable sink.

It's an interesting beautiful place to fly and I've never felt bored. http://caltopo.com/map.html#ll=44.10399,-72.81698&z=13&b=t

MB, thank you for branching off a comment of mine in the contest improvement thread and starting this one! I'm sorry to be late to the discussion - a trip made posting before now impossible, though.

The comments in this thread are quite good, quite wide ranging, and quite inspiring. But most are aimed at a much higher level than what I consider to be the fundamental problem: how to get glider pilots to even consider trying XC? Broadly speaking, only about 10% of glider pilots in US clubs fly XC. Contest participation is even smaller, perhaps about 3%. These are not good numbers! What can we do?

MB's commendable efforts over about 10 years basically doubled his club's size member-wise, tripled his club's XC pilot contingent, and built a capable XC fleet for non-glider owners to take XC. I think one of the keys to this growth is his comment that several club officers "slowly steered the direction of the club to embrace and allow XC flight", ie, they changed the club culture. This may be the prime ingredient towards generating XC pilots.

For example, my club has (in addition to four G103 training ships) a Duo, an ASW-19, and a G102. Club rules permit using Duo and the single seaters for XC. Here are their 5 year utilization rates in hours (flights):

2014 2013 2012 2011 2010
Duo 18(11) 27(29) 72(94) 80(67) 89(101)
19 25(24) 13(9) 25(19) 51(43) 59(48)
102 22(27) 66(65) 44(59) 5(10) 51(44)

What you cannot see in the numbers is that most of these are local flights, not XC flights. Add in the fact that for 2010 through 2013 only 9 pilots each year (out of about 120 club members) flew XC (determined by their flights appearing on the OLC, on the local Governor's Cup contest, or on a contest score sheet). Two further interesting facts are that 90% of these 9 XC pilots flew ASEL before flying gliders XC, 80% of them own their own glider, and only 20% of them learned to fly gliders at my club. In other words, we've had very little club generation of XC pilots.

Morgan mentioned his frustration is "trying to motivate and introduce XC to people". He's not alone. Like him, we use non-CFIG pilots to introduce people to XC. Also like him, we've given introductory XC flights a number of people. This year we're glad that we've enticed 3 new pilots to fly XC, but these folks bought their own gliders and they were not among our XC introductory flight participants!

Chris Fleming mentioned that he believes the problem in the US might be due to focusing on "low-cost basic training" and ignoring or discouraging "the progression to XC soaring". Perhaps so, my club's experience certainly bears this out. However, Martin Gregorie said that in his UK club "more members go XC than don't". Is the experience at other UK clubs similar to that at Martin's club? I have anecdotal evidence that in several Dutch and German glider clubs only about 10% of their members soar XC, similar to the US. What is the general European glider experience?

Does generating XC pilots come down to club culture?

-John, Q3

All,

I just want to make it clear that I'm not the only reason the club has had such success, I'm not that vain :-)! A great pilot, Dick Vangrunsven, was a presenter several years ago at the convention. He talked about the XC flights in the area and was one of the founding members of the SIG I mentioned before.

As noted, the club leadership and the more extended exposure of the 5-pack has been a great part.

The club culture noted above is certainly a big factor. The change in club rules, allowing XC flights, was one of the biggest boosts to the idea that anyone could do XC from our little airport.

I think Condor is a great tool. During the winter months I hold XC training ground school and we do Condor flying. Last year we did our first Condor LAN party and everyone is asking when we're doing it again.

The club has a growing core of XC/OLC pilots and they made a commitment to each other to be of assistance in the event of a land-out and to be willing to do a little lead-follow flying. The first helps to overcome some of the fear of the retrieve, someone experienced is coming to help. And the second is the encouragement, through time and example, to move a little further from the field.

I think we all agree that there's not just ONE thing that will get more pilots into XC but these ideas are all part of a toolbox that will help add pilots to the XC ranks.

MB

On Sun, 20 Jul 2014 07:35:38 -0700, son_of_flubber wrote:

> A qualified yes. I'm working on coring thermals quickly and flying fast
> on headings. The local terrain and lift/sink is asymmetrical. I can
> play 'how far can I fly beyond that ridge line and still get home' going
> E W or S. There is a similar decision point to the north caused by a
> zone of dependable sink.
>
> It's an interesting beautiful place to fly and I've never felt bored.
> http://caltopo.com/map.html#ll=44.10399,-72.81698&z=13&b=t
>
Looks interesting (I peeked at your area on Google Earth) but it is
significantly different from the flay area I fly over. I have to say that
my main gains, while still restricted to local soaring, came from
mentally pre-declaring local mini-triangles and then flying round the
course they define. Yes, this means that you fly round each turnpoint (so
you can see it over the inside canopy edge as you fly round it) rather
than going (almost) to it. The gains, apart from learning that you don't
need to use every thermal you come to, are all concerned with developing
the judgement needed to get high enough on the last climb on a task leg
to get round the turnpoint and into the next climb without needing to dig
yourself out of a hole. Of course, you also need to know about digging
yourself out of holes because for sure you'll get it wrong and fall into
one from time to time. This skill tends to develop from experience salted
with sheer necessity.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

I think XC is deeply embedded in the club culture at London Gliding Club (UK) with most of the active instructors also being active XC pilots, and new pilots positively encouraged to move on towards XC via Silver after solo and bronze. I just checked and found that 57 members have posted XC flights on the BGA ladder so far this year (a UK specific online ladder used by most club members in preference to OLC). Undoubtedly there are a few more members than this who fly XC, and I would guess that about 25% of our 270 club members do so.

We run one or two 9 day XC courses a year, comprising lectures, 2 seat opportunities, lead and follow and other similar activities. Our CFI does daily weather briefs, and XC task setting and weather briefing on suitable XC days. The club has a Duo - sadly under-utilised much of the time, perhaps mainly because most of the instructors with suitable experience and ability to train XC prefer to fly their own gliders. However, there are several privately owned high performance 2 seaters in which the owners regularly offer XC flights to the less experienced, and an instructor is rostered to instruct XC in the Duo on one day a week. During our local annual competition instructors take less experienced members XC in the Duo and a K21.

All this makes one wonder why 75% of members don't fly XC. One significant factor is the age profile of the membership. Some older members have given up XC, and many of those who have started at retirement age never take it up. But this is of course in addition to the factors already talked about in this thread - fear of landing out, lack of retrieve crews etc. (During our course weeks, pilots do not have to make individual retrieve arrangements, and fellow club members are always willing to come and get a pilot in a field).

On Sunday, 20 July 2014 19:01:53 UTC+1, John Carlyle wrote:
> MB, thank you for branching off a comment of mine in the contest improvement thread and starting this one! I'm sorry to be late to the discussion - a trip made posting before now impossible, though.
>
>
>
> The comments in this thread are quite good, quite wide ranging, and quite inspiring. But most are aimed at a much higher level than what I consider to be the fundamental problem: how to get glider pilots to even consider trying XC? Broadly speaking, only about 10% of glider pilots in US clubs fly XC. Contest participation is even smaller, perhaps about 3%. These are not good numbers! What can we do?
>
>
>
> MB's commendable efforts over about 10 years basically doubled his club's size member-wise, tripled his club's XC pilot contingent, and built a capable XC fleet for non-glider owners to take XC. I think one of the keys to this growth is his comment that several club officers "slowly steered the direction of the club to embrace and allow XC flight", ie, they changed the club culture. This may be the prime ingredient towards generating XC pilots.
>
>
>
> For example, my club has (in addition to four G103 training ships) a Duo, an ASW-19, and a G102. Club rules permit using Duo and the single seaters for XC. Here are their 5 year utilization rates in hours (flights):
>
>
>
> 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010
>
> Duo 18(11) 27(29) 72(94) 80(67) 89(101)
>
> 19 25(24) 13(9) 25(19) 51(43) 59(48)
>
> 102 22(27) 66(65) 44(59) 5(10) 51(44)
>
>
>
> What you cannot see in the numbers is that most of these are local flights, not XC flights. Add in the fact that for 2010 through 2013 only 9 pilots each year (out of about 120 club members) flew XC (determined by their flights appearing on the OLC, on the local Governor's Cup contest, or on a contest score sheet). Two further interesting facts are that 90% of these 9 XC pilots flew ASEL before flying gliders XC, 80% of them own their own glider, and only 20% of them learned to fly gliders at my club. In other words, we've had very little club generation of XC pilots.
>
>
>
> Morgan mentioned his frustration is "trying to motivate and introduce XC to people". He's not alone. Like him, we use non-CFIG pilots to introduce people to XC. Also like him, we've given introductory XC flights a number of people. This year we're glad that we've enticed 3 new pilots to fly XC, but these folks bought their own gliders and they were not among our XC introductory flight participants!
>
>
>
> Chris Fleming mentioned that he believes the problem in the US might be due to focusing on "low-cost basic training" and ignoring or discouraging "the progression to XC soaring". Perhaps so, my club's experience certainly bears this out. However, Martin Gregorie said that in his UK club "more members go XC than don't". Is the experience at other UK clubs similar to that at Martin's club? I have anecdotal evidence that in several Dutch and German glider clubs only about 10% of their members soar XC, similar to the US. What is the general European glider experience?
>
>
>
> Does generating XC pilots come down to club culture?
>
>
>
> -John, Q3

On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 3:41:40 PM UTC-4, noel.wade wrote:

> one of the issues leading to a lack of XC pilots is that basic training (especially in club environments) tends to be a very drawn-out affair. First, weekends and good weather limit the number of days people are interested in flying ...<

I've seen too many students with 'go for it' personalities abandon their soaring training for want of more rapid progress. What about getting promising students on XC flights before they drop out of soaring? Maybe this would help reduce the drop out rate and transition people to XC before they get bored. It might accelerate basic training.

How many XC pilots flew XC (in tandem) before they finished their basic training? I'd guess that that happens at some clubs.

On Sunday, July 20, 2014 5:24:58 PM UTC-6, son_of_flubber wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 3:41:40 PM UTC-4, noel.wade wrote:
>
>
>
> > one of the issues leading to a lack of XC pilots is that basic training (especially in club environments) tends to be a very drawn-out affair. First, weekends and good weather limit the number of days people are interested in flying ...<
>
>
>
> I've seen too many students with 'go for it' personalities abandon their soaring training for want of more rapid progress. What about getting promising students on XC flights before they drop out of soaring? Maybe this would help reduce the drop out rate and transition people to XC before they get bored. It might accelerate basic training.
>
>
>
> How many XC pilots flew XC (in tandem) before they finished their basic training? I'd guess that that happens at some clubs.

Student dual XC of more than 50km is happening more and more as high performance trainers become widely available - something that just wasn't practical with 2-33's. Note that fairly extensive dual and solo XC is required for all airplane student pilots.

" What about getting promising students on XC flights before they drop out of soaring?"

Last month one of my solo students offered to back-seat while I did a short XC flight in the Blanik. All of the common comments:

"Wow, you fly faster than I did!" and "You really bank much more than I did.", airspeed management while thermaling, etc.

I have done that with many of the pre-private students and a couple of long-time private pilots. One can read all the presentations, and listen to the hanger talk, but getting them into a glider and just letting them watch can be a great experience.

MB (Mike Bamberg)

PS, personal note, I just got confirmation of my contest number for my H301, 4M, Love it!

'PS, personal note, I just got confirmation of my contest number for my H301, 4M, Love it!'

My Arcus M has comp no 4M. In the UK you can choose any comp no which is not already taken. Some of my non-engine equipped friends have starred to call it 4 Motor.

Thanks, Waremark, that's interesting data. I'd love to see others post in this thread what their club XC participation rates are (with an XC pilot being defined as someone who posted a flight trace for a sanctioned contest, a fun meet, the OLC or a badge distance leg). Up until now my figures of merit were that only 10% of club members fly XC, and only 3% fly in contests.

Really understanding why people do not start flying XC is difficult. Some of it is personality (Type A's and self-starters probably predominate the XC ranks), but self-doubt must also factor in (people are unsure of their ability to find and use thermals and to properly land out, they're fearful of wrecking their glider, or they feel they'll be mocked). Another big factor has to be available time. Access to equipment can be an issue (suitable glider, proper trailer, car with a hitch), which is probably why most XC pilots own their own plane. Negative comments from instructors can also figure in, as does the lack of knowledge about the incredible satisfaction, sense of achievement and pilot skill growth that comes from flying XC. Naturally, all of these reasons can be addressed and minds changed, but we need to know what the issues are!

In past years my club made the process of flying XC too complicated. It's much better now, only a PPG and a Bronze badge are required. Still, very few people try it, even with our XC pilots talking it up, giving informal seminars, offering XC flights in the Duo, making written material available, etc. Any insights about what has worked elsewhere will be gratefully accepted!

-John, Q3

On Sunday, July 20, 2014 7:24:37 PM UTC-4, waremark wrote:
> I think XC is deeply embedded in the club culture at London Gliding Club (UK) with most of the active instructors also being active XC pilots, and new pilots positively encouraged to move on towards XC via Silver after solo and bronze. I just checked and found that 57 members have posted XC flights on the BGA ladder so far this year (a UK specific online ladder used by most club members in preference to OLC). Undoubtedly there are a few more members than this who fly XC, and I would guess that about 25% of our 270 club members do so.
>
> We run one or two 9 day XC courses a year, comprising lectures, 2 seat opportunities, lead and follow and other similar activities. Our CFI does daily weather briefs, and XC task setting and weather briefing on suitable XC days. The club has a Duo - sadly under-utilised much of the time, perhaps mainly because most of the instructors with suitable experience and ability to train XC prefer to fly their own gliders. However, there are several privately owned high performance 2 seaters in which the owners regularly offer XC flights to the less experienced, and an instructor is rostered to instruct XC in the Duo on one day a week. During our local annual competition instructors take less experienced members XC in the Duo and a K21.
>
> All this makes one wonder why 75% of members don't fly XC. One significant factor is the age profile of the membership. Some older members have given up XC, and many of those who have started at retirement age never take it up. But this is of course in addition to the factors already talked about in this thread - fear of landing out, lack of retrieve crews etc. (During our course weeks, pilots do not have to make individual retrieve arrangements, and fellow club members are always willing to come and get a pilot in a field).

Instructors can have a lot to do with a new pilot developing a fear of XC in that even if they aren't overtly hostile to XC, they convey their own fears of XC in many subtle ways such as tone of voice, body language, or just the way a training syllabus is presented. Primacy embeds this fear in students in a way that is very difficult to overcome later. The same is true of group dynamics. If the student is surrounded with club members who fear XC, (Perhaps because they were trained by an XC-hostile instructor.) it's likely they will pick up on this and become fearful themselves. Taken together, you have a self-perpetuating fear of XC.

The solution is to insist on instructors who are enthusiastic about XC and to elevate the status and influence of successful XC pilots so they tend to dominate group dynamics.

FAI badges can facilitate this. I'd like to see a club environment where badges are worn proudly - especially by instructors.

I'm happy to report that the last person I mentored in the Duo was 15 miles out from the airport yesterday in the 1-26. Not technically XC since he remained above glide, but the tutoring and confidence building in finding and working lift and strategies for getting up paid off. He spent 3.8 hours in the 1-26 I think and I've signed him off to step up into the Russia for a bit longer legs.

Really nice to see someone progressing safely and smartly.

Took another person up yesterday for 3+ hours of XC and their longest flight. This was a CFIG that doesn't get to go XC much from his home glider port so it was a good learning experience for him. Even included a near land out in a remote valley. Thankfully avoided adding that to my list of mentoring accomplishments and instead just gave the Low Save experience.

Of note, a great source of good glider pilots might be helicopter pilots. Every helicopter pilot I've flown with has had excellent stick and rudder skills and a very light touch.





On Monday, July 21, 2014 9:27:46 AM UTC-7, Bill D wrote:
> Instructors can have a lot to do with a new pilot developing a fear of XC in that even if they aren't overtly hostile to XC, they convey their own fears of XC in many subtle ways such as tone of voice, body language, or just the way a training syllabus is presented. Primacy embeds this fear in students in a way that is very difficult to overcome later. The same is true of group dynamics. If the student is surrounded with club members who fear XC, (Perhaps because they were trained by an XC-hostile instructor.) it's likely they will pick up on this and become fearful themselves. Taken together, you have a self-perpetuating fear of XC.
>
>
>
> The solution is to insist on instructors who are enthusiastic about XC and to elevate the status and influence of successful XC pilots so they tend to dominate group dynamics.
>
>
>
> FAI badges can facilitate this. I'd like to see a club environment where badges are worn proudly - especially by instructors.

On Monday, July 21, 2014 11:54:49 AM UTC-4, John Carlyle wrote:
> Thanks, Waremark, that's interesting data. I'd love to see others post in this thread what their club XC participation rates are (with an XC pilot being defined as someone who posted a flight trace for a sanctioned contest, a fun meet, the OLC or a badge distance leg). Up until now my figures of merit were that only 10% of club members fly XC, and only 3% fly in contests..
>
>
>
> Really understanding why people do not start flying XC is difficult. Some of it is personality (Type A's and self-starters probably predominate the XC ranks), but self-doubt must also factor in (people are unsure of their ability to find and use thermals and to properly land out, they're fearful of wrecking their glider, or they feel they'll be mocked). Another big factor has to be available time. Access to equipment can be an issue (suitable glider, proper trailer, car with a hitch), which is probably why most XC pilots own their own plane. Negative comments from instructors can also figure in, as does the lack of knowledge about the incredible satisfaction, sense of achievement and pilot skill growth that comes from flying XC. Naturally, all of these reasons can be addressed and minds changed, but we need to know what the issues are!
>
>
>
> In past years my club made the process of flying XC too complicated. It's much better now, only a PPG and a Bronze badge are required. Still, very few people try it, even with our XC pilots talking it up, giving informal seminars, offering XC flights in the Duo, making written material available, etc. Any insights about what has worked elsewhere will be gratefully accepted!
>
>
>
> -John, Q3

At Post Mills, about 2/3 of our current glider flying membership has some XC experience and about half of those fly XC regularly. Most of the "irregulars" will go out and fly XC on the very best days. The 1/3 with no XC experience are mostly low time, not yet ready. Of the three (IIRC) guys in the club who are active and have flown at least one contest, only one does so regularly.

Evan Ludeman / T8

On Monday, July 21, 2014 9:27:46 AM UTC-7, Bill D wrote:
> Instructors can have a lot to do with a new pilot developing a fear of XC in that even if they aren't overtly hostile to XC, they convey their own fears of XC in many subtle ways such as tone of voice, body language, or just the way a training syllabus is presented. Primacy embeds this fear in students

We've seen this with some of our local instructors.

Another issue that I think is subtly at-play: in the Club environment where instruction is already slow, students may naturally make the assumption that XC training - being an "advanced" topic - is going to be even slower than primary training was.

Noel, that's an interesting observation, and one I've never heard before. My club does lose people to the long training process, and that might indeed bias others to not try XC. We'll have to start pointing out that if they've earned a ticket they're 90% of the way towards becoming XC pilots. Thanks!

-John, Q3

On Monday, July 21, 2014 9:49:49 PM UTC-4, noel.wade wrote:
> Another issue that I think is subtly at-play: in the Club environment where instruction is already slow, students may naturally make the assumption that XC training - being an "advanced" topic - is going to be even slower than primary training was.

In the UK:
I would say for me lack of XC is due to:

Lack of any possibility for a retrieve crew and no, the fact that I have
recovered others from a field has no relevance whatsoever when trying to
find anyone to retrieve me....It's understandable - people really do have
other things to do in the evening rather than be called out to rescue
someone from a field....particularly if going to be a mega-difficult one
with added aggro' and difficult access, not to mention sitting in the
traffic jams just to get there.

Lack of suitable fields to land in - many either too small or with standing
crop at certain times of the year. Makes you very nervous when looking
down. Some apparently OK fields can be very high risk with the possibility
of overhead wires on the approach or even worse almost invisible barbed
wire fences in the middle of the field.

Abuse and aggro' when landing in a field. The worst was one where the farm
manager was livid and almost foaming at the mouth. Then guess what -
another glider landed in the field seeing that mine had landed
safely...sort of.
The police ended up being called. I could really do without this sort of
thing while ?enjoying? a hobby.

Complex airspace as to where you can and can't go and at what altitude.
Pages of notams to be poured over for all the special last minute
modifications. (The good weather will always be inside restricted
airspace!)

Then there is the fact I always get lost, I'm ever scanning the skies for
the crazed RAF fast jet about to cut me in two....and who cannot possibly
see me

It is simply not worth the aggro.

One word: ADVENTURE!

Dan Marotta

On 7/24/2014 3:03 PM, John Howell wrote:
> In the UK:
> I would say for me lack of XC is due to:
>
> Lack of any possibility for a retrieve crew and no, the fact that I have
> recovered others from a field has no relevance whatsoever when trying to
> find anyone to retrieve me....It's understandable - people really do have
> other things to do in the evening rather than be called out to rescue
> someone from a field....particularly if going to be a mega-difficult one
> with added aggro' and difficult access, not to mention sitting in the
> traffic jams just to get there.
>
> Lack of suitable fields to land in - many either too small or with standing
> crop at certain times of the year. Makes you very nervous when looking
> down. Some apparently OK fields can be very high risk with the possibility
> of overhead wires on the approach or even worse almost invisible barbed
> wire fences in the middle of the field.
>
> Abuse and aggro' when landing in a field. The worst was one where the farm
> manager was livid and almost foaming at the mouth. Then guess what -
> another glider landed in the field seeing that mine had landed
> safely...sort of.
> The police ended up being called. I could really do without this sort of
> thing while ?enjoying? a hobby.
>
> Complex airspace as to where you can and can't go and at what altitude.
> Pages of notams to be poured over for all the special last minute
> modifications. (The good weather will always be inside restricted
> airspace!)
>
> Then there is the fact I always get lost, I'm ever scanning the skies for
> the crazed RAF fast jet about to cut me in two....and who cannot possibly
> see me
>
> It is simply not worth the aggro.
>
>

On 2014-07-16 22:19:12 +0000, noel.wade said:

> On a separate note, I'm still working on earning my CFIG but I am
> surprised folks don't use varying tow-heights based on the phase of
> instruction the student is in. For example: I think instructors should
> consider 4,000 to 5,000 foot tows when they're working on things like
> rudder coordination, steep turns, stalls, slips, and slow-flight. Give
> the student a long-enough flight to practice maneuvers 2 or 3 times in
> a row (similar to many SEL airplane training flights, which are often 1
> - 1.5 hours in length and involve practicing a maneuver a couple of
> times in succession).

I guess we are fortunate where I fly that there is a good percentage of
days on which at least one of the local ridges is working well enough
for even beginning students to stay up for as long as you're prepared
to let them have the glider. And plenty more where you can let the
student lose 1000 or 2000 ft and then the instructor can get it back
(whether close in ridge flying or thermal) and let them have another
try.


> When training changes its focus and the landing pattern becomes a
> point of emphasis, there's certainly a strong case for pattern-height
> tows and/or winch-launches. In fact, there's even a case for setting
> aside some part of the day's operations to let a student and his/her
> instructor do these practice landings back-to-back (i.e. they land,
> pull up to the front of the line, and immediately take another pattern
> tow).

That happens naturally for us. There's a line of single seaters between
11 and 1. Outside that, there's mostly only the two DG1000 trainers
taking tows and even on the worst days the flights are more than twice
the length of the tow plane turnaround time, so there's no queue.

Try tiddly winks

Nearly all the problems you mention are mitigated by practice and planning.
Top xc pilots do 000's of k without landing in farmer's fields outside of
competition every year.

Even in comps they tend to land on airfields, especially in the UK where
there are plenty. Many now have engines and don't land out at all!

Practice and planning, or tiddly winks.



At 21:03 24 July 2014, John Howell wrote:
>
>In the UK:
>I would say for me lack of XC is due to:
>
>Lack of any possibility for a retrieve crew and no, the fact that I have
>recovered others from a field has no relevance whatsoever when trying to
>find anyone to retrieve me....It's understandable - people really do have
>other things to do in the evening rather than be called out to rescue
>someone from a field....particularly if going to be a mega-difficult one
>with added aggro' and difficult access, not to mention sitting in the
>traffic jams just to get there.
>
>Lack of suitable fields to land in - many either too small or with
standing
>crop at certain times of the year. Makes you very nervous when looking
>down. Some apparently OK fields can be very high risk with the
possibility
>of overhead wires on the approach or even worse almost invisible barbed
>wire fences in the middle of the field.
>
>Abuse and aggro' when landing in a field. The worst was one where the
farm
>manager was livid and almost foaming at the mouth. Then guess what -
>another glider landed in the field seeing that mine had landed
>safely...sort of.
>The police ended up being called. I could really do without this sort of
>thing while ?enjoying? a hobby.
>
>Complex airspace as to where you can and can't go and at what altitude.
>Pages of notams to be poured over for all the special last minute
>modifications. (The good weather will always be inside restricted
>airspace!)
>
>Then there is the fact I always get lost, I'm ever scanning the skies for
>the crazed RAF fast jet about to cut me in two....and who cannot possibly
>see me
>
>It is simply not worth the aggro.
>
>
>

On Friday, July 25, 2014 2:36:39 AM UTC-4, Jim White wrote:
> Try tiddly winks

Or perhaps some dual time in a high performance twin with a good XC pilot on (here's the key) a good day. 90% of keeping "recreational XC" recreational is keeping your plans and expectations in line with what mother nature gives you to work with.


Evan Ludeman

On Thu, 24 Jul 2014 21:03:21 +0000, John Howell wrote:

> In the UK:
Me also.

> I would say for me lack of XC is due to:
>
> Lack of any possibility for a retrieve crew and no, the fact that I have
> recovered others from a field has no relevance whatsoever when trying to
> find anyone to retrieve me....
>
We tend to use mutual retrieval agreements.

> Lack of suitable fields to land in - many either too small or with
> standing crop at certain times of the year.
>
Fair comment.

> Abuse and aggro' when landing in a field.
>
I've been in a few and flown competition free flight models for longer
than I've been gliding. Never had that reaction, in either case.

> Complex airspace as to where you can and can't go and at what altitude.
> Pages of notams to be poured over for all the special last minute
> modifications.
>
Use SPINE - its much quicker than scanning through printed NOTAM lists.
Better yet, if the NOTAM is plottable SPINE can save it in a file your nav
system can display.

> Then there is the fact I always get lost,
>
Both LK8000 and XCSoar are open source, hence free, navigation programs
that run on reasonably priced/inexpensive satnav kit and can display both
NOTAMs saved by SPINE and landout field details. Both are also useful for
local soaring: just set up a task with your home field as the only
turnpoint and, as well as keeping book on whether have the height to get
home, they'll show any restricted airspace/NOTAMs in the area.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

On Thursday, July 17, 2014 7:33:14 PM UTC-4, son_of_flubber wrote:
> On Thursday, July 17, 2014 1:26:40 PM UTC-4, kirk.stant wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 16, 2014 7:46:50 PM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:
> >
> > > I wonder if the old hands in XC have forgotten how big the issue of safely landing out looms in the mind of the aspiring XC pilot?
> >
> >
> >
> > Whoa, wait a minute - what does XC have to do with landing out?
> .
> Sure, a landout for me at this stage grows more inevitable with every flight. But novices make a very conservative estimation of final glide to pattern altitude, they only fly upwind of the airport, they stay above 'the funnel' etc..
>
>
> >What you are saying is that our (USA) training system does not put enough emphasis on a basic skill in flying gliders - the technique for picking a suitable landout field and accomplishing a safe pattern, landing, and recovery of the glider to the home field.
>
> I'm not saying that at all. Maybe that's true on average, but I've trained extensively with some of the best CFIs in the USA. Several are active or former XC pilots. I understand the theory very well and I habitually evaluate landout fields from the air and the ground.
>
> But I've also done an hour of simulated landout training in a LSA with a CFI who has done many landouts. I learned that that kind of training is invaluable. The experience started to integrate the book learning and discussion into concrete flying ability. Several people suggest that I should do that integration on-the-fly on my own in a field some day. That's what they did. Good luck pal!
>
> I've read Tom Knauff's opinion that many active XC pilots are unprepared to land out and over-confident in their ability to land out. I've read Tom's opinion that simulated landout training in a motorglider is very cost-effective training and that people make huge gains in their ability to select good fields and properly set up patterns with just a few hours of practice, and that simulated landout training justifiably increases confidence and reduces mistake-inducing land out stress.
>
> I've spoken with a top shelf CFI from the UK who emphatically states "training to land out in a motor glider is the ONLY sensible approach". The CFIs who have access to motorgliders probably agree with that, and those who don't have access to motorgliders naturally say that "simulated landout training is good" but not necessary.
>
> I've done an hour of simulated landout training in an LSA and based on that experience I'd like to do more in the rather difficult to landout region where I fly. I think that if that sort of training was more generally available and promoted, that it would increase the number of pilots interested in XC.
>
> BTW, I've also done a few hours in a Duo with a top-shelf XC pilot at a world class soaring location. The general thrust of this thread is to make those opportunities more available, and I would certainly like to see that happen. It is something that I would like to do more of in the future, but that level of flying is so far above my level that it hardly seems relevant at that the moment.

Great thread and wonderful comments.

One thing I haven't really seen discussed is...... what are the "low time pilots like" before XC?

My example, I started as a young teenager, we have NO FEAR!
My major instructor also did XC & racing (it was Hank Nixon..... maybe you've heard of him?).
Beyond the basic "airmanship" I learned, I was itching to "go somewhere". Once I could get into a 1-26 (my Mom's 1-26, Dianne Black-Nixon), I went where ever I could go.
Again, I was a kid and had no fear.

After I got older (maybe not grown up), I finally became an instructor. By then I had flown a number of different gliders, ABC route through silver & parts of gold/diamond.

I did basic instructing, but also did some XC in a 2-33 if the weather allowed.
Later on, I did mid-level/higher level instructing while others did basic instruction. Hank did the same kind of teaching as I.
So now, we had at least 2 XC backed instructors teaching students through the "Schweitzer route". We started in a 2-33, solo in a 2-33, build time and then onto the 1-26. The goal was a safe airplane that sorta forced you to use a lot of thermals. After some flying time, you could move up more to "more horsepower" meaning a better L/D. But at least you could find & USE thermals.

Every Thanksgiving we went to HHSC for the Snowbird. Part of that "contest" was showing how well you could consistently spotland a glider with good energy control (rules link & discussion in another thread here) compared to others.
Prior to the Snowbird, we would practice at home, more than our "day to day flying".
As an instructor, I (as well as other instructors) made a point of having the student pick a spot on the airport to land on. This was pushing the "how does it look, how does it sound, how does it feel" part of decision making..
As they got better, the students were doing patterns with the altimeter covered and still going for the spot.

This would help ease some of the, "What if I don't make it back?" angst for a potential XC pilot.
We would state, "You can be consistent spot landing here, same as out in the wild".

But there are still some that won't go anywhere. One "older gent" told me he wouldn't go anywhere until he could afford a GPS/flight computer.
I looked at him and stated, "Do you know how many miles I've flown with a ruler & paper map....especially in a 1-26?"

I applaud Hank, Karl and others that have made a seat in a glass 2 seater available for regional contests. It's a great way to help "shove along" some pilots just so they can see what's possible even on "crappy looking days". Hank usually uses a ASK-21, not high on the list of XC gliders, but way better than a 2-33.

Since Valley Soaring is a club, I guess we are a little different than a lot of commercial operations in terms of going XC.
But prior to the club, the Valley Soaring Corp. also promoted XC, again sorta driven by Hank & Dianne.

There are multiple reasons for pilots to not go XC, thus there are multiple ways to get them going (if they will even go.....).
No single method will work 100% of the time, but identifying possible issues and having a plan to work through them is the way to go.

-Training geared towards XC down the road (thermaling, spot landing EVERY FLIGHT)
-Some XC in a low performance 2 place (2-33 is a start)
-Having a path geared towards better performance flying (low performance to better performance, time & ability based)
-"Lead follow" or "mid/high performance 2 place XC" sessions
-Actually ANSWERING questions of pilots thinking about XC

Enough from me, hope it all made sense.

On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 8:28:38 PM UTC-4, SoaringXCellence wrote:
> All,
>
> I presented at the SSA conference this last winter on the efforts of our club to build XC soaring pilots. This has been an emphasis for me for many years (hence my moniker SoaringXCellence), to the point I went and personally bought a G103 just so I could provide the training (since been sold, congratulations Coastal Soaring).
>
> In the last 12 years the Willamette Valley club has gone from an average of 50-60 active pilots, to over 80 (we finished the last year with over 120, out of Portland Oregon!!)
>
> I attribute this growth to the support the club now gives to members that want to go XC. Fifteen years ago we did NOT permit club gliders to be flown XC. This meant that potential XC pilots had to get their own ship before attempting ANY XC flights. Quite a deterrent! We had a few syndicates but most XC flights were in single owner ships. It was the only way to participate.
>
> Several years ago several of us began an XC soaring Special Interest Group (SIG) in the club and met frequently to discuss flights and generally support each others efforts (we agreed that we would retrieve for each other as needed). Several of the club officers were in that group and slowly steered the direction of the club to embrace and allow XC flight.
>
> We now have 3 single-place ships that are set up and available for XC flights (another if you count the SGS 1-26) and there is competition for their time on any reasonable soaring day. We have a Twin Astir for dual XC flights (as well as the Blanik 1-23, which I do take XC!).
>
> The result is that from 2004 to 2014 we have grown from 6 pilots trying OLC to over 20 on any given year. We also have champions in the region 8 Sports class (congratulations, Joe Steele) that only begin flying 4 years ago..
>
> I'm still the primary XC training instructor and could fill my time with XC students most days the field is open.
>
> Another factor in the growth is a special training program called the "5-pack". This is a program that provide more than just a single "sled-ride" flight where skills can be developed and a more complete exposure of the sport can occur. For a cost of $450 the student gets a 3-month club membership, 5 tows to 3000 feet, aircraft rental and instructor for up to an hour. The 3-month membership allows the student more time to complete the flights (rather than just one weekend). This year we are currently restricting the number of 5-packs due to the instructor's student load. We can't handle more at the moment! I think we're teaching 10-15 currently. This is in addition to the other club pilots moving through the training from Student to Commercial.
>
> We have about a 70-80% conversion of the 5-pack to a full club membership.. Most are still with the club after 5 years.
>
> SO that's the Willamette Valley effort to grow the XC pilot pupolation. I'd like to hear other efforts and ideas.
>
> Sorry for the long post,
>
> MB

Condor guy here:

I would like to suggest incorporating the use of glider flight simulation (Condor) into your XC training program. Aspiring pilots can be trained in advance of the season in the fundamentals of XC. The instruction can take place individually or in groups, at a distance or locally. After initial training, students could practice for hours on their own or use Condors networked mode (Multi-player) to "fly" with their fellow students, their instructor, or other XC mentors on dozens of XC flights over varied terrain in a variety of weather conditions and gain valuable procedural and decision-making experience before applying that knowledge and skill in the real world once the season begins.

Cheers, Scott Manley CFIG

I am currently working on an article regarding gliding safety. Not sure when it may be posted - probably on our web site (www.eglider.org) our Facebook page, perhaps Soaring magazine, or Gliding International magazine.

The article uses data garnished from the NTSB accident reports. This data is not always correct, but one can use it to gain useful statistics.

I reduced the official NTSB reports in a new book, "Glider Accident Reports," ($14.95) to useable, readable size, which clearly indicates where the major problems are and hints at what can and should be done in attempts to reduce the accident statistics. You can order from our web site, www.eglider.org.

Landings are clearly the major problem regarding gliding safety. During the recent 11 year period there were about 500 accidents serious enough to be reported to the NTSB.

Of these, 167 occurred during airport landings, and 99 off field landings.

As we observe typical, low stress on-airport landings, it is clear glider pilots often perform what can be called undisciplined, incorrect landing patterns. Under the stress of an upcoming off-airport landing, flight logs show the discipline is very often extremely bad.

Over the years, many articles have been written in gliding publications. There are some controversial suggestions made, and even more being used in flight training.

Despite attempts by different Pilots, CFIs clubs and organizations, the landing phase of flight training discipline's varies widely.

As a sidebar, some years ago, there was an international gathering of notable CFI's from around the world held in Sweden. The most significant finding was how little differences there were among those notables regarding all phases of flight.

Tom Knauff

On Sunday, December 21, 2014 12:16:00 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> I am currently working on an article regarding gliding safety. Not sure when it may be posted - probably on our web site (www.eglider.org) our Facebook page, perhaps Soaring magazine, or Gliding International magazine.
>
> The article uses data garnished from the NTSB accident reports. This data is not always correct, but one can use it to gain useful statistics.
>
> I reduced the official NTSB reports in a new book, "Glider Accident Reports," ($14.95) to useable, readable size, which clearly indicates where the major problems are and hints at what can and should be done in attempts to reduce the accident statistics. You can order from our web site, www.eglider.org.
>
> Landings are clearly the major problem regarding gliding safety. During the recent 11 year period there were about 500 accidents serious enough to be reported to the NTSB.
>
> Of these, 167 occurred during airport landings, and 99 off field landings..
>
> As we observe typical, low stress on-airport landings, it is clear glider pilots often perform what can be called undisciplined, incorrect landing patterns. Under the stress of an upcoming off-airport landing, flight logs show the discipline is very often extremely bad.
>
> Over the years, many articles have been written in gliding publications. There are some controversial suggestions made, and even more being used in flight training.
>
> Despite attempts by different Pilots, CFIs clubs and organizations, the landing phase of flight training discipline's varies widely.
>
> As a sidebar, some years ago, there was an international gathering of notable CFI's from around the world held in Sweden. The most significant finding was how little differences there were among those notables regarding all phases of flight.
>
> Tom Knauff

I agree landings are the main problem. One improves those stats the same way one gets to Carnegie Hall - practice, practice, practice.

Unfortunately, landing practice using aero tow is expensive so many skimp on landings. Scott Manley will propose the use of simulators for landing practice and he's absolutely correct. I would suggest complementing simulator landings with winch launch where one can buy as many as 10 real landings for the price of one pattern tow.

When a pilot becomes truly proficient and confident in their landing skills, XC looks a lot less intimidating.

I suspect one of the main problems with landings away from the home field is that many pilots won't give up looking for lift at an altitude where a proper disciplined approach is possible and end up making a rushed approach with poor speed control and turns at low altitude. I know I'm guilty of this!

Mike

Just like we see everyday at the gliderport while pilots are performing "normal" landings.

Tom

On 12/21/2014 3:02 PM, Mike the Strike wrote:
> I suspect one of the main problems with landings away from the home field
> is that many pilots won't give up looking for lift at an altitude where a
> proper disciplined approach is possible and end up making a rushed approach
> with poor speed control and turns at low altitude. I know I'm guilty of
> this!
>
> Mike
>

I doff my cap in your direction for having the spine to publicly admit to
occasional lack of pre-planned off-field-landing pattern discipline (from
someone relatively well-known in the SW US contest scene, no less!); maybe
doing so will motivate someone fairly new on the XC learning curve to re-think
their current - and possibly misguided - XC outlanding plan. (I suspect that
most of the honest among us will mentally admit to being able to benefit from
an unblinking rethink...)

Perhaps I was more cowardly than many fresh out of college, my age upon
discovering soaring, but the thought of making an off-field landing was
genuinely intimidating to me at the relatively immortal age of 22. I may have
then felt mySELF immortal (can't remember, ha ha!)...but definitely not the
glider!

And not that I was looking for any, but I never found reason to dispute the
knowledge my officemate (Wil Schuemann) and my instructor sought to impart, a
fundamental part of it being that an off-field pattern should be no different
than one to one's departure airport, and if anything it should be better, more
precise, and as "spotworthy" as any dead-day airfield spot landing contest's
winner's. In their views, the only difference in an OFL would (and should)
have been the pre-pattern-entry-height field assessment...and they both
emphasized that pattern entry height should be identical to a routine one
entered at the home field.

All that insight was imparted to me in '72/'73. Since then I've seen, learned
of and read about (WAY too many) reasons NOT to dispute their wisdom and
advice. The worst cases have involved serious pilot injury and death;
definitely no fun to be had on those kind of retrieve adventures.

My observational experience includes only two kinds of broken-in-OFL
sailplanes: 1) poor surface/approach/obstruction/etc. field choice and 2)
lousy (usually, close-in, too fast, too high/overshot) pattern. Sometimes 1) &
2) were combined.

When it comes to glider landing patterns - OFL or on-airport - it definitely
pays to have a plan and to fly it. My best patterns have been when I carried
on a running conversation in my head about how - and why - the pattern was
going, while some memorably mediocre (being kind to myself) ones were flown by
rote.

YMMV,
Bob W.

On Sunday, December 21, 2014 5:42:38 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> Just like we see everyday at the gliderport while pilots are performing "normal" landings.
>
> Tom


It takes a lot of practice to pull off a crappy landing in a small field. Glad those guys are putting in the time at the airport!

-Evan Ludeman / T8

I'm a newly minted CPL-G, who also hold ASEL, ASES, heli, and instrument/airplane, who has a lot of XC experience in powered flight.

I have searched in vain for a place to start training for XC, and it has been very difficult because most glider clubs and commercial operation websites focus on club member activities, PPL-G training, and sightseeing rides (commercial). Also, I'm not by nature a "joiner," and the club process (go to some meetings, join up, fly with some people, etc) doesn't fit my Type A personality. My messages to club info email addresses info@blahblah go unanswered, or the people who've responded are like, yeah, sure, come to a meeting, which I didn't feel was very inviting.

My experience with finding a place to learn wave has been similar.

So my current plan is to buy a used SLMG and start flying.

Any thoughts or ideas please let me know.

--bob

On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 10:09:10 AM UTC-5, Bob Pasker wrote:
> I'm a newly minted CPL-G, who also hold ASEL, ASES, heli, and instrument/airplane, who has a lot of XC experience in powered flight.
>
> I have searched in vain for a place to start training for XC, and it has been very difficult because most glider clubs and commercial operation websites focus on club member activities, PPL-G training, and sightseeing rides (commercial). Also, I'm not by nature a "joiner," and the club process (go to some meetings, join up, fly with some people, etc) doesn't fit my Type A personality. My messages to club info email addresses info@blahblah go unanswered, or the people who've responded are like, yeah, sure, come to a meeting, which I didn't feel was very inviting.
>
> My experience with finding a place to learn wave has been similar.
>
> So my current plan is to buy a used SLMG and start flying.
>
> Any thoughts or ideas please let me know.
>
> --bob


Hi Bob,

"my Type A personality" Is there any other kind? -:) seriously I have been around pilots for over 40 years and of course one myself. If you are a lone wolf and comfortable with that then maybe a motor glider and flying alone is the right thing for you. I can be pretty independent at times but, after i land I just love the comradely of share fling talk with other pilots. Its how I learn, its how i validate my learning, I had a situation where I couldn't fly for a year, couldn't really do anything except go to work. I missed flying very much and really missed those war story conversations over beer and pizza.

Dennis

On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 8:09:10 AM UTC-7, Bob Pasker wrote:
> I'm a newly minted CPL-G, who also hold ASEL, ASES, heli, and instrument/airplane, who has a lot of XC experience in powered flight.
>
> I have searched in vain for a place to start training for XC, and it has been very difficult because most glider clubs and commercial operation websites focus on club member activities, PPL-G training, and sightseeing rides (commercial). Also, I'm not by nature a "joiner," and the club process (go to some meetings, join up, fly with some people, etc) doesn't fit my Type A personality. My messages to club info email addresses info@blahblah go unanswered, or the people who've responded are like, yeah, sure, come to a meeting, which I didn't feel was very inviting.
>
> My experience with finding a place to learn wave has been similar.
>
> So my current plan is to buy a used SLMG and start flying.
>
> Any thoughts or ideas please let me know.
>
> --bob

You've just run up against the intrinsic culture divide between gliders and airplanes.

I have about the same airplane background as you do so I understand where you are coming from. Owning an airplane makes flying incredibly simple. Just call the FBO and ask them to tow your airplane to the ramp and fuel it. When you arrive at the airport, just walk to the airplane with the keys in your pocket and go fly. You don't have to talk to anybody. Even flying a rental airplane is pretty much like that. You can fly as many hours or miles as your wallet can withstand.

Soaring is very different and it's not about simplicity and success depends on more than the thickness of one's wallet (although that helps). Gliders can't get into the sky without a team effort. They need assembling, pushing, someone to fly the tow plane, someone to run the wing and, if you land out, you will need someone to come get you. They need to know if they do this for you, you will do it for them. That's why the invitation to a meeting. It's inherently a group activity. I've been told many times I'm a type A but I nonetheless enjoy the teamwork.

If you really can't get your head around this maybe a SLMG is the way to go but even then you'll need some help from time to time.

So why do it? What are the rewards? Soaring can be hard but doing things that are hard often brings rewards in a feeling of accomplishment that airplane flying simply can't match. Learning to work with a team also has its rewards.

Hi Bob,

My experience has been that there's no training for cross country or
wave soaring other than at a few well known locations. I and most of my
soaring buddies learned simply by doing. We read books, asked
questions, tagged along with a more experienced glider pilot and picked
up the skills along the way. It was a lot of fun and very rewarding to
land after another major (for me) accomplishment.

A self launch sailplane can be great if you're in an area without club
or commercial gliding, but they are very expensive by comparison to
other gliders. They can also get you home when you might otherwise have
landed out. They can also fail you when least expected!

You didn't mention your location so I can only suggest checking out
gliding locations on the SSA.org website. Go to a commercial operation
and take a ride. Ask about cross country rentals and have a ball!

Oh yeah - if you're near Moriarty, NM, we're in the beginning of wave
season. There's no formal wave training, but we can routinely thermal
into wave or enter the wave from a 3,000' tow within a couple of miles
from the airport. Be advised, however, that the winds are pretty strong
this time of the year (hell, most of the year!). I'll be happy to fly
with you.

Good luck,
Dan

On 12/23/2014 8:09 AM, Bob Pasker wrote:
> I'm a newly minted CPL-G, who also hold ASEL, ASES, heli, and instrument/airplane, who has a lot of XC experience in powered flight.
>
> I have searched in vain for a place to start training for XC, and it has been very difficult because most glider clubs and commercial operation websites focus on club member activities, PPL-G training, and sightseeing rides (commercial). Also, I'm not by nature a "joiner," and the club process (go to some meetings, join up, fly with some people, etc) doesn't fit my Type A personality. My messages to club info email addresses info@blahblah go unanswered, or the people who've responded are like, yeah, sure, come to a meeting, which I didn't feel was very inviting.
>
> My experience with finding a place to learn wave has been similar.
>
> So my current plan is to buy a used SLMG and start flying.
>
> Any thoughts or ideas please let me know.
>
> --bob

--
Dan Marotta

On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 10:09:10 AM UTC-5, Bob Pasker wrote:
> I'm a newly minted CPL-G, who also hold ASEL, ASES, heli, and instrument/airplane, who has a lot of XC experience in powered flight.
>
> I have searched in vain for a place to start training for XC, and it has been very difficult because most glider clubs and commercial operation websites focus on club member activities, PPL-G training, and sightseeing rides (commercial). Also, I'm not by nature a "joiner," and the club process (go to some meetings, join up, fly with some people, etc) doesn't fit my Type A personality. My messages to club info email addresses info@blahblah go unanswered, or the people who've responded are like, yeah, sure, come to a meeting, which I didn't feel was very inviting.
>
> My experience with finding a place to learn wave has been similar.
>
> So my current plan is to buy a used SLMG and start flying.
>
> Any thoughts or ideas please let me know.
>
> --bob

@bobpasker: As a start, join the SSA. SOARING magazine has great articles, and in particular, articles on Condor - the Soaring Simulator. Scott Manley writes a column on it. It is a reasonable way to become familiar with cross-country techniques, which translate well into the aircraft, after your physical skills are learned; in the long winter (depending on your location) you can fly online with (or against) other pilots and communicate (via Teamspeak) or not; Frank Paynter's book "Cross-country soaring with Condor" is inexpensive and a good introduction (available on Amazon and in e-book format). You probably have a joystick and rudder pedals already, and Condor is relatively cheap (makes a nice Xmas gift).

Commercial operations that may cater to your situation are Ridge Soaring, Williams Soaring and Soar Nevada, among others. Your geographic location may make one a better choice than the others.

Clubs by necessity concentrate on focusing their limited energy on their members, and select their members carefully. They are a great way to make friends, and continue learning in cross-country, or aerobatics, or instruction, or giving rides, building a homebuilt, or towing. If you want to come/fly/go, they probably are not for you.

Though you are experienced at powered XC, safely learning to fly a glider XC is a whole other thing, and I'd urge you to get instruction rather than buying a self-launcher and starting flying it XC.

On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 10:33:25 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:

> My experience has been that there's no training for cross country or wave soaring other than at a few well known locations.*

That said, the difficulties of finding 1)wave conditions 2)willing CFI-G 3)high quality two place glider and 4)my own availability to fly at that right time and place does not make it impossible.

I completed my BFR with my favorite CFI-G in 'wet wave' conditions last October at a commercial/club operation. I knew that my favorite CFI-G worked on Thursday and Friday. At the beginning of September, I told him of my interest in doing my BFR on a 'wave day', and then I started watching the weather forecast closely. Eight weeks later, it happened. Wow... best flight ever. Rainbows on tow, spin training, diving through a closing blue hole etc. etc..

Soaring is inherently opportunistic and pilots need to create their own training opportunities. Putting yourself in the right place at the right time is a fundamental and inherent part of the sport and this is especially true for wave flying.