2-33

[Peter Smith[_2_]]

The Harris Hill Soaring Corp. is fortunate to have 3 2-33s, 4 ASK 21s,
a 1-26, a 1-34, a single place Discus & a Duo. Our juniors are trained
in the 2-33, & they then progress to the higher performance ships.
I've not seen any resistance on their part to learning to fly in the
2-33.

Former HHSC Juniors now fly for the USAF, American Airlines, Fedex,
Corning Corp. & who knows what else - lots of our members have become
aviation professionals.

We typically have 30-40 juniors. They don't seem to mind that the 2-33
doesn't look "cool."

They also don't seem to be at a disadvantage with respect to contest
soaring because they started out in a 2-33. We train top notch cross
country & contest pilots.

Having said all that, I learned to fly in a Blanik L-13. Nice glider,
wish it wasn't grounded.

[Terry Mc Elligott]

On Sep 15, 8:22*pm, Peter Smith > wrote:
>
> We typically have 30-40 juniors.

Peter - that's fantastic. How do you attract and keep that many?

[Brad[_2_]]

On Sep 15, 6:50*pm, Terry Mc Elligott > wrote:
> On Sep 15, 8:22*pm, Peter Smith > wrote:
>
>
>
> > We typically have 30-40 juniors.
>
> Peter - that's fantastic. How do you attract and keep that many?

how many show up on a typical weekend day?

Brad

[Liam]

I learned to fly in a 2-22 and 2-33. I have some warm feelings for
the 2-22, but the 2-33 is just a ****ty glider, people should stop
making excuses for it.

[[email protected]]

> We typically have 30-40 juniors.

Peter - that's fantastic. How do you attract and keep that many?

Don't want to speak for Peter, but maybe flying low performance,
affordable aircraft that enables a rating without a second mortgage
has something to do with it.

And of course, perhaps the glassholes dissing older trainers that may
not produce the latest champions are flying somewhere else...

Aerodyne

[Morgan[_2_]]

On Sep 15, 10:45*pm, wrote:

Sounds like Harris Hill has an excellent and well rounded fleet for
people to work through. Many of us in smaller clubs are not so
fortunate and the top of the line is or was an L-13. Having those
next step aircraft available seems key to me in retaining members or
driving them down the road to ownership. Give them a taste of things
to come with an incentive ride in a Duo or K21 or anything that is
smooth, well handled and quiet and I think you stand a better chance
at them sticking with soaring and progressing their skills. That's my
primary argument for quality glass dual ships.

What percentage of club members show up on any given weekend during
the soaring season? Also, how big is the club?

There are many things that are out of our control. The weather, our
location relative to population centers, but if your club has managed
to find such successful ways of attracting and retaining members I'd
encourage or even beg you to share that info. It's certainly more
useful use of keyboard time than blamestorming around which glider we
should hold responsible for the success/failure of soaring.





> > We typically have 30-40 juniors.
>
> Peter - that's fantastic. How do you attract and keep that many?
>
> Don't want to speak for Peter, but maybe flying low performance,
> affordable aircraft that enables a rating without a second mortgage
> has something to do with it.
>
> And of course, perhaps the glassholes dissing older trainers that may
> not produce the latest champions are flying somewhere else...
>
> Aerodyne

[Frank Whiteley]

On Sep 15, 7:50*pm, Terry Mc Elligott > wrote:
> On Sep 15, 8:22*pm, Peter Smith > wrote:
>
>
>
> > We typically have 30-40 juniors.
>
> Peter - that's fantastic. How do you attract and keep that many?

Harris Hill Juniors do much to run the place. I will add that six of
the ten are 501c(3) charitable chapters, which helps but is not
necessary. SCOH has some CAP involvement. TSA has a learn while you
earn scholarship.

Your SSA Top Ten Youth Chapters as of 9/1/2010

Name Total Youth
Caesar Creek Soaring Club 249 43
Finger Lakes Soaring Club Inc. 51 10
Greater Boston Soaring Club 123 17
Greater Houston Soaring Assoc 113 17
Harris Hill Soaring Corp. 144 33
Mid-Atlantic Soaring Assoc. 118 10
Sky Soaring, Inc. 108 15
Soaring Club of Houston 199 29
Texas Soaring Association 196 16
Valley Soaring Club, Inc. 99 24

SSA had 435 youth members at the beginning of the month. Nearly 10%
are in one chapter.

Frank Whiteley

[noel.wade]

On Sep 15, 10:45*pm, wrote:
>
> And of course, perhaps the glassholes dissing older trainers that may
> not produce the latest champions are flying somewhere else...
>
> Aerodyne

Have you looked closely at your club/FBO's finances?

In almost all circumstances that I've seen, the yearly operating &
maintenance costs of a glider are FAR surpassed by the costs of
maintaining tow-planes. 1 year of hangar costs, fuel, insurance,
maintenance, repairs, and reserve funds for a towplane are likely to
dwarf even a couple-thousand-dollar AD on a glider!

Admittedly, I've only been in the sport for a few years... But I
firmly believe that a better club glider does not have to equate to
dramatically higher club fees.

--Noel

[Tony[_5_]]

> Admittedly, I've only been in the sport for a few years... *But I
> firmly believe that a better club glider does not have to equate to
> dramatically higher club fees.

Well, except for when the club has to pay for the better the glider...

[[email protected]]

On Sep 15, 8:22*pm, Peter Smith > wrote:
> The Harris Hill Soaring Corp. is fortunate to have 3 2-33s, 4 ASK 21s,
> a 1-26, a 1-34, a single place Discus & a Duo. Our juniors are trained
> in the 2-33, & they then progress to the higher performance ships.
> I've not seen any resistance on their part to learning to fly in the
> 2-33.
>
> Former HHSC Juniors now fly for the USAF, American Airlines, Fedex,
> Corning Corp. & who knows what else - lots of our members have become
> aviation professionals.
>
> We typically have 30-40 juniors. They don't seem to mind that the 2-33
> doesn't look "cool."
>
> They also don't seem to be at a disadvantage with respect to contest
> soaring because they started out in a 2-33. We train top notch cross
> country & contest pilots.
>
> Having said all that, I learned to fly in a Blanik L-13. Nice glider,
> wish it wasn't grounded.

This agrees with experience at VSC.
(3) 2-33's
(2) 1-26's
(1) 1-34
(1) ASK-21
It is a real benefit to have gliders to look forward to progressing
to.
UH

[Berry[_2_]]

>
> Your SSA Top Ten Youth Chapters as of 9/1/2010
>
> Name Total Youth
> Caesar Creek Soaring Club 249 43
> Finger Lakes Soaring Club Inc. 51 10
> Greater Boston Soaring Club 123 17
> Greater Houston Soaring Assoc 113 17
> Harris Hill Soaring Corp. 144 33
> Mid-Atlantic Soaring Assoc. 118 10
> Sky Soaring, Inc. 108 15
> Soaring Club of Houston 199 29
> Texas Soaring Association 196 16
> Valley Soaring Club, Inc. 99 24
>
> SSA had 435 youth members at the beginning of the month. Nearly 10%
> are in one chapter.
>
> Frank Whiteley

What's the common factor with all these operations? I think it is
probably:

1) Consistent, regular flight operations. Regimented flight operations
set up with committed crews for each flying day is the way to go (if you
have the people). That model may not be directly applicable to small
clubs, but consistently scheduled flying and training operations are
crucial in my opinion. Most of our small clubs have erratic and
sporadic flying schedules that depend on one overworked flight
instructor and one or two tug drivers, all of whom also have families
and day jobs. That will soon drive off any but the most determined
trainees (and it ain't all that attractive to flight instructors and tow
pilots, either).

2) Good facilities. Facilities are really important for the non-flying
family members. Roasting in the summer, freezing in the winter, and not
even a clean place to go potty will soon drive off mom and dad, taking
Buffy and Bif, our promising young trainees, with them.


Man, do I miss Caesar Creek...

[mattm[_2_]]

On Sep 16, 10:39*am, Berry > wrote:
> > Your SSA Top Ten Youth Chapters as of 9/1/2010
>
> > Name * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Total * Youth
> > Caesar Creek Soaring Club *249 * * 43
> > Finger Lakes Soaring Club Inc. * * 51 * * *10
> > Greater Boston Soaring Club * * * *123 * * 17
> > Greater Houston Soaring Assoc * * *113 * * 17
> > Harris Hill Soaring Corp. *144 * * 33
> > Mid-Atlantic Soaring Assoc. * * * *118 * * 10
> > Sky Soaring, Inc. *108 * * 15
> > Soaring Club of Houston * *199 * * 29
> > Texas Soaring Association *196 * * 16
> > Valley Soaring Club, Inc. *99 * * *24
>
> > SSA had 435 youth members at the beginning of the month. *Nearly 10%
> > are in one chapter.
>
> > Frank Whiteley
>
> What's the common factor with all these operations? I think it is
> probably:
>
> 1) Consistent, regular flight operations. Regimented flight operations
> set up with committed crews for each flying day is the way to go (if you
> have the people). That model may not be directly applicable to small
> clubs, but consistently scheduled flying and training operations are
> crucial in my opinion. Most of our small clubs have erratic and *
> sporadic flying schedules that depend on one overworked flight
> instructor and one or two tug drivers, all of whom also have families
> and day jobs. That will soon drive off any but the most determined
> trainees (and it ain't all that attractive to flight instructors and tow
> pilots, either).
>
> 2) Good facilities. Facilities are really important for the non-flying
> family members. Roasting in the summer, freezing in the winter, and not
> even a clean place to go potty will soon drive off mom and dad, taking
> Buffy and Bif, our promising young trainees, with them.
>
> Man, do I miss Caesar Creek...

We're opening up the usual oil drum of worms again...

The 1 or 2 instructor paradigm is all too common. A club will latch
onto an instructor, put him in the back of the plane every weekend for
about a year or two, and then he will run screaming from the sport.
Lather, rinse, repeat.

Our club at various times has experimented with different ship mixes.
About 10 years ago it was an L-13 for primary training, G103 for
advanced training, and a 1-26 for solo work. The 1-26 never flew,
so we traded up to an L33. Usage of that took off, but the usage
of the G103 gradually declined. Finally we sold it and used the
money to pay off all our debts. Meanwhile, one club member put
an HpH 304C on leaseback, which gave us another stepping stone
past the L33. We lucked into a G103 just recently so we'll have
something to instruct in until the L13 can return to flight.

On the instructor front, one of our two instructors decided to avoid
the "screaming from the sport" path and recruited a larger number
of instructors. We currently have 5, which allows us to instruct
every Saturday and two Sundays a month with a given instructor
only needing to work an average of 1.2 days a month. Retention
is much better, needless to say.

As far as youth programs go, I belonged to Harris Hill in the past.
Critical mass was a large factor, and commitment by the adults
in the club, too. The adults would go out of their way to vote
higher dues so the juniors wouldn't have to. We've tried set up
a junior program at my current club a couple of times but we've
never gotten it to work yet. Two kids that show up on alternate
Saturdays don't make for a critical mass.

-- Matt

[[email protected]]

On Sep 16, 10:39*am, Berry > wrote:
> > Your SSA Top Ten Youth Chapters as of 9/1/2010
>
> > Name * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Total * Youth
> > Caesar Creek Soaring Club *249 * * 43
> > Finger Lakes Soaring Club Inc. * * 51 * * *10
> > Greater Boston Soaring Club * * * *123 * * 17
> > Greater Houston Soaring Assoc * * *113 * * 17
> > Harris Hill Soaring Corp. *144 * * 33
> > Mid-Atlantic Soaring Assoc. * * * *118 * * 10
> > Sky Soaring, Inc. *108 * * 15
> > Soaring Club of Houston * *199 * * 29
> > Texas Soaring Association *196 * * 16
> > Valley Soaring Club, Inc. *99 * * *24
>
> > SSA had 435 youth members at the beginning of the month. *Nearly 10%
> > are in one chapter.
>
> > Frank Whiteley
>
> What's the common factor with all these operations? I think it is
> probably:
>
> 1) Consistent, regular flight operations. Regimented flight operations
> set up with committed crews for each flying day is the way to go (if you
> have the people). That model may not be directly applicable to small
> clubs, but consistently scheduled flying and training operations are
> crucial in my opinion. Most of our small clubs have erratic and *
> sporadic flying schedules that depend on one overworked flight
> instructor and one or two tug drivers, all of whom also have families
> and day jobs. That will soon drive off any but the most determined
> trainees (and it ain't all that attractive to flight instructors and tow
> pilots, either).
>
> 2) Good facilities. Facilities are really important for the non-flying
> family members. Roasting in the summer, freezing in the winter, and not
> even a clean place to go potty will soon drive off mom and dad, taking
> Buffy and Bif, our promising young trainees, with them.
>
> Man, do I miss Caesar Creek...- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

From my experience as commercial operator and then club leader at VSC:
1) It is more important to have enough equipment than the fanciest
equipment. A couple 2-33's(or Blaniks or K13's) making training
possible without stopping member solo or fun flying is far better than
one K-21 that you have to wait around all day to fly.
2) A realistic progression path is important. One negative of "better"
trainers like '21 is that you then must have similar performance
gliders to progress to. A person of modest means that would like to
maybe move to ownership is highly unlikely to want a 1-26 or something
he can afford.
Barrier to progress- drop out.
3) Family friendly. Shade- welcoming environment. Comfort facilities
reasonably at hand.
4) Reliable core staff. Folks want to know they will be able to fly
and not wonder if there will be a tug pilot or instructor today.
5) Social events- Organize a grill picnic once a month after flying.
6) Kids are a wonderful thing. They keep us energized and are a big
help with operation. That said, the number one way to attract and keep
young people is to have bunch of them around. Nobody wants to be the
only (girl, minority, young person,etc.) at the airport. We take extra
care to provide a comfortable environment and social network for our
kids. Pairing them up with another junior knocks down a lot of
barriers. It does not hurt at all to have a few good looking girls in
the group. Guys flock in and other girls feel more comfortable.
7) Cost is important if you want to attract beyond the affluent empty
nest crowd.
8) Do anything you can to make folks want to be part of the group.
There is a huge importance to the social side of things.
9) A good web site really helps to attract folks. SSA's where to fly
site is a great resource.
10) Continuing mentorship of members even after they get a license.
Keep the personal growth going.
It is also worth noting that there are a number of solutions that work
and to not dismiss them just because it doesn't fit your idea of how
things should be.
One guy may think one modern glass ship and a tow car is all that is
needed. Possibly true for his "business" model.
Others will see it differently. It depends on the group you start
with, what facility you have, financial reources available, and what
your objectives are.
That said, a couple guys with a 2-33 and a tow car on some big farm
someplace could have a bunch of fun.
Constructively
UH

[Andreas Maurer]

On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 09:39:35 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:


>From my experience as commercial operator and then club leader at VSC:


Hello Hank,

what are the fees at your club?


Regards
Andreas

[Brad[_2_]]

I learned to fly in a 2-33 years ago at a commercial operation. There
were a few L-13's on the field as well, but for some reason the 2-33
and I seemed to do well together. I viewed the Schweitzer as a means
to an end, and that was to get my ticket and move on to something
better. At Issaquah Soaring that meant a 1-26. I must have been very
naive by todays standards: I didn't know that the 2-33 was an ugly
piece of **** and if I was smart I would have demanded the L-13 or
simply given up my dream of soaring..............as to the 1-26 the
day I got checked out to fly it made me think I had finally "arrived"
and could now play with the "big boys" Of course the big boys flew
ASW-15's, ASW-20's and an RS-15 that I thought looked like a
rocketship.

I couldn't wait to help these guys rig their ships, as a guy in his
late teens/early twenties the thought of helping these guys rig their
unbelievably cool gliders was a source of endless enthusiasm and
inspiration.

Fast forward to now: At our field it's very rare for any student or
low time pilot to come over and help any of the private guys rig. In
fact I'm led to believe that they have been told that we are a bunch
of low level XC flying lunatics and should be avoided! The students
tend to huddle together and talk amongst themselves or feverishly text
their buddies. I don't recall any of them asking us seasoned pilots
about local conditions, what the weather might do today, where the
best routes for XC might be........I find it all very strange. True,
they are students, but someday students are supposed to become pilots
and soaring pilots are want to go XC, I think.......

Our club would also do well to start making the instructor corp pay
monthly dues, and to make students pay the full membership fees and
dues. We probably see a shortfall of over $5000 a year due to our
current policies. From what I've seen some of our instructors seem to
think they and their students have priority on the field. More than
once while waiting for the towplane I've seen a Blanik get pulled in
front of a waiting private ship, with the excuse that students have
priority.

Maybe students are the future of soaring, well...............yes, some
are...........out of the many that start I bet only a handful will
move forward and experience the full joy of what soaring has to offer.
I don't believe it is our business to push people towards this,
something like soaring pulls people...............those that don't fly
a lot in my opinion are dangerous and should leave the
sport.................perhaps to text their buddies and tell them how
rad it was to fly in a glider.

Brad

[Morgan[_2_]]

I think you're seeing one of the primary reasons that soaring is in
decline and that people want to blame 2-33s. Times and people have
changed. Instant gratification, me first, and a sense of entitlement
are all pretty common in modern society. What often hasn't changed is
the approach that clubs take to attracting and addressing the changing
demographic.

I've seen it professed that the downfall of soaring is in fact due to
high performance glass ships and the fact that they result in people
being gone all day and that there is no challenge or camaraderie like
in the good ole days when people landed out in their 1-26 near the
airport every weekend. I'm sure there is some semblance of truth in
that, but only when taken into context of how society has changed and
that pilots of the 70's or 80's had a different set of pressures and
norms to work against.

Ultimately it is the people involved and how they welcome new faces
into soaring that probably makes the biggest difference. I appreciate
the constructive tack that this conversation is taking. As the
president of a small and struggling club, I can use all of the help
and ideas I can get in trying to motivate existing members to come out
and fly and to get new people involved.

For what it is worth, despite the feeling that not having a sexy ship
in our fleet was hurting our long term retention, I drove the
acquisition of a second 2-33 as a priority over something higher
performance. If you want good activity in a club, you need to make
sure that students that go solo have something to fly and that it
doesn't interrupt training as well.

Morgan


On Sep 16, 10:29*am, Brad > wrote:
> I learned to fly in a 2-33 years ago at a commercial operation. There
> were a few L-13's on the field as well, but for some reason the 2-33
> and I seemed to do well together. I viewed the Schweitzer as a means
> to an end, and that was to get my ticket and move on to something
> better. At Issaquah Soaring that meant a 1-26. I must have been very
> naive by todays standards: I didn't know that the 2-33 was an ugly
> piece of **** and if I was smart I would have demanded the L-13 or
> simply given up my dream of soaring..............as to the 1-26 the
> day I got checked out to fly it made me think I had finally "arrived"
> and could now play with the "big boys" Of course the big boys flew
> ASW-15's, ASW-20's and an RS-15 that I thought looked like a
> rocketship.
>
> I couldn't wait to help these guys rig their ships, as a guy in his
> late teens/early twenties the thought of helping these guys rig their
> unbelievably cool gliders was a source of endless enthusiasm and
> inspiration.
>
> Fast forward to now: At our field it's very rare for any student or
> low time pilot to come over and help any of the private guys rig. In
> fact I'm led to believe that they have been told that we are a bunch
> of low level XC flying lunatics and should be avoided! The students
> tend to huddle together and talk amongst themselves or feverishly text
> their buddies. I don't recall any of them asking us seasoned pilots
> about local conditions, what the weather might do today, where the
> best routes for XC might be........I find it all very strange. True,
> they are students, but someday students are supposed to become pilots
> and soaring pilots are want to go XC, I think.......
>
> Our club would also do well to start making the instructor corp pay
> monthly dues, and to make students pay the full membership fees and
> dues. We probably see a shortfall of over $5000 a year due to our
> current policies. From what I've seen some of our instructors seem to
> think they and their students have priority on the field. More than
> once while waiting for the towplane I've seen a Blanik get pulled in
> front of a waiting private ship, with the excuse that students have
> priority.
>
> Maybe students are the future of soaring, well...............yes, some
> are...........out of the many that start I bet only a handful will
> move forward and experience the full joy of what soaring has to offer.
> I don't believe it is our business to push people towards this,
> something like soaring pulls people...............those that don't fly
> a lot in my opinion are dangerous and should leave the
> sport.................perhaps to text their buddies and tell them how
> rad it was to fly in a glider.
>
> Brad

[[email protected]]

On Sep 16, 12:57*pm, Andreas Maurer > wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 09:39:35 -0700 (PDT),
> wrote:
>
> >From my experience as commercial operator and then club leader at VSC:
>
> Hello Hank,
>
> what are the fees at your club?
>
> Regards
> Andreas

Initiation is $300
Dues $35/month
2000' tow is $25 and $13 for Jrs
2-33 is @26/hr and $13 for Jr's
1-26 is $20/hr and N/C for Jrs
1-34 $28/hr and $14 for Jrs
K21 is $40/ hr for all- that will drop in 5 yrs time when it is paid
for.
General approach is Jr's pay variable costs and fixed costs are
covered by regular members.
Jrs are about 25% of membership and about 35% of activity
FWIW

[Andreas Maurer]

On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:50:01 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:


>Initiation is $300
>Dues $35/month
>2000' tow is $25 and $13 for Jrs
>2-33 is @26/hr and $13 for Jr's
>1-26 is $20/hr and N/C for Jrs
>1-34 $28/hr and $14 for Jrs
>K21 is $40/ hr for all- that will drop in 5 yrs time when it is paid
>for.
>General approach is Jr's pay variable costs and fixed costs are
>covered by regular members.
>Jrs are about 25% of membership and about 35% of activity


Argh... impressive. Does your club have a web site?


I'd estimate that an average pilot with, say, 30 flights and 30 hours
with a mix between 2-33, 1-26 and 1-34 per year pays about $1.900 per
year, and an average junior student pilot with the same hours about
$1.300 per year. Am I halfways correct?


Sorry if I'm being offensive, but to me these fees are brutal.
Please allow me a question: How many members does your club have, and
what is causing such high costs?

I have to admit that unless your club has to pay a formidable rent for
the use of your airfield I don't have the slightest clue what could
cause such costs for a glider operation.

Regards
Andreas

[Morgan[_2_]]

Similar rates in our club and ours is also pretty cheap by some
standards.

$40/mnth dues
Aircraft: $7/flight
2000ft tow: $30

Your 30 flights/30hrs is still in the $1500 range thanks mostly to tow
costs.

I would love to have our average member taking 30 flights. Students
yes, more actually. Average members are not as active with far fewer
flights than 30 I would guess. We love them, they pay their dues and
help us with our fixed costs, but I'd like to see more members out and
flying.

Costs in the US depend a lot on the location of the club. I would
guess that a typical club pays the most in rent/mortgage. Then
probably insurance. (Remember, we are talking about the US and we
love to sue everyone for everything) Aircraft leases, maintenance,
utilities, misc.

Our club of around 40-50 members requires very careful attention to
finances to stay afloat with the above cost structure.

Some things we do to support Juniors are including kids automatically
with a parent membership. So a juniors parent joins the club for $40/
mnth and their children are automatically covered as club members. It
can be beneficial because sometimes it is a kid that is really
interested, but we get mom or dad to take a demo (in a 2-33) and they
end up giving soaring a try as well. Young students in college get an
extremely discounted rate for monthly dues. $10 gets their monthly
dues covered. Right now I don't think we have any college students on
the roster though, not for lack of trying. We are located 70 miles
from the closest college though.






On Sep 16, 5:26*pm, Andreas Maurer > wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:50:01 -0700 (PDT),
> wrote:
>
> >Initiation is $300
> >Dues $35/month
> >2000' tow is $25 and $13 for Jrs
> >2-33 is @26/hr *and $13 for Jr's
> >1-26 is $20/hr and N/C for Jrs
> >1-34 $28/hr and $14 for Jrs
> >K21 is $40/ hr for all- that will drop in 5 yrs time when it is paid
> >for.
> >General approach is Jr's pay variable costs and fixed costs are
> >covered by regular members.
> >Jrs are about 25% of membership and about 35% of activity
>
> Argh... impressive. Does your club have a web site?
>
> I'd estimate that an average pilot with, say, 30 flights and 30 hours
> with a mix between 2-33, 1-26 and 1-34 per year pays about $1.900 per
> year, and an average junior student pilot with the same hours about
> $1.300 per year. Am I halfways correct?
>
> Sorry if I'm being offensive, but to me these fees are brutal.
> Please allow me a question: How many members does your club have, and
> what is causing such high costs?
>
> I have to admit that unless your club has to pay a formidable rent for
> the use of your airfield I don't have the slightest clue what could
> cause such costs for a glider operation.
>
> Regards
> Andreas

[vaughn[_3_]]

"Andreas Maurer" > wrote in message
...
>
> Sorry if I'm being offensive, but to me these fees are brutal.
> Please allow me a question: How many members does your club have, and
> what is causing such high costs?
>
Don't know about anyone else, but I would love to have that club near me so I
could pay those "brutal" costs.

Vaughn

[Andreas Maurer]

On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 18:16:03 -0700 (PDT), Morgan >
wrote:

>Similar rates in our club and ours is also pretty cheap by some
>standards.
>
>$40/mnth dues
>Aircraft: $7/flight
>2000ft tow: $30
>
>Your 30 flights/30hrs is still in the $1500 range thanks mostly to tow
>costs.
>
>I would love to have our average member taking 30 flights. Students
>yes, more actually. Average members are not as active with far fewer
>flights than 30 I would guess. We love them, they pay their dues and
>help us with our fixed costs, but I'd like to see more members out and
>flying.
>
>Costs in the US depend a lot on the location of the club. I would
>guess that a typical club pays the most in rent/mortgage. Then
>probably insurance. (Remember, we are talking about the US and we
>love to sue everyone for everything) Aircraft leases, maintenance,
>utilities, misc.

Thx a lot for your numbers!
Are you able to provide some typical numbers for rent, mortgage and
insurances?

For comparison:
My club with about 85 to 90 active members pays 18.000 Euro per year
for the insurances of nine gliders (ASK-21, Ka-8b, 2*DG-300, ASW-24,
ASW-27, Duo Discus XL, SF-34B, Mistral-C), a Super Dimona motorglider
and a DR-300 tow plane. All our gliders apart from Ka-8 and Mistral-C
are covered by hull insurance.


>Our club of around 40-50 members requires very careful attention to
>finances to stay afloat with the above cost structure.

I see other clubs with similar size having similar problems: Few
members, not much flying by paying members, therefore very limited
income because income is provided by flying time.

>
>Some things we do to support Juniors are including kids automatically
>with a parent membership. So a juniors parent joins the club for $40/
>mnth and their children are automatically covered as club members. It
>can be beneficial because sometimes it is a kid that is really
>interested, but we get mom or dad to take a demo (in a 2-33) and they
>end up giving soaring a try as well. Young students in college get an
>extremely discounted rate for monthly dues. $10 gets their monthly
>dues covered. Right now I don't think we have any college students on
>the roster though, not for lack of trying. We are located 70 miles
>from the closest college though.

Have you considered a different kind of fee system?
An example:
In my club we have a flat rate of 305 Euro per year that includes all
the flying (including all winch launches) for any glider. This flat
rate is identical for all members, the only additional fees are the
member fees of about 140 Euro and 70 Euro for junior pilots without an
income.
This means, a pilot in my club pays 445 Euro (respectively a student
pilot375 Euro) per year, no matter how much he flies. The only
additional fees are aerotows (which are similar to yours - aertow fees
are calculated to cover the costs of the tow plane).

Very easy to calculate, stable income, and tends to provoke pilots to
fly *much* more often because flying is essentially free (flatrate!).

We are of the opinion that the introduction of this flat rate saved
our club 25 years ago when takeoff numbers started to decline (we had
a similar system these days as you have now).

With this system we get an overage of cash of about 15.000 Euro per
year which we are using to pay for our part of the airfield since 2000
(it'll be payed at the end of 2011).


Might this be a useful system for a US club (with adjusted fees of
course)?


Regards
Andreas

>
>
>
>
>
>
>On Sep 16, 5:26*pm, Andreas Maurer > wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:50:01 -0700 (PDT),
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Initiation is $300
>> >Dues $35/month
>> >2000' tow is $25 and $13 for Jrs
>> >2-33 is @26/hr *and $13 for Jr's
>> >1-26 is $20/hr and N/C for Jrs
>> >1-34 $28/hr and $14 for Jrs
>> >K21 is $40/ hr for all- that will drop in 5 yrs time when it is paid
>> >for.
>> >General approach is Jr's pay variable costs and fixed costs are
>> >covered by regular members.
>> >Jrs are about 25% of membership and about 35% of activity
>>
>> Argh... impressive. Does your club have a web site?
>>
>> I'd estimate that an average pilot with, say, 30 flights and 30 hours
>> with a mix between 2-33, 1-26 and 1-34 per year pays about $1.900 per
>> year, and an average junior student pilot with the same hours about
>> $1.300 per year. Am I halfways correct?
>>
>> Sorry if I'm being offensive, but to me these fees are brutal.
>> Please allow me a question: How many members does your club have, and
>> what is causing such high costs?
>>
>> I have to admit that unless your club has to pay a formidable rent for
>> the use of your airfield I don't have the slightest clue what could
>> cause such costs for a glider operation.
>>
>> Regards
>> Andreas

[Andreas Maurer]

On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 21:39:50 -0400, "vaughn"
> wrote:

>
>"Andreas Maurer" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> Sorry if I'm being offensive, but to me these fees are brutal.
>> Please allow me a question: How many members does your club have, and
>> what is causing such high costs?
>>
>Don't know about anyone else, but I would love to have that club near me so I
>could pay those "brutal" costs.

Wrong side of the big pond I guess... ;)
Here in Germany you seldom have to drive more than 15 miles to the
next gliding club...

But honestly I'd like to know where all that money goes - in other
words: What is this cost factor ( (one that German clubs don't have to
pay) which forces the club to demand such fees?

Regards
Andreas

[Papa3]

On Sep 16, 8:26*pm, Andreas Maurer > wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:50:01 -0700 (PDT),
> wrote:
>
> >Initiation is $300
> >Dues $35/month
> >2000' tow is $25 and $13 for Jrs
> >2-33 is @26/hr *and $13 for Jr's
> >1-26 is $20/hr and N/C for Jrs
> >1-34 $28/hr and $14 for Jrs
> >K21 is $40/ hr for all- that will drop in 5 yrs time when it is paid
> >for.
> >General approach is Jr's pay variable costs and fixed costs are
> >covered by regular members.
> >Jrs are about 25% of membership and about 35% of activity
>
> Argh... impressive. Does your club have a web site?
>
> I'd estimate that an average pilot with, say, 30 flights and 30 hours
> with a mix between 2-33, 1-26 and 1-34 per year pays about $1.900 per
> year, and an average junior student pilot with the same hours about
> $1.300 per year. Am I halfways correct?
>
> Sorry if I'm being offensive, but to me these fees are brutal.
> Please allow me a question: How many members does your club have, and
> what is causing such high costs?
>
> I have to admit that unless your club has to pay a formidable rent for
> the use of your airfield I don't have the slightest clue what could
> cause such costs for a glider operation.
>
> Regards
> Andreas

Years ago, I did a comparative study of the costs of various soaring
operations in our Region (SSA Region 2) for a report I was working
on. The finding was that the above costs would be at the lower end
of what it costs for ANY club in the US. And, costs can be much
higher... the going rate for 2,000 foot aero tow at a commercial
operation in the mid- Atlantic region is close to $50. So, a person
doing 30 tows per year is already out $1500 exclusive of any sailplane
rental, instruction, etc.

There are many reasons for these higher costs (compared to most
European clubs), but some of them are:

- Aero Tow Only: A towplane is an expensive piece of equipment to
operate and maintain compared to a winch.
- Airport Ownership: Only a small fraction of clubs own the property
from which they operate. This has to do with land use policy in the
US. Suburban sprawl means that any place close enough to a major
population center will cost several hundred thousand dollars to
acquire (and several million for a place like the airport where VSC
operates). As a result of not owning the airport, clubs struggle to:
* Build repair and maintenance facilities and skills (meaning they
tend to pay for maintenance and repairs)
* Create clubhouses (making it harder to attract/retain members)
* Create inviting places for non-flying members to hang out (same)
* Pay for aircraft tiedowns and/or hangars (taking money away from
maintenance or capital funds and restricting the type of aircraft due
to lack of hangarage)
* Run a winch operation (since many public use airports are NOT winch
friendly)
- Alternative flying options: Paradoxically, the fact that the US is
a relatively easier/cheaper place for people who want to learn to fly
means that gliding (which is sometimes viewed as a second tier behind
power flying) has to compete harder for potential pilots.

Having flown at glider clubs around the world including the UK,
Germany, and Sweden, I'm always struck by how nice the environments
are at even moderate sized clubs. A bar, a small restaurant,
bunkhouse, and most of all, well-stocked workshops go a long way to
growing clubs and creating the volunteer corps which helps to keep
costs in check.

Erik

[mattm[_2_]]

On Sep 16, 9:39*pm, "vaughn" > wrote:
> "Andreas Maurer" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Sorry if I'm being offensive, but to me these fees are brutal.
> > Please allow me a question: How many members does your club have, and
> > what is causing such high costs?
>
> Don't know about anyone else, but I would love to have that club near me so I
> could pay those "brutal" costs.
>
> Vaughn

Our club has similar rates: $40/mo dues, $29 for 2K tow,
$12/hr for L13, $18/hr for L33, $35/hr for 304C, N/C for instruction.
By far the largest expense is towplane maintenance. Insurance
jumped this year because of two expensive claims in two years,
but I believe it's somewhat proportional to the amount you're paying
for all your planes. $1M liability is included (standard amount),
and the deductibles are small (again standard amount). We
were hoping that our dues could decrease since we had an
increase in membership this year, but we had to buy a G103
after the L13 was grounded, so we'll be paying that off for a while.

-- Matt

[Morgan[_2_]]

I think Erik nailed it on where the money goes and why we are
challenged in the US in a variety of ways.

Insurance is our single largest fixed cost. Nearly half of your
club's insurance costs and not covering nearly as nice of equipment.
A Duo in the US with commercial coverage would cost in the
neighborhood of $4000 to insure. More or less depending on the
declared value, but you can see that just covering the insurance for
100hrs of flight time per year is $40/hr. If it sits idle for part of
the year, that makes the hourly rate even worse.

Critical mass of clubs is obviously dependent on the fixed costs, but
I'd venture to guess that somewhere around 40 paying members is
required to cover basic fixed costs with dues in the $30/$40 a month
range. If you want to buy or lease new aircraft, you're tacking on
$10-20/mnth for every acquisition. But add 10 members and you don't
need to add any additional monthly rate.

If I can succeed in building our club by 10-20 members, that is enough
to afford the mortgage/lease on a pretty nice glider or several decent
gliders. It costs almost nothing in additional overhead to add 10 or
20 members, but their dues go straight to improving the clubs
financial strength and more importantly you need a large base in order
to keep the club active. People lead busy lives, so 10 or 20% of the
membership coming out on the weekend might be all that is reasonable
to expect.

I have looked at alternative fee structures. We do not charge an
hourly rate for our aircraft, so we aren't that far off your club
rates. If I had the same number of members as your club, I'd
probably be able to roll back dues to $30/mnth and that puts us in a
similar price range to your German rates of around $400/yr. But no
winch to provide cheap launches, so you're definitely getting a good
deal. I'd rather charge a couple more dollars per month and eliminate
the per flight fees. It's just an accounting headache and in the end
doesn't raise a tremendous amount of money.

Good to hear how it works for others.

Morgan

On Sep 16, 8:15*pm, mattm > wrote:
> On Sep 16, 9:39*pm, "vaughn" > wrote:
>
> > "Andreas Maurer" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > > Sorry if I'm being offensive, but to me these fees are brutal.
> > > Please allow me a question: How many members does your club have, and
> > > what is causing such high costs?
>
> > Don't know about anyone else, but I would love to have that club near me so I
> > could pay those "brutal" costs.
>
> > Vaughn
>
> Our club has similar rates: $40/mo dues, $29 for 2K tow,
> $12/hr for L13, $18/hr for L33, $35/hr for 304C, N/C for instruction.
> By far the largest expense is towplane maintenance. *Insurance
> jumped this year because of two expensive claims in two years,
> but I believe it's somewhat proportional to the amount you're paying
> for all your planes. *$1M liability is included (standard amount),
> and the deductibles are small (again standard amount). *We
> were hoping that our dues could decrease since we had an
> increase in membership this year, but we had to buy a G103
> after the L13 was grounded, so we'll be paying that off for a while.
>
> -- Matt

[[email protected]]

On Sep 16, 8:26*pm, Andreas Maurer > wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:50:01 -0700 (PDT),
> wrote:
>
> >Initiation is $300
> >Dues $35/month
> >2000' tow is $25 and $13 for Jrs
> >2-33 is @26/hr *and $13 for Jr's
> >1-26 is $20/hr and N/C for Jrs
> >1-34 $28/hr and $14 for Jrs
> >K21 is $40/ hr for all- that will drop in 5 yrs time when it is paid
> >for.
> >General approach is Jr's pay variable costs and fixed costs are
> >covered by regular members.
> >Jrs are about 25% of membership and about 35% of activity
>
> Argh... impressive. Does your club have a web site?
>
> I'd estimate that an average pilot with, say, 30 flights and 30 hours
> with a mix between 2-33, 1-26 and 1-34 per year pays about $1.900 per
> year, and an average junior student pilot with the same hours about
> $1.300 per year. Am I halfways correct?
>
> Sorry if I'm being offensive, but to me these fees are brutal.
> Please allow me a question: How many members does your club have, and
> what is causing such high costs?
>
> I have to admit that unless your club has to pay a formidable rent for
> the use of your airfield I don't have the slightest clue what could
> cause such costs for a glider operation.
>
> Regards
> Andreas

All I can say is that this works for our group. The fee structure does
reflect our approach of generating enough cash to buy or pay for the
next glider or tug. We're now in year 1 of paying for the purchase of
the '21 which will take 5 years. We could cut our fees substantially
if we chose to keep the fleet stagnant, but we , strong users of
2-33's, realize they will not last forever.
We are an 18 year old club that started with 30 members leasing
everything and now have about 100 members(25 juniors) and own 3
2-33's, a 1-34, the '21, and a Pawnee.
Our net member growth has been about 10% /yr after the usual
attrition.
Our fixed costs are not trivial as you might expect. Insurance is
about $12000/yr, airport rent and tiedowns about $22,000/yr. In the
northeastern US, we will never have our own airport.
BTW- Kids pay $50 initiation and $13/ month. It was $8/month but was
increased to help with '21 cost. Once they are in the 1-26, they fly
for cost of the tow.
We also, like many US operations, have quite a number of private and
syndicate gliders, about 25 currently.
FWIW -we see virtually no price resistance with our structure. In fact
most people think it is quite reasonable.
Oor biggest challange in member retention is the reality of time
commitment required given that almost everyone drives an hour or more
each way to fly. And we are the closest(give or take a mile or 2) to
the New York City market.
My personal view is that our biggest challange is making our sport
worth the time required. Urban sprawl, land cost, and airspace issues
mean that, in many parts of the country, Dad can't do chores around
the house on Saturday morning, and spend the afternoon at the gliding
club. Gliding is now an all day activity.
So it isn't the same everywhere and all us have to find ways that work
for our groups. This is why I said in another post that there is no
"right" answer
CU
UH

[cernauta]

On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 03:41:50 -0700 (PDT), ray conlon

>I may be wrong, on this but aren't many of the "clubs" In Europe
>subsidized by there respective governments? I know at one time that
>was true...here except for the CAP program, that just doesn't happen.
>And of course the fact they don't have the culture of "sue everyone in
>site" makes the insurance cost a whole different ball game. Those are
>huge factors in keeping cost lower and attracting more people into the
>sport.

I think it was decades ago, when some funding was given to the
National Aero Clubs, which in turn shared those funds between the
affiliated clubs dedicated to any of the aviation activities, with
motor flying getting by far the largest part of it.

In Italy this has lead to the introduction in service, for the gliding
clubs, of a significant number of tow planes, mainly from US WW-II
leftovers (L-5, L-19). That was from the '50s to the early '80s.
Many of them needed extensive work, of course. They're still the
backbone of Italian gliding, today, after repeated overhauls and
rebuilds.

There was also a program for helping clubs acquire new gliders and
Robin tow planes. The clubs were in competition with each other,
trying and grab one of the very few aircraft available. And, mmm...
the chairmans had to vote for the "right" candidate to the NAC's
board, otherwise...
Still, the clubs had to pay for the aircraft, but could do so with
very long terms.

As of today, in Italy there are no funds for the clubs. I may be
wrong, we just enjoy a very limited exemption on avgas taxes, only for
training flights. Sometimes, a few thousand bucks may be spent by the
NAC on aerotows, for the training or coaching of young competition
pilots.

On the other hand, we suffer very high avgas prices, even by European
standards, very high land rates (for those clubs which are not owners
of their land), very high maintenance prices.
On State-owned airports, we also pay landing fees which substantially
increase the cost of towing (in Rieti, 65 Eur for 2.000ft launch).
In general, Italian clubs really _need_ powerful towplanes, as our
strips are usually quite short and close to obstacles. A weaker tow,
like an ultralight or a motorglider, would more often be grounded for
the day's wind conditions, making most members unhappy.

So, the _average_ fees are:
annual 1.000 Eur (between 400 and 2000, peak values)
tow 30-60 Eur
glider rent - free

our clubs have very differing glider fleets. Most used trainer is the
ASK-21, then Grobs and K-13. Janus, and in a few lucky clubs,
Duo-Discus for advanced x-c training. Single seaters are not generally
in big numbers, mainly used for the progression of the new members,
not very much for extended x-c activity.
Private ownership is encouraged. One of the advantages of the larger
membership is it's easy to find 2 or 3 partners for shared ownership.
The most successful clubs are not the cheapest, but those with >100
members and long opening periods (not limited to weekends).

Junior members usually get much better prices, but even so, most of
the young pilots in Italy are the sons and daughters of active,
competitive pilots.
Since the last 10 years, almost half of the new membership has been
coming from other forms of flying, like para-hang gliding.

aldo cernezzi

[Michel Talon]

ray conlon > wrote:
> I may be wrong, on this but aren't many of the "clubs" In Europe
> subsidized by there respective governments? I know at one time that
> was true...here except for the CAP program, that just doesn't happen.
> And of course the fact they don't have the culture of "sue everyone in
> site" makes the insurance cost a whole different ball game. Those are
> huge factors in keeping cost lower and attracting more people into the
> sport.

I think these subsidies have disappeared in France at least 30 years
ago, but they helped the creation of the activity after the war.


--

Michel TALON

[Andreas Maurer]

On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 06:03:30 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:


>All I can say is that this works for our group. The fee structure does
>reflect our approach of generating enough cash to buy or pay for the
>next glider or tug. We're now in year 1 of paying for the purchase of
>the '21 which will take 5 years. We could cut our fees substantially
>if we chose to keep the fleet stagnant, but we , strong users of
>2-33's, realize they will not last forever.

How many hours do your giders fly per year?

>We are an 18 year old club that started with 30 members leasing
>everything and now have about 100 members(25 juniors) and own 3
>2-33's, a 1-34, the '21, and a Pawnee.

Ahhh... that explains a lot.

Nearly all European clubs are a lot older (usually they were founded
in the early 1950's), therefore we had a lot more time top build up a
fleet of glass gliders (my club purchased its first ASW-15 in 1967).
If it takes only five years for you to pay an ASK-21, you might be
Schweizer-free after 20 years... ;)


>Our fixed costs are not trivial as you might expect. Insurance is
>about $12000/yr, airport rent and tiedowns about $22,000/yr. In the
>northeastern US, we will never have our own airport.

:(
Do you lease part of the airport from a commercial operator or is it
just the rent for the piece of land you airport is built upon?

>BTW- Kids pay $50 initiation and $13/ month. It was $8/month but was
>increased to help with '21 cost. Once they are in the 1-26, they fly
>for cost of the tow.
>We also, like many US operations, have quite a number of private and
>syndicate gliders, about 25 currently.


>FWIW -we see virtually no price resistance with our structure. In fact
>most people think it is quite reasonable.

That amazes me.
I have no idea about the income of kids in your area, but in my club
many of the kids couldn't afford if they had to pay significantly more
than the current fees.

>Oor biggest challange in member retention is the reality of time
>commitment required given that almost everyone drives an hour or more
>each way to fly. And we are the closest(give or take a mile or 2) to
>the New York City market.

Yup - quite a challenge here, too (altough our members usually live
within a 30 minutes drive).

>My personal view is that our biggest challange is making our sport
>worth the time required. Urban sprawl, land cost, and airspace issues
>mean that, in many parts of the country, Dad can't do chores around
>the house on Saturday morning, and spend the afternoon at the gliding
>club. Gliding is now an all day activity.

Quite a problem, I agree.

>So it isn't the same everywhere and all us have to find ways that work
>for our groups. This is why I said in another post that there is no
>"right" answer

100% agree.

CU
Andreas

[jb92563]

The critical mass of a club is very important.

I was treasurer at LESC when our club was struggling to meet our
monthly obligations with only 35 members a few years ago.

We had 3 2-33's, 1 1-26, 1 1-34, 1 Pilatus B4, and 2 Calair
towplanes.

But last year when local Glider clubs at Hemet, CA were kicked off the
airport we gained about 35 members.

Based on all the extra income selling more tows etc, we are now a
healthy club and can start thinking about buying a nice 2 seater for
dual training and rides.

We have had to offer a lot of rides to keep us afloat flying Boy
Scouts, Adventure Clubs, and gift certificates in the past.

I feel that when the club goes below 50 members its a lot harder to
make ends meet.

We charge 50/mth dues , 25/mth for Juniors, 10/mth if you own your
own glider and just need tows.

Tows are $63 for the first 3000' to get up on our ridge at Elsinore.

Ray

[Frank Whiteley]

On Sep 17, 1:20*am, Morgan > wrote:
> I think Erik nailed it on where the money goes and why we are
> challenged in the US in a variety of ways.
>
> Insurance is our single largest fixed cost. *Nearly half of your
> club's insurance costs and not covering nearly as nice of equipment.
> A Duo in the US with commercial coverage would cost in the
> neighborhood of $4000 to insure. *More or less depending on the
> declared value, but you can see that just covering the insurance for
> 100hrs of flight time per year is $40/hr. *If it sits idle for part of
> the year, that makes the hourly rate even worse.
>
> Critical mass of clubs is obviously dependent on the fixed costs, but
> I'd venture to guess that somewhere around 40 paying members is
> required to cover basic fixed costs with dues in the $30/$40 a month
> range. *If you want to buy or lease new aircraft, you're tacking on
> $10-20/mnth for every acquisition. *But add 10 members and you don't
> need to add any additional monthly rate.
>
> If I can succeed in building our club by 10-20 members, that is enough
> to afford the mortgage/lease on a pretty nice glider or several decent
> gliders. *It costs almost nothing in additional overhead to add 10 or
> 20 members, but their dues go straight to improving the clubs
> financial strength and more importantly you need a large base in order
> to keep the club active. *People lead busy lives, so 10 or 20% of the
> membership coming out on the weekend might be all that is reasonable
> to expect.
>
> I have looked at alternative fee structures. *We do not charge an
> hourly rate for our aircraft, so we aren't that far off your club
> rates. * If I had the same number of members as your club, I'd
> probably be able to roll back dues to $30/mnth and that puts us in a
> similar price range to your German rates of around $400/yr. *But no
> winch to provide cheap launches, so you're definitely getting a good
> deal. *I'd rather charge a couple more dollars per month and eliminate
> the per flight fees. *It's just an accounting headache and in the end
> doesn't raise a tremendous amount of money.
>
> Good to hear how it works for others.
>
> Morgan
>

Texas Soaring Association and Bay Area Soaring Associates self-insure
and perhaps others do also, including at least one commercial
operator.

Renter/non-owner insurance is left to the member/user.

Frank Whiteley

[Bruce Hoult]

On Sep 17, 7:20*pm, Morgan > wrote:
> Insurance is our single largest fixed cost. *Nearly half of your
> club's insurance costs and not covering nearly as nice of equipment.
> A Duo in the US with commercial coverage would cost in the
> neighborhood of $4000 to insure. *More or less depending on the
> declared value,

That sounds reasonable. In NZ we paid around US$9500 to insure our
fleet in 2008 which consisted of two DG1000s, an ancient Janus, and
two PW5s.


> but you can see that just covering the insurance for
> 100hrs of flight time per year is $40/hr. *If it sits idle for part of
> the year, that makes the hourly rate even worse.

That sounds low.

Our 2 seater fleet has totaled the following hours:

2009: 426
2008: 535
2007: 524
2006: 512
2005: 471

Over that time the fleet varied from two Grob Twin Astirs plus a
little used ancient Janus (generally 70 - 80 hours a year due to few
pilots being rated and comfortable flying it) to just two DG1000's
today.

In 2008 the first of our DG1000s did 359 hours while the Janus did 69
and the 2nd DG1000 (which arrived after the soaring season had
finished) did 107.

We fly weekends year round (with a lot of no-flying days in winter),
and 7 days a week in December - March.

I think it's fair to say that if you've got a glass two seater and
it's not doing 200 - 250 hours a year in a club environment (or more
commercially) then you're doing something wrong.

[Marc Ramsey[_3_]]

At 15:54 17 September 2010, Frank Whiteley wrote:
>Texas Soaring Association and Bay Area Soaring Associates self-insure
>and perhaps others do also, including at least one commercial
>operator.

I don't want this to sound snarky, but:

I know a commercial operator who self-insured for years, until a "freak"
wind storm (perhaps a small tornado) tore up his hangar and destroyed just
about every glider and towplane he had tied down outside, basically
putting him out of business until he found new partners with deep pockets.
Since this is a thread about replacing US$10K 2-33s and Blaniks with
nearly US$100K K-21s and moving clubs into the 21st century, are you
really suggesting self-insurance as a serious option?

Marc

[Morgan[_2_]]

I was just throwing a number and some easy math out there for
Andreas.

Generally, I would agree that 200hrs+ a year for a nice glass two-
place in a commercial or club environment is reasonable. 4+ hours
each day on the weekend doesn't seem unreasonable. Still 200/hrs is
only $20/hr just to insurance thanks to the lawyers.





On Sep 17, 11:36*am, Bruce Hoult > wrote:
> On Sep 17, 7:20*pm, Morgan > wrote:
>
> > Insurance is our single largest fixed cost. *Nearly half of your
> > club's insurance costs and not covering nearly as nice of equipment.
> > A Duo in the US with commercial coverage would cost in the
> > neighborhood of $4000 to insure. *More or less depending on the
> > declared value,
>
> That sounds reasonable. In NZ we paid around US$9500 to insure our
> fleet in 2008 which consisted of two DG1000s, an ancient Janus, and
> two PW5s.
>
> > but you can see that just covering the insurance for
> > 100hrs of flight time per year is $40/hr. *If it sits idle for part of
> > the year, that makes the hourly rate even worse.
>
> That sounds low.
>
> Our 2 seater fleet has totaled the following hours:
>
> 2009: 426
> 2008: 535
> 2007: 524
> 2006: 512
> 2005: 471
>
> Over that time the fleet varied from two Grob Twin Astirs plus a
> little used ancient Janus (generally 70 - 80 hours a year due to few
> pilots being rated and comfortable flying it) to just two DG1000's
> today.
>
> In 2008 the first of our DG1000s did 359 hours while the Janus did 69
> and the 2nd DG1000 (which arrived after the soaring season had
> finished) did 107.
>
> We fly weekends year round (with a lot of no-flying days in winter),
> and 7 days a week in December - March.
>
> I think it's fair to say that if you've got a glass two seater and
> it's not doing 200 - 250 hours a year in a club environment (or more
> commercially) then you're doing something wrong.

[Frank Whiteley]

On Sep 17, 2:21*pm, Marc Ramsey >
wrote:
> At 15:54 17 September 2010, Frank Whiteley wrote:
>
> >Texas Soaring Association and Bay Area Soaring Associates self-insure
> >and perhaps others do also, including at least one commercial
> >operator.
>
> I don't want this to sound snarky, but:
>
> I know a commercial operator who self-insured for years, until a "freak"
> wind storm (perhaps a small tornado) tore up his hangar and destroyed just
> about every glider and towplane he had tied down outside, basically
> putting him out of business until he found new partners with deep pockets..
> *Since this is a thread about replacing US$10K 2-33s and Blaniks with
> nearly US$100K K-21s and moving clubs into the 21st century, are you
> really suggesting self-insurance as a serious option?
>
> Marc

I'm not suggesting anything, merely pointing out what some clubs are
doing (or have done).

BASA's fleet

DG-1000S (N451CH)
DG-505 (N505KM)
Grob 103 (N3836L)
Pegasus 101A (N101LV)
Pegasus 101A (N599JH)
SZD-51-1 “Junior” (N106DS)

Most recent NL indicates $50K+ in their 'insurance fund' set aside.
No idea what member's personal liability for damage might be or if
there's a ceiling.

TSA's fleet
glider, hour, minimum.

Schleicher ASK 21 $24.00 $9.60
Schweizer 1-26 $9.00 $3.60
PZL Swidnik PW-5 $19.00 $7.60
Rolladen-Schneider LS-4 $25.00 $10.00
Schempp-Hirth Duo Discus $30.00 $12.00

TSA's re-designed web site doesn't specify if there's a member
liability. It was the first $3,000 of damage. I don't see that in
any of the currently linked docs. At the current member rates, it may
be that they now carry hull insurance.

Frank Whiteley

[Surfer![_2_]]

"Marc Ramsey" > wrote in message
...
> At 15:54 17 September 2010, Frank Whiteley wrote:
>>Texas Soaring Association and Bay Area Soaring Associates self-insure
>>and perhaps others do also, including at least one commercial
>>operator.
>
> I don't want this to sound snarky, but:
>
> I know a commercial operator who self-insured for years, until a "freak"
> wind storm (perhaps a small tornado) tore up his hangar and destroyed just
> about every glider and towplane he had tied down outside, basically
> putting him out of business until he found new partners with deep pockets.
> Since this is a thread about replacing US$10K 2-33s and Blaniks with
> nearly US$100K K-21s and moving clubs into the 21st century, are you
> really suggesting self-insurance as a serious option?

Did he really self-insure as in put aside the money each year into an
interest-bearing account, or did he ignore the issue?

My club self-insured for a while (UK-based) but then premiums became more
reasonable and we went back to insuring with an insurer.

[Marc Ramsey[_3_]]

At 06:54 18 September 2010, Frank Whiteley wrote:
>BASA's fleet
>
> DG-1000S (N451CH)
> DG-505 (N505KM)
> Grob 103 (N3836L)
> Pegasus 101A (N101LV)
> Pegasus 101A (N599JH)
> SZD-51-1 =93Junior=94 (N106DS)
>
>Most recent NL indicates $50K+ in their 'insurance fund' set aside.
>No idea what member's personal liability for damage might be or if
>there's a ceiling.

BASA is a bit of an anomaly, they are effectively a large syndicate with a
set number of non-owner members. They do no training, have no towplane,
their facilities consist of rented tie downs and parking spaces at various
airports. Self-insurance may well make sense for them.

The whole point behind (hull) insurance is pooled risk. I doubt there are
any clubs or commercial operators that can self-insure against loss of
their entire fleet, yet in just the past decade here in northern
California it has happened once (high winds), and very nearly happened a
second time (uncontained wildfire).

For what it's worth, and based only on the clubs I've belonged to, the
only reason why there have been periods of "self-insurance" is that
there have been enough recent accident claims that they can no longer get
hull insurance for an affordable premium...

Marc

[Paul[_2_]]

On Sep 15, 7:22*pm, Peter Smith > wrote:
> The Harris Hill Soaring Corp. is fortunate to have 3 2-33s, 4 ASK 21s,
> a 1-26, a 1-34, a single place Discus & a Duo. Our juniors are trained
> in the 2-33, & they then progress to the higher performance ships.
> I've not seen any resistance on their part to learning to fly in the
> 2-33.

[snip]
>
> They also don't seem to be at a disadvantage with respect to contest
> soaring because they started out in a 2-33. We train top notch cross
> country & contest pilots.

I learned to fly in 2-33s at Texas Soaring Association in the late
1980s. Eventually the club sold off the old birds and went to Puchacz
and then to ASK-21s, but I know lots of pilots who learned the basics
and much more in old Tubby The Trainer.

It was and is a great confidence builder and it's dirt cheap--two
virtues in a club trainer. Also, like the J-3 Cub, "It's so safe it'll
just barely kill you."

[Steve]

Parachutes with club and training gliders.

Another significant cost is whether or not to require the use of
parachutes for instructors and students.
What are the insurance requirements/savings, if any? The TSA rate for
the club fleet includes a
parachute for use only in the club sailplanes. Seems like parachute
prices have almost doubled in
the last several years.

The member liability is still $3,000. but for some damage, members
will pitch in and help with repairs which
can reduce the cost by a considerable amount.

[Frank Whiteley]

On Sep 18, 12:33*pm, Marc Ramsey >
wrote:
> At 06:54 18 September 2010, Frank Whiteley wrote:
>
> >BASA's fleet
>
> > * *DG-1000S (N451CH)
> > * *DG-505 (N505KM)
> > * *Grob 103 (N3836L)
> > * *Pegasus 101A (N101LV)
> > * *Pegasus 101A (N599JH)
> > * *SZD-51-1 =93Junior=94 (N106DS)
>
> >Most recent NL indicates $50K+ in their 'insurance fund' set aside.
> >No idea what member's personal liability for damage might be or if
> >there's a ceiling.
>
> BASA is a bit of an anomaly, they are effectively a large syndicate with a
> set number of non-owner members. *They do no training, have no towplane,
> their facilities consist of rented tie downs and parking spaces at various
> airports. *Self-insurance may well make sense for them. *
>
> The whole point behind (hull) insurance is pooled risk. *I doubt there are
> any clubs or commercial operators that can self-insure against loss of
> their entire fleet, yet in just the past decade here in northern
> California it has happened once (high winds), and very nearly happened a
> second time (uncontained wildfire). *
>
> For what it's worth, and based only on the clubs I've belonged to, the
> only reason why there have been periods of "self-insurance" is that
> there have been enough recent accident claims that they can no longer get
> hull insurance for an affordable premium...
>
> Marc

I agree, and that is why BASA is almost the perfect example of a
501c(7) social/recreational club. Chapters that train and bring
people to soaring would be better served to seek a more public benefit
model. Of course, the BASA model only works because there are
sufficient commercial services in the region, so no need to feed a tow
plane. Checkouts and tows are left to the commercial operators. At
least one SSA region has no commercial services, there the chapters
carry the full burden of training and rides.

Apparently some commercial operators transfer much of the insurance
burden to the pilot by requiring renter/non-owner insurance and risk
the other events. Private owners may have this up to the limits of
their hull coverage depending on the underwriter and whether the
glider is on flight coverage. Funny thing about insurance, it's
against negligence. So in the case of wind damage, there must be some
assumption of negligence. The club that lost its fleet earlier this
year in a wind storm had moved and neglected to install adequate tie-
downs apparently or otherwise stow the gliders.

And yes, some chapters have been unable to insure at times due to a
high number of claims. Many repairs up $2500 or so are not claimed
for this reason.

Frank