Letter to editor in SOARING Mag

[R Walters]

Roger Bard has a letter to the editor in this month's SOARING mag. His point is "Why even bother" to fly the OLC contest and he lists four reasons why..

Answering his "reasons why not" is the following: 1&2. A Nimbus 4 is not required since results are handicapped. Ron Schwartz flew his 1-26 to 11th in the world, and he did it from that soaring mecca known as New Jersey. Fifth place was a Ventus 2 (Uwe) and ninth place an ASW27 (Ramy.) 3. Yes, the winner flew above 18,000" legally for some flights. Most of the other winners are not instrument rated pilots and stayed below 18K. 4. One does have to be at the right place at the right time to win anything. That is true of soaring and many other sports. Wally Scott kept his ASW12 assembled in an Odessa hangar and picked his days. Hardly something to be upset about, but rather admired.

A better use for OLC is to learn and compare your flight with club members and pilots flying in similar conditions. Much can be learned from studying traces and Wx, take off times, average climb rates, course deviations, and final glides. Anyone that posts six flights is a winner.

Richard Walters

[Renny[_2_]]

On Monday, February 4, 2013 11:01:19 AM UTC-7, R Walters wrote:
> Roger Bard has a letter to the editor in this month's SOARING mag. His point is "Why even bother" to fly the OLC contest and he lists four reasons why.
>
>
>
> Answering his "reasons why not" is the following: 1&2. A Nimbus 4 is not required since results are handicapped. Ron Schwartz flew his 1-26 to 11th in the world, and he did it from that soaring mecca known as New Jersey. Fifth place was a Ventus 2 (Uwe) and ninth place an ASW27 (Ramy.) 3. Yes, the winner flew above 18,000" legally for some flights. Most of the other winners are not instrument rated pilots and stayed below 18K. 4. One does have to be at the right place at the right time to win anything. That is true of soaring and many other sports. Wally Scott kept his ASW12 assembled in an Odessa hangar and picked his days. Hardly something to be upset about, but rather admired.
>
>
>
> A better use for OLC is to learn and compare your flight with club members and pilots flying in similar conditions. Much can be learned from studying traces and Wx, take off times, average climb rates, course deviations, and final glides. Anyone that posts six flights is a winner.
>
>
>
> Richard Walters

Rick,
Well said! One can really learn a lot using the OLC when you look at your flight and then compare your flight with the flights of others that flew on the same day and from the same location. In the past it was often quite difficult to obtain information from pilots on their flights. In many ways it seemed like a bit of a secret, but now using the OLC you can easily study OLC flight information and really improve your flying and decision making!
Thanks - Renny

[Mike the Strike]

My reaction to the letter was the same - the author's attitude "if I can't be at the top, I'm not going to bother" seems so defeatist.

OLC has been a great boon to cross-country soaring. Although our club has been at the top end, at least in terms of OLC points, we have found that it encourages a lot more folks to try than we ever found before. Our club two-seaters are often carrying loggers and we see a lot more logged flights each year. Even the seasoned cross-country and contest pilots are flying longer and further - often teasing out lift at the end of the day when we would formerly been on the deck drinking beer as the sun set!

Most important, though, even if you are into contests, it can act as your own personal benchmark.

Mike

[[email protected]]

On Monday, February 4, 2013 1:01:19 PM UTC-5, R Walters wrote:
> Roger Bard has a letter to the editor in this month's SOARING mag. His point is "Why even bother" to fly the OLC contest and he lists four reasons why. Answering his "reasons why not" is the following: 1&2. A Nimbus 4 is not required since results are handicapped. Ron Schwartz flew his 1-26 to 11th in the world, and he did it from that soaring mecca known as New Jersey. Fifth place was a Ventus 2 (Uwe) and ninth place an ASW27 (Ramy.) 3. Yes, the winner flew above 18,000" legally for some flights. Most of the other winners are not instrument rated pilots and stayed below 18K. 4. One does have to be at the right place at the right time to win anything. That is true of soaring and many other sports. Wally Scott kept his ASW12 assembled in an Odessa hangar and picked his days. Hardly something to be upset about, but rather admired. A better use for OLC is to learn and compare your flight with club members and pilots flying in similar conditions. Much can be learned from studying traces and Wx, take off times, average climb rates, course deviations, and final glides. Anyone that posts six flights is a winner. Richard Walters

The simple answer to Mr Bard's "why bother?" is that OLC gets a lot of folks out flying XC and extending themselves instead of sitting around home being bored.
The number of participants shows that many pilots don't agree, even if thay don't have an open class glider in wave city.
UH

[[email protected]]

If you get discouraged by Jim Payne doing another 2000 miles in wave, you can set OLC to display flights in your club and your region. Then it's a lot of fun to see who went further/faster in the same conditions where you are.

John Cochrane

[Uncle Fuzzy[_2_]]

I really enjoy the OLC. I can compare my flights this year to last, look at which paths seemed to be faster, and it provides a place to keep my .igc files I'm not likely to lose!!
It's fun to play with the categories too! I downloaded the 'Best Flight' spreadsheet, and found you can sort by aircraft. Then I found that I had the BEST FLIGHT IN THE WORLD - IN A Speed Astir (a couple years!). Too much fun!


On Monday, February 4, 2013 10:01:19 AM UTC-8, R Walters wrote:
> Roger Bard has a letter to the editor in this month's SOARING mag. His point is "Why even bother" to fly the OLC contest and he lists four reasons why.
>
>
>
> Answering his "reasons why not" is the following: 1&2. A Nimbus 4 is not required since results are handicapped. Ron Schwartz flew his 1-26 to 11th in the world, and he did it from that soaring mecca known as New Jersey. Fifth place was a Ventus 2 (Uwe) and ninth place an ASW27 (Ramy.) 3. Yes, the winner flew above 18,000" legally for some flights. Most of the other winners are not instrument rated pilots and stayed below 18K. 4. One does have to be at the right place at the right time to win anything. That is true of soaring and many other sports. Wally Scott kept his ASW12 assembled in an Odessa hangar and picked his days. Hardly something to be upset about, but rather admired.
>
>
>
> A better use for OLC is to learn and compare your flight with club members and pilots flying in similar conditions. Much can be learned from studying traces and Wx, take off times, average climb rates, course deviations, and final glides. Anyone that posts six flights is a winner.
>
>
>
> Richard Walters

[[email protected]]

On Monday, February 4, 2013 6:29:48 PM UTC-6, Uncle Fuzzy wrote:
> I really enjoy the OLC. I can compare my flights this year to last, look at which paths seemed to be faster, and it provides a place to keep my .igc files I'm not likely to lose!!
>
> It's fun to play with the categories too! I downloaded the 'Best Flight' spreadsheet, and found you can sort by aircraft. Then I found that I had the BEST FLIGHT IN THE WORLD - IN A Speed Astir (a couple years!). Too much fun!
>
>
>
>
>
> On Monday, February 4, 2013 10:01:19 AM UTC-8, R Walters wrote:
>
> > Roger Bard has a letter to the editor in this month's SOARING mag. His point is "Why even bother" to fly the OLC contest and he lists four reasons why.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Answering his "reasons why not" is the following: 1&2. A Nimbus 4 is not required since results are handicapped. Ron Schwartz flew his 1-26 to 11th in the world, and he did it from that soaring mecca known as New Jersey. Fifth place was a Ventus 2 (Uwe) and ninth place an ASW27 (Ramy.) 3. Yes, the winner flew above 18,000" legally for some flights. Most of the other winners are not instrument rated pilots and stayed below 18K. 4. One does have to be at the right place at the right time to win anything. That is true of soaring and many other sports. Wally Scott kept his ASW12 assembled in an Odessa hangar and picked his days. Hardly something to be upset about, but rather admired.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > A better use for OLC is to learn and compare your flight with club members and pilots flying in similar conditions. Much can be learned from studying traces and Wx, take off times, average climb rates, course deviations, and final glides. Anyone that posts six flights is a winner.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Richard Walters

Fuzzy is making my point: You can sort the OLC results in so many ways, if you try hard enough you might find your name on top of one of the many categories and regions. Our region 7 is not blessed with the best soaring weather and you won't find any ridges but we compete every weekend with the neighboring IN, MI, OH etc. clubs for the most points and enjoy beating them at times.

Herb Kilian

[Peter von Tresckow]

> wrote:
> On Monday, February 4, 2013 6:29:48 PM UTC-6, Uncle Fuzzy wrote:
>> I really enjoy the OLC. I can compare my flights this year to last,
>> look at which paths seemed to be faster, and it provides a place to keep
>> my .igc files I'm not likely to lose!!
>>
>> It's fun to play with the categories too! I downloaded the 'Best
>> Flight' spreadsheet, and found you can sort by aircraft. Then I found
>> that I had the BEST FLIGHT IN THE WORLD - IN A Speed Astir (a couple
>> years!). Too much fun!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, February 4, 2013 10:01:19 AM UTC-8, R Walters wrote:
>>
>>> Roger Bard has a letter to the editor in this month's SOARING mag. His
>>> point is "Why even bother" to fly the OLC contest and he lists four reasons why.
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Answering his "reasons why not" is the following: 1&2. A Nimbus 4 is
>>> not required since results are handicapped. Ron Schwartz flew his 1-26
>>> to 11th in the world, and he did it from that soaring mecca known as
>>> New Jersey. Fifth place was a Ventus 2 (Uwe) and ninth place an ASW27
>>> (Ramy.) 3. Yes, the winner flew above 18,000" legally for some flights.
>>> Most of the other winners are not instrument rated pilots and stayed
>>> below 18K. 4. One does have to be at the right place at the right time
>>> to win anything. That is true of soaring and many other sports. Wally
>>> Scott kept his ASW12 assembled in an Odessa hangar and picked his days.
>>> Hardly something to be upset about, but rather admired.
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> A better use for OLC is to learn and compare your flight with club
>>> members and pilots flying in similar conditions. Much can be learned
>>> from studying traces and Wx, take off times, average climb rates,
>>> course deviations, and final glides. Anyone that posts six flights is a winner.
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Richard Walters
>
> Fuzzy is making my point: You can sort the OLC results in so many ways,
> if you try hard enough you might find your name on top of one of the many
> categories and regions. Our region 7 is not blessed with the best
> soaring weather and you won't find any ridges but we compete every
> weekend with the neighboring IN, MI, OH etc. clubs for the most points
> and enjoy beating them at times.
>
> Herb Kilian

Lol Herb, you seem to do alright usually but then you have to keep up with
Ted Clausing.

There's even something for us vintage pilots on the OLC now. They started a
Vintage ranking last year, and I think it has actually helped to get some
of us old timer glider pilots to go XC.

I know I'm not going to win the worldwide olc flying a Ka-6 in Wi but
posting to the OLC is still fun.

Pete

[JS]

Pete, you must remember David Stevenson's 1000km flight out of New Castle in a Ka6...
http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/flightinfo.html?dsId=326850
May the Schwartz be with you,
Jim

[Helge_Zembold]

In Germany, my club uses the OLC results for weekly press releases to the local media. Doing so, we have experienced an enormous increase in reputation and applicants for flight training. I would imagine that it should also be possible in the US to send articles about the recent results in e. g. local areas like described by Herbert?

[Dan Marotta]

What a terrific idea! I'll pass this along to the owner of Sundance
Aviation in Moriarty, NM, USA. I'm sure he'd appreciate an enormous
increase in revenue!


"Helge_Zembold" > wrote in message
...
>
> In Germany, my club uses the OLC results for weekly press releases to
> the local media. Doing so, we have experienced an enormous increase in
> reputation and applicants for flight training. I would imagine that it
> should also be possible in the US to send articles about the recent
> results in e. g. local areas like described by Herbert?
>
>
>
>
> --
> Helge_Zembold

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, February 6, 2013 12:55:24 AM UTC-8, Helge_Zembold wrote:
> In Germany, my club uses the OLC results for weekly press releases to
> the local media.
> Helge_Zembold

Helge
Great idea. In Minden, NV USA we have a local TV weatherman ( Mike Alger) very tuned into what Gordo and Hugh are up to and he often talks about their 2000km+ flights. Of particular OLC note was Devin's 2181km wave flight with his girlfriend in a borrowed Duo Discus, never exceeding 18,000'.
Richard Walters

[Dave Nadler]

Seriously, do you guys still read Snoring ?

The high drivel content (as the above-mentioned letter,
dubious technical articles, and limited of coverage of
modern gliding) has caused many I know (and me) to just
stop reading it.

Again, do you still read this ?
Or do you read Gliding International, S&G, and other
possibly more relevant rags ?

Just wondering...
Best Regards, Dave

[who's me?]

Good lord , yes cover to cover. Everything except that nucklehead dealer ad selling electrogliders for 320,000 dollars or is it euro. I rather fly a 1-26.
But seriously , I know I am the only one who read the entire brillant article (Feb 13) by Dr. ( what-the-hell-is-his name...hold on...here it is ) Dr. Daniel Johnson.
I know that none of you sailors are smart enough to comprehend the article so I will tell you the part you must read and post somewhere on your instrument panel.
READ THE LAST 2 PARAGRAPH and post the last 2 sentences on your instrument panel.
Ladies.....his words speak reason why I manage to exceed 38,000 hours without so much a scratch or a violation. Add the great number of mentors along the way to pass on their experience and mistakes that would creat the perfect level of paranoia. Imperfection is inherent in aviation...which is why we wag our stick all the time.
I feel the understanding of Johnson words by all would reduce accidents and incidences by 86%.
"....without so much as a scratch or a violation..."so far! "".
( no cockiness here..trust me )
Amazing piece of work. He deserves the ' Lincoln ' and I shall be the nominee.


R

[Tony[_5_]]

On Monday, February 11, 2013 1:42:36 PM UTC-6, Dave Nadler wrote:
> Seriously, do you guys still read Snoring ?
>
>
>
> The high drivel content (as the above-mentioned letter,
>
> dubious technical articles, and limited of coverage of
>
> modern gliding) has caused many I know (and me) to just
>
> stop reading it.
>
>
>
> Again, do you still read this ?
>
> Or do you read Gliding International, S&G, and other
>
> possibly more relevant rags ?
>
>
>
> Just wondering...
>
> Best Regards, Dave

how do you know its all drivel?

i still read asap after getting it in the mail.

[Andrew[_13_]]

Does anyone argue against Dave, that there is not an
unacceptably high 'drivel content' in Soaring magazine? I don't.
Counting pages in the last issue, I'd put the 'obvious drivel' at
90%. Even the few pages that seem useful, I can't help but be
uncertain about, since I feel there is no knowledgeable editorial
supervision.


At 19:42 11 February 2013, Dave Nadler wrote:
>Seriously, do you guys still read Snoring ?
>
>The high drivel content (as the above-mentioned letter,
>dubious technical articles, and limited of coverage of
>modern gliding) has caused many I know (and me) to just
>stop reading it.
>
>Again, do you still read this ?
>Or do you read Gliding International, S&G, and other
>possibly more relevant rags ?
>
>Just wondering...
>Best Regards, Dave
>

[Andrew[_13_]]

Does anyone argue against Dave, that there is not an
unacceptably high 'drivel content' in Soaring magazine? I don't.
Counting pages in the last issue, I'd put the 'obvious drivel' at
90%. Even the few pages that seem useful, I can't help but be
uncertain about, since I feel there is no knowledgeable editorial
supervision.


At 19:42 11 February 2013, Dave Nadler wrote:
>Seriously, do you guys still read Snoring ?
>
>The high drivel content (as the above-mentioned letter,
>dubious technical articles, and limited of coverage of
>modern gliding) has caused many I know (and me) to just
>stop reading it.
>
>Again, do you still read this ?
>Or do you read Gliding International, S&G, and other
>possibly more relevant rags ?
>
>Just wondering...
>Best Regards, Dave
>

[[email protected]]

Several of my club members have remarked that the last two issues have been the best issues they have ever seen. The issue concentrating on winch ops seemed to have struck a cord with many people.

All of the content in Soaring is provided by volunteers like yourself. If you want to see more content that interests you then please write an article and submit it for publishing.

I just finished reading Bill Schweizer's book detailing the first fifty years of SSA history. Amazingly the same issues that confront the SSA today also confronted it in 1935, 1945, 1955, etc.. The newsletter and later the magazine have been continuously improved since the days when it was a bimonthly newsletter.

When you call the content drivel and slam the articles please put a face to the author's name and remember that he or she took the time out of their daily lives to write the article, edit it, and submit it with zero compensation. I encourage you to do the same with content that you find interesting.. It may just be the article that others like you are wanting to see.

Lane
XF

[gkemp]

On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 5:53:30 AM UTC-7, wrote:
> Several of my club members have remarked that the last two issues have been the best issues they have ever seen. The issue concentrating on winch ops seemed to have struck a cord with many people.
>
>
>
> All of the content in Soaring is provided by volunteers like yourself. If you want to see more content that interests you then please write an article and submit it for publishing.
>
>
>
> I just finished reading Bill Schweizer's book detailing the first fifty years of SSA history. Amazingly the same issues that confront the SSA today also confronted it in 1935, 1945, 1955, etc.. The newsletter and later the magazine have been continuously improved since the days when it was a bimonthly newsletter.
>
>
>
> When you call the content drivel and slam the articles please put a face to the author's name and remember that he or she took the time out of their daily lives to write the article, edit it, and submit it with zero compensation. I encourage you to do the same with content that you find interesting. It may just be the article that others like you are wanting to see.
>
>
>
> Lane
>
> XF

After being a member of SSA for 45 years, and my membership being due this month, and I don't fly anymore, this month's Soaring magazine has almost decided me not to renew.

Gary

[[email protected]]

I hate to hear that you might not renew. I know that you have many soaring accomplishments and records. Soaring and the SSA don't need to loose members like you who have led the way for the next generation.

[Dave Nadler]

On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 7:53:30 AM UTC-5, wrote:

> When you call the content drivel and slam the articles please put a
> face to the author's name and remember that he or she took the time
> out of their daily lives to write the article, edit it, and submit
> it with zero compensation. I encourage you to do the same with
> content that you find interesting. It may just be the article
> that others like you are wanting to see.

I have had at least 10 articles published in Soaring.
Have you ?

Every time I submit something, it gets screwed up in editing,
and I get nasty letters and emails. My recent favorite is the
picture of Tom Kelley, caption erroneously changed to say
it was Al Tyler ! Not sure if these guys appreciated that...

[son_of_flubber]

I applaud ALL individual contributions to Soaring Magazine. I've helped edit some of the articles and I know that it is a lot of work.

The recent issue that focused on winches and "gravity launches" was a hoot, but most months I scan the whole thing and pick out one article that I want to read.

A printed magazine is anachronistic. Which will last the longest, the 2-33s or Soaring magazine?

Maybe cut it back to four issues a year? Two in the Winter, one in Spring and one in Fall.

Maybe hire one of the better soaring journals to produce an SSA edition? The good stuff from USA contributors could find a wider audience.

Put all of the announcements and "communications to members" on the SAA website? Put the letters on a members-only forum of the SSA website. Some of the letters would discourage people from getting involved with the sport.

If the magazine went away entirely, SSA would probably lose 500+ members who maintain no other contact with the sport. So I'd like to see fewer issues of higher and more consistent quality.

[[email protected]]

> If the magazine went away entirely, SSA would probably lose 500+ members who maintain no other contact with the sport.

This thread has made me really sad. I love the sport of soaring only slightly less than my family...and depending on the day sometimes more. ;) My guess is that without Soaring magazine coming monthly the real loss in membership would be more like adding another zero to the above comment to be more like 5000+ members dropping off. Sorry guys but I think it is petty to rip on the content of a volunteer publication in public. Feel free to submit more of your own work to improve the quality. My guess is it will be criticized as well. I for one appreciate the magazine even with its flaws. Would much rather have it come every month than not.

Damn you guys - stop being so quick to find fault and pick fights and just enjoy the silent fun we have up in the air. Maybe it is because it is so peaceful and silent up there when we soar that we feel the compulsion to shout and bicker when we get down on the ground?

Bruno - B4

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 12:42:23 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> > If the magazine went away entirely, SSA would probably lose 500+ members who maintain no other contact with the sport. This thread has made me really sad. I love the sport of soaring only slightly less than my family...and depending on the day sometimes more. ;) My guess is that without Soaring magazine coming monthly the real loss in membership would be more like adding another zero to the above comment to be more like 5000+ members dropping off. Sorry guys but I think it is petty to rip on the content of a volunteer publication in public. Feel free to submit more of your own work to improve the quality. My guess is it will be criticized as well. I for one appreciate the magazine even with its flaws. Would much rather have it come every month than not. Damn you guys - stop being so quick to find fault and pick fights and just enjoy the silent fun we have up in the air. Maybe it is because it is so peaceful and silent up there when we soar that we feel the compulsion to shout and bicker when we get down on the ground? Bruno - B4

I second that emotion
UH

[Tony[_5_]]

On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 11:42:23 AM UTC-6, wrote:
> > If the magazine went away entirely, SSA would probably lose 500+ members who maintain no other contact with the sport. This thread has made me really sad. I love the sport of soaring only slightly less than my family...and depending on the day sometimes more. ;) My guess is that without Soaring magazine coming monthly the real loss in membership would be more like adding another zero to the above comment to be more like 5000+ members dropping off. Sorry guys but I think it is petty to rip on the content of a volunteer publication in public. Feel free to submit more of your own work to improve the quality. My guess is it will be criticized as well. I for one appreciate the magazine even with its flaws. Would much rather have it come every month than not. Damn you guys - stop being so quick to find fault and pick fights and just enjoy the silent fun we have up in the air. Maybe it is because it is so peaceful and silent up there when we soar that we feel the compulsion to shout and bicker when we get down on the ground? Bruno - B4

bravo Bruno.

back to the original subject (does anyone remember that?) I can sympathize with Roger's feelings. I felt the same way back when I started. My cross country flying was generally short distances, involved a fairly high fun quotient but had a nearly 100% frustration aspect when any sort of flight recording was involved. I got to the point where I wouldn't even fly with a barograph because the eventual failure would just put a black spot on an otherwise fun flight. My time was otherwise occupied with concerns of passing college classes and my budget would hardly accomodate a tow let alone any sort of logger. So to me the OLC was for rich glassholes (although i had never flown with a fiberglass glider pilot i was sure they all must be rich jerks). It surely didn't help that no one else in my area was using OLC either really so there wasn't any peer pressure to join in.

That changed when I moved to kansas and my financial situation improved markedly AND the soaring conditions got a lot better. Steve Leonard loaned me a logger, a cambridge 20 which made a great gateway drug, as he knew it would. My general soaring outlook improved, i started hanging out with glass pilots and couldn't find a single jerk, and lo and behold i eventually bought a glass ship myself.

[Bob Whelan[_3_]]

On 2/12/2013 10:42 AM, wrote:
>> If the magazine went away entirely, SSA would probably lose 500+ members
>> who maintain no other contact with the sport.
>
> This thread has made me really sad. I love the sport of soaring only
> slightly less than my family...and depending on the day sometimes more. ;)
> My guess is that without Soaring magazine coming monthly the real loss in
> membership would be more like adding another zero to the above comment to
> be more like 5000+ members dropping off. Sorry guys but I think it is
> petty to rip on the content of a volunteer publication in public. Feel
> free to submit more of your own work to improve the quality. My guess is
> it will be criticized as well. I for one appreciate the magazine even with
> its flaws. Would much rather have it come every month than not.
>
> Damn you guys - stop being so quick to find fault and pick fights and just
> enjoy the silent fun we have up in the air. Maybe it is because it is so
> peaceful and silent up there when we soar that we feel the compulsion to
> shout and bicker when we get down on the ground?
>
> Bruno - B4
>

"What Bruno said."

I'm from the school: Praise in public. Criticize in private.

There's a time and place for everything...discussing (say) economics when
(say) the preacher is moralizing from the pulpit is an example of the wrong
time and place for the former.

I discuss soaring (the sport) and "Soaring" (the magazine) with my buddies and
with people knowledgeable about the sport. To that extent, the discussions are
private. When I've felt the need, I've directed my criticisms of the latter to
my Regional Director and - if also felt necessary - to others in the "chain of
command".

Like the preacher and sin (he was agin' it!), I'm no fan of willy-nilly,
public, opinionizing "on the cheap" when individual volunteers (and a few paid
staff) are easily identified as "targets" even if not intended as such at the
outset. That's just the nature of the beast.

To each their own, I suppose...

Bob W.

[Helge_Zembold]

Excellent idea! By the way, can you please cut and paste here one of the articles? I'd love to see who this gets written up. Thanks!

Hi,

here is our club's website which contains all articles I sent to the press: http://www.stillberghof.de.

And here is what it looks like in the press (everything that is on the newspaper's website also is printed):
http://www.augsburger-allgemeine.de/donauwoerth/sport/Auf-drei-Kontinenten-unterwegs-id23586156.html

Bye, Helge

[Helge_Zembold]

Maybe hire one of the better soaring journals to produce an SSA edition? The good stuff from USA contributors could find a wider audience.

In Germany, we have "segelfliegen", which is the only German speaking gliding magazine. Starting October 2011, we tried to establish an international online-edition in English with some new articles and some translated articles from the German edition. (I tried to announce this in the forum but was banned for doing so... I'll try it again: http://www.segelfliegen-international.com - oh, I just found out that the english eMag is not available anymore :-( )

However, we had to end our "experiment" last August due to lack of readers after just four issues. There have been talks with the SSA about us printing the international edition with a dedicated SSA part, but as far as I know, the SSA did not really know what they wanted.

Helge
Chief Editor of "segelfliegen"

[Greg Arnold]

On 2/12/2013 3:05 PM, Helge_Zembold wrote:
> son_of_flubber;833314 Wrote:
>> Maybe hire one of the better soaring journals to produce an SSA
>> edition? The good stuff from USA contributors could find a wider
>> audience.
>
> In Germany, we have "segelfliegen", which is the only German speaking
> gliding magazine. Starting October 2011, we tried to establish an
> international online-edition in English with some new articles and some
> translated articles from the German edition. (I tried to announce this
> in the forum but was banned for doing so... I'll try it again:
> http://www.segelfliegen-international.com - oh, I just found out that
> the english eMag is not available anymore :-( )
>
> However, we had to end our "experiment" last August due to lack of
> readers after just four issues. There have been talks with the SSA about
> us printing the international edition with a dedicated SSA part, but as
> far as I know, the SSA did not really know what they wanted.
>
> Helge
> Chief Editor of "segelfliegen"
>

I read an issue or two, and thought the online interface was pretty bad.
Good content, though.