A proposal to increase membership, cross-country pilots, competitors,and world champions (USA).

[Fox Two[_2_]]

There have been several threads on RAS recently about the disappointing state of our sport in the USA: a shrinking membership, few cross-country pilots, fewer contest pilots, and no world champions. If we're going to reverse these trends, we need more than contest rule tweaking and membership drive gimmicks. We need to make our sport exciting so that we don't just attract new members but, more importantly, keep the ones that we already have.

Our sport is about soaring long distances at fast speeds or performing energy-conserving aerobatics. Of course there are also the antique enthusiasts and those who enjoy simply boring holes in the sky above the airfield - but we sell the sex. We lose potential new members when they see the Schweizer 2-33, we lose existing members when there's nothing better to fly than a Grob 103, and we lose even more due to boredom because cross-country training is a rare luxury, and inexperienced pilots are reluctant to venture away from the nest alone. The problems of our sport all originate at the club level - and it will be up to the clubs to fix them. Our clubs need to offer high-performance gliders and training that goes beyond the FAA's Practical Test Standards.

The Europeans dominate this sport for the same reason the US military dominates the battlefield: they spend more money and train more than anybody else. There are national soaring centers to teach the teachers so they in turn can offer the highest-quality training to their club's members. With the assistance of their national organizations, European clubs blaze a clear path from debutant to the diamond badge, with training at every step of the way. Unfortunately, the European model won't work in the USA (something to do with our distrust of socialism), but we can build our own model of success based on theirs.

THINK BIG: Imagine a 'United States National Soaring Center.' Let's put it where even the Europeans would be envious: Minden. Employ professional instructors with state-of-the-art sailplanes teaching our clubs' instructors, offering year-round cross-country and mountain-wave camps, and coaching the US Teams. A pipe dream you say? It would be expensive for sure - but it wouldn't be impossible.

The SSA is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, which means among other things, that it is able to receive tax-deductible donations. And it does. For example, in 2011 the SSA received a $1 million cash donation. Would $1 million pay for the National Soaring Center? No. But the SSA could use some of that money to get ALL of the clubs 501(c)3 tax status. A team of tax professionals, paid for by the SSA, could work with the clubs to restructure each club so that they could receive tax-deductible donations. Every club member would immediately benefit: club dues, for example, can be tax deductible. Few club members would object to paying higher dues if they were tax deductible, and some club members would love to make tax-deductible donations to the club. I would much rather give a thousand bucks to my club than to Uncle Sam! This would allow the clubs to finally leave the 1960's and get some gliders that aren't 50 years old. High-performance gliders would attract and retain more members, paying even more dues. Eventually, there would be enough money for the National Soaring Center in Minden.

It's not a sexy solution, but we would have a growing membership, more cross-country pilots and competitors, and maybe even a world champion.

Chris Fleming

[HGXC[_2_]]

On Friday, August 8, 2014 1:14:02 PM UTC-4, Fox Two wrote:
> There have been several threads on RAS recently about the disappointing state of our sport in the USA: a shrinking membership, few cross-country pilots, fewer contest pilots, and no world champions. If we're going to reverse these trends, we need more than contest rule tweaking and membership drive gimmicks. We need to make our sport exciting so that we don't just attract new members but, more importantly, keep the ones that we already have.
>
>
>
> Our sport is about soaring long distances at fast speeds or performing energy-conserving aerobatics. Of course there are also the antique enthusiasts and those who enjoy simply boring holes in the sky above the airfield - but we sell the sex. We lose potential new members when they see the Schweizer 2-33, we lose existing members when there's nothing better to fly than a Grob 103, and we lose even more due to boredom because cross-country training is a rare luxury, and inexperienced pilots are reluctant to venture away from the nest alone. The problems of our sport all originate at the club level - and it will be up to the clubs to fix them. Our clubs need to offer high-performance gliders and training that goes beyond the FAA's Practical Test Standards.
>
>
>
> The Europeans dominate this sport for the same reason the US military dominates the battlefield: they spend more money and train more than anybody else. There are national soaring centers to teach the teachers so they in turn can offer the highest-quality training to their club's members. With the assistance of their national organizations, European clubs blaze a clear path from debutant to the diamond badge, with training at every step of the way. Unfortunately, the European model won't work in the USA (something to do with our distrust of socialism), but we can build our own model of success based on theirs.
>
>
>
> THINK BIG: Imagine a 'United States National Soaring Center.' Let's put it where even the Europeans would be envious: Minden. Employ professional instructors with state-of-the-art sailplanes teaching our clubs' instructors, offering year-round cross-country and mountain-wave camps, and coaching the US Teams. A pipe dream you say? It would be expensive for sure - but it wouldn't be impossible.
>
>
>
> The SSA is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, which means among other things, that it is able to receive tax-deductible donations. And it does. For example, in 2011 the SSA received a $1 million cash donation. Would $1 million pay for the National Soaring Center? No. But the SSA could use some of that money to get ALL of the clubs 501(c)3 tax status. A team of tax professionals, paid for by the SSA, could work with the clubs to restructure each club so that they could receive tax-deductible donations. Every club member would immediately benefit: club dues, for example, can be tax deductible. Few club members would object to paying higher dues if they were tax deductible, and some club members would love to make tax-deductible donations to the club. I would much rather give a thousand bucks to my club than to Uncle Sam! This would allow the clubs to finally leave the 1960's and get some gliders that aren't 50 years old. High-performance gliders would attract and retain more members, paying even more dues. Eventually, there would be enough money for the National Soaring Center in Minden.
>
>
>
> It's not a sexy solution, but we would have a growing membership, more cross-country pilots and competitors, and maybe even a world champion.
>
>
>
> Chris Fleming

You had my interest until you went political on me. I don't see using tax payer money to train a small percentage of fortunate pilots as a good use of public funds. We do well in Olympics and other international competitions so its not about being a mommy state. Its about growing a broader base of younger pilots and all of GA is challenged by that. I flew Hang Gliders for 38 years and competed and XCed in that sport and we had the same issue. You go to a local soaring club and you see both a 233 and glass ships as well. Most people who have the competitive drive will see one as a road map to the other.

Dennis

[son_of_flubber]

Want more pilots? Do whatever it takes to get 90% of students to PTS-level in a single season. The student drop out rate is abysmal. Everyone's entire investment goes down the toilet when that happens and it is disheartening to everyone who carries on.

I'm pretty sure that this is possible and that there are people who know how to do it. It would mean making some changes to how things are done.

(Not to take anything away from the other good ideas mentioned in this thread.)

[Frank Whiteley]

Chris,

You bring up several interesting points.

I learned to fly gliders AND SOAR in a BGA club. As all instructors were trained at a national course, they did all speak the same patter and follow the same syllabus. It works, wonderfully. However, in the USA, we do have the FAA, which gets in the way to an extent. Thus, I do see best results in the US when the student and instructor are a good fit and work towards the rating one on one. Unfortunately, several clubs work instructor du jour, so student progress may be haphazard. Some clubs have worked to standardize instructor performance. In the BGA club, the instructor would take every opportunity to soar when it presented itself. My observation is that a lot of soaring is bypassed by US instructors while training to PTS standards. Just sayin'. What's the real goal after all? Effective instructors are the key.

Southern California Soaring Academy is an approach, not perfect, but might well be considered by others wishing to promote a full time soaring organization employing professional instructors. It is a 501(c)(3). Should the SSA establish a national soaring center? Probably not. Too much risk for a member services organization. Should the SSA promote such a center? Absolutely. A 501(c)(3) is certainly a such a vehicle and is not a difficult process. You simply must answer the question, "what is the public benefit?" While other countries do give sports grants and governmental help to soaring organizations, our way is to allow local definition of the 'public benefit' and allow a tax benefit for doing so.

Yesterday I was informed that a newish SSA chapter had received it's 501(c)(3) determination. Another received its determination a 3-4 months ago. The IRS log jam created by the 501(c)(4) political re-education camps may have cleared (same office). There are others in progress. This is a local issue and needs local initiative. The SSA has resources to help a successful outcome. Before you departed the CONUS and when you served a president of your chapter, you were offered help, but the initiative to proceed required local organization. You were also offered support from another 501(c)(3) soaring operation. Sadly, the opportunity did not materialize and an unfortunate accident kind of brought things to a halt. Not casting blame, just saying I think there was a lost opportunity and timing was not on our side.

I, and others, have pestered the SSF to develop a national syllabus. They have refused, for good reason. There are several good commercial products out there. Likewise, the SSA reduced it's SSA store offerings. At one time the SSA was the only place to find several soaring items. However, we decided not to complete with our Business Members. Some asked us to continue offering their products, but we also want to support them and hope our members will also. It was not a decision taken lightly, but we want our Business Members to be good resources for our membership also. We were well aware of friction between Sporty's and AOPA when AOPA started offering competing products.

So, a US National Soaring Center? Flesh out the concept a bit. Would the SSA contribute materially? Perhaps, if it passes the smell test. Use the SSA as a pass through organization for donations? Doubtful, this is a local matter and not such a high hurdle as some perceive.

Notice how Boeing poked it's finger in the eye of the FAA and Congress at Oshkosh? Certainly a good motivation for starting youth in soaring as early as possible is to help them work towards for an ATP if they have an aviation career in sight. There are a number of youth soaring scholarships available, some from the SSA, many others from local initiatives. Get those 'plane crazy' youth into the air!

Frank Whiteley

[Frank Whiteley]

On Friday, August 8, 2014 11:14:02 AM UTC-6, Fox Two wrote:
> There have been several threads on RAS recently about the disappointing state of our sport in the USA: a shrinking membership, few cross-country pilots, fewer contest pilots, and no world champions. If we're going to reverse these trends, we need more than contest rule tweaking and membership drive gimmicks. We need to make our sport exciting so that we don't just attract new members but, more importantly, keep the ones that we already have.
>
>
>
> Our sport is about soaring long distances at fast speeds or performing energy-conserving aerobatics. Of course there are also the antique enthusiasts and those who enjoy simply boring holes in the sky above the airfield - but we sell the sex. We lose potential new members when they see the Schweizer 2-33, we lose existing members when there's nothing better to fly than a Grob 103, and we lose even more due to boredom because cross-country training is a rare luxury, and inexperienced pilots are reluctant to venture away from the nest alone. The problems of our sport all originate at the club level - and it will be up to the clubs to fix them. Our clubs need to offer high-performance gliders and training that goes beyond the FAA's Practical Test Standards.
>
>
>
> The Europeans dominate this sport for the same reason the US military dominates the battlefield: they spend more money and train more than anybody else. There are national soaring centers to teach the teachers so they in turn can offer the highest-quality training to their club's members. With the assistance of their national organizations, European clubs blaze a clear path from debutant to the diamond badge, with training at every step of the way. Unfortunately, the European model won't work in the USA (something to do with our distrust of socialism), but we can build our own model of success based on theirs.
>
>
>
> THINK BIG: Imagine a 'United States National Soaring Center.' Let's put it where even the Europeans would be envious: Minden. Employ professional instructors with state-of-the-art sailplanes teaching our clubs' instructors, offering year-round cross-country and mountain-wave camps, and coaching the US Teams. A pipe dream you say? It would be expensive for sure - but it wouldn't be impossible.
>
>
>
> The SSA is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, which means among other things, that it is able to receive tax-deductible donations. And it does. For example, in 2011 the SSA received a $1 million cash donation. Would $1 million pay for the National Soaring Center? No. But the SSA could use some of that money to get ALL of the clubs 501(c)3 tax status. A team of tax professionals, paid for by the SSA, could work with the clubs to restructure each club so that they could receive tax-deductible donations. Every club member would immediately benefit: club dues, for example, can be tax deductible. Few club members would object to paying higher dues if they were tax deductible, and some club members would love to make tax-deductible donations to the club. I would much rather give a thousand bucks to my club than to Uncle Sam! This would allow the clubs to finally leave the 1960's and get some gliders that aren't 50 years old. High-performance gliders would attract and retain more members, paying even more dues. Eventually, there would be enough money for the National Soaring Center in Minden.
>
>
>
> It's not a sexy solution, but we would have a growing membership, more cross-country pilots and competitors, and maybe even a world champion.
>
>
>
> Chris Fleming

Minden?

Give me five good reasons.

Frank Whiteley

[Frank Whiteley]

On Friday, August 8, 2014 7:43:32 PM UTC-6, son_of_flubber wrote:
> Want more pilots? Do whatever it takes to get 90% of students to PTS-level in a single season. The student drop out rate is abysmal. Everyone's entire investment goes down the toilet when that happens and it is disheartening to everyone who carries on.
>
>
>
> I'm pretty sure that this is possible and that there are people who know how to do it. It would mean making some changes to how things are done.
>
>
>
> (Not to take anything away from the other good ideas mentioned in this thread.)

It's abysmal in power training as AOPA found out. Why? Disinterested instructors.

Effective instruction is the most valuable commodity and students are known to pay willingly for results.

[Fox Two[_2_]]

Hi Frank,

I absolutely agree with you that these specific issues are local in nature and that they require local solutions. But regarding the broader issue of growing our sport as a whole, our clubs need the guidance and support of the SSA. It's their stated mission. And now, thanks to the generosity of an anonymous donor, the SSA has the means to help ALL of our clubs by renovating their corporate foundations and receiving 501(c)(3) determinations, which would help them raise revenue, modernize, and grow. In its most basic terms:

1. The SSA's Board of Directors should approve and fund a program to actively help all clubs receive 501(c)(3) determinations.

2. The SSA should then contact each club to explain the program, and to develop a plan for that club.

3. Club volunteers, working with the SSA's 501(c)(3) experts, would then restructure the club.

Yes, some clubs have already received their 501(c)(3) determinations without a program like the one I'm proposing, but they are the exception to the norm. Most clubs aren't aware of the benefits 501(c)(3) offers, while others aren't willing to make the effort to get the certification. An SSA approved, funded and managed program would make the process convenient to everyone.

You mentioned my tenure as a club president. You helped me by pointing me in directions that wouldn't have ever occurred to me. With your guidance, our club was able to restructure, modernize, and grow. Yes, the 501(c)(3) determination was the big fish that got away. But if our small club could do what it did with the limited resources it had, imagine what an average club could do with greater resources.

Think globally but act locally.

Chris Fleming

[[email protected]]

I live and fly in Minden, in fact I moved to Minden for the soaring 8 years ago, so I'm partial to the idea of basing a national soaring center there.

Right now a small group of volunteers is trying to build a soaring center on the east side on land we have from the airport. Utilities will be going in this month or next, and we are trying to come up with a site plan. It is quite an ambitious, and exciting, prospect. Contact the Sports Aviation Foundation for details if you want more information. The Sports Aviation Foundation has 501(c)3 status and we are working slowly on building a fundraising base.

That said, I'm not sure 501(c)3 status is what is holding things up. As I said, the Sports Aviation Foundation already has that status, as does the Minden Soaring Club, which has given some 15 youth scholarships (worth $1000 in instructional costs) over the last 2 years alone.

There is some growth in our sport, but I'm not sure infrastructure is the real lack

[jfitch]

On Friday, August 8, 2014 10:14:02 AM UTC-7, Fox Two wrote:
> There have been several threads on RAS recently about the disappointing state of our sport in the USA: a shrinking membership, few cross-country pilots, fewer contest pilots, and no world champions. If we're going to reverse these trends, we need more than contest rule tweaking and membership drive gimmicks. We need to make our sport exciting so that we don't just attract new members but, more importantly, keep the ones that we already have.
>
>
>
> Our sport is about soaring long distances at fast speeds or performing energy-conserving aerobatics. Of course there are also the antique enthusiasts and those who enjoy simply boring holes in the sky above the airfield - but we sell the sex. We lose potential new members when they see the Schweizer 2-33, we lose existing members when there's nothing better to fly than a Grob 103, and we lose even more due to boredom because cross-country training is a rare luxury, and inexperienced pilots are reluctant to venture away from the nest alone. The problems of our sport all originate at the club level - and it will be up to the clubs to fix them. Our clubs need to offer high-performance gliders and training that goes beyond the FAA's Practical Test Standards.
>
>
>
> The Europeans dominate this sport for the same reason the US military dominates the battlefield: they spend more money and train more than anybody else. There are national soaring centers to teach the teachers so they in turn can offer the highest-quality training to their club's members. With the assistance of their national organizations, European clubs blaze a clear path from debutant to the diamond badge, with training at every step of the way. Unfortunately, the European model won't work in the USA (something to do with our distrust of socialism), but we can build our own model of success based on theirs.
>
>
>
> THINK BIG: Imagine a 'United States National Soaring Center.' Let's put it where even the Europeans would be envious: Minden. Employ professional instructors with state-of-the-art sailplanes teaching our clubs' instructors, offering year-round cross-country and mountain-wave camps, and coaching the US Teams. A pipe dream you say? It would be expensive for sure - but it wouldn't be impossible.
>
>
>
> The SSA is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, which means among other things, that it is able to receive tax-deductible donations. And it does. For example, in 2011 the SSA received a $1 million cash donation. Would $1 million pay for the National Soaring Center? No. But the SSA could use some of that money to get ALL of the clubs 501(c)3 tax status. A team of tax professionals, paid for by the SSA, could work with the clubs to restructure each club so that they could receive tax-deductible donations. Every club member would immediately benefit: club dues, for example, can be tax deductible. Few club members would object to paying higher dues if they were tax deductible, and some club members would love to make tax-deductible donations to the club. I would much rather give a thousand bucks to my club than to Uncle Sam! This would allow the clubs to finally leave the 1960's and get some gliders that aren't 50 years old. High-performance gliders would attract and retain more members, paying even more dues. Eventually, there would be enough money for the National Soaring Center in Minden.
>
>
>
> It's not a sexy solution, but we would have a growing membership, more cross-country pilots and competitors, and maybe even a world champion.
>
>
>
> Chris Fleming

There have been many such discussions over the last couple of decades, all start with the assumption that there is a large population of youth aching to learn soaring, but who for various reasons are prevented from doing so. That is a massive leap of faith. My observation is that aviation (and even automobiles) do not command the imagination and attention of today's youth, as they did in my generation. (I will note that in another thread Sean compares soaring to sailing, I will point out that sailing is on a similar decline for similar reasons).

First you must interest people in soaring. Only then must you find a way for them to access it. And it you truly solve the first problem, the second will take care of itself.

[John Cochrane[_3_]]

Interesting discussion, but I think we're missing a basic fact: dropoff and churn. We don't really need more people in the front door. We need fewer out the back door.

The SSA membership has about 20% turnover every year -- or rather 20 leave and 18 come. I did a study of contest participation, and roughly the same happens, about one in five start flying contests every year and about one in five leave.

Think of the attrition at every stage of the game. From ride to lesson. From lesson to solo. From solo to license. From license to soaring. From soaring to xc. From xc to ownership. From xc/ownership to flying contests or serious lifelong xc/olc. At each stage, do we keep even 1 in 20?

Keeping a few more of what we have, rather than getting another thousand in the front door to produce one contest pilot seems like a better strategy.

But... Increasingly every time one of my faculty colleagues says to the dean, "hey, you guys ought to xyz..." and outlines a great but difficult and time-consuming idea, the dean says "congratulations, you've just volunteered to head the xzy committee. Let us know how it's working out." The SSA sort of has a similar response!

John Cochrane

[son_of_flubber]

On Saturday, August 9, 2014 4:09:16 PM UTC-4, John Cochrane wrote:


> Think of the attrition at every stage of the game. From ride to lesson. From lesson to solo. From solo to license. From license to soaring. ...

And every one that drops out in the early stages will discourage five friends from even trying.

[Kevin Brooker]

Money is not the issue. People have plenty of cash to spend on recreation and discretionary activities. Money is not the barrier to entry. Look at the ski industry. A one day lift ticket costs more then a tow, maybe to tows depending upon the ski area and glider operation. New skis will set the skier back anywhere from $500-2000 depending upon what they purchase. Look at motorcycling, off road vehicles; pick something. Most are on-par with soaring or more expensive to begin participating.

What the sport needs is more time in a day and longer attention spans. I stopped flying because I didn't have enough time to participate how I enjoyed it. Soaring is a selfish activity which requires a lot of time.

American's do not have the attention span. How much time is spent hanging out at the strip compared to flying. If someone is interested in taking up soaring look at the standing around time to flight/active participation time ratio. Glider pilots spend a huge volume of time standing around. By comparison, look at the stand around to participation in the ski industry.

With gliders we cannot have the complete noob help out in a meaningful way. Gliders are too expensive and having the "never before touched a glider" person help us rig a ship doesn't happen. The hands on participation of newcomers is really low. Instructors /club members talk and they listen. We talk too much and do too little.

The mindset of people in 2014 is much different then in 1950-2000. To survive and grow, the soaring (GA too) population has to change its attitude and methods to capture today's youth. Aviation is trying to adapt old ways to today and it isn't working. Aviation has to change the paradigm and change is scary and difficult.

While seeking this new paradigm there will be lots of failures and some success. What is there to lose by trying? Nothing since what is happening now isn't working yet the aviation community seems to believe if they keep going at the status quo it will work. This is a bit like speaking louder to someone who doesn't understand our language. More volume will not breed instant fluency.

Beside believing the aviation community should try something new, not fear failure, and stop pinning the decline on expense, I have no solutions to offer at this time.

[Matt Herron Jr.]

I still maintain that soaring flight simulators (like Condor) that are widely available and approachable would help. They can reduce training time. They appeal to youth. They can be used whenever there is a spare 1/2 hour with no commute and no wait. They are inexpensive. They enable online instruction.

I would like to see the SSA try a pilot (no pun intended) program to support something like this, and track results.

Matt

[Brad[_2_]]

On Sunday, August 10, 2014 12:23:43 PM UTC-7, Matt Herron Jr. wrote:
> I still maintain that soaring flight simulators (like Condor) that are widely available and approachable would help. They can reduce training time. They appeal to youth. They can be used whenever there is a spare 1/2 hour with no commute and no wait. They are inexpensive. They enable online instruction.
>
>
>
> I would like to see the SSA try a pilot (no pun intended) program to support something like this, and track results.
>
>
>
> Matt

Most of the youth I've seen come in to our club get their license, then are off to college or full time jobs or starting a family or combinations of the 3 and we hardly see them anymore. the guys I see regularly are the geezers with money and time to fly sailplanes.

look through soaring magazine and tell me how many "youth" are going to buy anything from the latest crop of racing glass, or even the left-overs extending back 30 years or more?

Maybe these sexy ships get the youths all exited then reality rears it's head and understanding that what caught their eye is a piece of carbon fiber un-obtaineum.

Brad

[Frank Whiteley]

On Saturday, August 9, 2014 2:09:16 PM UTC-6, John Cochrane wrote:
> Interesting discussion, but I think we're missing a basic fact: dropoff and churn. We don't really need more people in the front door. We need fewer out the back door.
>
>
>
> The SSA membership has about 20% turnover every year -- or rather 20 leave and 18 come. I did a study of contest participation, and roughly the same happens, about one in five start flying contests every year and about one in five leave.
>
>
>
> Think of the attrition at every stage of the game. From ride to lesson. From lesson to solo. From solo to license. From license to soaring. From soaring to xc. From xc to ownership. From xc/ownership to flying contests or serious lifelong xc/olc. At each stage, do we keep even 1 in 20?
>
>
>
> Keeping a few more of what we have, rather than getting another thousand in the front door to produce one contest pilot seems like a better strategy..
>
>
>
> But... Increasingly every time one of my faculty colleagues says to the dean, "hey, you guys ought to xyz..." and outlines a great but difficult and time-consuming idea, the dean says "congratulations, you've just volunteered to head the xzy committee. Let us know how it's working out." The SSA sort of has a similar response!
>
>
>
> John Cochrane

Churn is part of the equation. If the SSA is 20%, then we are like much of the rest of the soaring world. Roy Edwards of NZ presented at an SSA convention in the late 1990's. At that time SSA churn was 30%, while the rest of the world was 20%.

Flying is a much more common experience. That is, many more youth have been on a jet. For some, it's so common they don't bother to look out the window. Sports flying doesn't seem to enter their consciousness. I had an opportunity on a flight from Detroit to Denver to introduce a young GM hybrid vehicle engineer to the concept, something he'd never considered.

There are several aviation related STEM initiatives. I hope the SSA will have a ground school curriculum suitable for high school or aviation camp use that will incorporate STEM. There has been a project that might seed this that received some SSA support. Time to check in again. Combined with some of Scott Manley's methods might generate some youth interest. At least it would be a useful tool for a person or group wanting to organize this.

Some of the present apparent churn is loss at the top end. The estimated average age of SSA members is around 57. This means health and morbidity will impact SSA membership and pilot participation, probably at an increasing rate for several years.

Perhaps we can leverage the new right seat ATP requirements to entice youth to start their aviation careers early with the glider rating. This fact is often missed during youth in aviation promotions. There is a Colorado initiative for a specialty Support Aviation license plate. It had varietal aircraft silhouettes, but was missing a sailplane. I commented to the organizers and have seen the proposed revision. I'm awaiting committee approval of the revision before pressing the Colorado soaring button.

The new glider ratings are taken from FAA civil airman statistics tables 8, 17, and 18. What was it about the 1990's? Internet exposure? Disposable income?

http://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation_data_statistics/civil_airmen_statistics/

New glider ratings
Year Initial Add-on Total
2013 163 1 164
2012 180 0 180
2011 219 10 229
2010 222 8 230
2009 249 10 259
2008 204 11 215
2007 263 14 277
2006 298 42 340
2005 290 27 317
2004 309 43 352
2003 312 47 359
2002 336 38 374
2001 403 77 480
2000 455 62 517
1999 423 98 521
1998 472 105 577
1997 501 161 662
1996 633 196 829
1995 373 83 456
1994 320 25 345
1993 341 28 369
1992 376 32 408
1991 487 29 516
1990 378 41 419

Several of our US chapters have robust youth participation with youth membership exceeding 20% of membership. About 25% of chapters have 10% youth members. Unfortunately 33% have no youth members. There's room for improvement, but in a country where reportedly 35% with credit reports have debt in collections, there not a lot of discretionary income for a large segment of the population. With real income stagnant or declining, perhaps that's reflected in the numbers also.

Larger chapters who have a 501(c)(3) determination have realized a benefit of $30,000 to $60,000 annually through donations and other exclusions. The SSA Clubs & Chapters Committee recommends chapters explore the migration to a 501(c)(3) organization. Although it sounds appealing to have the SSA take the lead, chapters are primarily state non-profit or not-for-profit corporations, subject first to those statutes. Starting in the 1980's, the American Bar Association has suggested that state's modernize their corporate statutes to better align with federal guidelines. Many states have done so. Some haven't. The SSA doesn't have the resources to research and recommend the local approach apart from the voluntary efforts of its members. We recommend seeking competent local help. Once the local effort is done, the SSA has resources to make the filings. We do need to update what we have on the SSA website with some recommended guidelines and what the options are. Some chapters have been willing to share their packages, so we have case files to share with those organizations interested in taking the step. One big step may be recommending formation of a new entity, transferring assets, and dissolving the old entity. You need to be real clean financially to make a migration.

Frank Whiteley

[Frank Whiteley]

On Sunday, August 10, 2014 7:01:29 AM UTC-6, Kevin Brooker wrote:
> Money is not the issue. People have plenty of cash to spend on
>
> recreation and discretionary activities. Money is not the barrier to
>
> entry. Look at the ski industry. A one day lift ticket costs more then
>
> a tow, maybe to tows depending upon the ski area and glider operation.
>
> New skis will set the skier back anywhere from $500-2000 depending upon
>
> what they purchase. Look at motorcycling, off road vehicles; pick
>
> something. Most are on-par with soaring or more expensive to begin
>
> participating.
>
>
>
> What the sport needs is more time in a day and longer attention spans. I
>
> stopped flying because I didn't have enough time to participate how I
>
> enjoyed it. Soaring is a selfish activity which requires a lot of time.
>
>
>
>
>
> American's do not have the attention span. How much time is spent
>
> hanging out at the strip compared to flying. If someone is interested in
>
> taking up soaring look at the standing around time to flight/active
>
> participation time ratio. Glider pilots spend a huge volume of time
>
> standing around. By comparison, look at the stand around to
>
> participation in the ski industry.
>
>
>
> With gliders we cannot have the complete noob help out in a meaningful
>
> way. Gliders are too expensive and having the "never before touched a
>
> glider" person help us rig a ship doesn't happen. The hands on
>
> participation of newcomers is really low. Instructors /club members talk
>
> and they listen. We talk too much and do too little.
>
>
>
> The mindset of people in 2014 is much different then in 1950-2000. To
>
> survive and grow, the soaring (GA too) population has to change its
>
> attitude and methods to capture today's youth. Aviation is trying to
>
> adapt old ways to today and it isn't working. Aviation has to change the
>
> paradigm and change is scary and difficult.
>
>
>
> While seeking this new paradigm there will be lots of failures and some
>
> success. What is there to lose by trying? Nothing since what is
>
> happening now isn't working yet the aviation community seems to believe
>
> if they keep going at the status quo it will work. This is a bit like
>
> speaking louder to someone who doesn't understand our language. More
>
> volume will not breed instant fluency.
>
>
>
> Beside believing the aviation community should try something new, not
>
> fear failure, and stop pinning the decline on expense, I have no
>
> solutions to offer at this time.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Kevin Brooker
True for some Kevin.

I once called a lapsed SSA member to see why he'd dropped out after a year. Turns out he was president of a local Corvette owner's club. He tried soaring for a week, but hadn't soloed and gave it up. His expectation was way out of line. For some it's simply not a good fit. For others, given the chance, it becomes a lifetime pursuit. How do we give them that chance?

Frank Whiteley

[Frank Whiteley]

On Sunday, August 10, 2014 1:23:43 PM UTC-6, Matt Herron Jr. wrote:
> I still maintain that soaring flight simulators (like Condor) that are widely available and approachable would help. They can reduce training time. They appeal to youth. They can be used whenever there is a spare 1/2 hour with no commute and no wait. They are inexpensive. They enable online instruction.
>
>
>
> I would like to see the SSA try a pilot (no pun intended) program to support something like this, and track results.
>
>
>
> Matt

Scott Manley demonstrated this as presenter of the Barnaby Lecture last year. Others have hopefully seen Scott's SSA Convention presentations.

As I commented in another post, a STEM cored glider pilot ground school curriculum would be a nice addition.

Frank Whiteley

[son_of_flubber]

On Sunday, August 10, 2014 5:35:10 PM UTC-4, Frank Whiteley wrote:
http://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation_data_statistics/civil_airmen_statistics/

That is a very interesting link worthy of some study. But in the top level introduction, I found this: "Glider pilots are not required to have a medical examination but the numbers represent only those who had a valid medical certificate on record at the Aeronautical Center."

I'd think that would make these numbers rather unreliable. I'm a very active glider pilot who got my PPL-Glider in 2012, but I don't have a medical certificate... so I guess I'm not included in the stats that you posted. A lot of glider pilots don't have valid medical certificates.

The aggregation of the numbers is interesting, but it obscures the fact that some glider ports are healthy and some are moribund.

[Frank Whiteley]

On Sunday, August 10, 2014 7:22:38 PM UTC-6, son_of_flubber wrote:
> On Sunday, August 10, 2014 5:35:10 PM UTC-4, Frank Whiteley wrote:
>
> http://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation_data_statistics/civil_airmen_statistics/
>
>
>
> That is a very interesting link worthy of some study. But in the top level introduction, I found this: "Glider pilots are not required to have a medical examination but the numbers represent only those who had a valid medical certificate on record at the Aeronautical Center."
>
>
>
> I'd think that would make these numbers rather unreliable. I'm a very active glider pilot who got my PPL-Glider in 2012, but I don't have a medical certificate... so I guess I'm not included in the stats that you posted. A lot of glider pilots don't have valid medical certificates.
>
>
>
> The aggregation of the numbers is interesting, but it obscures the fact that some glider ports are healthy and some are moribund.

That appears to apply to table 1 and possibly others. Look at table 1, then go to table 8.

There are about 8,000 foreign addressed glider pilots holding US glider ratings also.

Frank Whiteley

[Frank Whiteley]

On Sunday, August 10, 2014 7:22:38 PM UTC-6, son_of_flubber wrote:
> On Sunday, August 10, 2014 5:35:10 PM UTC-4, Frank Whiteley wrote:
>
> http://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation_data_statistics/civil_airmen_statistics/
>
>
>
> That is a very interesting link worthy of some study. But in the top level introduction, I found this: "Glider pilots are not required to have a medical examination but the numbers represent only those who had a valid medical certificate on record at the Aeronautical Center."
>
>
>
> I'd think that would make these numbers rather unreliable. I'm a very active glider pilot who got my PPL-Glider in 2012, but I don't have a medical certificate... so I guess I'm not included in the stats that you posted. A lot of glider pilots don't have valid medical certificates.
>
>
>
> The aggregation of the numbers is interesting, but it obscures the fact that some glider ports are healthy and some are moribund.

There is also a downloadable pilot database. Some have opted out by keeping their information private, including some that were there, but excluded themselves when the plastic certificates came out. However, by querying the data with appropriate filters, the number is pretty close to what's in Table 8.

The add-on data is what may be suspect, Table 18.

See also this FAA internal product from January 2014 on US pilot totals by age/rating.
http://www.ssa.org/files/member/A55_ActiveUSPilotsByAge_2013.pdf

Frank Whiteley

[Dennis Vreeken]

Hey brad, who are you calling a geezer? Dennis ;-)

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, August 10, 2014 9:01:29 AM UTC-4, Kevin Brooker wrote:
> Money is not the issue. People have plenty of cash to spend on
>
Snip
>
>
> What the sport needs is more time in a day and longer attention spans. I
>
> stopped flying because I didn't have enough time to participate how I
>
> enjoyed it. Soaring is a selfish activity which requires a lot of time.
>
>
Snip

Time is a dwindling resource for many people, including me. I actively engaged in x-country years ago, when fewer work demands allowed me to take time off when conditions were ripe for a good day of soaring. In recent years, my schedule has been booked out weeks in advance, and it simply is not possible for me to get the time of in the middle of week like I use to. The same work demands have me going in on Saturdays and Sundays.

This may be an over generalization, but those who can afford this sport are generally career-successful individuals.. and many of them are experiencing the same increasing time crunch.

[Kevin Brooker]

--

Kevin Brooker[/i][/color]
True for some Kevin.

I once called a lapsed SSA member to see why he'd dropped out after a year. Turns out he was president of a local Corvette owner's club. He tried soaring for a week, but hadn't soloed and gave it up. His expectation was way out of line. For some it's simply not a good fit. For others, given the chance, it becomes a lifetime pursuit. How do we give them that chance?

Frank Whiteley[/QUOTE]

Frank,
I was an extremely active glider and power pilot for years; SSA state record keeper, successful contest pilot, state record holder, and headed up the committee to make Mt. Washington a National Historic Landmark of Soaring. My involvement went well beyond trying it for a week and deciding soaring wasn't a good fit.

What keeps me from flying is the lack of available time to participate in a way which is meaningful and enjoyable. Soaring requires a lot of discretionary time and the ability to be opportunistic with respect to the weather. If a potential pilot works Monday through Friday and only has weekends to complete domestic chores, and other recreational activities (go for a bike ride, run, exercise, visit friends/family) there is not much time left over to head to the airport. If the weather isn't flyable then the opportunity to get some stick time and feed the interest is gone past. Have a few weekends in a row with non-flyable weather and the interest wanes or is replaced by something not so conditional.

When my life changed to where the point of losing the opportunism, flying went away. I still head to the airport to visit soaring buddies and listen to storied and keep in touch but I haven't flown anything in at least two years. My glider sits in the trailer in the yard with hopes of getting the time to fly it but it is mostly just hanging onto a dream. I should divest of it or remove the canopy and plant it full of flowers. At least as a flower pot it will be getting some use.

Learning to fly requires a lot of time, specific conditions (just VFR not necessarily soarable) on a consistent basis in order to keep the student interested. There are too many other things to compete with which give more access. Learning to fly is also relatively difficult and society doesn't have the attention span of discipline to wait. Most people expect instant results and success. Soaring is also extremely solitary while participating. Most other activities are more communal and social while participating.

The number of barriers to growing the sport of soaring are monumental compared to the small hurdle of expense. American's have tons of discretionary income and an immense playing field to spend it. Expense is an easy scapegoat and blinds us from seeing what else needs to be done to grow the sport either by attracting new participants or keeping what we have.

[Frank Whiteley]

On Monday, August 11, 2014 6:18:38 AM UTC-6, Kevin Brooker wrote:
> --
>
>
>
> Kevin Brooker
>
> True for some Kevin.
>
>
>
> I once called a lapsed SSA member to see why he'd dropped out after a
>
> year. Turns out he was president of a local Corvette owner's club. He
>
> tried soaring for a week, but hadn't soloed and gave it up. His
>
> expectation was way out of line. For some it's simply not a good fit.
>
> For others, given the chance, it becomes a lifetime pursuit. How do we
>
> give them that chance?
>
>
>
> Frank Whiteley
>
>
>
> Frank,
>
> I was an extremely active glider and power pilot for years; SSA state
>
> record keeper, successful contest pilot, state record holder, and headed
>
> up the committee to make Mt. Washington a National Historic Landmark of
>
> Soaring. My involvement went well beyond trying it for a week and deciding
>
> soaring wasn't a good fit.
>
>
>
> What keeps me from flying is the lack of available time to participate in
>
> a way which is meaningful and enjoyable. Soaring requires a lot of
>
> discretionary time and the ability to be opportunistic with respect to the
>
> weather. If a potential pilot works Monday through Friday and only has
>
> weekends to complete domestic chores, and other recreational activities
>
> (go for a bike ride, run, exercise, visit friends/family) there is not
>
> much time left over to head to the airport. If the weather isn't flyable
>
> then the opportunity to get some stick time and feed the interest is gone
>
> past. Have a few weekends in a row with non-flyable weather and the
>
> interest wanes or is replaced by something not so conditional.
>
>
>
> When my life changed to where the point of losing the opportunism, flying
>
> went away. I still head to the airport to visit soaring buddies and listen
>
> to storied and keep in touch but I haven't flown anything in at least two
>
> years. My glider sits in the trailer in the yard with hopes of getting the
>
> time to fly it but it is mostly just hanging onto a dream. I should divest
>
> of it or remove the canopy and plant it full of flowers. At least as a
>
> flower pot it will be getting some use.
>
>
>
> Learning to fly requires a lot of time, specific conditions (just VFR not
>
> necessarily soarable) on a consistent basis in order to keep the student
>
> interested. There are too many other things to compete with which give
>
> more access. Learning to fly is also relatively difficult and society
>
> doesn't have the attention span of discipline to wait. Most people expect
>
> instant results and success. Soaring is also extremely solitary while
>
> participating. Most other activities are more communal and social while
>
> participating.
>
>
>
> The number of barriers to growing the sport of soaring are monumental
>
> compared to the small hurdle of expense. American's have tons of
>
> discretionary income and an immense playing field to spend it. Expense is
>
> an easy scapegoat and blinds us from seeing what else needs to be done to
>
> grow the sport either by attracting new participants or keeping what we
>
> have.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Kevin Brooker[/i][/color]

Agreed, discretionary time is probably more important then income. I've been doing a lot of grandparenting with two that are not yet ready for the gliderport. And also looking after affairs of estate of my late father-in-law, a much bigger project than for my parents. At least we're out of the cheap rentals business and only keeping the farm viable.

Outreach remains our most important imperative.

Frank

[son_of_flubber]

On Monday, August 11, 2014 8:18:38 AM UTC-4, Kevin Brooker wrote:

> What keeps me from flying is the lack of available time to participate in a way which is meaningful and enjoyable.

Maybe people like Kevin will have the opportunity to re-involve themselves in the sport once their kids are in their 20s and the demands of their careers taper. It's good that they got their soaring chops at an early age. Having that expertise under their belts will make it a lot easier to get back into the sport in the future.

Kevin's experience seems typical; I did not have time to learn to soar until I was 56 and that was a bit too old to learn to soaring easily.

If we want to keep soaring alive, we will train young people to soar, expect that most of them will get too busy to participate in the sport, and then make it as easy as possible for them to reenter and stay active in the sport later in life. This is the long game.

With an eye to demographics, there will be fewer and fewer previously trained young-geezers reentering the sport in the next 15 years. What about marketing Ab Initio soaring to the affluent 50+ cohort?

Clubs and CFI-Gs are enthusiastic and successful when teaching young students who learn fast. Are they less successful with older harder-to-teach students? Who is good at teaching older students, what are their secrets, and how can those techniques become widespread?

Sure, we should train lots of young people, but we also need to recruit and train 50+ year old people to replace the people in their 70-80s. Older people will stick around and keep clubs afloat, and that will allow the hopefully steady stream of younger people to come and go.

[Evan Ludeman[_4_]]

On Monday, August 11, 2014 8:18:38 AM UTC-4, Kevin Brooker wrote:
> --
>
>
>
> Kevin Brooker
>
> True for some Kevin.
>
>
>
> I once called a lapsed SSA member to see why he'd dropped out after a
>
> year. Turns out he was president of a local Corvette owner's club. He
>
> tried soaring for a week, but hadn't soloed and gave it up. His
>
> expectation was way out of line. For some it's simply not a good fit.
>
> For others, given the chance, it becomes a lifetime pursuit. How do we
>
> give them that chance?
>
>
>
> Frank Whiteley
>
>
>
> Frank,
>
> I was an extremely active glider and power pilot for years; SSA state
>
> record keeper, successful contest pilot, state record holder, and headed
>
> up the committee to make Mt. Washington a National Historic Landmark of
>
> Soaring. My involvement went well beyond trying it for a week and deciding
>
> soaring wasn't a good fit.
>
>
>
> What keeps me from flying is the lack of available time to participate in
>
> a way which is meaningful and enjoyable. Soaring requires a lot of
>
> discretionary time and the ability to be opportunistic with respect to the
>
> weather. If a potential pilot works Monday through Friday and only has
>
> weekends to complete domestic chores, and other recreational activities
>
> (go for a bike ride, run, exercise, visit friends/family) there is not
>
> much time left over to head to the airport. If the weather isn't flyable
>
> then the opportunity to get some stick time and feed the interest is gone
>
> past. Have a few weekends in a row with non-flyable weather and the
>
> interest wanes or is replaced by something not so conditional.
>
>
>
> When my life changed to where the point of losing the opportunism, flying
>
> went away. I still head to the airport to visit soaring buddies and listen
>
> to storied and keep in touch but I haven't flown anything in at least two
>
> years. My glider sits in the trailer in the yard with hopes of getting the
>
> time to fly it but it is mostly just hanging onto a dream. I should divest
>
> of it or remove the canopy and plant it full of flowers. At least as a
>
> flower pot it will be getting some use.
>
>
>
> Learning to fly requires a lot of time, specific conditions (just VFR not
>
> necessarily soarable) on a consistent basis in order to keep the student
>
> interested. There are too many other things to compete with which give
>
> more access. Learning to fly is also relatively difficult and society
>
> doesn't have the attention span of discipline to wait. Most people expect
>
> instant results and success. Soaring is also extremely solitary while
>
> participating. Most other activities are more communal and social while
>
> participating.
>
>
>
> The number of barriers to growing the sport of soaring are monumental
>
> compared to the small hurdle of expense. American's have tons of
>
> discretionary income and an immense playing field to spend it. Expense is
>
> an easy scapegoat and blinds us from seeing what else needs to be done to
>
> grow the sport either by attracting new participants or keeping what we
>
> have.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Kevin Brooker[/i][/color]

....says the guy who lives under the traffic pattern of the best little soaring club in the USA. You have access to soaring the rest of us dream about.

Come back any time Kevin, it's always great to see you.


Evan Ludeman

[Sean Fidler]

Great idea but Minden? How about Ionia, Michigan? ;-)

On Friday, August 8, 2014 1:14:02 PM UTC-4, Fox Two wrote:
> There have been several threads on RAS recently about the disappointing state of our sport in the USA: a shrinking membership, few cross-country pilots, fewer contest pilots, and no world champions. If we're going to reverse these trends, we need more than contest rule tweaking and membership drive gimmicks. We need to make our sport exciting so that we don't just attract new members but, more importantly, keep the ones that we already have.
>
>
>
> Our sport is about soaring long distances at fast speeds or performing energy-conserving aerobatics. Of course there are also the antique enthusiasts and those who enjoy simply boring holes in the sky above the airfield - but we sell the sex. We lose potential new members when they see the Schweizer 2-33, we lose existing members when there's nothing better to fly than a Grob 103, and we lose even more due to boredom because cross-country training is a rare luxury, and inexperienced pilots are reluctant to venture away from the nest alone. The problems of our sport all originate at the club level - and it will be up to the clubs to fix them. Our clubs need to offer high-performance gliders and training that goes beyond the FAA's Practical Test Standards.
>
>
>
> The Europeans dominate this sport for the same reason the US military dominates the battlefield: they spend more money and train more than anybody else. There are national soaring centers to teach the teachers so they in turn can offer the highest-quality training to their club's members. With the assistance of their national organizations, European clubs blaze a clear path from debutant to the diamond badge, with training at every step of the way. Unfortunately, the European model won't work in the USA (something to do with our distrust of socialism), but we can build our own model of success based on theirs.
>
>
>
> THINK BIG: Imagine a 'United States National Soaring Center.' Let's put it where even the Europeans would be envious: Minden. Employ professional instructors with state-of-the-art sailplanes teaching our clubs' instructors, offering year-round cross-country and mountain-wave camps, and coaching the US Teams. A pipe dream you say? It would be expensive for sure - but it wouldn't be impossible.
>
>
>
> The SSA is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, which means among other things, that it is able to receive tax-deductible donations. And it does. For example, in 2011 the SSA received a $1 million cash donation. Would $1 million pay for the National Soaring Center? No. But the SSA could use some of that money to get ALL of the clubs 501(c)3 tax status. A team of tax professionals, paid for by the SSA, could work with the clubs to restructure each club so that they could receive tax-deductible donations. Every club member would immediately benefit: club dues, for example, can be tax deductible. Few club members would object to paying higher dues if they were tax deductible, and some club members would love to make tax-deductible donations to the club. I would much rather give a thousand bucks to my club than to Uncle Sam! This would allow the clubs to finally leave the 1960's and get some gliders that aren't 50 years old. High-performance gliders would attract and retain more members, paying even more dues. Eventually, there would be enough money for the National Soaring Center in Minden.
>
>
>
> It's not a sexy solution, but we would have a growing membership, more cross-country pilots and competitors, and maybe even a world champion.
>
>
>
> Chris Fleming

[Brad[_2_]]

I like the part about hot women..................where I fly they all work at the local coffee shop.

GK

[Bill D]

On Sunday, August 10, 2014 3:41:21 PM UTC-6, Frank Whiteley wrote:
> On Sunday, August 10, 2014 7:01:29 AM UTC-6, Kevin Brooker wrote:
>
> > Money is not the issue. People have plenty of cash to spend on
>
> >
>
> > recreation and discretionary activities. Money is not the barrier to
>
> >
>
> > entry. Look at the ski industry. A one day lift ticket costs more then
>
> >
>
> > a tow, maybe to tows depending upon the ski area and glider operation.
>
> >
>
> > New skis will set the skier back anywhere from $500-2000 depending upon
>
> >
>
> > what they purchase. Look at motorcycling, off road vehicles; pick
>
> >
>
> > something. Most are on-par with soaring or more expensive to begin
>
> >
>
> > participating.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > What the sport needs is more time in a day and longer attention spans. I
>
> >
>
> > stopped flying because I didn't have enough time to participate how I
>
> >
>
> > enjoyed it. Soaring is a selfish activity which requires a lot of time.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > American's do not have the attention span. How much time is spent
>
> >
>
> > hanging out at the strip compared to flying. If someone is interested in
>
> >
>
> > taking up soaring look at the standing around time to flight/active
>
> >
>
> > participation time ratio. Glider pilots spend a huge volume of time
>
> >
>
> > standing around. By comparison, look at the stand around to
>
> >
>
> > participation in the ski industry.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > With gliders we cannot have the complete noob help out in a meaningful
>
> >
>
> > way. Gliders are too expensive and having the "never before touched a
>
> >
>
> > glider" person help us rig a ship doesn't happen. The hands on
>
> >
>
> > participation of newcomers is really low. Instructors /club members talk
>
> >
>
> > and they listen. We talk too much and do too little.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > The mindset of people in 2014 is much different then in 1950-2000. To
>
> >
>
> > survive and grow, the soaring (GA too) population has to change its
>
> >
>
> > attitude and methods to capture today's youth. Aviation is trying to
>
> >
>
> > adapt old ways to today and it isn't working. Aviation has to change the
>
> >
>
> > paradigm and change is scary and difficult.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > While seeking this new paradigm there will be lots of failures and some
>
> >
>
> > success. What is there to lose by trying? Nothing since what is
>
> >
>
> > happening now isn't working yet the aviation community seems to believe
>
> >
>
> > if they keep going at the status quo it will work. This is a bit like
>
> >
>
> > speaking louder to someone who doesn't understand our language. More
>
> >
>
> > volume will not breed instant fluency.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Beside believing the aviation community should try something new, not
>
> >
>
> > fear failure, and stop pinning the decline on expense, I have no
>
> >
>
> > solutions to offer at this time.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > --
>
> >
>
> > Kevin Brooker
>
> True for some Kevin.
>
>
>
> I once called a lapsed SSA member to see why he'd dropped out after a year. Turns out he was president of a local Corvette owner's club. He tried soaring for a week, but hadn't soloed and gave it up. His expectation was way out of line. For some it's simply not a good fit. For others, given the chance, it becomes a lifetime pursuit. How do we give them that chance?
>
>
>
> Frank Whiteley

The starting point for understanding the growth problem is the fact that soaring is a very small sport embedded in a vast and incredibly diverse population. In that population there are probably enough wealthy "annuity kids" who will never need to work who could increase the number of glider pilots by an order of magnitude. There are a huge number of other special situations where individuals could take up the sport if they chose to. There is a target "market" "out there".

We fall into a trap when we project our own situations onto the general population. When we say "people" we are unconsciously saying "people like us".. We are too unique as individuals for that to work.

It's really not "the economy" or "kids these days" or a "70 hour week work ethic" etc... that's causing the growth problem. In fact, I don't think there's an external problem at all. Instead, I think we would do much better to look hard at our "product" and how it's marketed.

When a company's product is not selling, it's pointless to blame the customer. The route to success is always the same - improve the product and then do a better job of marketing it. Those go hand in hand - marketing won't help if the product is inferior nor will a better product succeed if no one knows about it. It's basic business 101.

Another poster nailed it when he suggested that most airports and glider operations in the US are simply not nice places to hang out. For every hour a student flies in a glider, probably three or more hours are spent on the ground at the airfield so it had better be a comfortable, interesting place if we expect them to come back. It's even more critical if the student brings family.

Old, ratty trainers are just as problematic. Even if a student can be persuaded that training in one is acceptable, a watching family member who can only judge appearances may think otherwise.

Both on the ground and in the air, our image is critical to success. The European model is a great place to start - then improve on it.

[jfitch]

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 6:26:08 AM UTC-7, Bill D wrote:

>
>
> Another poster nailed it when he suggested that most airports and glider operations in the US are simply not nice places to hang out.
>

"Another poster nailed it when he suggested that most airports and glider operations in the US are simply not nice places to hang out."

Think about that when Minden is proposed as the national gliding center. While I'm sure a lovely place to live, it isn't listed in Conde Naste as one of the ten top destination resorts.....

Another difference between the US and Europe: In most European countries the National Gliding center is less than a days drive away, because the whole country is less than a days drive across. Not true in the US.

[Evan Ludeman[_4_]]

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:26:08 AM UTC-4, Bill D wrote:

> Both on the ground and in the air, our image is critical to success. The European model is a great place to start - then improve on it.

Okay, fine. What makes the European model go, financially? How would we do this, here in the USA?

-Evan

[Bill D]

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:51:40 AM UTC-6, Evan Ludeman wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:26:08 AM UTC-4, Bill D wrote:
>
>
>
> > Both on the ground and in the air, our image is critical to success. The European model is a great place to start - then improve on it.
>
>
>
> Okay, fine. What makes the European model go, financially? How would we do this, here in the USA?
>
>
>
> -Evan

I don't think anyone has all the answers but I have uncovered two.

One, the European clubs get a lot of "sweat equity" from their members who feel an obligation to help the club in whatever way their skills allow. That may be helping with glider maintenance or just mowing the grass - whatever needs done. I've heard it put this way, "Every day, try to leave the glider operation in better shape than when you arrived." That effort just makes it a nice place to be. An example is Elke Fuglsang-Petersen whose writing is often seen at the Soaring Cafe. She obtained a parachute riggers license so she could repack her clubs parachutes.

The second is intensive use of winches which if done well can create a substantial cash flow that can help support the operation.

A third may be that in some countries, tax laws encourage companies to donate equipment. One sees late model Mercedes vehicles used to retrieve winch ropes which, I understand, were donated to the club. In another case, I heard of a club needing a new winch engine. In a few days they found a new Mercedes V10 industrial diesel sitting on their doorstep. In the US we could make something like that work with 501(c)(3) incorporation.

[Evan Ludeman[_4_]]

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 5:06:54 PM UTC-4, Bill D wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:51:40 AM UTC-6, Evan Ludeman wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:26:08 AM UTC-4, Bill D wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > > Both on the ground and in the air, our image is critical to success. The European model is a great place to start - then improve on it.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Okay, fine. What makes the European model go, financially? How would we do this, here in the USA?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > -Evan
>
>
>
> I don't think anyone has all the answers but I have uncovered two.
>
>
>
> One, the European clubs get a lot of "sweat equity" from their members who feel an obligation to help the club in whatever way their skills allow. That may be helping with glider maintenance or just mowing the grass - whatever needs done. I've heard it put this way, "Every day, try to leave the glider operation in better shape than when you arrived." That effort just makes it a nice place to be. An example is Elke Fuglsang-Petersen whose writing is often seen at the Soaring Cafe. She obtained a parachute riggers license so she could repack her clubs parachutes.
>
>
>
> The second is intensive use of winches which if done well can create a substantial cash flow that can help support the operation.
>
>
>
> A third may be that in some countries, tax laws encourage companies to donate equipment. One sees late model Mercedes vehicles used to retrieve winch ropes which, I understand, were donated to the club. In another case, I heard of a club needing a new winch engine. In a few days they found a new Mercedes V10 industrial diesel sitting on their doorstep. In the US we could make something like that work with 501(c)(3) incorporation.

We have the sweat equity thing covered. And in my experience, this is pretty common in US soaring clubs.

Winches are non-starters at most ops I've been involved in. We don't have the space and more space is prohibitively expensive. Existing airports in the 4500+ range are mostly asphalt, public use, high performance GA, with runway lights and traffic and not really a step up in the "nice to hang out" direction. An old but serviceable tow plane is a hell of a lot more economical than scratching a new 4500x300 airfield out of trees, rocks or farm land.

Soaring ops don't work, business wise, because the utilization of real estate, capital and labor is appallingly bad. Unfortunately, I don't see an easy way to improve this (and neither does anyone else, thus the general shape of things in US soaring).

What's it take to found a religion :-)?

-Evan

[Frank Whiteley]

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 7:34:16 PM UTC-6, Evan Ludeman wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 5:06:54 PM UTC-4, Bill D wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:51:40 AM UTC-6, Evan Ludeman wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:26:08 AM UTC-4, Bill D wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > Both on the ground and in the air, our image is critical to success.. The European model is a great place to start - then improve on it.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Okay, fine. What makes the European model go, financially? How would we do this, here in the USA?
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > -Evan
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I don't think anyone has all the answers but I have uncovered two.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > One, the European clubs get a lot of "sweat equity" from their members who feel an obligation to help the club in whatever way their skills allow. That may be helping with glider maintenance or just mowing the grass - whatever needs done. I've heard it put this way, "Every day, try to leave the glider operation in better shape than when you arrived." That effort just makes it a nice place to be. An example is Elke Fuglsang-Petersen whose writing is often seen at the Soaring Cafe. She obtained a parachute riggers license so she could repack her clubs parachutes.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > The second is intensive use of winches which if done well can create a substantial cash flow that can help support the operation.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > A third may be that in some countries, tax laws encourage companies to donate equipment. One sees late model Mercedes vehicles used to retrieve winch ropes which, I understand, were donated to the club. In another case, I heard of a club needing a new winch engine. In a few days they found a new Mercedes V10 industrial diesel sitting on their doorstep. In the US we could make something like that work with 501(c)(3) incorporation.
>
>
>
> We have the sweat equity thing covered. And in my experience, this is pretty common in US soaring clubs.
>
>
>
> Winches are non-starters at most ops I've been involved in. We don't have the space and more space is prohibitively expensive. Existing airports in the 4500+ range are mostly asphalt, public use, high performance GA, with runway lights and traffic and not really a step up in the "nice to hang out" direction. An old but serviceable tow plane is a hell of a lot more economical than scratching a new 4500x300 airfield out of trees, rocks or farm land.
>
>
>
> Soaring ops don't work, business wise, because the utilization of real estate, capital and labor is appallingly bad. Unfortunately, I don't see an easy way to improve this (and neither does anyone else, thus the general shape of things in US soaring).
>
>
>
> What's it take to found a religion :-)?
>
>
>
> -Evan

There are many county/municipal/private airports of reasonable size where winching is quite feasible. It's pretty easy to lay the rope in the grass verge between the hard surface and the lights. Some have end lights that are easily removed and replaced, allowing the winch to be placed 500 ft or more past the end of the pavement and off to the side. Others have a soft surface parallel to the hard surface. Two gliderports have been donated to foundations in recent years. One is too short for winching. The other should have winching regularly and will hopefully have a winch camp before long. Two winch only chapters have formed in Colorado in the past year. One trains elsewhere and launches from a private strip but is planning on operating also at a longer municipal airport. They are in need of two-seater. Several of the members are from the HG world. The other winches most weekends at a municipal airport and has an interesting cadre of local pilots and EAAers working on their glider ratings. They think it's a hoot!

Frank Whiteley

[Bill D]

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 7:34:16 PM UTC-6, Evan Ludeman wrote:

> Winches are non-starters at most ops I've been involved in. We don't have the space and more space is prohibitively expensive. Existing airports in the 4500+ range are mostly asphalt, public use, high performance GA, with runway lights and traffic and not really a step up in the "nice to hang out" direction. An old but serviceable tow plane is a hell of a lot more economical than scratching a new 4500x300 airfield out of trees, rocks or farm land.

>
> -Evan

Evan, with respect, we don't need "Negative Experts" to tell us why it won't work. We need people with the imagination to see how to make it work.

The Winching World column in the October issue of Soaring will address winch economics in detail.

[Bob Whelan[_3_]]

In a different thought-provoking thread, on 8/12/2014 7:34 PM, Evan Ludeman wrote:

<Major snippery...>
> We have the sweat equity thing covered. And in my experience, this is
> pretty common in US soaring clubs.
>
> Winches are non-starters at most ops I've been involved in. We don't have
> the space and more space is prohibitively expensive. Existing airports in
> the 4500+ range are mostly asphalt, public use, high performance GA, with
> runway lights and traffic and not really a step up in the "nice to hang
> out" direction. An old but serviceable tow plane is a hell of a lot more
> economical than scratching a new 4500x300 airfield out of trees, rocks or
> farm land.
>
> Soaring ops don't work, business wise, because the utilization of real
> estate, capital and labor is appallingly bad. Unfortunately, I don't see
> an easy way to improve this (and neither does anyone else, thus the general
> shape of things in US soaring).
>
> What's it take to found a religion :-)?

Drifting too far from the topical shore...

Ask Mr. Pastafarian himself, Bobby Henderson. N.B.: Several stories down,
kinda-sorta in E.L.'s neck of the woods, prolly so can Chris Schaeffer of
Pomfret Township (NY? CT?).

http://www.venganza.org/

:-)

As to what this has to do with soaring...it was a good soaring day out here?
Yeah, it's a stretch!

[GM]

>> One sees late model Mercedes vehicles used to retrieve winch ropes which, I understand, were donated to the club. <<
My old club in Germany just took delivery of a brand-spanking new Audi Q5 with the top of the line trim. They use it to retrieve their winch cables. This vehicle and I guess others from other manufacturers were used as test vehicles and don't have a 'VIN', so officially, they don't exist. The Q5 is 'on loan' from Audi and they reserved the right to recall it at any time.
Living near the BMW plant in SC and knowing the now retired VP of production, I asked him if our club could get a nice X5 for our operation. He shuddered at the thought and said that this would be the fastest way to get the Feds, the IRS and lawyers on their tails. So they continue the cruel practice of shredding complete vehicles if a flaw too big to fix within a short time period is detected.
IMHO, introducing winching to the US soaring community is a key for its longtime survival. Our club is winching off a very busy county airport with everything from biz-jets to gyro-planes in attendance and we make it work. We have hosted three winch clinics to promote this economic launch method. One of them was hosted for members of one club and they are seriously working on a plan to acquire a winch.
Quit bitching, roll up your sleeves and do something to make your club or operation a little bit better. As long as a large part of the US glider community thinks that club participation is the act of writing a monthly check and expecting in return the tow plane to appear when they show up with their nice shiny toy, nothing is going to happen! But then again, I may be influenced by my upbringing in one of these socialist European countries, where soaring is well and alive.
Uli

[Kevin Brooker]

There is a bunch of interesting observations in this thread.


The club of which Evan speaks where I live just below the traffic pattern IS fantastic but doesn't hold a candle to itself in its heyday. When I began soaring a few decades back, PMSC was a complete social hub. Entire families came to the strip and hung out. Kids drove golf carts, significant others sat in a sunscreen house and chewed the fat, some sort of gathering when the ships were put away (yes, you guys still do this which is super cool). People would arrive at the strip even if the family pilot wasn't there so they were able to socialize. We moved the operation as an encampment at least once each month, etc. XC has always been encouraged and retrieves were more common and anticipated. My daughter would be all bummed out of everyone made it home because she loved the adventure of a retrieve. PMSC still has the adventurous spirit and the volunteerism is unmatched. Point being, and others have touched upon this, the airport was an enjoyable place to hang out. Still is and the kids ask to head down to check it out and drive golf carts to move gliders around. While I am not actively flying, my family still enjoys seeing the friends we've made over the years and we regularly get together outside of the soaring environment. Besides flying, soaring has enhanced all aspects of our lives. And in case you are wondering, there are extremely aesthetic individuals who are members. Eye candy for all.

Someone also mentioned improving the product. Not the flying but the entire package regardless of the activity at the strip. This is key to retaining membership in soaring and improving the overall brand.

How does the soaring community, not just some SSA committee, do this?

We can start by being more open in our communication. There have been many mentions of success by unnamed individuals and organizations at unnamed airports. Help each other out. Who, what, where, why; fill us in on the successes. There are too many mistakes to make in a lifetime so let's educate each other on how we overcame the obstacles to achieving success.

It'd be great if the internal bickering would go away; forever. Who cares if the winch or the towplane gets people into the air. What is important is people are flying. The partisanship just kills creativity. It doesn't matter who is correct as long as the brand is improved and people are flying. Help the community find the best solution to the location to help make an operation a success. Winch; towplane; bungee; balloon drop? Doesn't matter as long as the operation works.

If the brand needs a makeover to improve the image then let's figure out how to do this. What does it cost to recover the and install a new interior into the 2-33? To most new-commers the difference between a 2-33 and DG-1000 is the color. Maybe the clubs set in a barren dessert can benefit from having a screenhouse to provide shade for pilots, families and interested parties. Not much but it gives the impression the organization cares about the comfort of people who stop by.

Are these good ideas? I have no idea but we need to put these bits out there so others can tap into them and see if they work at all. Will this all require effort? YES but if we spend as much effort improving the brand as we do cutting each other up we have the problem solved.

Will this take money. Hell yes. Where will we get it? Big question. Liability, tax, and commerce law does get into the way for corporate donations like cars and beer (got to reward the volunteers). 501(c)(3) status helps but setting up individual clubs has shown to be a lot of work. Can one mega club be set up to receive and distribute the cash for brand improvement? It seems like the SSA should be able to do this but if they cannot, skip over them and don't let them be an impediment. I stand on the platform there is a ton of money available in the US. What can we do to improve the brand by not having to throw money at it? What improvements to the brand can we make? This goes well beyond the flying. Before you can land the fish you need to set the hook. Most of the conversations are about what to do with the fish once it is in the boat.

[HGXC[_2_]]

On Wednesday, August 13, 2014 12:23:27 AM UTC-4, GM wrote:
> >> One sees late model Mercedes vehicles used to retrieve winch ropes which, I understand, were donated to the club. <<
>
> My old club in Germany just took delivery of a brand-spanking new Audi Q5 with the top of the line trim. They use it to retrieve their winch cables. This vehicle and I guess others from other manufacturers were used as test vehicles and don't have a 'VIN', so officially, they don't exist. The Q5 is 'on loan' from Audi and they reserved the right to recall it at any time.
>
> Living near the BMW plant in SC and knowing the now retired VP of production, I asked him if our club could get a nice X5 for our operation. He shuddered at the thought and said that this would be the fastest way to get the Feds, the IRS and lawyers on their tails. So they continue the cruel practice of shredding complete vehicles if a flaw too big to fix within a short time period is detected.
>
> IMHO, introducing winching to the US soaring community is a key for its longtime survival. Our club is winching off a very busy county airport with everything from biz-jets to gyro-planes in attendance and we make it work. We have hosted three winch clinics to promote this economic launch method. One of them was hosted for members of one club and they are seriously working on a plan to acquire a winch.
>
> Quit bitching, roll up your sleeves and do something to make your club or operation a little bit better. As long as a large part of the US glider community thinks that club participation is the act of writing a monthly check and expecting in return the tow plane to appear when they show up with their nice shiny toy, nothing is going to happen! But then again, I may be influenced by my upbringing in one of these socialist European countries, where soaring is well and alive.
>
> Uli

"my upbringing in one of these socialist European countries"

Another interjection of politics, I would prefer to go on a more independent self relent track to a solution. Don't you feel a little silly taking resources from your finite tax base for a high end recreation activity for a privileged few? Let the Q5 go to a needy concern. Each club has their own set of challenges and resources. Local solutions work best.

Dennis

[kirk.stant]

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 10:08:01 PM UTC-5, Bill D wrote:

> Evan, with respect, we don't need "Negative Experts" to tell us why it won't work. We need people with the imagination to see how to make it work.

Bill, with respect, you can't change physics. Our club has a fantastic grass field - but is only 2400' long, with roads and an interstate at each end. So you tell us how a winch will work - because we would love to have one!

And yes I have winch launched - in Germany, France, and the US. And what all those operations had in common was a LONG runway (over 4000').

So we will stick to our trusty Pawnee and Super Cub for now.

Kirk
66

[[email protected]]

While it is no way takes away from the suggested solutions to the problem, it is worth noting that the problem of decreasing membership is a worldwide issue and not unique to the US. Take a look at John Roake's summary of worldwide membership statistics. You will see that the decline is everywhere including in those European countries we often seek to emulate. Note also that the production of world champions (something the original post highlights as a concern) does not in any way correlate to membership stats. Poland, for example, has had one of the steepest declines in membership over the last decade yet in that time has risen to be the the top in contests.

http://www.lkka.cz/sport/zapisy/ZapisPK.2013.03.30_2.P2.pdf

So, the question is not what is being done wrong in the US (or my country, Canada) in particular, but rather what can change within the worldwide soaring community? We can look to best practices from abroad yes, but there may very well be things we do that those abroad may want to consider as well.

We also have to consider what the end goal is. Soaring is both a sport and an activity. Success can be measured by bums in seats or by seats on podiums. and as the Poles have shown us, the two are not necessarily one and the same.

[SCVihlen]

I learned to fly sailplanes while stationed with the USAF in Germany. I've been soaring in the US since 2000 and with my airline job have many opportunities to visit clubs around the world. My take on one of the factors is that the US is so large and clubs spread so far apart. Many times not near metropolitan areas. The club I've belonged to is an hour and forty minutes each way. The next nearest clubs are at least twice that distance and more. It's just a huge commitment to make a day at the club happen.

Now, my experience in Europe where I've flown internationally the most (Germany and England) There is a club every 30 miles. Usually, there's public transportation available from town to the club which makes it very accessible even for me on layovers. Imagine if here in the US we had this kind of access to our club field and facilities. Europe is not the US and this is the limitation we have. There are many reasons membership is dwindling, but I wanted to put this part of the equation out there.

Steve Vihlen

[Fox Two[_2_]]

We all appear to agree on two points: First, we have a problem attracting new members to our sport.

There aren't many people in the general population who are interested in soaring, but I believe that those who are will seek us out. It is important that we are able to quickly satisfy their curiosity when they do. I think it's safe to assume that most people's first stop would be a search on the internet, and that first visit to our website needs to convince them to make further contact. When they do, we need to respond quickly, and get them to come for a visit. When they arrive, somebody should be there to make them feel welcome, and answer their questions. I would suggest that this 'greeter' be somebody other than the person giving the glider rides so that the conversation can remain fluid. This personal touch cannot be overemphasized. In addition, our facilities need to be attractive. My wish-list would include a well-groomed outdoor picnic area that is in the shade, a well-maintained comfortable club house with refreshments, and a clean toilet with a sink that is kept stocked with paper, soap and towels (very important to the ladies). But it's the glider ride that sells the membership. The glider itself should be the best glider in the fleet, but it MUST be well-maintained and clean, inside and out. And the pilot giving the ride shouldn't look like a bum.

The second point that we appear to agree upon is that we have a problem keeping the members that we already have.

We can retain many members by just making improvements to club policies, such as:

1. While many members can only come out to the club on weekends and holidays, there's no reason why the club itself should be open only on weekends and holidays.

2. Double the size of each flying day by training in the mornings; pattern tows don't require thermals.

3. Standardize initial training. There is more than one way to satisfactorily demonstrate a maneuver to the PTS, but students are easily frustrated by different instructors teaching different procedures.

4. People hate duty rosters. If your club has a difficult time staffing a position, offer the carrot and not the stick.

5. Don't discourage cross-country by putting a daily time limit on club gliders. If you only have a few gliders for several people to share, set one glider aside for some to share, but let the others fly their gliders all day.

6. Encourage cross-country by correlating badges to privileges. For example: flight privileges beyond immediate local would require a C badge, flights beyond extended local require a Bronze badge, access to the club's entry-level fiberglass glider would require a Silver badge, etc.

7. Instructors should introduce cross-country BEFORE they sign them off for their check ride. The SGS 2-33 and ASK 13 can easily fly Silver distance tasks.

Other necessary club improvements would require deeper commitments, such as:

1. The basic training gliders, like the SGS 2-33 and the ASK 13, fill an important role in our sport. But they live hard lives, and all too often they're in poor condition. This is unsafe and unacceptable. Gliders need to be maintained (not just inspected), and eventually they need to be torn apart, refurbished and rebuilt.

2. Club fleets must grow. We need classic ships for the beginners, fiberglass ships for the intermediate members, and high-performance ships for the advanced members. And we need a safe and reliable way to get them all in the air, quickly.

3. But high-performance gliders by themselves are useless without receiving the necessary training to extract their performance capabilities; instruction must continue beyond the initial check ride in high-performance bi-place gliders, far away from home.

4. And club facilities must grow. We need hangars, internet-equipped club houses, covered areas near the runway for members waiting to fly, golf carts, picnic areas for end-of-day beverage consumption and holiday barbeques, campgrounds for tents and RV's, playgrounds for the kids...

In short, we desperately need to improve our product. Many clubs focus on making the sport affordable, but by doing so they won't ever have enough money to make improvements like these. But even if we doubled our fees we wouldn't raise enough revenue to make the improvements our sport needs; we would only lose more members.

While money by itself won't fix anything, we won't be able to fix everything without money. For clubs in the USA, the best tool available to grow funds is the 501(c)(3) certification. The government created this program specifically to help organizations like ours grow, but too few are even aware of it. The core of my proposal is that the SSA has an opportunity (and I would even say a responsibility) to get the word out to every club about the benefits of 501(c)(3). The specifics of to what degree the SSA becomes involved with each club's process is open for debate.


Chris Fleming

[Bill D]

On Wednesday, August 13, 2014 6:28:06 AM UTC-6, kirk.stant wrote:

> Bill, with respect, you can't change physics. Our club has a fantastic grass field - but is only 2400' long, with roads and an interstate at each end. So you tell us how a winch will work - because we would love to have one!
>
>
> And yes I have winch launched - in Germany, France, and the US. And what all those operations had in common was a LONG runway (over 4000').
>

> So we will stick to our trusty Pawnee and Super Cub for now.
>
>
>
> Kirk
>
> 66

Yes, winch operations work better with longer runways and 2500 feet is too short. Some might say 2500 feet is too short for safe aero tow operations particularly with heavy gliders. Don't limit your thinking to the existing airfield. Imagine how to get a larger one. Think outside the box. People ARE doing that.

On average, that "trusty Pawnee" will deliver about 30,000 tows before it gets totaled in a crash according to 20 years of NTSB data and activity surveys. There's only about 100 left and we're crashing 4 - 5 a year. Those surveys also say it's likely to kill a tow pilot every 125,000 tows. Only one in of five of those wrecks will get rebuilt to tow again. We're running out of 50 year old Pawnees.

Most clubs see their tow planes sucking up around 65% of their revenue leaving little money to upgrade their glider fleets. Sure, they could raise fees but that will cost them members. When the tug costs reach 75% of revenue, clubs tend to start a downward spiral as gliders get older and members leave.

Winch launch is inevitable.

[jfitch]

On Wednesday, August 13, 2014 5:28:06 AM UTC-7, kirk.stant wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 10:08:01 PM UTC-5, Bill D wrote:
>
>
>
> > Evan, with respect, we don't need "Negative Experts" to tell us why it won't work. We need people with the imagination to see how to make it work..
>
>
>
> Bill, with respect, you can't change physics. Our club has a fantastic grass field - but is only 2400' long, with roads and an interstate at each end. So you tell us how a winch will work - because we would love to have one!
>
>
>
> And yes I have winch launched - in Germany, France, and the US. And what all those operations had in common was a LONG runway (over 4000').
>
>
>
> So we will stick to our trusty Pawnee and Super Cub for now.
>
>
>
> Kirk
>
> 66

While there is much hand wringing about tows vs. winch launches on this thread and comparisons to Europe, it seems that a large part of the solution in Europe is self-launched gliders. I have heard figures like 70-80% of new gliders sold have engines. There are far less popular that that in the US.

But I do not believe that the cost of the launch has much to do with the decline in popularity, and therefore decreasing it will not halt the decline. The international figures referred to above show that the US is no more in decline than most of the rest of the world: USA down 19%, Germany down 18% over 11 years for example. In spite of the national soaring centers, winch launches, and a new Audi for every club member.

Since all sports are faddish in nature, there very best thing that could happen is to make a blockbuster feature length drama about soaring, demonstrating (through popular young stars) how glamorous it is. Second choice might be a poplar video game featuring soaring as the main element. Both probably need a lot of blood and gore to be popular. That is how young people are influenced these days.

[Justin Craig[_3_]]

In the UK there is considerable resource put into the juniors moment to
attract youth to the support. This is very successful, and IMHO a very
worthwhile investment.

As I see it a bigger issue is retaining members through their mid to late
20s. Typically at this stage in life their are external factors affecting
membership retention ( careers, mortgages, wife / husband, children, etc).


So should clubs invest in creating and environment / infrastructure where
the airfield is a "family friendly environment". Static caravan parks for
members, so that the family can stay for the weekend and BBQ in the evening
with friends, etc. Make each weekend like a holiday for the family and
allow yourself more time to fly?

I, and I suspect many others find that gliding is wonderful, but the
friendships and social aspect of our sport also play a considerable role in
enjoyment of the sport (particularly in the UK where the weather is crap
for 11.5 months of the year!)

Just a thought.....



At 13:21 13 August 2014, SCVihlen wrote:
>I learned to fly sailplanes while stationed with the USAF in Germany.
I've
>=
>been soaring in the US since 2000 and with my airline job have many
>opportu=
>nities to visit clubs around the world. My take on one of the factors is
>th=
>at the US is so large and clubs spread so far apart. Many times not near
>me=
>tropolitan areas. The club I've belonged to is an hour and forty minutes
>ea=
>ch way. The next nearest clubs are at least twice that distance and more.
>I=
>t's just a huge commitment to make a day at the club happen.=20
>
>Now, my experience in Europe where I've flown internationally the most
>(Ger=
>many and England) There is a club every 30 miles. Usually, there's public
>t=
>ransportation available from town to the club which makes it very
>accessibl=
>e even for me on layovers. Imagine if here in the US we had this kind of
>ac=
>cess to our club field and facilities. Europe is not the US and this is
>the=
> limitation we have. There are many reasons membership is dwindling, but
I
>=
>wanted to put this part of the equation out there.
>
>Steve Vihlen
>

[Robin Clark]

What if America's national training center for soaring was mobile?

A two-place,self-launching sailplane towed by a motor home driven by the SSA's chief of training
could show up a week before a regional contest. The instructor would conduct seminars, take students aloft and encourage others to follow in their own planes. Other times, clubs could pool interested members to bring SSA training to town. It might be popular enough to require bidding with sites bringing the most paying students getting the trainer first.

The chief training officer could write a column for Soaring magazine, have winter chores in the offices at Hobbs, help put on the convention and other national events.

The project would be partially self-funding, but mostly supported through the SSA with the most subsidy aimed at the instructor community, because we want our instructors to convey excitement about cross country flying. Some sailplane manufacturer would get the benefit of a top-of-the-line product being demonstrated across the country.
Robin Clark

[kirk.stant]

On Wednesday, August 13, 2014 9:02:00 AM UTC-5, Bill D wrote:

> Yes, winch operations work better with longer runways and 2500 feet is too short. Some might say 2500 feet is too short for safe aero tow operations particularly with heavy gliders. Don't limit your thinking to the existing airfield. Imagine how to get a larger one. Think outside the box. People ARE doing that.

Disagree that our 2400' (with nice overruns) is too short for aero tows. Of course, we are at 500' msl, which helps. Hot day, no wind, full up G-103 can make it sporting for the 180 Super Cub, but our 235 Pawnee doesn't mind at all.


> On average, that "trusty Pawnee" will deliver about 30,000 tows before it gets totaled in a crash according to 20 years of NTSB data and activity surveys. There's only about 100 left and we're crashing 4 - 5 a year. Those surveys also say it's likely to kill a tow pilot every 125,000 tows. Only one in of five of those wrecks will get rebuilt to tow again. We're running out of 50 year old Pawnees.

Well, ours has been going for over 30 years since a complete rebuild (from a basket case). We have parts for a couple more, and are looking at some interesting options out of Argentina - don't give up on the Pawnee yet!

Also, you can now get an essentially zero time Cessna Bird Dog. Not cheap, but probably one of the best towplanes ever made, and no fabric to worry about.

>Most clubs see their tow planes sucking up around 65% of their revenue leaving little money to upgrade their glider fleets. Sure, they could raise fees but that will cost them members. When the tug costs reach 75% of revenue, clubs tend to start a downward spiral as gliders get older and members leave.

We are lucky to own our field, towplanes, and an expanding fleet (everything from a 2-33 and 1-26s, to K-21 and Astir CS for XC), all hangared (with a separate new hangar for 10 private gliders). We are seeing a lot of new members this year, including several teens - to the point that our limitation now is CFIGs!

> Winch launch is inevitable.

No, death and taxes are inevitable. Winch launching is an attractive option. Now if we all had sustainers, a short winch launch followed by a sustainer climb would have potential. But this isn't Europe yet.

Kirk
66

[Frank Whiteley]

On Wednesday, August 13, 2014 11:06:47 AM UTC-6, Robin Clark wrote:
> What if America's national training center for soaring was mobile?
>
>
>
> A two-place,self-launching sailplane towed by a motor home driven by the SSA's chief of training
>
> could show up a week before a regional contest. The instructor would conduct seminars, take students aloft and encourage others to follow in their own planes. Other times, clubs could pool interested members to bring SSA training to town. It might be popular enough to require bidding with sites bringing the most paying students getting the trainer first.
>
>
>
> The chief training officer could write a column for Soaring magazine, have winter chores in the offices at Hobbs, help put on the convention and other national events.
>
>
>
> The project would be partially self-funding, but mostly supported through the SSA with the most subsidy aimed at the instructor community, because we want our instructors to convey excitement about cross country flying. Some sailplane manufacturer would get the benefit of a top-of-the-line product being demonstrated across the country.
>
> Robin Clark

Last time I checked, first solo in a self-launching sailplane was not insurable. I know there was interest at one time in forming a training club around a Grob G-103 SL, but lack of insurability for first solos put that idea to bed.

Frank Whiteley

[Robin Clark]

On Wednesday, August 13, 2014 2:28:02 PM UTC-4, Frank Whiteley wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 13, 2014 11:06:47 AM UTC-6, Robin Clark wrote:
>
> > What if America's national training center for soaring was mobile?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > A two-place,self-launching sailplane towed by a motor home driven by the SSA's chief of training
>
> >
>
> > could show up a week before a regional contest. The instructor would conduct seminars, take students aloft and encourage others to follow in their own planes. Other times, clubs could pool interested members to bring SSA training to town. It might be popular enough to require bidding with sites bringing the most paying students getting the trainer first.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > The chief training officer could write a column for Soaring magazine, have winter chores in the offices at Hobbs, help put on the convention and other national events.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > The project would be partially self-funding, but mostly supported through the SSA with the most subsidy aimed at the instructor community, because we want our instructors to convey excitement about cross country flying. Some sailplane manufacturer would get the benefit of a top-of-the-line product being demonstrated across the country.
>
> >
>
> > Robin Clark
>
>
>
> Last time I checked, first solo in a self-launching sailplane was not insurable. I know there was interest at one time in forming a training club around a Grob G-103 SL, but lack of insurability for first solos put that idea to bed.
>
>
>
> Frank Whiteley

All flights in an SSA sponsored self-launched two-place would be with the SSA's chief instructor aboard. Instruction would be for advanced cross country and racing with the idea of improving overall US performance and eventually our results internationally. There would be a minimum skill requirement to fly with the instructor. Training on the ground would be open.

[Chris Rollings[_2_]]

Thnat's not very far off a description of about 25% of my job as Senior
National Coach for the British Gliding Association in the late 80's and
90's. The training weeks weren't linked to competitions (apart from the
Junior National Championships) but run a various clubs around the country.
Easier in the UK, everywhere is within a day's drive.

At 17:06 13 August 2014, Robin Clark wrote:
>
>What if America's national training center for soaring was mobile?
>
>A two-place,self-launching sailplane towed by a motor home driven by the
>SS=
>A's chief of training=20
>could show up a week before a regional contest. The instructor would
>conduc=
>t seminars, take students aloft and encourage others to follow in their
>own=
> planes. Other times, clubs could pool interested members to bring SSA
>trai=
>ning to town. It might be popular enough to require bidding with sites
>brin=
>ging the most paying students getting the trainer first.=20
>
>The chief training officer could write a column for Soaring magazine,
have
>=
>winter chores in the offices at Hobbs, help put on the convention and
>other=
> national events.
>
>The project would be partially self-funding, but mostly supported through
>t=
>he SSA with the most subsidy aimed at the instructor community, because
we
>=
>want our instructors to convey excitement about cross country flying.
Some
>=
>sailplane manufacturer would get the benefit of a top-of-the-line product
>b=
>eing demonstrated across the country.
>Robin Clark
>

[Sean Fidler]

Great idea. Where do I apply for this job? ;-)

[Fox Two[_2_]]

On Wednesday, August 13, 2014 7:06:47 PM UTC+2, Robin Clark wrote:

> What if America's national training center for soaring was mobile?
>
> A two-place,self-launching sailplane towed by a motor home driven by the SSA's chief of training
>
> could show up a week before a regional contest. The instructor would conduct seminars, take students aloft and encourage others to follow in their own planes. Other times, clubs could pool interested members to bring SSA training to town. It might be popular enough to require bidding with sites bringing the most paying students getting the trainer first.
>
> The chief training officer could write a column for Soaring magazine, have winter chores in the offices at Hobbs, help put on the convention and other national events.
>
> The project would be partially self-funding, but mostly supported through the SSA with the most subsidy aimed at the instructor community, because we want our instructors to convey excitement about cross country flying. Some sailplane manufacturer would get the benefit of a top-of-the-line product being demonstrated across the country.
>
> Robin Clark


Robin,

The more I think about your idea, the more I like it. I strongly agree that the key to getting more cross-country pilots is to get instructors to convey that excitement to their students early. Many instructors haven't ever flown cross-country themselves, so they don't ever share it with their students. If we could get those instructors into high-performance two-seaters and fly some nice tasks with experienced cross-country pilots, some are bound to get hooked.

One way it could work:

1. Find experienced cross-country pilots with access to high-performance two-place gliders, either privately-owned or club-owned, who are willing to volunteer their time.

2. Find the flight instructors who are current and active, but who do not fly cross-country.

3. Have the volunteer cross-country pilots travel with the gliders to the clubs of the instructors, so that the instructors could experience cross-country from their home fields (note: insurance shouldn't be an issue with the glider being insured through the pilot and the tow insured through the instructor).

4. Then, encourage those instructors to fly cross-country with both students during training and with rated pilots during flight reviews.

If we had enough volunteers, no single volunteer would have to travel very far to get all of the instructors this crucial experience. The potential of this is exponential.

Chris Fleming

[son_of_flubber]

What do people think about an organized attempt to recruit new soaring pilots from the ranks of professional pilots that are facing mandatory retirement?

[Bruce Hoult[_2_]]

On 2014-08-16 10:14:00 +0000, Fox Two said:

> The more I think about your idea, the more I like it. I strongly agree
> that the key to getting more cross-country pilots is to get instructors
> to convey that excitement to their students early. Many instructors
> haven't ever flown cross-country themselves, so they don't ever share
> it with their students. If we could get those instructors into
> high-performance two-seaters and fly some nice tasks with experienced
> cross-country pilots, some are bound to get hooked.One way it could
> work:

I don't own a glider and have never done much "real" cross country.
I've hired the club PW5 and taken it to comps and done 200-250 km
thermal tasks (even won a day once).

Landouts with rides or students screw up the bookings for the rest of
the day, so I try not to cut it too fine, and certainly not NEED to
find a thermal to get home. But 3000 or 3500 ft 20 or 30 km from the
field *feels* like cross country to the inexperienced, even though you
should only use half or two thirds of the height getting back. You
can't see the airfield. You can't even see the town the airfield is in.
Even in flat land. In fact, the field is often hidden by ridges that
you have to cross on the way back.

It's a very powerful thing to tell the student to head for a 1500 ft
ridge 10 or 15 km away that looks to them to be just as high as you
are, and as you get closer the airfield 5 km beyond it is slowly
revealed.

Of course we're using (short wing, fixed gear) DG1000s for all rides
and training, but frankly the retractable Grob twins we had before them
were almost as good if you kept the speed down. The main benefit of the
DG (besides the better handling and better CofG control and infinitly
better instructor comfort) is that it only takes a few hundred feet
above best L/D glideslope to pump the MacCready setting up and romp
home at 80 - 100 knots.

[[email protected]]

W dniu piątek, 8 sierpnia 2014 19:14:02 UTC+2 użytkownik Fox Two napisał:
> There have been several threads on RAS recently about the disappointing state of our sport in the USA: a shrinking membership, few cross-country pilots, fewer contest pilots, and no world champions. If we're going to reverse these trends, we need more than contest rule tweaking and membership drive gimmicks. We need to make our sport exciting so that we don't just attract new members but, more importantly, keep the ones that we already have.
>
>
>
> Our sport is about soaring long distances at fast speeds or performing energy-conserving aerobatics. Of course there are also the antique enthusiasts and those who enjoy simply boring holes in the sky above the airfield - but we sell the sex. We lose potential new members when they see the Schweizer 2-33, we lose existing members when there's nothing better to fly than a Grob 103, and we lose even more due to boredom because cross-country training is a rare luxury, and inexperienced pilots are reluctant to venture away from the nest alone. The problems of our sport all originate at the club level - and it will be up to the clubs to fix them. Our clubs need to offer high-performance gliders and training that goes beyond the FAA's Practical Test Standards.
>
>
>
> The Europeans dominate this sport for the same reason the US military dominates the battlefield: they spend more money and train more than anybody else. There are national soaring centers to teach the teachers so they in turn can offer the highest-quality training to their club's members. With the assistance of their national organizations, European clubs blaze a clear path from debutant to the diamond badge, with training at every step of the way. Unfortunately, the European model won't work in the USA (something to do with our distrust of socialism), but we can build our own model of success based on theirs.
>
>
>
> THINK BIG: Imagine a 'United States National Soaring Center.' Let's put it where even the Europeans would be envious: Minden. Employ professional instructors with state-of-the-art sailplanes teaching our clubs' instructors, offering year-round cross-country and mountain-wave camps, and coaching the US Teams. A pipe dream you say? It would be expensive for sure - but it wouldn't be impossible.
>
>
>
> The SSA is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, which means among other things, that it is able to receive tax-deductible donations. And it does. For example, in 2011 the SSA received a $1 million cash donation. Would $1 million pay for the National Soaring Center? No. But the SSA could use some of that money to get ALL of the clubs 501(c)3 tax status. A team of tax professionals, paid for by the SSA, could work with the clubs to restructure each club so that they could receive tax-deductible donations. Every club member would immediately benefit: club dues, for example, can be tax deductible. Few club members would object to paying higher dues if they were tax deductible, and some club members would love to make tax-deductible donations to the club. I would much rather give a thousand bucks to my club than to Uncle Sam! This would allow the clubs to finally leave the 1960's and get some gliders that aren't 50 years old. High-performance gliders would attract and retain more members, paying even more dues. Eventually, there would be enough money for the National Soaring Center in Minden.
>
>
>
> It's not a sexy solution, but we would have a growing membership, more cross-country pilots and competitors, and maybe even a world champion.
>
>
>
> Chris Fleming

Hi, I am writing on behalf of Polish KSS (Karkonosze Soaring Society), a non-profit organization of seasoned pilots, who believe, that teaching less experienced in an orderly way brings more fruits that letting them alone to discover rules of soaring the way, Lilienthal did. Time consuming, frustrating and at the end, non-efficient.
Karkonosze is the chain of mountains on Polish-Czech border, where unique thermal and wave conditions permit for nearly year-round soaring activity.
We have been watching this thread as it contains many elements
relevant to all national soaring communities.

In short, the Polish soaring community believes that the model of our
(KSS) activity had substantially invigorated gliding scene in Poland,
with all subsequent benefits (increased participation, publicity,
training, increased flight hours within community etc). All this had
been done without interference with the existing structures and
without substantial monetary investment, basically by using existing
potential and underutilized resources. This is why we post in this
thread.

To be clear, we do not make any claims to "own" any successes of
Polish competition glider pilots, who seem to be on the roll recently.
Bulk of our activity is below that level, and we are active only last
couple of years. There are other established structures here which
could make such claims, if anyone could.

Gliding in Poland is (roughly) based on local Aero Clubs
(self-financing) associated in central Polish Aero Club (minimal state
donations, majority financing by associate clubs) and two nationwide
gliding schools (plains and mountain) financed from within that
community. Financial situation is probably similar to what is in the
US, with differences in income levels in Poland vs US at one side and
legacy of cheap, usually exclusive leases on big grass airfields at
the other side.

Typical route for someone in gliding is taking a basic course at some
local club (about $1700 with first 10 solos), then training for
licence (about the same cost), then training individually for XC, then
competition participation. With attrition/delays at each stage as was
discussed in this thread.

First two stages of training are standardized nationwide (in the
main). Training is still based on old wooden ships (SZD-9, SZD-30)
with some glass whenever possible or necessary (aerobatics). Much
depends on how financially savvy a given club is. Some clubs gather
large fleets of cheap ($3k) SZD-30, some clubs go for more expensive
and less numerous glass. Clubs have usually several SZD-48s, which go
for "high performance" here. Ships build after 1990 are rare (unless
privately owned by club members or at national center school).

Training works well locally at the basic level (till first 10 solos).
It is usually organized in groups (10 is typical, but 40 may happen)
and for short intense periods - about 6 flying days whole, contiguous
if possible. This can be done as weather impact is moderate (training
is circuit patterns around sunset and sunrise, short small showers and/or
low - 1200' - cloudbase are tolerated). Clubs mostly have cheap local
accommodations (campsites and showers, dormitories, diner type bars).

The problems start after solo for reasons discussed in this thread. At
any given time, at each airfield there are few people for further
training. Due to naturally smaller group being interested, weather
uncertainties (thermals needed!) etc. This leads to inefficiencies and
for some, disillusions. This is even more problem at XC training
level. In reality, people after license are left to themselves.

Here is where the concept introduced by KSS seem to change things. KSS
is just an animator group, with minimal resources (couple of gliders).
What we do is we organize, throughout the year, a week or 2 weeks long
training camps based at various airfields, in Poland and abroad. Camps
are usually targeted at XC training level, but many are accessible for
student-pilots (after solo, before license). The elements are:
- use the infrastructure of some local club, augmented for the event (towplanes)
- use local club gliders but ask all participants to bring ships from
their clubs if possible
- invite (volunteer) instructors from all over the country, in
addition to local folks.
- make sure several people with considerable competition experience
are present and participate very actively

Typical attendance is 30-40 plus about 5 instructors. Usually there is
someone with world level competition experience, multiple people with
national level competition experience. The day is organized in a way
typical for competition (task setting, debriefings, meteo, log
analysis etc). Every day there is some gliding-related lecture,
usually very interactive and centered on XC performance.

Because of instructors and doubleseaters available, there is much of
intensive training, and students may fly tasks they could otherwise
only hear about (e.g. wave).

Because of the group character of the event, there is no problem with
retrieves (well, some pretty long and late night if 70% of pilots land
out :-) )

The fascinating thing is that this worked out with no changes to
existing organisation and no substantial money expenditure.
Admittedly, there is a lot of "sweat equity" put in by the whole FI
community (vacation time etc). It turned out that there is MUCH unused
capacity in many clubs (even at national gliding schools), much good
will and volunteer time at all the local clubs we work with, and much
pent-up demand nationwide (we have people come from as far as
Australia as well). Somehow at most local clubs there were at any
given time 1-2 people who wanted to participate in some form of group
training, and could not have this locally. The lists for the camps
close within hours or days, there is always a waiting list. The
benefits of large regular gatherings are obvious in many aspects.

Each camp is open (and aimed at) to people who would before not
participate in regular competition events, for various reasons. This
really brings down some barriers. But in practice, maybe quarter of
pilots are quite hard-core.

What is important is that local clubs support this idea (ship rental
to their members for the event for example). There is even a feedback
- some clubs organize similar things locally - people who participated
in KSS events got enthusiastic enough to mimic them, on a smaller
scale perhaps.

We would invite you to talk with us about details, and/or come to our
camps (in 2015 we can accept more participants)
to get the feel if this type of activity could be some element
of the US scene as well. For those who would want to come please
contact us early so the details (e.g. license validation) can be taken
care of at reasonable pace.

KSS was involved also in some high-profile things (Sebastian Kawa flew in
Himalaya in the ship a KSS member provided, we broke through into national TV
coverage, some Worlds competitors from outside Poland are training
with us), but the real impact is for the community.

[Andy Gough[_2_]]

This post should come across as inspirational to all of us interested in
the subject it addresses. Strangely after two days there have been
no responses. I guess we could all be on vacation or flying contests, or even
buried in work but I considered we may not be able to understand the post because it is in Polish:-).

Considering this is a success story I thought a translation might enhance our understanding and spark some enthusiasm.





On Monday, August 18, 2014 5:15:57 AM UTC-4, wrote:

> Hi, I am writing on behalf of Polish KSS (Karkonosze Soaring Society), a non-profit
>organization of seasoned pilots, who believe, that teaching less experienced in
>an orderly way brings more fruits that letting them alone to discover rules of
>soaring the way, Lilienthal did. Time consuming, frustrating and at the end, non-efficient.
> Karkonosze is the chain of mountains on Polish-Czech border, where unique thermal
>and wave conditions permit for nearly year-round soaring activity.>
> We have been watching this thread as it contains many elements
> relevant to all national soaring communities.

TRANSLATION:
Leadership characterized by organized training to a national standard is far superior to students going it alone at their own pace. We think you are experiencing the same problems we and others are attempting to overcome.


>
>
>
> In short, the Polish soaring community believes that the model of our
> (KSS) activity had substantially invigorated gliding scene in Poland,
> with all subsequent benefits (increased participation, publicity,
> training, increased flight hours within community etc). All this had
> been done without interference with the existing structures and
> without substantial monetary investment, basically by using existing
> potential and underutilized resources. This is why we post in this
> thread.
>


TRANSLATION:
The strategy we have pursued has been successful. The results include increased participation, publicity, training, increased flight hours for participants. You may wish to try it yourself.



> Gliding in Poland is (roughly) based on local Aero Clubs
> (self-financing) associated in central Polish Aero Club (minimal state
> donations, majority financing by associate clubs) and two nationwide
> gliding schools (plains and mountain) financed from within that
> community. Financial situation is probably similar to what is in the
> US, with differences in income levels in Poland vs US at one side and
> legacy of cheap, usually exclusive leases on big grass airfields at
> the other side.


TRANSLATION:
Apart from two national soaring sites our situation is not that different from yours.



>
>
> First two stages of training are standardized nationwide (in the
> main). Training is still based on old wooden ships (SZD-9, SZD-30)
> with some glass whenever possible or necessary (aerobatics). Much
> depends on how financially savvy a given club is. Some clubs gather
> large fleets of cheap ($3k) SZD-30, some clubs go for more expensive
> and less numerous glass. Clubs have usually several SZD-48s, which go
> for "high performance" here. Ships build after 1990 are rare (unless
> privately owned by club members or at national center school).
>


TRANSLATION:
You don't need fancy aeroplanes and infrastructure it will work with your current resources.


>
> Training works well locally at the basic level (till first 10 solos).
> It is usually organized in groups (10 is typical, but 40 may happen)
> and for short intense periods - about 6 flying days whole, contiguous
> if possible. This can be done as weather impact is moderate (training
> is circuit patterns around sunset and sunrise, short small showers and/or
> low - 1200' - cloudbase are tolerated). Clubs mostly have cheap local
> accommodations (campsites and showers, dormitories, diner type bars).
>


TRANSLATION:
Organized group ab-initio training that takes place over a short intense contiguous period works best. Weather and soaring conditions do not have to be perfect and high altitude launches are not necessary for ab-initio training. Contiguous training does not necessarily mean contiguous days, contiguous weekends accomplishes the same as long as the training is organized in a
course type format where students and instructors commit to be present for
the duration of the training course regardless of weather and soaring conditions.



>
> The problems start after solo for reasons discussed in this thread. At
> any given time, at each airfield there are few people for further
> training. Due to naturally smaller group being interested, weather
> uncertainties (thermals needed!) etc. This leads to inefficiencies and
> for some, disillusions. This is even more problem at XC training
> level. In reality, people after license are left to themselves.

TRANSLATION:
We experience the same problem of providing advanced training as you do.


>
> Here is where the concept introduced by KSS seem to change things. KSS
> is just an animator group, with minimal resources (couple of gliders).
> What we do is we organize, throughout the year, a week or 2 weeks long
> training camps based at various airfields, in Poland and abroad. Camps
> are usually targeted at XC training level, but many are accessible for
> student-pilots (after solo, before license). The elements are:
> - use the infrastructure of some local club, augmented for the event (towplanes)
> - use local club gliders but ask all participants to bring ships from
> their clubs if possible
> - invite (volunteer) instructors from all over the country, in
> addition to local folks.
> - make sure several people with considerable competition experience
> are present and participate very actively
>
> Typical attendance is 30-40 plus about 5 instructors. Usually there is
> someone with world level competition experience, multiple people with
> national level competition experience. The day is organized in a way
> typical for competition (task setting, debriefings, meteo, log
> analysis etc). Every day there is some gliding-related lecture,
> usually very interactive and centered on XC performance.
> Because of instructors and doubleseaters available, there is much of
> intensive training, and students may fly tasks they could otherwise
> only hear about (e.g. wave).
>
> Because of the group character of the event, there is no problem with
> retrieves (well, some pretty long and late night if 70% of pilots land
> out :-) )
>


TRANSLATION:
We pool our resources and avoid wasteful one on one training and organize
group training using the resources of multiple locations. The larger group
dynamic overcomes the traditional problems associated with small groups or
one on one training in multiple locations. We have been able to accomplish
as a group what individual clubs were unable to do.



> The fascinating thing is that this worked out with no changes to
> existing organisation and no substantial money expenditure.



TRANSLATION:
We have been successful despite no new equipment or infrastructure.



> Admittedly, there is a lot of "sweat equity" put in by the whole FI
> community (vacation time etc). It turned out that there is MUCH unused
> capacity in many clubs (even at national gliding schools), much good
> will and volunteer time at all the local clubs we work with, and much
> pent-up demand nationwide (we have people come from as far as
> Australia as well). Somehow at most local clubs there were at any
> given time 1-2 people who wanted to participate in some form of group
> training, and could not have this locally. The lists for the camps
> close within hours or days, there is always a waiting list. The
> benefits of large regular gatherings are obvious in many aspects.
>


TRANSLATION:
Nothing is for free but you can probably access the same type of volunteers
we have been successful in engaging.


>
> Each camp is open (and aimed at) to people who would before not
> participate in regular competition events, for various reasons. This
> really brings down some barriers. But in practice, maybe quarter of
> pilots are quite hard-core.
>

TRANSLATION:
We have been able to engage a group that individual clubs had difficulty
reaching.


>
> What is important is that local clubs support this idea (ship rental
> to their members for the event for example). There is even a feedback
> - some clubs organize similar things locally - people who participated
> in KSS events got enthusiastic enough to mimic them, on a smaller
> scale perhaps.
>


TRANSLATION:
Clubs that embrace this strategy often enhance the benefits by
adding further programs.


>
> We would invite you to talk with us about details, and/or come to our
> camps (in 2015 we can accept more participants)
> to get the feel if this type of activity could be some element
> of the US scene as well. For those who would want to come please
> contact us early so the details (e.g. license validation) can be taken
> care of at reasonable pace.
>


TRANSLATION:
We are willing to share our experiences with you and help you out.


>
> KSS was involved also in some high-profile things (Sebastian Kawa flew in
> Himalaya in the ship a KSS member provided, we broke through into national TV
> coverage, some Worlds competitors from outside Poland are training
> with us), but the real impact is for the community.


TRANSLATION:
Success could bring you publicity and further benefits.

[Kevin Brooker]

Thanks for sharing your activity plan. These type of low key learn XC camps seem to have success here in the US too. Do you guys have a basic syllabus or outline of your camps? Does anyone here on the forum run camps and what has/has not worked? We should find a place to share this type of information and support each other in making these kinds of efforts.

[Craig R.]

There has been a lot of good dialog on developing cross country pilots (= private ship owners) with perhaps a small percentage of those becoming competition pilots.
However, when I look at the basics, the outlook is pretty dismal. To me, the bottom line is lack of personal income for the bulk of Americans.
It was stated earlier "Money is not the issue. People have plenty of cash to spend on recreation and discretionary activities".
The facts are quite the opposite. "Americans tend to think of their middle class as being the richest in the world, but it turns out, in terms of wealth, they rank fairly low among major industrialized countries," said Edward Wolff, a New York University economics professor who studies net worth."
Median net worth for middle class Americans is approximately $45,000. We rank 19th in the world. If you look at all Americans, the number is $301,000 (4th). This number is highly skewed because of the very to ultra rich (Bill Gates types). Disposable income is dandy for the rich, but not so wonderful for the middle class and below.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/11/news/economy/middle-class-wealth/?iid=EL
In addition, soaring in the US is not directly funded by our government. As many know, some European countries have varying degrees of government support to reduce their pilot's cost.
So if we can agree that most middle (and poorer) class Americans won't / can't spend the money necessary to join the ranks of cross country / racing glider pilots (this is an expensive sport!), we are left with the potential pilot pool of wealthy Americans. That is a much smaller number to work with..
So who are we marketing our sport to? The posts above seem to target middle class (and above) younger adults. With financial and time limitations most young adults deal with, these factors = small numbers. And as we have seen, many new pilots toss in the towel pretty quickly to pursue other activities.
So what do we do to expand our pilot pool? John Cochrane's point of limiting the turnover of current pilots seems to me to be the best method to increase the number of glider pilots. We keep working the front end as best we can and pull out all the stops to reduce the shrink. Slow growth is not sexy, but workable.

[Bill D]

On Wednesday, August 20, 2014 9:09:31 PM UTC-6, Craig R. wrote:
> There has been a lot of good dialog on developing cross country pilots (= private ship owners) with perhaps a small percentage of those becoming competition pilots.
>
> However, when I look at the basics, the outlook is pretty dismal. To me, the bottom line is lack of personal income for the bulk of Americans.
>
> It was stated earlier "Money is not the issue. People have plenty of cash to spend on recreation and discretionary activities".
>
> The facts are quite the opposite. "Americans tend to think of their middle class as being the richest in the world, but it turns out, in terms of wealth, they rank fairly low among major industrialized countries," said Edward Wolff, a New York University economics professor who studies net worth."
>
> Median net worth for middle class Americans is approximately $45,000. We rank 19th in the world. If you look at all Americans, the number is $301,000 (4th). This number is highly skewed because of the very to ultra rich (Bill Gates types). Disposable income is dandy for the rich, but not so wonderful for the middle class and below.
>
> http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/11/news/economy/middle-class-wealth/?iid=EL
>
> In addition, soaring in the US is not directly funded by our government. As many know, some European countries have varying degrees of government support to reduce their pilot's cost.
>
> So if we can agree that most middle (and poorer) class Americans won't / can't spend the money necessary to join the ranks of cross country / racing glider pilots (this is an expensive sport!), we are left with the potential pilot pool of wealthy Americans. That is a much smaller number to work with.
>
> So who are we marketing our sport to? The posts above seem to target middle class (and above) younger adults. With financial and time limitations most young adults deal with, these factors = small numbers. And as we have seen, many new pilots toss in the towel pretty quickly to pursue other activities.
>
> So what do we do to expand our pilot pool? John Cochrane's point of limiting the turnover of current pilots seems to me to be the best method to increase the number of glider pilots. We keep working the front end as best we can and pull out all the stops to reduce the shrink. Slow growth is not sexy, but workable.




If the proposal is to enlist 20% of the population, then class economics is an issue but we are at most .006% of the population. That's way too tiny a number to be talking about the general economy. If we suddenly got .0003% of the population interested in learning to fly gliders, it would overwhelm our training capacity but it would turn the growth picture around.

Remember, soaring began in the US during the Great Depression. All we need is a few thousand new people - and they are out there waiting to be found. I think the problem is entirely our own pessimism.

[Dave Martin[_3_]]

Why must every glider pilot be forced to become a cross country
soaring and racing pilot.

Many see this and say that is not for me I cannot afford that
ship, that time that commitment. YOU simply put then off.

Why not teach and sell the joys of soaring.

Once hooked THEN teach them to expand their horizons.

The more members you get the more will become the XC pilots
of the future, the stalwarts of the club, the instructors and the
backbone of the movement.

A few cheaper to fly club aircraft will give many the pleasure of
soaring flight. A winch launch cuts the cost further......!

As a percentage of national membership how many race and
how many do extended cross country flying yet this is pushed as
the ultimate goal of our sport.

Food for thought



At 03:28 21 August 2014, Bill D wrote:
>On Wednesday, August 20, 2014 9:09:31 PM UTC-6, Craig R.
wrote:
>> There has been a lot of good dialog on developing cross
country pilots (=
>=3D private ship owners) with perhaps a small percentage of
those becoming
>=
>competition pilots.=20
>>=20
>> However, when I look at the basics, the outlook is pretty
dismal. To me,
>=
>the bottom line is lack of personal income for the bulk of
Americans.=20
>>=20
>> It was stated earlier "Money is not the issue. People have
plenty of
>cash=
> to spend on recreation and discretionary activities".=20
>>=20
>> The facts are quite the opposite. "Americans tend to think of
their
>middl=
>e class as being the richest in the world, but it turns out, in
terms of
>we=
>alth, they rank fairly low among major industrialized
countries," said
>Edwa=
>rd Wolff, a New York University economics professor who
studies net
>worth."=
>=20
>>=20
>> Median net worth for middle class Americans is
approximately $45,000. We
>=
>rank 19th in the world. If you look at all Americans, the
number is
>$301,00=
>0 (4th). This number is highly skewed because of the very to
ultra rich
>(Bi=
>ll Gates types). Disposable income is dandy for the rich, but
not so
>wonder=
>ful for the middle class and below.=20
>>=20
>>
>http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/11/news/economy/middle-
class-wealth/?iid=3DE=
>L
>>=20
>> In addition, soaring in the US is not directly funded by our
government.
>=
>As many know, some European countries have varying
degrees of government
>su=
>pport to reduce their pilot's cost.=20
>>=20
>> So if we can agree that most middle (and poorer) class
Americans won't /
>=
>can't spend the money necessary to join the ranks of cross
country /
>racing=
> glider pilots (this is an expensive sport!), we are left with the
>potentia=
>l pilot pool of wealthy Americans. That is a much smaller
number to work
>wi=
>th.=20
>>=20
>> So who are we marketing our sport to? The posts above
seem to target
>midd=
>le class (and above) younger adults. With financial and time
limitations
>mo=
>st young adults deal with, these factors =3D small numbers.
And as we have
>=
>seen, many new pilots toss in the towel pretty quickly to
pursue other
>acti=
>vities.=20
>>=20
>> So what do we do to expand our pilot pool? John Cochrane's
point of
>limit=
>ing the turnover of current pilots seems to me to be the best
method to
>inc=
>rease the number of glider pilots. We keep working the front
end as best
>we=
> can and pull out all the stops to reduce the shrink. Slow
growth is not
>se=
>xy, but workable.
>
>
>
>
>If the proposal is to enlist 20% of the population, then class
economics
>is=
> an issue but we are at most .006% of the population. That's
way too tiny
>=
>a number to be talking about the general economy. If we
suddenly got
>.0003=
>% of the population interested in learning to fly gliders, it
would
>overwhe=
>lm our training capacity but it would turn the growth picture
around. =20
>
>Remember, soaring began in the US during the Great
Depression. All we
>need=
> is a few thousand new people - and they are out there waiting
to be
>found.=
> I think the problem is entirely our own pessimism.
>

[Bruce Hoult[_2_]]

On 2014-08-21 09:14:20 +0000, Dave Martin said:

> Why must every glider pilot be forced to become a cross country
> soaring and racing pilot.

Telling everyone they should be doing 300 km flights is equally as
silly as forbidding them to go more than 5 miles from the field.

Find known good landout sites every 10 miles or so around the field,
document them, program them into the GPSs in the club ships, take
people to see them from the ground, hold "away" days at any big enough
for towing out of and with a friendly landowner.

And when a novice starting to spread her wings actually lands in one,
CONGRATULATE HER on her good decision not to try to get home at all
costs.

[Piotr Szafranski]

Andy Gough: thank you for the translation :-)
You got the gist of the message out clear.

First, the official contact:
Karkonoskie Stowarzyszenie Szybowcowe
ul Długa 61
58-521 Jeżów Sudecki
Poland


http://www.kssjezow.pl/pl/
(there is an English version there as well, but Polish is current)

I will edit/translate the syllabus/description of one of the past camps and post it here ASAP (as requested by Kevin). All specific questions might be best answered at the address listed above, I am writing this (authorized) post as one of community members benefiting from KSS activity, but I will try to get here directly as much info and feedback as possible. This (KSS) initiative works, I have seen it firsthand.

Some of (my own) comments:

There seem to be a perception in the US of a big difference/barrier between local and XC flight. This is how I read posts here. But another perception is possible. Here in Poland one CANNOT get license without doing at least one short XC. Students do them, it is seen as normal (I do not claim casual, students and instructors prepare seriously). But there is no perception "local is fun, XC is hard work". I repeat, no perception barrier. Student train (syllabus) for outfield landings, precision landings, down/cross wind landings, from above high obstacle landings etc. Students outland moderately often (this is considered error given small distances involved, but accepted grudgingly, with everybody respecting the "1000ft? - LAND!" rule). Ships sometimes get damaged, injuries are rare. But we know what business we are in.

Do not think XC requires fancy ships. We do much XC training using L/D30 (theoretical) wooden SZD-30. It used to be a matter of honor to do diamond distance on an L/D 30 ship before flying some better machine. Do not think XC=private owners. Most of my fellow club members who do XC do not own any ship (hard thing for a 19 year old, or someone raising a family). Do not think for individual pilots money has to be a deciding issue. After training (expensive, no way around that) full weekend of XC using club equipment (no individual investment) is about $150 for 2 4-hours flights (8hrs total), tug tows included.

Dave: you write "Why must every glider pilot be forced to become a cross country soaring and racing pilot?". This is exactly what my wife (400+hrs) was saying when asked to participate in competitions. But when she took part in her first KSS camp she got hooked. Hooked into the camp concept, not competitions. These camps are not (ostensibly) to train ratrace racers, they are to enjoy soaring. You may soar above airfield all the camp time (some people do), but you still are in the group of fellow enthusiast (well, you are still expected to drive to the boonies to get them out often :-) ). You are not frown down for doing it in any way which gives YOU fun. The KSS motto is "Soar! Nothing else matters!" - and it is being lived. XC training is a means to the end.

But even if you think XC is not for you, or not for you yet, befriending a national-level competition pilot who will discuss with you, as an equal, some details of your or his thermalling is something which really does increase the fun factor overall. And you do this in a group. And you feel you belong, whatever your hours. This is (among other things) what these camps are about. I repeat - one thing these camps do is to integrate, to make evident there are no barriers.

I think also that "fun" is greatly increased if you get your technique better.
For one thing, you will be able to fly on days which beforehand you would skip. And these camps help a lot with technique at any level.

Last, I think the reference to Great Depression (Bill) is quite relevant. What matters mostly is in our heads and hands.

Piotr Szafranski

>
>
>
> Remember, soaring began in the US during the Great Depression. All we need is a few thousand new people - and they are out there waiting to be found. I think the problem is entirely our own pessimism.

[Kevin Brooker]

The facts are quite the opposite. "Americans tend to think of their middle class as being the richest in the world, but it turns out, in terms of wealth, they rank fairly low among major industrialized countries," said Edward Wolff, a New York University economics professor who studies net worth."

Median net worth for middle class Americans is approximately $45,000. We rank 19th in the world. If you look at all Americans, the number is $301,000 (4th). This number is highly skewed because of the very to ultra rich (Bill Gates types). Disposable income is dandy for the rich, but not so wonderful for the middle class and below.

If this is true, please explain the results from this study.

"Americans devote more money to enjoying the outdoors than buying gasoline, purchasing pharmaceutical drugs, or owning cars. More than 44 percent of us make outdoor recreation a priority, adding up to an annual economic impact of $646 billion, according to a recent report by the Outdoor Industry Association. (By comparison, Americans buy $354 billion worth of gas and other fuels.)"

http://www.takepart.com/article/2013/01/11/americans-spend-more-great-outdoors-gasoline

Read the full report here: http://outdoorindustry.org/advocacy/recreation/economy.html

The availability of cash to be spent on discretionary activity is not the problem and never will be. The economic argument is just an easy way out and takes the burden off of us, the soaring community, for not being able to figure out how to improve the product, adapt to a changing demographic, compete with the almost unlimited competition for participants, and recognizing our own failure to be successful in building the sport.

Cash does play some part in developing a program and and we have also failed to raise this capitol which is a failure of the community. Would each soaring pilot, once every year, be willing to donate the cost of one tow to develop a program to bring in new pilots and help retain those who have a ticket but do not fly?

In simpler economic terms, if the sport has no growth and attrition and natural causes erode the population of soaring pilots, every glider is now almost worthless. There is nobody to sell it to; no buyers. Even if gliders are traded amongst the current pool, there will soon be a glut of ships and the value will plummet to the same as my glider sitting in the yard is now, a future flower pot and relic.

The economic argument also gives the community an excuse to not try. Growing a sport or activity requires the same amount of effort as starting a business; the business of growing an activity. This is extremely entrepreneurial and entrepreneurs fail very often. Writers very often fail go find a published but when they do the results can be huge.

If the community stops trying the failure of the activity is almost guaranteed. If certain failure is the outcome what harm is there in trying?

Volunteerism also has its limits. People will gladly volunteer some time but when the volunteer commitment cuts into family or career the volunteerism is curtailed. The volunteers burn out trying to do two (or more) jobs' one makes them money to live, the other eats time. Money can be replaced; time cannot.

The economic issue is not with the potential soaring pilot, the economic issue is with the current community not being willing to spend money to find new pilots.

There are many great ideas being kicked around here. We need to find the cash to fund a program so the person running the program can earn a living and devote themselves without having to make a choice of where to spend their time.


I think the problem is entirely our own pessimism.[/QUOTE]

Amen! This often becomes self fulfilling.

Threads like this are optimistic and insightful. Thank you all for contributing and please keep doing so.

[Squeaky]

Well, the post above is about bringing people to soaring, and while there are plenty of facts, they do not support what we are seeing in VA right now.

Since we have started an active Facebook and web presence, kept updated with phots and videos, we have more new members and FAST applicants than we can train with our existing instructors (...and that creates problems on it's own). At a recent meeting of the Virginia Soaring Association (VaSA), the other VA soraing clubs which have the same types of presence are experiencing the same.

We do not have fancy trainers, just one each of a 2-33, Super Blanik and PW-6, yet that has not seemed to put anyone off in the least. So it's not always about selling the newest and best stuf.

The product is not the planes, or the facilities. Yes they need to be adquate, but it's not the main issue. The product is the joy and freedom of flight. The product is the challenge and art of staying ariborne based on your own skills and experience. The product is the thrill of venturing away from the aerodrome and gettting more than one thermal from the field and still making it back. The product is completing loops, rolls, tail slides, spins without an engine. The product is joining up with a Bald Eagle and flying with a raptor for a space of time. The product is hitting the road and flying in wave, or down a ridge. The product is membership and belonging in a small unique community and socializing with people who share your passion. The product is the sense of fun, pride and satisfaction in becoming a pilot.

Sure, money does play a factor for many. But we are bringing in more than we can handle right now, because there are always plenty of people who do have enough to enjoy the sport of soaring--if they so choose. It's just a matter of finding them, and letting them know about the excitement, challenge, art, variety and various abilities of sailplanes... the fun, excitment reward that is all part of the sport.

All that comes across well on social media, and with good FB, Twitter and web page management. It brings new people in of all ages. Maybe the kids will not stay as they go to college or start families. Some will. But they are likely to come back. Getting them interested in cross country hasn't been hard either, as our club encourages it, and plays up OLC and logging flights all the time. It has worked. We don't push competition, but we have competitors...

It's not as doom and gloom as many make out.

[HGXC[_2_]]

On Thursday, August 21, 2014 8:01:36 AM UTC-4, Squeaky wrote:
> Well, the post above is about bringing people to soaring, and while
>
> there are plenty of facts, they do not support what we are seeing in VA
>
> right now.
>
>
>
> Since we have started an active Facebook and web presence, kept updated
>
> with phots and videos, we have more new members and FAST applicants than
>
> we can train with our existing instructors (...and that creates problems
>
> on it's own). At a recent meeting of the Virginia Soaring Association
>
> (VaSA), the other VA soraing clubs which have the same types of presence
>
> are experiencing the same.
>
>
>
> We do not have fancy trainers, just one each of a 2-33, Super Blanik and
>
> PW-6, yet that has not seemed to put anyone off in the least. So it's
>
> not always about selling the newest and best stuf.
>
>
>
> The product is not the planes, or the facilities. Yes they need to be
>
> adquate, but it's not the main issue. The product is the joy and
>
> freedom of flight. The product is the challenge and art of staying
>
> ariborne based on your own skills and experience. The product is the
>
> thrill of venturing away from the aerodrome and gettting more than one
>
> thermal from the field and still making it back. The product is
>
> completing loops, rolls, tail slides, spins without an engine. The
>
> product is joining up with a Bald Eagle and flying with a raptor for a
>
> space of time. The product is hitting the road and flying in wave, or
>
> down a ridge. The product is membership and belonging in a small unique
>
> community and socializing with people who share your passion. The
>
> product is the sense of fun, pride and satisfaction in becoming a pilot.
>
>
>
> Sure, money does play a factor for many. But we are bringing in more
>
> than we can handle right now, because there are always plenty of people
>
> who do have enough to enjoy the sport of soaring--if they so choose.
>
> It's just a matter of finding them, and letting them know about the
>
> excitement, challenge, art, variety and various abilities of
>
> sailplanes... the fun, excitment reward that is all part of the sport.
>
>
>
> All that comes across well on social media, and with good FB, Twitter
>
> and web page management. It brings new people in of all ages. Maybe
>
> the kids will not stay as they go to college or start families. Some
>
> will. But they are likely to come back. Getting them interested in
>
> cross country hasn't been hard either, as our club encourages it, and
>
> plays up OLC and logging flights all the time. It has worked. We don't
>
> push competition, but we have competitors...
>
>
>
> It's not as doom and gloom as many make out.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Squeaky

Couldn't agree more with Kevin and Squeaky. We need to convey the excitement and passion. The students will follow.

Dennis

[Bill D]

On Thursday, August 21, 2014 6:01:36 AM UTC-6, Squeaky wrote:

> The product is not the planes, or the facilities. Yes they need to be
>
> adquate, but it's not the main issue.

That's what we think but it's probably not what a student's family thinks since they have no other way to judge a glider operation than by appearances - and they likely have a say in funding a student's training.

We don't see those who fail to show up so we form distorted opinions. If all the discouraged would-be glider pilots appeared at once, there would be an enormous mob leaning on the airport fence.

Equipment and facilities do matter - bigtime.

[Evan Ludeman[_4_]]

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:08:01 PM UTC-4, Bill D wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 7:34:16 PM UTC-6, Evan Ludeman wrote:
>
>
>
> > Winches are non-starters at most ops I've been involved in. We don't have the space and more space is prohibitively expensive. Existing airports in the 4500+ range are mostly asphalt, public use, high performance GA, with runway lights and traffic and not really a step up in the "nice to hang out" direction. An old but serviceable tow plane is a hell of a lot more economical than scratching a new 4500x300 airfield out of trees, rocks or farm land.
>
>
>
> >
>
> > -Evan
>
>
>
> Evan, with respect, we don't need "Negative Experts" to tell us why it won't work. We need people with the imagination to see how to make it work.
>
>
>
> The Winching World column in the October issue of Soaring will address winch economics in detail.

Bill,

The economics of the machine were never, ever in doubt. The airport can be a problem.

Hence, the interest in existing 4500'+ runways. Around here, those are found exclusively at public use airports. We're trying to find a new home for our winch at one such, right now. There is a precedent for winch activity at the place we have in mind... but the fact of the matter is that there have been more turbine airplane ops at this airport than winch ops for several years and the tendency is always towards more signs, more lights, more rules, more acronyms and so forth. It's not a busy place. On weekends gliders out number single engine GA by a fair margin and it's a rare weekend that any jet traffic shows up while gliders are flying. It happens, but there has never been a problem.

A potential obstruction to gliding at such airports is AC 150/5300 on airport design. This document contains all sorts of "good" reasons to prohibit winching and severely restrict aero towing, and I think this may have been the basis for a whole lot of bother at Mifflin Co. in the last year or two. It's a document written with the safety of turbine airplanes in mind, period. I can "imagine" operating a winch launch operation safely at these not-so-busy airports without interfering in any way with other users (thank you very much) but it is sometimes difficult to deal "imaginatively" with some of the people that will assert themselves in charge of such airports when obstruction is on their minds. Constructive thoughts on the matter would be of interest.

Evan Ludeman

[gb]

Men no longer willing to put their amusement first is probably the biggest problem. Used to be daddy did what daddy wanted to do on the weekend and that was that. No longer works that way for almost all dads.
The other issue no one has mentioned is unpleasant club cultures. Not universal but there are plenty of them around. And the unpleasant culture may not be obvious to experienced pilots that own gliders and have a level of autonomy far removed from new students.
Solve those two and soaring will do just fine.

[son_of_flubber]

On Sunday, August 24, 2014 12:00:00 AM UTC-4, gb wrote:
> Men no longer willing to put their amusement first ...

Earlier this summer, I helped an octogenarian wife put her octogenarian husband's trailer on her hitch to go retrieve him from a land out. It was interesting to see that 'the old ways' were not entirely made-up tales.

If XC soaring lasts long enough, we will someday be able to summon our self-driving cars and trailers to a landout.

[Dan Marotta]

Or just beam the glider home, Scottie!

Dan Marotta

On 8/24/2014 8:57 AM, son_of_flubber wrote:
> On Sunday, August 24, 2014 12:00:00 AM UTC-4, gb wrote:
>> Men no longer willing to put their amusement first ...
> Earlier this summer, I helped an octogenarian wife put her octogenarian husband's trailer on her hitch to go retrieve him from a land out. It was interesting to see that 'the old ways' were not entirely made-up tales.
>
> If XC soaring lasts long enough, we will someday be able to summon our self-driving cars and trailers to a landout.

[Brad[_2_]]

On Sunday, August 24, 2014 9:10:37 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Or just beam the glider home, Scottie!
>
> Dan Marotta
> On 8/24/2014 8:57 AM, son_of_flubber wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sunday, August 24, 2014 12:00:00 AM UTC-4, gb wrote:
>
>
> Men no longer willing to put their amusement first ...
>
>
> Earlier this summer, I helped an octogenarian wife put her octogenarian husband's trailer on her hitch to go retrieve him from a land out. It was interesting to see that 'the old ways' were not entirely made-up tales.
>
> If XC soaring lasts long enough, we will someday be able to summon our self-driving cars and trailers to a landout.

or we'll all have jet sustainers and never land out again, everyone makes it home for beertime.

GK