How do we inspire pilots to truly take up cross country soaring ?

[Sean Fidler]

From another thread recently, thought it might be a good topic to paw around with everyone...

For me, soaring is great fun. I've been doing it consistently for about 5 years now. I've met a bunch of amazing, great, kind people and have learned a tremendous amount about the sport (light years left to go). Thru and thru, as a group, soaring pilots, their friends and family are among the nicest, smartest most interesting people I have ever met. I am attracted to this immensely.

Part of the reason I have devoted time and energy to the sport is that am truly inspired by what competition/cross country pilots are capable of doing in gliders. I am still fascinated by it and want to be a part of it. This, for me, was huge. Glider pilots are amazing pilots, PERIOD.

I probably never would have truly learned of the sport (and what it really is at the highest levels), or been so attracted to it if my dad was not involved. Having a family member with a high performance glider, flying it regularly and promoting how amazing the sport could be all the time was key. Having access to a high performance glider and a group of local friends who could mentor me and take me out on cross country flights shortly after I got my license was the key moment. Would I have got my license if the motivation was just flying around the airport? Probably not.

Those experiences flying with the Ionio boys on short, mentored cross country's "set the hook" for me and eventually led to me buying a glider so that I could fly with everyone rather than leave my dad back at the airport whenever I was flying. Of course once I bought my first glider so I could fly with this gang regularly, the learning curve grew dramatically. The hook set deeper. And so on.

Flying clubs are important to US soaring "health" I suppose but they also seem to lack in areas. They often don't have much to offer in terms of even moderate performance gliders. They often don't promote or in some cases even allow cross country.

It seems that European clubs are more into cross country which is more challenging and more rewarding than local flight, which I think gets old after a year or so. If some inspirational figure is not actively encouraging and facilitating cross country glider flight (the whole point of the sport I think) at that key moment in a glider pilots career, I think they come to the conclusion that they have checked the box and move on.

Obviously without glider clubs more focused on taking pilots into cross country levels, one has to have the financial means to do it on their own. I dont see that as a real problem as numerous 40:1 gliders are available for the same price as a small sailboat or powerboat, which almost everybody seems to have these days (jet skis, snowmobiles, etc). It's a matter of priority. Gliders I suppose are for one person (usually) where a boat (or other rec toy) is for the whole family.

But Europe seems to have an entirely different dynamic with respect to soaring. More youth, larger numbers, etc. U.S. numbers have been steadily declining for 25 years.

One thing I learned in business school. It's often better to adopt successful competitors methods even if at first you don't fully understand them yet. Our clubs (and the SSA) should be talking to European clubs and picking their brains for advise. I wonder how many have actually done that. Perhaps take a trip to Europe on summer and spend a few weeks with a successful club, talk to the people, etc.

Oddly, my flying is at a location that actually IDs itself as IONIA NON CLUB. They don't like the politics. :-).

The rules is a small thing overall but debating the rules is an important thing in terms of competition pilots. My suggestions usually would make getting into competition soaring simpler for the new pilot. I do think our rules are too complicated, but the rule makers are all GREAT PEOPLE, working hard and want nothing but the best for our sport.

Sean
7T

[jfitch]

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 8:09:43 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> From another thread recently, thought it might be a good topic to paw around with everyone...
>
> For me, soaring is great fun. I've been doing it consistently for about 5 years now. I've met a bunch of amazing, great, kind people and have learned a tremendous amount about the sport (light years left to go). Thru and thru, as a group, soaring pilots, their friends and family are among the nicest, smartest most interesting people I have ever met. I am attracted to this immensely.
>
> Part of the reason I have devoted time and energy to the sport is that am truly inspired by what competition/cross country pilots are capable of doing in gliders. I am still fascinated by it and want to be a part of it. This, for me, was huge. Glider pilots are amazing pilots, PERIOD.
>
> I probably never would have truly learned of the sport (and what it really is at the highest levels), or been so attracted to it if my dad was not involved. Having a family member with a high performance glider, flying it regularly and promoting how amazing the sport could be all the time was key.. Having access to a high performance glider and a group of local friends who could mentor me and take me out on cross country flights shortly after I got my license was the key moment. Would I have got my license if the motivation was just flying around the airport? Probably not.
>
> Those experiences flying with the Ionio boys on short, mentored cross country's "set the hook" for me and eventually led to me buying a glider so that I could fly with everyone rather than leave my dad back at the airport whenever I was flying. Of course once I bought my first glider so I could fly with this gang regularly, the learning curve grew dramatically. The hook set deeper. And so on.
>
> Flying clubs are important to US soaring "health" I suppose but they also seem to lack in areas. They often don't have much to offer in terms of even moderate performance gliders. They often don't promote or in some cases even allow cross country.
>
> It seems that European clubs are more into cross country which is more challenging and more rewarding than local flight, which I think gets old after a year or so. If some inspirational figure is not actively encouraging and facilitating cross country glider flight (the whole point of the sport I think) at that key moment in a glider pilots career, I think they come to the conclusion that they have checked the box and move on.
>
> Obviously without glider clubs more focused on taking pilots into cross country levels, one has to have the financial means to do it on their own. I dont see that as a real problem as numerous 40:1 gliders are available for the same price as a small sailboat or powerboat, which almost everybody seems to have these days (jet skis, snowmobiles, etc). It's a matter of priority. Gliders I suppose are for one person (usually) where a boat (or other rec toy) is for the whole family.
>
> But Europe seems to have an entirely different dynamic with respect to soaring. More youth, larger numbers, etc. U.S. numbers have been steadily declining for 25 years.
>
> One thing I learned in business school. It's often better to adopt successful competitors methods even if at first you don't fully understand them yet. Our clubs (and the SSA) should be talking to European clubs and picking their brains for advise. I wonder how many have actually done that. Perhaps take a trip to Europe on summer and spend a few weeks with a successful club, talk to the people, etc.
>
> Oddly, my flying is at a location that actually IDs itself as IONIA NON CLUB. They don't like the politics. :-).
>
> The rules is a small thing overall but debating the rules is an important thing in terms of competition pilots. My suggestions usually would make getting into competition soaring simpler for the new pilot. I do think our rules are too complicated, but the rule makers are all GREAT PEOPLE, working hard and want nothing but the best for our sport.
>
> Sean
> 7T

I will point out that European numbers have been in decline for a similar period, at a similar rate to the US, just starting from a higher plateau. GA numbers also seem to be in decline. For whatever reason, I just don't think aviation is the same magnetic for young imaginations that it once was.

[Dan Marotta]

In a word (or two) - "smart phones". How often do you see young people
that don't have their heads down and both thumbs working at near-light
speed?

On 8/15/2015 9:18 AM, jfitch wrote:
> <snip>
> I will point out that European numbers have been in decline for a similar period, at a similar rate to the US, just starting from a higher plateau. GA numbers also seem to be in decline. For whatever reason, I just don't think aviation is the same magnetic for young imaginations that it once was.

--
Dan Marotta

[son_of_flubber]

Due to my present endurance limitations, I keep my flights to less than 2.5 hours. The terrain and lift conditions where I fly are complicated and a recurring challenge. I'm not bored. I often need to find lift on the way back to the airport and landing out is always a possibility. But I'm not flying XC.

Here's the thing. I fly 3X as frequently as most XC pilots at my club. For the most part, they only fly on 'good XC days', and the coincidence of 'good XC days' with 'days off' is infrequent in Vermont. I'm not sure that I would/should want to ever fly that infrequently.

I have fun flying on a lot of 'marginal days'. Timing my launch to coincide with the 1-2 hours of workable lift on a marginal day is fun.

So sure, I'm trying to extend my endurance so that I can fly real XC flights. But I hope that flying on marginal days does not lose it's appeal. If at some point, I join the ranks of XC pilots that only fly infrequently, I may very well quit the sport at that stage. Maybe when I reach that stage, I won't have to fly so frequently to maintain my currency. I'm in no rush to quit the sport, so my present fun and extremely slow progression to fly XC seems a good way for me to enjoy the sport for many years to come.

Do XC pilots ever recover the joy of flying on marginal days?

[[email protected]]

Reply to all 3 posts.

Sean, how much fun actually flying gliders is doesn't matter that much to the initial "sale" An interested visitor will at most get a 20 minute "sleigh ride" in a glider but spend hours on the ground at the airfield. The thing that makes the "deal" possible is the environment at the gliderport. Unfortunately, most are fly blown armpits of creation populated by not very friendly people. Guess which one makes the biggest impression?. What to do is obvious.

Yes, participation in all aspects of aviation is shrinking. Our bad press is mostly to blame. From the evening news to stand up comics, people are being frightened away from aviation. All of aviation needs to mount a PR campaign to offset this. We also need to become absolutely militant about reducing accidents. We are far too tolerant of unsafe practices.

Dan, be very careful about overgeneralising. I did an informal survey in shopping malls observing about 1000 young people. My numbers say only about 10% were fiddling with cellphones. That's still a big number but it's not 100%. My impression is they do this when they are bored and have nothing else to do. We can give them something more interesting.

Keep the overall numbers in mind. If 1,000 people walked onto US glider operations seeking flight training our infrastructure would be saturated. We just need to figure out how to find that 1,000 in a population of 310 million.

Bill Daniels

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 9:39:44 AM UTC-7, wrote:
> Reply to all 3 posts.
>
> Sean, how much fun actually flying gliders is doesn't matter that much to the initial "sale" An interested visitor will at most get a 20 minute "sleigh ride" in a glider but spend hours on the ground at the airfield. The thing that makes the "deal" possible is the environment at the gliderport. Unfortunately, most are fly blown armpits of creation populated by not very friendly people. Guess which one makes the biggest impression?. What to do is obvious.
>
> Yes, participation in all aspects of aviation is shrinking. Our bad press is mostly to blame. From the evening news to stand up comics, people are being frightened away from aviation. All of aviation needs to mount a PR campaign to offset this. We also need to become absolutely militant about reducing accidents. We are far too tolerant of unsafe practices.
>
> Dan, be very careful about overgeneralising. I did an informal survey in shopping malls observing about 1000 young people. My numbers say only about 10% were fiddling with cellphones. That's still a big number but it's not 100%. My impression is they do this when they are bored and have nothing else to do. We can give them something more interesting.
>
> Keep the overall numbers in mind. If 1,000 people walked onto US glider operations seeking flight training our infrastructure would be saturated. We just need to figure out how to find that 1,000 in a population of 310 million.
>
> Bill Daniels

Bill and I talked about this at the Nationals a couple of years ago. There are three related challenges: intake, conversion and churn.

- Intake is the number of people taking an introductory ride, or are ins some way given an initial introduction to the sport.

- Conversion, is the percentage of people who transition to solo, licensed pilot, XC pilot, racing pilot.

- Churn, is the number of people who get all the way through the conversion "funnel", are in the sport for a (short or long) while then drop out.

The balance of these three effects determine the size of the racing pilot pool year by year.

A big chunk of churn is related to demographics and aging of the baby boom, some is related to the pressures of modern life. Retaining an older pilot for a few more years only buys you a few more years, but given the current profile of the pilot community there might be some work to do.

Intake is expensive, especially with a conversion rate like ours, which IIRC, is around 1% of those who are introduced to the sport actually become a licensed pilot, let alone a regular XC or racing pilot. This is partly a time and money issue, but at the higher levels it is one of finding a mentor to bring you along. At the RC meeting last year we hosted a gathering of local XC, OLC and racing pilots. The most profound comments were around the lack of an onramp to racing, to lean the skills by flying (following, really) a better pilot to see how it's done.

Team flying using the radio is allowed at the regional level. For better or worse Flarm following has reduces some of the "where'd you go?" issues associated with flying with someone. It's kind of fun to run around the course with other pilots from time to time. Bruno's hybrid events have seen a higher proportion of pilots flying at least one, but seemingly more that one, of the assigned tasks as a learning experience - and because it allows you to fly with buddies.

I think there is something that each of us could do in increasing the conversion rate of new XC and racing pilots.

9B

[Bob Whelan[_3_]]

On 8/15/2015 10:29 AM, son_of_flubber wrote:
<Snip>
> Here's the thing. I fly 3X as frequently as most XC pilots at my club. For
> the most part, they only fly on 'good XC days', and the coincidence of
> 'good XC days' with 'days off' is infrequent in Vermont. I'm not sure that
> I would/should want to ever fly that infrequently.
>
> I have fun flying on a lot of 'marginal days'. Timing my launch to coincide
> with the 1-2 hours of workable lift on a marginal day is fun.

"Roger that!"
- - - - - -

>
> So sure, I'm trying to extend my endurance so that I can fly real XC
> flights. But I hope that flying on marginal days does not lose it's
> appeal. If at some point, I join the ranks of XC pilots that only fly
> infrequently, I may very well quit the sport at that stage. Maybe when I
> reach that stage, I won't have to fly so frequently to maintain my
> currency. I'm in no rush to quit the sport, so my present fun and
> extremely slow progression to fly XC seems a good way for me to enjoy the
> sport for many years to come.
>
> Do XC pilots ever recover the joy of flying on marginal days?

Recover? Are there any that lose it (as distinct from those who try XC only on
days when bricks can soar)? Some of my most memorably fun & satisfying flights
have been on what, at preliminary best guess, appeared to be anywhere from
unsoarable to pure survival days. A few of those turned out to even be
awesomely good XC days, though most were pretty much as they looked, though
soarable. And - and here's a key point - if a person takes a tow (or snap)
every chance they make for themselves, then tries to hang on until they're
forced to land by absence of lift, over time they'll begin to learn that it's
more often soarable - XC, too! - than not, regardless of one's
"pre-experiential" preconceptions.

I obtained my license in Maryland (Cumberland) which is where I also made my
first landout, but actually learned (as in, taught myself through reading,
brain-picking and flying-until-forced-to-land) to fly XC in the intermountain
west. Out west was where I began to realize a person's mental outlook was
fundamentally important to how (fast) they clumb the XC learning curve. Many a
time at my home club I'd take tows on what I soon began to call "Eastern days"
when fellow club members demurred due to (low cloudbases, preconceived
notions, etc.). Most of those days proved soarable, and XC soon became part of
those days' picture...and yet I'd typically return to find almost no one else
had towed or even stayed up long locally. That was in the late '70's & early
'80s and the local soaring scene (wonderfully enough) has changed hugely from
those unenlightened days of yore.

Point being - and *especially* for relatively inexperienced-in-time soaring
pilots - odds are your post-release-experience will prove considerably
different (likely, better) than your ground-based guess...IF you hoist
yourself aloft, and IF you seek to hang on by your fingernails (should it be
necessary). Eventually "hanging on thermal-by-thermal by one's fingernails"
morphs to "reading what a day is likely to sustain" and - voila! - low-stress
XC, with short retrieves (if necessary).

One memorable cloud-free day yielded ridge-generated tops to ~ 2.7k' agl
(measured relative to the flatlands), and, after several ridge hours, a real
sense of joy when a buddy eventually towed in a similar-performing ship.
Mutual "boredom" and his residence's airpark field about 12 miles away,
resulted in us deciding to "go for it." If we didn't find a thermal away from
the ridge, our "convenient out" was an abandoned/former airstrip at a private
school halfway to his residential airstrip; in any event we'd retrieve each
other, if necessary. An hour or so later we were back on the ridge, savoring a
gratifying little XC. Had it not been so late in the day, we could've likely
gone considerably farther, despite the low thermal tops & absence of clouds,
because often, the toughest part of going east from Boulder was reaching I-25
due to irrigation and - on "somewhat breezy days" which that one wasn't -
wind-induced thermal suppression until some miles away from the foot of the
mountains.

On another day (which began foggy), I drove the the field late "just because
of pent-up demand" despite murk and visibility of perhaps 5-8 miles. It was a
weekend. No one else wanted a tow, but I found rigging help...and about 4
hours later came back from Rifle, CO, on what turned out to be a booming day,
on both sides of the continental divide, while never experiencing more than
*maybe* 15 miles visibility (which for westerners can be psychologically
unsettling, it's so uncommon). Everyone had gone home, and per the departing
towpilot, only one other tow that day. I corralled a passerby to help me
derig, and drove home hardly able - judging from the invisible mountains and
murky sky in my rear-view mirror - to believe the day's soaring experience.

And, yes, there were those days of multiple tows when I simply refused to
believe my failure to be able to remain aloft was due to the day and not me!

YMWV,
Bob W.

[David Hirst]

>
> I think there is something that each of us could do in increasing the conversion rate of new XC and racing pilots.

In New Zealand, we're seeing the same decline as pretty much everywhere but there are a couple of programmes in place which might (just might) turn things around. Off-topic slightly, getting the kids re-engaged is about getting them to form their own gliding-and-social organisation (youthglide.org.nz) and that seems to be working quite well. I think Abby Delore gave a talk about Youthglide at the SSA conference a couple of years ago.

Back on-topic. After much head-scratching, a bunch of pilots decided that the key to retaining pilots was to get as many as possible into X Country - not denying that there's always a place for the pilots who just like to fly locally but it's the ones who go further who don't tend to drop out of the sport.

The next question was how to do get people into XC. One answer is to lower the (perceived) barriers to flying contest tasks. Most club members have access to club gliders but it's the whole mountain of "there's no way I could fly that far" that seemed to pose the biggest hurdle.

As a consequence, the Racing Committee have made a major revamp to the rules this season, to the effect that contest classes aren't so much based on "Std/15m", "Club", "18/20m" etc. but more "Beginner", "Intermediate" and "Advanced", i.e. based on pilot ability rather than glider performance. You can still fly with the big boys if you want (and get the points and prizes), but you can also turn up in a 18m glider and enter the "beginner" contest. We trialled the scheme informally last season and got a good number of new pilots to come along to contests and fly 75 - 150km tasks. Unsurprisingly, they had a blast! It'll be interesting to see the results this season.

Another thing that may help the decline is the sort of coaching programme that Australia is using for its cross-country pilots, which came out of a whole bunch of work that the Australian Institute of Sport developed, completely unrelated to gliding.

Interesting times. Watch this space.

DH

[Sean Fidler]

Dave,

These are fantastic ideas. I don't think anyone ran with the ideas at the SSA convention that it was presented at unfortunately.

Rather than a one class fits all, the idea of breaking classes (and perhaps tasks) down into smaller, appropriate groups seems very appealing (all the way around).

A few years ago we had some regional contests in Ionia. We generally had both FAI and a Sports class. Some really wanted the easier tasks that sports class typically offered (even some experienced pilots with 18m gliders). Others wanted to race with the "hot shots' in FAI even thought they had older gliders (knowing they would probably end up near the bottom). We didn't really know how to handle this. We could certainly see the desire these pilots had to do what "they wanted" rather than what "we wanted!" We of course let them do what they wanted.

In sailing, lots of classes and lots of trophies works very well. Rather than having 60 boats (for example) in one class and only one winner...why not have 4 classes of various skill level and experience. In sailing it might be broken down into professional, corinthian, Women, Jr's, etc. They all race the same race course, but are scored as an overall AND in the individual classes. Trophies and recognition is of equal importance for all classes. Also little awards such as most improved, best first time attendee, capsize award (see land out award) are well liked.

In soaring, I could see a breakdown by SSA ranking. 100-90, 90-80, 80-70, etc. We could also start a beginner class. I agree (no brainer really) that all involved would have more fun and more of a chance to compete with pilots of equal skill level with more segmented classes. It would be less intimidating. More trophies, more excitement and hopefully a steady graduation thru the ranks as one improves. People enjoy recognition and to feel a sense of accomplishment. When someone gets trophy in front of a crowd, it is a great moment for them and really "set's the hook" in a good way. We should be maximizing these moments for our contests participants AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE! Far more than we do today.

I personally could care less if I was racing with 30 gliders or 5 of my general skills level. The truth is that we always end up racing with 3-5 gliders anyway at most contests. The 3-5 of our skill level. Interesting points DH. Thanks for sharing!

Sean

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 5:53:00 PM UTC-4, David Hirst wrote:
> >
> > I think there is something that each of us could do in increasing the conversion rate of new XC and racing pilots.
>
> In New Zealand, we're seeing the same decline as pretty much everywhere but there are a couple of programmes in place which might (just might) turn things around. Off-topic slightly, getting the kids re-engaged is about getting them to form their own gliding-and-social organisation (youthglide.org.nz) and that seems to be working quite well. I think Abby Delore gave a talk about Youthglide at the SSA conference a couple of years ago.
>
> Back on-topic. After much head-scratching, a bunch of pilots decided that the key to retaining pilots was to get as many as possible into X Country - not denying that there's always a place for the pilots who just like to fly locally but it's the ones who go further who don't tend to drop out of the sport.
>
> The next question was how to do get people into XC. One answer is to lower the (perceived) barriers to flying contest tasks. Most club members have access to club gliders but it's the whole mountain of "there's no way I could fly that far" that seemed to pose the biggest hurdle.
>
> As a consequence, the Racing Committee have made a major revamp to the rules this season, to the effect that contest classes aren't so much based on "Std/15m", "Club", "18/20m" etc. but more "Beginner", "Intermediate" and "Advanced", i.e. based on pilot ability rather than glider performance. You can still fly with the big boys if you want (and get the points and prizes), but you can also turn up in a 18m glider and enter the "beginner" contest. We trialled the scheme informally last season and got a good number of new pilots to come along to contests and fly 75 - 150km tasks. Unsurprisingly, they had a blast! It'll be interesting to see the results this season..
>
> Another thing that may help the decline is the sort of coaching programme that Australia is using for its cross-country pilots, which came out of a whole bunch of work that the Australian Institute of Sport developed, completely unrelated to gliding.
>
> Interesting times. Watch this space.
>
> DH

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 2:53:00 PM UTC-7, David Hirst wrote:
> >
> > I think there is something that each of us could do in increasing the conversion rate of new XC and racing pilots.
>
> In New Zealand, we're seeing the same decline as pretty much everywhere but there are a couple of programmes in place which might (just might) turn things around. Off-topic slightly, getting the kids re-engaged is about getting them to form their own gliding-and-social organisation (youthglide.org.nz) and that seems to be working quite well. I think Abby Delore gave a talk about Youthglide at the SSA conference a couple of years ago.
>
> Back on-topic. After much head-scratching, a bunch of pilots decided that the key to retaining pilots was to get as many as possible into X Country - not denying that there's always a place for the pilots who just like to fly locally but it's the ones who go further who don't tend to drop out of the sport.
>
> The next question was how to do get people into XC. One answer is to lower the (perceived) barriers to flying contest tasks. Most club members have access to club gliders but it's the whole mountain of "there's no way I could fly that far" that seemed to pose the biggest hurdle.
>
> As a consequence, the Racing Committee have made a major revamp to the rules this season, to the effect that contest classes aren't so much based on "Std/15m", "Club", "18/20m" etc. but more "Beginner", "Intermediate" and "Advanced", i.e. based on pilot ability rather than glider performance. You can still fly with the big boys if you want (and get the points and prizes), but you can also turn up in a 18m glider and enter the "beginner" contest. We trialled the scheme informally last season and got a good number of new pilots to come along to contests and fly 75 - 150km tasks. Unsurprisingly, they had a blast! It'll be interesting to see the results this season..
>
> Another thing that may help the decline is the sort of coaching programme that Australia is using for its cross-country pilots, which came out of a whole bunch of work that the Australian Institute of Sport developed, completely unrelated to gliding.
>
> Interesting times. Watch this space.
>
> DH

Interesting ideas. It has been tried at a small scale in the US in places with good effect as far as I can tell. Maybe there is something that can be done more formally. I do get the sense that people don't want to spend too much time at the "kids table" so being able to hang with the more experienced pilots (in the air and on the ground) seems to be important aspect of all of this, That was the potential to learn from more experienced pilots is opened up.

9B

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 7:25:13 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Dave,
>
> These are fantastic ideas. I don't think anyone ran with the ideas at the SSA convention that it was presented at unfortunately.
>
> Rather than a one class fits all, the idea of breaking classes (and perhaps tasks) down into smaller, appropriate groups seems very appealing (all the way around).
>
> A few years ago we had some regional contests in Ionia. We generally had both FAI and a Sports class. Some really wanted the easier tasks that sports class typically offered (even some experienced pilots with 18m gliders).. Others wanted to race with the "hot shots' in FAI even thought they had older gliders (knowing they would probably end up near the bottom). We didn't really know how to handle this. We could certainly see the desire these pilots had to do what "they wanted" rather than what "we wanted!" We of course let them do what they wanted.
>
> In sailing, lots of classes and lots of trophies works very well. Rather than having 60 boats (for example) in one class and only one winner...why not have 4 classes of various skill level and experience. In sailing it might be broken down into professional, corinthian, Women, Jr's, etc. They all race the same race course, but are scored as an overall AND in the individual classes. Trophies and recognition is of equal importance for all classes. Also little awards such as most improved, best first time attendee, capsize award (see land out award) are well liked.
>
> In soaring, I could see a breakdown by SSA ranking. 100-90, 90-80, 80-70, etc. We could also start a beginner class. I agree (no brainer really) that all involved would have more fun and more of a chance to compete with pilots of equal skill level with more segmented classes. It would be less intimidating. More trophies, more excitement and hopefully a steady graduation thru the ranks as one improves. People enjoy recognition and to feel a sense of accomplishment. When someone gets trophy in front of a crowd, it is a great moment for them and really "set's the hook" in a good way. We should be maximizing these moments for our contests participants AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE! Far more than we do today.
>
> I personally could care less if I was racing with 30 gliders or 5 of my general skills level. The truth is that we always end up racing with 3-5 gliders anyway at most contests. The 3-5 of our skill level. Interesting points DH. Thanks for sharing!
>
> Sean
>
> On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 5:53:00 PM UTC-4, David Hirst wrote:
> > >
> > > I think there is something that each of us could do in increasing the conversion rate of new XC and racing pilots.
> >
> > In New Zealand, we're seeing the same decline as pretty much everywhere but there are a couple of programmes in place which might (just might) turn things around. Off-topic slightly, getting the kids re-engaged is about getting them to form their own gliding-and-social organisation (youthglide.org.nz) and that seems to be working quite well. I think Abby Delore gave a talk about Youthglide at the SSA conference a couple of years ago.
> >
> > Back on-topic. After much head-scratching, a bunch of pilots decided that the key to retaining pilots was to get as many as possible into X Country - not denying that there's always a place for the pilots who just like to fly locally but it's the ones who go further who don't tend to drop out of the sport.
> >
> > The next question was how to do get people into XC. One answer is to lower the (perceived) barriers to flying contest tasks. Most club members have access to club gliders but it's the whole mountain of "there's no way I could fly that far" that seemed to pose the biggest hurdle.
> >
> > As a consequence, the Racing Committee have made a major revamp to the rules this season, to the effect that contest classes aren't so much based on "Std/15m", "Club", "18/20m" etc. but more "Beginner", "Intermediate" and "Advanced", i.e. based on pilot ability rather than glider performance. You can still fly with the big boys if you want (and get the points and prizes), but you can also turn up in a 18m glider and enter the "beginner" contest. We trialled the scheme informally last season and got a good number of new pilots to come along to contests and fly 75 - 150km tasks. Unsurprisingly, they had a blast! It'll be interesting to see the results this season.
> >
> > Another thing that may help the decline is the sort of coaching programme that Australia is using for its cross-country pilots, which came out of a whole bunch of work that the Australian Institute of Sport developed, completely unrelated to gliding.
> >
> > Interesting times. Watch this space.
> >
> > DH

Some things I have been involved in
Mifflin "rookie" contest. Entry by reverse seeding so all the new guys get in. Then run classes every day before flying and debrief after flying. This was quite popular and hopefully will be repeated.
Rookie School- actively teaching the new folks how to fly a contest and mentoring each every day. This has had good results in terms of safety and getting folks going with good results. We also ask the top rookie to give "winner's" speech at pilots meetings.
Contest riding- most everyone in our club who wants to has gotten to fly/ride in one of our 2 seat gliders in a contest. We are seeing some of these folks become contestants. Even those that don't seem to be much more likely to start flying XC.
It may seem obvious but the more we welcome and encourage those that have an interest, the more will stay and thrive.
FWIW
UH

[MNLou]

Another thought -

The Region 10 North contest last year had Club and Low Performance classes. (Another Tony Condon idea.)

It brought a bunch of less experienced pilots with less expensive gliders into the contest fold.

Lou

PS - Little did I know that, in my case, Low Performance applied to both the glider and the pilot:)

[Sean Fidler]

We should consider formalizing this and mapping it into our contest results, website etc on a standard basis.

If people know they have a chance to compete at their level and "win" a level category, they will probably be more excited to compete.

Instead of a straight linear SSA Pilot Ranking list, break it up into segments so we have several champions. The same breakdown for contest results. Overall and then by segments.

100-90 - Hot Shots
89.9-80 - Advanced
79.9-70 - Intermediate
Beginner (first 2 (3?) years since first contest?)
Jr.
Female

Jr. and Female would be ranked in up to 3 categories (overall, advanced (for example) and Jr. or Female. 3 times on the podium! 3 medals!

Instead of just one, we would have 6 ranking lists with 6 champions on the contest results page of the SSA website! We could also start some perpetual trophies for the SSA convention awards banquet (SSA) (per the annual ranking list "champions" along with the additional SSA medals for these categories at contests.

We could also do OLC individual achievement medals and club trophies at the SSA convention.

The more winners and recognition that we can produce, the better! We are leaving considerable magic (opportunity) on the table at contest by not recognizing more pilots at various skill/experience levels. People simply love having a shot at a trophy. They love being recognized. It may just keep them coming back. It may just inspire others to give it a try. Not be beat the superstars, but to win at a reasonable first step level against pilots of a similar skill level within a class. Medals, trophies, etc. are fairly inexpensive while being enormously valuable to those who receive them in front of their peers (see Tony Condon getting on the podium for the USA team bronze at the 13.5 meter World Championship today).

We have a nice, content rich SSA website...it would be easy to have a special "podium" page highlighting all these new rankings, awards and trophies. I'll bet it would be the most viewed page before too long. It would create buzz and these pilots recieving new recognition would love it!

We need to try these things! How about now for next season?

Sean

[Sean Fidler]

We should consider formalizing this and mapping it into our contest results, website etc on a standard basis.

If people know they have a chance to compete at their level and "win" a level category, they will probably be more excited to compete.

Instead of a straight linear SSA Pilot Ranking list, break it up into segments so we have several champions. The same breakdown for contest results. Overall and then by segments.

100-90 - Hot Shots
89.9-80 - Advanced
79.9-70 - Intermediate
Beginner (first 2 (3?) years since first contest?)
Jr.
Female

Jr. and Female would be ranked in up to 3 categories (overall, advanced (for example) and Jr. or Female. 3 times on the podium! 3 medals!

Instead of just one, we would have 6 ranking lists with 6 champions on the contest results page of the SSA website! We could also start some perpetual trophies for the SSA convention awards banquet.

We could also do OLC individual achievement medals and club trophies at the SSA convention.

The more winners and recognition that we can produce, the better! We are leaving considerable "magic" (opportunity) on the table at contest by not recognizing more pilots at various skill/experience levels. People simply love having a shot at a trophy. They love being recognized. It may just keep them coming back. It may just inspire others to give it a try. Not to beat the superstars, but to win at their current level against pilots of a similar skill level.

Medals, trophies, etc. are fairly inexpensive while being enormously valuable to those who receive them in front of their peers (see Tony Condon getting on the podium for the USA team bronze at the 13.5 meter World Championship today).

We have a nice, content rich SSA website...it would be easy to have a special "podium" page highlighting all these new rankings, awards and trophies. I'll bet it would be the most viewed page before too long. It would create buzz and these pilots recieving new recognition would love it!

We need to try these things! How about now for next season?

Sean

[Dan Marotta]

Heck yes! Simply being in the air is a joy for me. If I can go XC, all
the better!

On 8/15/2015 10:29 AM, son_of_flubber wrote:
> <snip>
>
> Do XC pilots ever recover the joy of flying on marginal days?

--
Dan Marotta

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 10:09:43 AM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
> From another thread recently, thought it might be a good topic to paw around with everyone...
>
> For me, soaring is great fun. I've been doing it consistently for about 5 years now. I've met a bunch of amazing, great, kind people and have learned a tremendous amount about the sport (light years left to go). Thru and thru, as a group, soaring pilots, their friends and family are among the nicest, smartest most interesting people I have ever met. I am attracted to this immensely.
>
> Part of the reason I have devoted time and energy to the sport is that am truly inspired by what competition/cross country pilots are capable of doing in gliders. I am still fascinated by it and want to be a part of it. This, for me, was huge. Glider pilots are amazing pilots, PERIOD.
>
> I probably never would have truly learned of the sport (and what it really is at the highest levels), or been so attracted to it if my dad was not involved. Having a family member with a high performance glider, flying it regularly and promoting how amazing the sport could be all the time was key.. Having access to a high performance glider and a group of local friends who could mentor me and take me out on cross country flights shortly after I got my license was the key moment. Would I have got my license if the motivation was just flying around the airport? Probably not.
>
> Those experiences flying with the Ionio boys on short, mentored cross country's "set the hook" for me and eventually led to me buying a glider so that I could fly with everyone rather than leave my dad back at the airport whenever I was flying. Of course once I bought my first glider so I could fly with this gang regularly, the learning curve grew dramatically. The hook set deeper. And so on.
>
> Flying clubs are important to US soaring "health" I suppose but they also seem to lack in areas. They often don't have much to offer in terms of even moderate performance gliders. They often don't promote or in some cases even allow cross country.
>
> It seems that European clubs are more into cross country which is more challenging and more rewarding than local flight, which I think gets old after a year or so. If some inspirational figure is not actively encouraging and facilitating cross country glider flight (the whole point of the sport I think) at that key moment in a glider pilots career, I think they come to the conclusion that they have checked the box and move on.
>
> Obviously without glider clubs more focused on taking pilots into cross country levels, one has to have the financial means to do it on their own. I dont see that as a real problem as numerous 40:1 gliders are available for the same price as a small sailboat or powerboat, which almost everybody seems to have these days (jet skis, snowmobiles, etc). It's a matter of priority. Gliders I suppose are for one person (usually) where a boat (or other rec toy) is for the whole family.
>
> But Europe seems to have an entirely different dynamic with respect to soaring. More youth, larger numbers, etc. U.S. numbers have been steadily declining for 25 years.
>
> One thing I learned in business school. It's often better to adopt successful competitors methods even if at first you don't fully understand them yet. Our clubs (and the SSA) should be talking to European clubs and picking their brains for advise. I wonder how many have actually done that. Perhaps take a trip to Europe on summer and spend a few weeks with a successful club, talk to the people, etc.
>
> Oddly, my flying is at a location that actually IDs itself as IONIA NON CLUB. They don't like the politics. :-).
>
> The rules is a small thing overall but debating the rules is an important thing in terms of competition pilots. My suggestions usually would make getting into competition soaring simpler for the new pilot. I do think our rules are too complicated, but the rule makers are all GREAT PEOPLE, working hard and want nothing but the best for our sport.
>
> Sean
> 7T

We have been working on generating new cross country pilots at our club (Chicago Glider Club) over the last several years and have had some success with the following approach:

1. When new members without glider licenses join the club and seek instruction we try to introduce them to the idea of flying cross country early in the training process. My initial training flights, when the conditions permit, include taking the pilot to nearby airports, using them as turnpoints and getting the new pilot (many are already airplane rated) used to the idea that we don't just stay at the home field, and that modern gliders have the range to safely fly cross country. We have four airports within 10 miles, so its not much of a trip, but it seems to affect attitudes and expectations in a positive manner.

2. Cross-country and racing is a normal weekend activity at our club when the weather permits, so all members see that a group of us are flying cross-country regularly.

3. We have a training program focused on cross country that includes talks by experienced pilots on relevant issues, followed by practice with an experienced cross-country pilot who is usually a CFIG. We have three club two-place gliders (2 ASK-21s and a Duo Discus), so we have the equipment to do this. We have had good turnout at these events, both from new and older club members, many of whom have not been flying cross-country. After a short talk we fly 1-1/2 hour local tasks and evaluate the results. (I have found, by the way, that the biggest problem, so far, in getting people proficient to fly cross-country is thermaling ability.)

4. Apart from the cross-country flights with instructors, we have arranged for practice off-field landings at a near by RLA with a friendly owner. The pilots fly one of the two place glider to the RLA with an instructor in the backseat. They also tow out to go back to the glider club. This got a lot of interest and was appreciated by people who had never landed anywhere but at our glider club. Its a good project on days when the weather is too weak for cross-country.

5. Our club also has an ASW-24, and we encourage pilots to use it for cross-country flying.

6. We set cross-country tasks on most weekends when the weather cooperates (very few this year). If there are new cross-country pilots flying, the task options include a local MAT that won't take the pilot more than 10 miles or so from our airport, but allow visiting up to five other turnpoints. We encourage people to turn in their flight logs and we post the results, usually with comments from the pilots who flew tasks that day.

Interest has been good and several members who were not flying cross country when they started are now doing so. Mike Shakman

[son_of_flubber]

On Sunday, August 16, 2015 at 11:12:15 AM UTC-4, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Heck yes!* Simply being in the air is a joy for me.* If I can go XC,
> all the better!
>

> On 8/15/2015 10:29 AM, son_of_flubber
> wrote:

> <snip>
>
> Do XC pilots ever recover the joy of flying on marginal days?
>

I know a few XC pilots like yourself that fly on marginal days.

But I'm talking about the XC pilots that don't race and who only fly on the rare strong XC day that coincides with their days off. If it came to that, I'd probably quit.

[[email protected]]

Can't think of a single logical reason to have a separate "female" class. What is this? 1953?
"

[Dan Marotta]

I understand what you're saying.

Last week at Minden we took off early on a blue day in an ASH-30 mi. It
took us an hour and a half of scratching, gaining and losing, heading
out and retreating, before we finally were able to climb. After that,
things got better and we had a great day of soaring. Of course our
average speed was severely impacted by the 1.5 hours of zero mileage,
but we had a terrific time nonetheless.

I'm very fortunate to have a friend who owns such a super ship and loves
to fly as much as I do!

On 8/16/2015 9:43 AM, son_of_flubber wrote:
> On Sunday, August 16, 2015 at 11:12:15 AM UTC-4, Dan Marotta wrote:
>> Heck yes! Simply being in the air is a joy for me. If I can go XC,
>> all the better!
>>
>
>> On 8/15/2015 10:29 AM, son_of_flubber
>> wrote:
>
>> <snip>
>>
>> Do XC pilots ever recover the joy of flying on marginal days?
>>
> I know a few XC pilots like yourself that fly on marginal days.
>
> But I'm talking about the XC pilots that don't race and who only fly on the rare strong XC day that coincides with their days off. If it came to that, I'd probably quit.

--
Dan Marotta

[WAVEGURU]

How about a team to work on some media coverage? We need a team of people, familiar with how to get coverage, work on getting national coverage for our national contests and local coverage for our local events. NBC, ABC,CBS, FOX, sports channels... They've got a golf channel, why not a Soaring channel? The public needs to see how far and high high we go on maps, with interviews with the winners, and youth participants.

Boggs

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 12:21:35 PM UTC-6, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 9:39:44 AM UTC-7, wrote:
> > Reply to all 3 posts.
> >
> > Sean, how much fun actually flying gliders is doesn't matter that much to the initial "sale" An interested visitor will at most get a 20 minute "sleigh ride" in a glider but spend hours on the ground at the airfield. The thing that makes the "deal" possible is the environment at the gliderport.. Unfortunately, most are fly blown armpits of creation populated by not very friendly people. Guess which one makes the biggest impression?. What to do is obvious.
> >
> > Yes, participation in all aspects of aviation is shrinking. Our bad press is mostly to blame. From the evening news to stand up comics, people are being frightened away from aviation. All of aviation needs to mount a PR campaign to offset this. We also need to become absolutely militant about reducing accidents. We are far too tolerant of unsafe practices.
> >
> > Dan, be very careful about overgeneralising. I did an informal survey in shopping malls observing about 1000 young people. My numbers say only about 10% were fiddling with cellphones. That's still a big number but it's not 100%. My impression is they do this when they are bored and have nothing else to do. We can give them something more interesting.
> >
> > Keep the overall numbers in mind. If 1,000 people walked onto US glider operations seeking flight training our infrastructure would be saturated. We just need to figure out how to find that 1,000 in a population of 310 million.
> >
> > Bill Daniels
>
> Bill and I talked about this at the Nationals a couple of years ago. There are three related challenges: intake, conversion and churn.
>
> - Intake is the number of people taking an introductory ride, or are ins some way given an initial introduction to the sport.
>
> - Conversion, is the percentage of people who transition to solo, licensed pilot, XC pilot, racing pilot.
>
> - Churn, is the number of people who get all the way through the conversion "funnel", are in the sport for a (short or long) while then drop out.
>
> The balance of these three effects determine the size of the racing pilot pool year by year.
>
> A big chunk of churn is related to demographics and aging of the baby boom, some is related to the pressures of modern life. Retaining an older pilot for a few more years only buys you a few more years, but given the current profile of the pilot community there might be some work to do.
>
> Intake is expensive, especially with a conversion rate like ours, which IIRC, is around 1% of those who are introduced to the sport actually become a licensed pilot, let alone a regular XC or racing pilot. This is partly a time and money issue, but at the higher levels it is one of finding a mentor to bring you along. At the RC meeting last year we hosted a gathering of local XC, OLC and racing pilots. The most profound comments were around the lack of an onramp to racing, to lean the skills by flying (following, really) a better pilot to see how it's done.
>
> Team flying using the radio is allowed at the regional level. For better or worse Flarm following has reduces some of the "where'd you go?" issues associated with flying with someone. It's kind of fun to run around the course with other pilots from time to time. Bruno's hybrid events have seen a higher proportion of pilots flying at least one, but seemingly more that one, of the assigned tasks as a learning experience - and because it allows you to fly with buddies.
>
> I think there is something that each of us could do in increasing the conversion rate of new XC and racing pilots.
>
> 9B

Andy, we don't disagree at all. Until and unless we solve the intake and conversion problems, churn ("retention") is moot. While it's absolutely true that getting new pilots into XC will increase retention, we have to have the new pilots.

[WAVEGURU]

How about a Red Bull glider race?

Boggs

[Dan Marotta]

Another way to inspire XC flying is to have club camps away from the
home field and/or soaring safaris. Pilots get to experience different
locations and conditions and have a time of total immersion in soaring
without the pressures of work or going home in the evening.

When I was at Black Forest in Colorado, the club usually held a couple
of camps per year away from home. We'd take our tow plane and at least
one trainer with us for students and newbies and would also sell rides
to tourists to help with costs. These events were usually well
subscribed by private owners and normally occurred over long weekends.

Safaris, on the other hand, usually lasted a week or so and consisted of
straight out flying, landing at a different airport each day. I have
participated in three such safaris but, unfortunately, could never get
more than one pair of pilots sharing one glider to go along. We've done
those by ground launch or using a self-launcher.

At Moriarty we've discussed taking a tow plane and a group of gliders
and heading out on a week-long trip but, to date, it's not gotten
further than the talking stage. I recall reading of border to border
flights back in the '80s and I'd do that in a heartbeat if it could be
organized. I know a few new pilots who would jump at the chance to
participate in that! I imagine starting at Alamogordo, NM or El Paso,
TX and flying north to a preplanned location to rest and continue the
next day. We could continue to the Canadian border in WY or MT, rest
up, and head for home. That might take two weeks! The biggest problem
I see is getting to commit to using their vacation. For my money this
would be a lot more fun than returning home each day as in a contest.

On 8/16/2015 9:40 AM, wrote:
> On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 10:09:43 AM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
>> From another thread recently, thought it might be a good topic to paw around with everyone...
>>
>> For me, soaring is great fun. I've been doing it consistently for about 5 years now. I've met a bunch of amazing, great, kind people and have learned a tremendous amount about the sport (light years left to go). Thru and thru, as a group, soaring pilots, their friends and family are among the nicest, smartest most interesting people I have ever met. I am attracted to this immensely.
>>
>> Part of the reason I have devoted time and energy to the sport is that am truly inspired by what competition/cross country pilots are capable of doing in gliders. I am still fascinated by it and want to be a part of it. This, for me, was huge. Glider pilots are amazing pilots, PERIOD.
>>
>> I probably never would have truly learned of the sport (and what it really is at the highest levels), or been so attracted to it if my dad was not involved. Having a family member with a high performance glider, flying it regularly and promoting how amazing the sport could be all the time was key. Having access to a high performance glider and a group of local friends who could mentor me and take me out on cross country flights shortly after I got my license was the key moment. Would I have got my license if the motivation was just flying around the airport? Probably not.
>>
>> Those experiences flying with the Ionio boys on short, mentored cross country's "set the hook" for me and eventually led to me buying a glider so that I could fly with everyone rather than leave my dad back at the airport whenever I was flying. Of course once I bought my first glider so I could fly with this gang regularly, the learning curve grew dramatically. The hook set deeper. And so on.
>>
>> Flying clubs are important to US soaring "health" I suppose but they also seem to lack in areas. They often don't have much to offer in terms of even moderate performance gliders. They often don't promote or in some cases even allow cross country.
>>
>> It seems that European clubs are more into cross country which is more challenging and more rewarding than local flight, which I think gets old after a year or so. If some inspirational figure is not actively encouraging and facilitating cross country glider flight (the whole point of the sport I think) at that key moment in a glider pilots career, I think they come to the conclusion that they have checked the box and move on.
>>
>> Obviously without glider clubs more focused on taking pilots into cross country levels, one has to have the financial means to do it on their own. I dont see that as a real problem as numerous 40:1 gliders are available for the same price as a small sailboat or powerboat, which almost everybody seems to have these days (jet skis, snowmobiles, etc). It's a matter of priority. Gliders I suppose are for one person (usually) where a boat (or other rec toy) is for the whole family.
>>
>> But Europe seems to have an entirely different dynamic with respect to soaring. More youth, larger numbers, etc. U.S. numbers have been steadily declining for 25 years.
>>
>> One thing I learned in business school. It's often better to adopt successful competitors methods even if at first you don't fully understand them yet. Our clubs (and the SSA) should be talking to European clubs and picking their brains for advise. I wonder how many have actually done that. Perhaps take a trip to Europe on summer and spend a few weeks with a successful club, talk to the people, etc.
>>
>> Oddly, my flying is at a location that actually IDs itself as IONIA NON CLUB. They don't like the politics. :-).
>>
>> The rules is a small thing overall but debating the rules is an important thing in terms of competition pilots. My suggestions usually would make getting into competition soaring simpler for the new pilot. I do think our rules are too complicated, but the rule makers are all GREAT PEOPLE, working hard and want nothing but the best for our sport.
>>
>> Sean
>> 7T
> We have been working on generating new cross country pilots at our club (Chicago Glider Club) over the last several years and have had some success with the following approach:
>
> 1. When new members without glider licenses join the club and seek instruction we try to introduce them to the idea of flying cross country early in the training process. My initial training flights, when the conditions permit, include taking the pilot to nearby airports, using them as turnpoints and getting the new pilot (many are already airplane rated) used to the idea that we don't just stay at the home field, and that modern gliders have the range to safely fly cross country. We have four airports within 10 miles, so its not much of a trip, but it seems to affect attitudes and expectations in a positive manner.
>
> 2. Cross-country and racing is a normal weekend activity at our club when the weather permits, so all members see that a group of us are flying cross-country regularly.
>
> 3. We have a training program focused on cross country that includes talks by experienced pilots on relevant issues, followed by practice with an experienced cross-country pilot who is usually a CFIG. We have three club two-place gliders (2 ASK-21s and a Duo Discus), so we have the equipment to do this. We have had good turnout at these events, both from new and older club members, many of whom have not been flying cross-country. After a short talk we fly 1-1/2 hour local tasks and evaluate the results. (I have found, by the way, that the biggest problem, so far, in getting people proficient to fly cross-country is thermaling ability.)
>
> 4. Apart from the cross-country flights with instructors, we have arranged for practice off-field landings at a near by RLA with a friendly owner. The pilots fly one of the two place glider to the RLA with an instructor in the backseat. They also tow out to go back to the glider club. This got a lot of interest and was appreciated by people who had never landed anywhere but at our glider club. Its a good project on days when the weather is too weak for cross-country.
>
> 5. Our club also has an ASW-24, and we encourage pilots to use it for cross-country flying.
>
> 6. We set cross-country tasks on most weekends when the weather cooperates (very few this year). If there are new cross-country pilots flying, the task options include a local MAT that won't take the pilot more than 10 miles or so from our airport, but allow visiting up to five other turnpoints. We encourage people to turn in their flight logs and we post the results, usually with comments from the pilots who flew tasks that day.
>
> Interest has been good and several members who were not flying cross country when they started are now doing so. Mike Shakman

--
Dan Marotta

[[email protected]]

One thing that's worked, and has been a lot of fun, is having a task set for each flying day. After the task is flown, we get together the next morning, compare the scores, watch all the flights on see you, and get some coaching from the experienced xc pilots. It's a lot of fun to "compete" against your friends. We get to fly places we might not otherwise go, and it's fun to learn from each other. At the soaring club of Houston we are fortunate that we have a cross country mentor willing to do all of the task setting, scoring, getting the projector ready etc.

[Jim White[_3_]]

Enthusiasm

I will offer two ideas:

First. Next week the UK Junior Nationals will be run at Aston Down. There
are over 50 entries and a load of two seaters being flown by pundits to
show those who are not yet ready for competition how it goes. This is down
to a few very enthusiastic pundits who are keen to grow the sport and pass
on their knowledge and enthusiasm to the next generation and to a few of
the juniors themselves who have thrown their efforts into enthusing other
youngsters.

There is a junior web site, great junior videos, 'how to' stuff etc. See
http://www.juniorgliding.co.uk Our BGA is also enthusiastic and supportive
with competition subsidies and training bursaries for the young.

I have never known the junior scene to be more active. Let the youngsters
loose and they will do it.

Second: Make cross country flying less intimidating for newbies and low
handicap gliders at club level. Handicap distance tasks allow all to fly
together at the same time, in the same air, in a collective spirit. We set
these every weekend at Booker and they get flown in gliders from 89 to 112
handicap. One member who flies a Pegase and hasn't flown more than 100k on
her own tasks for years flew nearly 300k the other week and landed with a
huge smile.

For newbies you can give them an extra 5 handicap points to allow them to
play on a more level ground.

Take a look at www.handicaptask.uk I have even made it US friendly! Sean,
please have a look if you are seeking ideas.

Jim

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 7:21:35 PM UTC+1, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 9:39:44 AM UTC-7, wrote:
> > Reply to all 3 posts.
> >
> > Sean, how much fun actually flying gliders is doesn't matter that much to the initial "sale" An interested visitor will at most get a 20 minute "sleigh ride" in a glider but spend hours on the ground at the airfield. The thing that makes the "deal" possible is the environment at the gliderport.. Unfortunately, most are fly blown armpits of creation populated by not very friendly people. Guess which one makes the biggest impression?. What to do is obvious.
> >
> > Yes, participation in all aspects of aviation is shrinking. Our bad press is mostly to blame. From the evening news to stand up comics, people are being frightened away from aviation. All of aviation needs to mount a PR campaign to offset this. We also need to become absolutely militant about reducing accidents. We are far too tolerant of unsafe practices.
> >
> > Dan, be very careful about overgeneralising. I did an informal survey in shopping malls observing about 1000 young people. My numbers say only about 10% were fiddling with cellphones. That's still a big number but it's not 100%. My impression is they do this when they are bored and have nothing else to do. We can give them something more interesting.
> >
> > Keep the overall numbers in mind. If 1,000 people walked onto US glider operations seeking flight training our infrastructure would be saturated. We just need to figure out how to find that 1,000 in a population of 310 million.
> >
> > Bill Daniels
>
> Bill and I talked about this at the Nationals a couple of years ago. There are three related challenges: intake, conversion and churn.
>
> - Intake is the number of people taking an introductory ride, or are ins some way given an initial introduction to the sport.
>
> - Conversion, is the percentage of people who transition to solo, licensed pilot, XC pilot, racing pilot.
>
> - Churn, is the number of people who get all the way through the conversion "funnel", are in the sport for a (short or long) while then drop out.
>
> The balance of these three effects determine the size of the racing pilot pool year by year.
>
> A big chunk of churn is related to demographics and aging of the baby boom, some is related to the pressures of modern life. Retaining an older pilot for a few more years only buys you a few more years, but given the current profile of the pilot community there might be some work to do.
>
> Intake is expensive, especially with a conversion rate like ours, which IIRC, is around 1% of those who are introduced to the sport actually become a licensed pilot, let alone a regular XC or racing pilot. This is partly a time and money issue, but at the higher levels it is one of finding a mentor to bring you along. At the RC meeting last year we hosted a gathering of local XC, OLC and racing pilots. The most profound comments were around the lack of an onramp to racing, to lean the skills by flying (following, really) a better pilot to see how it's done.
>
> Team flying using the radio is allowed at the regional level. For better or worse Flarm following has reduces some of the "where'd you go?" issues associated with flying with someone. It's kind of fun to run around the course with other pilots from time to time. Bruno's hybrid events have seen a higher proportion of pilots flying at least one, but seemingly more that one, of the assigned tasks as a learning experience - and because it allows you to fly with buddies.
>
> I think there is something that each of us could do in increasing the conversion rate of new XC and racing pilots.
>
> 9B

Improvement at all stages -- intake, conversion & churn, should be improved by participants seeing clear goals ahead that they could achieve. For the most part this is XC flying in a nice ship, but there are other goals people could set themselves.

One observation is that on your side of the pond, you refer to introductory flights as "sleigh rides." I've heard that, by default, the prospective pilot doesn't even get a stick to handle!

If that's true, then no wonder the conversion rate is so low! In the era of high rises and budget commercial airline travel, sitting passively in (an ageing) glider just isn't very appealing to young people.

Give them a "trial flight," get them on the controls, and allow them to see themselves flying a high performance ship in the future.

That seed needs to be planted right from the get-go. Once it is planted, their own enthusiasm will do the rest.

[Sarah[_2_]]

On Sunday, August 16, 2015 at 11:00:12 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> Can't think of a single logical reason to have a separate "female" class. What is this? 1953?
> "

I can't either. Soaring competition doesn't require muscle unless you're talking about rigging/derigging. As far as I know that's not scored.

[Sarah[_2_]]

On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 7:12:25 AM UTC-5, Sarah wrote:
> On Sunday, August 16, 2015 at 11:00:12 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> > Can't think of a single logical reason to have a separate "female" class. What is this? 1953?
> > "
>
> I can't either. Soaring competition doesn't require muscle unless you're talking about rigging/derigging. As far as I know that's not scored.

I should probably add I'm not the famous contest winner Sarah. Just to avoid confusion. I'm just another average glider pilot.

[Bruce Hoult]

On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 3:11:43 PM UTC+3, wrote:
> One observation is that on your side of the pond, you refer to introductory flights as "sleigh rides." I've heard that, by default, the prospective pilot doesn't even get a stick to handle!
>
> If that's true, then no wonder the conversion rate is so low! In the era of high rises and budget commercial airline travel, sitting passively in (an ageing) glider just isn't very appealing to young people.
>
> Give them a "trial flight," get them on the controls, and allow them to see themselves flying a high performance ship in the future.

Yeah, that's pretty shocking.

My most popular youtube video (link below) is an intro flight I did a few years ago in the DG1000. The day was not very good (overcast and light wind), but I managed to show a little bit of soaring to at least pretty much maintain altitude, and then gave the student the controls for I guess 15 min or so and just let him play and get a feel for it.

The background was that he'd pretty clearly decided he wanted to fly *something*. He'd been for a trial flight in a Cessna already on the same day, and I tried to sell him on gliders instead.

It must have worked, as he went solo in the DG1000 almost exactly six months later.

That was one of my first flights after getting the instructor ticket. Looking back at it now I can see all kinds of things that I hope I've improved since then! But, all the same, I've had a lot of very positive comments on the video and I hope some of the commenters have been inspired to take a flight themselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDZN21xzsRo

[ND]

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 11:09:43 AM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> From another thread recently, thought it might be a good topic to paw around with everyone...
>
> For me, soaring is great fun. I've been doing it consistently for about 5 years now. I've met a bunch of amazing, great, kind people and have learned a tremendous amount about the sport (light years left to go). Thru and thru, as a group, soaring pilots, their friends and family are among the nicest, smartest most interesting people I have ever met. I am attracted to this immensely.
>
> Part of the reason I have devoted time and energy to the sport is that am truly inspired by what competition/cross country pilots are capable of doing in gliders. I am still fascinated by it and want to be a part of it. This, for me, was huge. Glider pilots are amazing pilots, PERIOD.
>
> I probably never would have truly learned of the sport (and what it really is at the highest levels), or been so attracted to it if my dad was not involved. Having a family member with a high performance glider, flying it regularly and promoting how amazing the sport could be all the time was key.. Having access to a high performance glider and a group of local friends who could mentor me and take me out on cross country flights shortly after I got my license was the key moment. Would I have got my license if the motivation was just flying around the airport? Probably not.
>
> Those experiences flying with the Ionio boys on short, mentored cross country's "set the hook" for me and eventually led to me buying a glider so that I could fly with everyone rather than leave my dad back at the airport whenever I was flying. Of course once I bought my first glider so I could fly with this gang regularly, the learning curve grew dramatically. The hook set deeper. And so on.
>
> Flying clubs are important to US soaring "health" I suppose but they also seem to lack in areas. They often don't have much to offer in terms of even moderate performance gliders. They often don't promote or in some cases even allow cross country.
>
> It seems that European clubs are more into cross country which is more challenging and more rewarding than local flight, which I think gets old after a year or so. If some inspirational figure is not actively encouraging and facilitating cross country glider flight (the whole point of the sport I think) at that key moment in a glider pilots career, I think they come to the conclusion that they have checked the box and move on.
>
> Obviously without glider clubs more focused on taking pilots into cross country levels, one has to have the financial means to do it on their own. I dont see that as a real problem as numerous 40:1 gliders are available for the same price as a small sailboat or powerboat, which almost everybody seems to have these days (jet skis, snowmobiles, etc). It's a matter of priority. Gliders I suppose are for one person (usually) where a boat (or other rec toy) is for the whole family.
>
> But Europe seems to have an entirely different dynamic with respect to soaring. More youth, larger numbers, etc. U.S. numbers have been steadily declining for 25 years.
>
> One thing I learned in business school. It's often better to adopt successful competitors methods even if at first you don't fully understand them yet. Our clubs (and the SSA) should be talking to European clubs and picking their brains for advise. I wonder how many have actually done that. Perhaps take a trip to Europe on summer and spend a few weeks with a successful club, talk to the people, etc.
>
> Oddly, my flying is at a location that actually IDs itself as IONIA NON CLUB. They don't like the politics. :-).
>
> The rules is a small thing overall but debating the rules is an important thing in terms of competition pilots. My suggestions usually would make getting into competition soaring simpler for the new pilot. I do think our rules are too complicated, but the rule makers are all GREAT PEOPLE, working hard and want nothing but the best for our sport.
>
> Sean
> 7T

Morning Sean,

I think your comments about mirroring european soaring clubs definitely has some merit. At harris hill, I think a huge thing for our club is that we have a discus CS, and a Duo Discus, as well as a number of pilots who are active in cross country as a baseline. Even if your father/grandfather is not involved in this case, you still end up with access to high performance equipment, and people to guide you along.

my first cross country was with roy mcmaster in our duo. after about 5-7 cross country flights on my own, i flew a HUGE flight (for me at the time) with tim welles and he offered some pointers. i did the flying, he critiqued, and i saw that if i made the right decisions i could go fly cross country all afternoon too.

also, harris hill offers two gliders to junior members free of hourly charge: the discus CS and the SGS 1-34. for those reasons, we are able to expose our junior members to flying and make it very attractive to them from a cost standpoint. so we're getting a younger crowd involved. we have four members under 25 right now who have completed silver badges, and several more who are on their way with one or two of the legs done. The majority of them aren't from soaring families. bottom line, make it affordable, and give them access to the equipment. No way could my dad have afforded normal flying lessons for me when i was a teen. harris hill offered instructional flights when i was junior 13 years ago for 3 bucks a flight. that was offset with commercial rides, and subsidized by senior member rates.

as far as drawing adults to the cross country aspect, it needs to be turnkey, people need the have the ability to advance quickly if they want so that they dont get bored. a good training program is helpful. we do instruction every wednesday night during the flying months so that senior members can get focused weekly instruction. in the winter we do a condor night, where we set up a server and 6-8 members join and fly a cross country flight. we always debrief those and talk about the decision making. it gets everyone involved juiced up for spring.

the formula is the same in your example as mine. there needs to be equipment available, and mentors available. one reason we see people getting into cross country at harris hill is because there are several people who go on a regular basis. it creates a cross country environment. tim welles (W3) is an ironman and flies more regularly, and and in poorer weather, than most. i think it takes a catalyst in that regard. you need people who can shepherd and motivate others.

[Squeaky]

;907821']On Sunday, August 16, 2015 at 11:00:12 AM UTC-5, wrote:
Can't think of a single logical reason to have a separate "female" class. What is this? 1953?
"

I can't either. Soaring competition doesn't require muscle unless you're talking about rigging/derigging. As far as I know that's not scored.

I thought it was suggested just for fairness... I can't even get close to fitting in a Discus A... My 200+ pounds creates a lot of trim drag and a higher sink rate/slower climbs in any aircraft I fly... Most girls have an unfair advantage!!! They're kicking my butt. ;)

[Dan Marotta]

Every place I've flown in the USA has offered the stick to the
customer. In my experience the term, "sleigh ride", refers to flights
when there is no lift available. In that case we suggest a different
time or day for the flight. Often the suggestion is accepted but just
as often not. A lot of the people who come for a ride are simply
checking off a box on their bucket list and there's no doubt they won't
be returning. For those who show the spark of enthusiasm, we go far out
of our way to encourage them to return.

In my case, as a prior experienced formation pilot, I was given the
stick from the beginning of the takeoff roll to the end of the rollout.
The hook was deeply set for me and I immediately began taking lessons
culminating in a commercial add-on rating.

On 8/17/2015 6:11 AM, wrote:
> On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 7:21:35 PM UTC+1, Andy Blackburn wrote:
>> On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 9:39:44 AM UTC-7, wrote:
>>> Reply to all 3 posts.
>>>
>>> Sean, how much fun actually flying gliders is doesn't matter that much to the initial "sale" An interested visitor will at most get a 20 minute "sleigh ride" in a glider but spend hours on the ground at the airfield. The thing that makes the "deal" possible is the environment at the gliderport. Unfortunately, most are fly blown armpits of creation populated by not very friendly people. Guess which one makes the biggest impression?. What to do is obvious.
>>>
>>> Yes, participation in all aspects of aviation is shrinking. Our bad press is mostly to blame. From the evening news to stand up comics, people are being frightened away from aviation. All of aviation needs to mount a PR campaign to offset this. We also need to become absolutely militant about reducing accidents. We are far too tolerant of unsafe practices.
>>>
>>> Dan, be very careful about overgeneralising. I did an informal survey in shopping malls observing about 1000 young people. My numbers say only about 10% were fiddling with cellphones. That's still a big number but it's not 100%. My impression is they do this when they are bored and have nothing else to do. We can give them something more interesting.
>>>
>>> Keep the overall numbers in mind. If 1,000 people walked onto US glider operations seeking flight training our infrastructure would be saturated. We just need to figure out how to find that 1,000 in a population of 310 million.
>>>
>>> Bill Daniels
>> Bill and I talked about this at the Nationals a couple of years ago. There are three related challenges: intake, conversion and churn.
>>
>> - Intake is the number of people taking an introductory ride, or are ins some way given an initial introduction to the sport.
>>
>> - Conversion, is the percentage of people who transition to solo, licensed pilot, XC pilot, racing pilot.
>>
>> - Churn, is the number of people who get all the way through the conversion "funnel", are in the sport for a (short or long) while then drop out.
>>
>> The balance of these three effects determine the size of the racing pilot pool year by year.
>>
>> A big chunk of churn is related to demographics and aging of the baby boom, some is related to the pressures of modern life. Retaining an older pilot for a few more years only buys you a few more years, but given the current profile of the pilot community there might be some work to do.
>>
>> Intake is expensive, especially with a conversion rate like ours, which IIRC, is around 1% of those who are introduced to the sport actually become a licensed pilot, let alone a regular XC or racing pilot. This is partly a time and money issue, but at the higher levels it is one of finding a mentor to bring you along. At the RC meeting last year we hosted a gathering of local XC, OLC and racing pilots. The most profound comments were around the lack of an onramp to racing, to lean the skills by flying (following, really) a better pilot to see how it's done.
>>
>> Team flying using the radio is allowed at the regional level. For better or worse Flarm following has reduces some of the "where'd you go?" issues associated with flying with someone. It's kind of fun to run around the course with other pilots from time to time. Bruno's hybrid events have seen a higher proportion of pilots flying at least one, but seemingly more that one, of the assigned tasks as a learning experience - and because it allows you to fly with buddies.
>>
>> I think there is something that each of us could do in increasing the conversion rate of new XC and racing pilots.
>>
>> 9B
> Improvement at all stages -- intake, conversion & churn, should be improved by participants seeing clear goals ahead that they could achieve. For the most part this is XC flying in a nice ship, but there are other goals people could set themselves.
>
> One observation is that on your side of the pond, you refer to introductory flights as "sleigh rides." I've heard that, by default, the prospective pilot doesn't even get a stick to handle!
>
> If that's true, then no wonder the conversion rate is so low! In the era of high rises and budget commercial airline travel, sitting passively in (an ageing) glider just isn't very appealing to young people.
>
> Give them a "trial flight," get them on the controls, and allow them to see themselves flying a high performance ship in the future.
>
> That seed needs to be planted right from the get-go. Once it is planted, their own enthusiasm will do the rest.
>

--
Dan Marotta

[Bruce Hoult]

On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 4:28:28 PM UTC+3, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Every place I've flown in the USA has offered the stick to the
> customer.* In my experience the term, "sleigh ride", refers to
> flights when there is no lift available.* In that case we suggest a
> different time or day for the flight.

Of course guaranteeing lift is not compatible with taking bookings for a fixed future day and time, so we encourage people to take the 4000 ft tow option to ensure a reasonable flight length.

Anyway it's not a good idea to fight too hard to exploit marginal lift (thermals, certainly) with a 1st timer aboard. Even if it's a thermal day, I'll generally only demonstrate a climb of 200 or 300 ft before exiting the thermal, just to give them a taste.

Of course if it's big fat thermals that work with well under 30 degrees of bank, or even only part of the turn in the thermal, then it's a different matter.

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 9:16:18 AM UTC-4, ND wrote:

> Morning Sean,
>
> I think your comments about mirroring european soaring clubs definitely has some merit. At harris hill, I think a huge thing for our club is that we have a discus CS, and a Duo Discus, as well as a number of pilots who are active in cross country as a baseline. Even if your father/grandfather is not involved in this case, you still end up with access to high performance equipment, and people to guide you along.
>
> my first cross country was with roy mcmaster in our duo. after about 5-7 cross country flights on my own, i flew a HUGE flight (for me at the time) with tim welles and he offered some pointers. i did the flying, he critiqued, and i saw that if i made the right decisions i could go fly cross country all afternoon too.
>
> also, harris hill offers two gliders to junior members free of hourly charge: the discus CS and the SGS 1-34. for those reasons, we are able to expose our junior members to flying and make it very attractive to them from a cost standpoint. so we're getting a younger crowd involved. we have four members under 25 right now who have completed silver badges, and several more who are on their way with one or two of the legs done. The majority of them aren't from soaring families. bottom line, make it affordable, and give them access to the equipment. No way could my dad have afforded normal flying lessons for me when i was a teen. harris hill offered instructional flights when i was junior 13 years ago for 3 bucks a flight. that was offset with commercial rides, and subsidized by senior member rates.
>
> as far as drawing adults to the cross country aspect, it needs to be turnkey, people need the have the ability to advance quickly if they want so that they dont get bored. a good training program is helpful. we do instruction every wednesday night during the flying months so that senior members can get focused weekly instruction. in the winter we do a condor night, where we set up a server and 6-8 members join and fly a cross country flight. we always debrief those and talk about the decision making. it gets everyone involved juiced up for spring.
>
> the formula is the same in your example as mine. there needs to be equipment available, and mentors available. one reason we see people getting into cross country at harris hill is because there are several people who go on a regular basis. it creates a cross country environment. tim welles (W3) is an ironman and flies more regularly, and and in poorer weather, than most.. i think it takes a catalyst in that regard. you need people who can shepherd and motivate others.

HHSC is not the only one doing this.....

Valley Soaring in Middletown, NY (where I fly) does similar.

It started back in the '70's with the commercial operation (also called Valley Soaring) by helping out "kids".
Basically, work a day, get a flight.
Some regulars added some money to a "pot" to help offset some of the costs as well.
This operation was started by Hank Nixon, his wife Dianne & Herb Reilly until it was turned into a club.
Hank & I own SGS-1-26 SN 002 which we let juniors use for "free". They cut the grass in the tiedown, wash the glider, etc.
Junior members at VS pay lower dues and tow rates. Instruction is also a lower rate.

Once they get some more flying time, there are quite a few pilots that fly cross country and will lead other pilots around and help out.
We also take people for cross country in a ASK-21 from our field as well as at contests so they can get a better idea of what goes on.

During the summer, we try to have at least one picnic/month so the "none flying" members of a family can come out and see some of what the "flying member" does for the day.

All of this has been modeled after Euro clubs and tweaked a bit for our site.

Maybe Sean just has not seen some of what IS going on in clubs/operations in the US.

As to "rides" for new people, we usually try and let them do some of the flying while up.
If they do well and the weather is good, then we'll help them get set on final, then put our hands on their shoulders and talk them to a landing. The resulting grin is usually rather large.

PS, yes, I've flown at HHSC lots of times. Many times for the Snowbird as well as contests held there.

PPS, I started flying there in the early '70's, so the current club is the 3rd entity I've flown with at the same airport.

[Sean Fidler]

The same can be said of sailing but we still have female classification and it is wildly successful.

Women like competing with other women (in sailing for sure). They are not very prevalent right now in the USA and Canada. I can count the female glider pilots I know on one hand.

Obviously, worldwide women glider competition is more popular. To me it makes great sense. Women should be recognized when they do compete in the USA. It will encourage others.

[Sean Fidler]

Great post! The concept of a "catalyst" or "spark plug" is very important. It's also hard to quantify. It sometimes can be under-rated how important these kinds of people can be to local growth in many sports or groups. The kind of person who gives time, knowhow and encouragement and basically does whatever it takes to help others move forward (short of paying their bills).

Perhaps we need to more actively recognize and appreciate these folks wherever they may be at our annual convention. They are probably the glue that holds the sport together right now!

Sean

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 12:18:03 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Great post! The concept of a "catalyst" or "spark plug" is very important. It's also hard to quantify. It sometimes can be under-rated how important these kinds of people can be to local growth in many sports or groups. The kind of person who gives time, knowhow and encouragement and basically does whatever it takes to help others move forward (short of paying their bills).
>
> Perhaps we need to more actively recognize and appreciate these folks wherever they may be at our annual convention. They are probably the glue that holds the sport together right now!
>
> Sean

Not sure whom this was directed to..... but.... I know Hank has been honored before as has Dianne (by SSA).
VSC (as well as HHSC) have been honored in the past for their junior programs as well (by SSA).
In fact, I believe these 2 sites usually via against each other for their junior programs.

You are correct though, ANY site can "help promote the sport"! All it takes is one or more people that see a stranger, walk up and say, "Hi, how are you? Do you have any questions??" Some new people are hesitant to talk to strangers at a strange place (what could be stranger than flying, with some of us that are at the airport??, LOL......)

Sad but true story.....
I used to travel a LOT, I had a free weekend in the SW US. Went to a "local but known site" hoping I could do a flight/share costs for a cross country flight (I know they have great weather compared to the NE US).
I had generic clothes on, but a hat with a Gold "C" & 2 Diamonds pin on the front.
I hung around for a couple hours, helped move some gliders, etc.
Not ONCE did ANYONE come up to me and ask, "Hi, how are you? Do you have any questions??".
I had decided to see what they did as well as see if they picked up on the pin.
Needless to say, I didn't spend any money there...... At least, while it looked decent, overheard conversations were that it was not too good a day, thus I didn't push it.

[Frank Whiteley]

> > I think there is something that each of us could do in increasing the conversion rate of new XC and racing pilots.
> >
> > 9B
>
> Improvement at all stages -- intake, conversion & churn, should be improved by participants seeing clear goals ahead that they could achieve. For the most part this is XC flying in a nice ship, but there are other goals people could set themselves.
>
> One observation is that on your side of the pond, you refer to introductory flights as "sleigh rides." I've heard that, by default, the prospective pilot doesn't even get a stick to handle!
>
> If that's true, then no wonder the conversion rate is so low! In the era of high rises and budget commercial airline travel, sitting passively in (an ageing) glider just isn't very appealing to young people.
>
> Give them a "trial flight," get them on the controls, and allow them to see themselves flying a high performance ship in the future.
>
> That seed needs to be planted right from the get-go. Once it is planted, their own enthusiasm will do the rest.

Our clubs and chapters have been encouraged to offer introductory lessons over scenic flights. We have our Fly A Sailplane Today (FAST) package, which includes some materials, a log book, 1/2 hour ground lesson and 1/2 hour flight lesson and three-month SSA Introductory Membership (Soaring Magazine, website access, etc). Our committee encourages a local 'upgrade' for some additional dosh to make this a three-lesson 'FAST Plus' package and include a local introductory membership for a similar term (insurance reasons). After three logged lessons, there is a 'value-added' weight to that logbook, and with encouragement, many will become full members, especially if one of the lessons includes nice soaring sortie. Of course a reasonable cap on lessons as an 'intro' membership is recommended. But at least this will shake out those who are a good fit for the sport, for the club or chapter, and makes a bit of money. Scenic flights may be revenue positive, but deny members access to fleet and instruction although it may prepare a commercial pilot for becoming an instructor. Unfortunately we don't have a tiered instructor program like the BGA.

Frank Whiteley

[Frank Whiteley]

On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 7:28:28 AM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Every place I've flown in the USA has offered the stick to the
> customer.* In my experience the term, "sleigh ride", refers to
> flights when there is no lift available.* In that case we suggest a
> different time or day for the flight.* Often the suggestion is
> accepted but just as often not.* A lot of the people who come for a
> ride are simply checking off a box on their bucket list and there's
> no doubt they won't be returning.* For those who show the spark of
> enthusiasm, we go far out of our way to encourage them to return.
>
>
>
> In my case, as a prior experienced formation pilot, I was given the
> stick from the beginning of the takeoff roll to the end of the
> rollout.* The hook was deeply set for me and I immediately began
> taking lessons culminating in a commercial add-on rating.
>
>
>
>
> On 8/17/2015 6:11 AM,
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 7:21:35 PM UTC+1, Andy Blackburn wrote:
>
>
> On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 9:39:44 AM UTC-7, wrote:
>
>
> Reply to all 3 posts.
>
> Sean, how much fun actually flying gliders is doesn't matter that much to the initial "sale" An interested visitor will at most get a 20 minute "sleigh ride" in a glider but spend hours on the ground at the airfield. The thing that makes the "deal" possible is the environment at the gliderport. Unfortunately, most are fly blown armpits of creation populated by not very friendly people. Guess which one makes the biggest impression?. What to do is obvious.
>
> Yes, participation in all aspects of aviation is shrinking. Our bad press is mostly to blame. From the evening news to stand up comics, people are being frightened away from aviation. All of aviation needs to mount a PR campaign to offset this. We also need to become absolutely militant about reducing accidents. We are far too tolerant of unsafe practices.
>
> Dan, be very careful about overgeneralising. I did an informal survey in shopping malls observing about 1000 young people. My numbers say only about 10% were fiddling with cellphones. That's still a big number but it's not 100%. My impression is they do this when they are bored and have nothing else to do. We can give them something more interesting.
>
> Keep the overall numbers in mind. If 1,000 people walked onto US glider operations seeking flight training our infrastructure would be saturated. We just need to figure out how to find that 1,000 in a population of 310 million.
>
> Bill Daniels
>
>
> Bill and I talked about this at the Nationals a couple of years ago. There are three related challenges: intake, conversion and churn.
>
> - Intake is the number of people taking an introductory ride, or are ins some way given an initial introduction to the sport.
>
> - Conversion, is the percentage of people who transition to solo, licensed pilot, XC pilot, racing pilot.
>
> - Churn, is the number of people who get all the way through the conversion "funnel", are in the sport for a (short or long) while then drop out.
>
> The balance of these three effects determine the size of the racing pilot pool year by year.
>
> A big chunk of churn is related to demographics and aging of the baby boom, some is related to the pressures of modern life. Retaining an older pilot for a few more years only buys you a few more years, but given the current profile of the pilot community there might be some work to do.
>
> Intake is expensive, especially with a conversion rate like ours, which IIRC, is around 1% of those who are introduced to the sport actually become a licensed pilot, let alone a regular XC or racing pilot. This is partly a time and money issue, but at the higher levels it is one of finding a mentor to bring you along. At the RC meeting last year we hosted a gathering of local XC, OLC and racing pilots. The most profound comments were around the lack of an onramp to racing, to lean the skills by flying (following, really) a better pilot to see how it's done.
>
> Team flying using the radio is allowed at the regional level. For better or worse Flarm following has reduces some of the "where'd you go?" issues associated with flying with someone. It's kind of fun to run around the course with other pilots from time to time. Bruno's hybrid events have seen a higher proportion of pilots flying at least one, but seemingly more that one, of the assigned tasks as a learning experience - and because it allows you to fly with buddies.
>
> I think there is something that each of us could do in increasing the conversion rate of new XC and racing pilots.
>
> 9B
>
>
> Improvement at all stages -- intake, conversion & churn, should be improved by participants seeing clear goals ahead that they could achieve. For the most part this is XC flying in a nice ship, but there are other goals people could set themselves.
>
> One observation is that on your side of the pond, you refer to introductory flights as "sleigh rides." I've heard that, by default, the prospective pilot doesn't even get a stick to handle!
>
> If that's true, then no wonder the conversion rate is so low! In the era of high rises and budget commercial airline travel, sitting passively in (an ageing) glider just isn't very appealing to young people.
>
> Give them a "trial flight," get them on the controls, and allow them to see themselves flying a high performance ship in the future.
>
> That seed needs to be planted right from the get-go. Once it is planted, their own enthusiasm will do the rest.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dan Marotta

The SSA Group Plan does not allow club/chapter scenic passengers to manipulate the controls. Hence the FAST program.

Frank Whiteley

[Frank Whiteley]

On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 10:00:07 AM UTC-6, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
> On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 9:16:18 AM UTC-4, ND wrote:
>
> > Morning Sean,
> >
> > I think your comments about mirroring european soaring clubs definitely has some merit. At harris hill, I think a huge thing for our club is that we have a discus CS, and a Duo Discus, as well as a number of pilots who are active in cross country as a baseline. Even if your father/grandfather is not involved in this case, you still end up with access to high performance equipment, and people to guide you along.
> >
> > my first cross country was with roy mcmaster in our duo. after about 5-7 cross country flights on my own, i flew a HUGE flight (for me at the time) with tim welles and he offered some pointers. i did the flying, he critiqued, and i saw that if i made the right decisions i could go fly cross country all afternoon too.
> >
> > also, harris hill offers two gliders to junior members free of hourly charge: the discus CS and the SGS 1-34. for those reasons, we are able to expose our junior members to flying and make it very attractive to them from a cost standpoint. so we're getting a younger crowd involved. we have four members under 25 right now who have completed silver badges, and several more who are on their way with one or two of the legs done. The majority of them aren't from soaring families. bottom line, make it affordable, and give them access to the equipment. No way could my dad have afforded normal flying lessons for me when i was a teen. harris hill offered instructional flights when i was junior 13 years ago for 3 bucks a flight. that was offset with commercial rides, and subsidized by senior member rates.
> >
> > as far as drawing adults to the cross country aspect, it needs to be turnkey, people need the have the ability to advance quickly if they want so that they dont get bored. a good training program is helpful. we do instruction every wednesday night during the flying months so that senior members can get focused weekly instruction. in the winter we do a condor night, where we set up a server and 6-8 members join and fly a cross country flight. we always debrief those and talk about the decision making. it gets everyone involved juiced up for spring.
> >
> > the formula is the same in your example as mine. there needs to be equipment available, and mentors available. one reason we see people getting into cross country at harris hill is because there are several people who go on a regular basis. it creates a cross country environment. tim welles (W3) is an ironman and flies more regularly, and and in poorer weather, than most. i think it takes a catalyst in that regard. you need people who can shepherd and motivate others.
>
> HHSC is not the only one doing this.....
>
> Valley Soaring in Middletown, NY (where I fly) does similar.
>
> It started back in the '70's with the commercial operation (also called Valley Soaring) by helping out "kids".
> Basically, work a day, get a flight.
> Some regulars added some money to a "pot" to help offset some of the costs as well.
> This operation was started by Hank Nixon, his wife Dianne & Herb Reilly until it was turned into a club.
> Hank & I own SGS-1-26 SN 002 which we let juniors use for "free". They cut the grass in the tiedown, wash the glider, etc.
> Junior members at VS pay lower dues and tow rates. Instruction is also a lower rate.
>
> Once they get some more flying time, there are quite a few pilots that fly cross country and will lead other pilots around and help out.
> We also take people for cross country in a ASK-21 from our field as well as at contests so they can get a better idea of what goes on.
>
> During the summer, we try to have at least one picnic/month so the "none flying" members of a family can come out and see some of what the "flying member" does for the day.
>
> All of this has been modeled after Euro clubs and tweaked a bit for our site.
>
> Maybe Sean just has not seen some of what IS going on in clubs/operations in the US.
>
> As to "rides" for new people, we usually try and let them do some of the flying while up.
> If they do well and the weather is good, then we'll help them get set on final, then put our hands on their shoulders and talk them to a landing. The resulting grin is usually rather large.
>
> PS, yes, I've flown at HHSC lots of times. Many times for the Snowbird as well as contests held there.
>
> PPS, I started flying there in the early '70's, so the current club is the 3rd entity I've flown with at the same airport.

Texas Soaring Association has had an active youth program, with attendant youth 'earning' $10/hour credit toward their training for being there and helping. These programs can work very well with oversight.

Frank Whiteley

[Dan Stroschine]

Speaking as a pre-solo student with aspirations of doing XC I love the idea of creating at least a couple of levels. I don't know if we'd have enough contestants to fill six at my club, but at least a couple would work.

At our club there are some accomplished XC pilots that are incredibly nice and giving with knowledge. But the idea of 'competing' with them on a task that is designed to be challenging to them is quite intimidating. Of course I wouldn't expect to be at or close the bottom but if I don't have the experience I might not have a good idea as to my (or my planes) limits so the chances of me landing out trying because I thought I could make it would increase a lot.

It would be great to have a task that would challenge me (and other inexperienced XC'ers) without making it too easy for the competent ones. This could be a subset of turn points that make up a larger task. The more experienced groups progressively have more turn points/areas...

just my 0.5c

Dan

[[email protected]]

Some great ideas being discussed. Most require a "sparkplug" or two and a lot of dedication and time, and take a while to show positive results. Often those who are most interested in XC and competition are the least inclined to organize and drive these efforts although they're quite happy to support them.

Some years ago there was an annual intro-to-XC event held at Philadelphia Glider Council's facility. Classroom sessions (IIRC, Roy McMaster came down for it) followed by several task options with mentors, each of whom flew with 1-3 "students". A couple of students with a little more experience had Doug Jacobs as their mentor one year! Several of us who had been volunteered as mentors tried to convince the organizers that we could benefit more from flying with Doug than our students could with us. :)

Yes, obviously the participants had to have access to their own gliders, but many (most?) private owners don't fly cross country that much so this effort was targeted at them. One weekend enjoyed particularly good weather, which allowed us to get out on course and gain some real experience, including students getting low. Weather is obviously a huge imponderable when planning ahead.

I don't know what the stats were regarding effectiveness of the program but the Governor's Cup--a season-long competition around common courses in the PA/NJ/NY area anchored by half a dozen gliderports including PGC--took off about then and was a big draw for pilots of widely varying abilities.

One thing to keep in mind: it's not just exposing people to soaring and then converting them. I honestly don't know what the attrition rates are but we seem to lose a lot of pilots who are active for a while and then drop away. Having been out of soaring three times over the years, I can say it can be tough to stay with it no matter how much you enjoy it. It's expensive, takes an inordinate amount of time, isn't always family friendly, and is a lot of work. Yes, the truly motivated will persevere. It's the mortal rest of us who are sometimes diverted, not always by choice.

I've resumed soaring three times after lapses of 5, 3, and nearly 4 years and it's pretty daunting. HUGE thanks to Hank Nixon (already lauded for his work) and Erik Mann (heavily involved in the PGC experiment and driver of the G-Cup) who have kept in touch even when I wasn't flying, aided enormously when I undertook comebacks on my own, and provided the spark (shove) to get me moving the last time when I needed encouragement. The days of "paying your dues" by working your way up the ladder painfully slowly and "if someone really wants to fly badly enough, they'll find a way" are long past. There are too many other demands for our time/money in today's world.

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
U.S.A.

[Jim White[_3_]]

At 20:05 17 August 2015, Dan Stroschine wrote:
>Speaking as a pre-solo student with aspirations of doing XC I love the
>idea=
> of creating at least a couple of levels. I don't know if we'd have
enough
>=
>contestants to fill six at my club, but at least a couple would work.=20
>
>At our club there are some accomplished XC pilots that are incredibly
nice
>=
>and giving with knowledge. But the idea of 'competing' with them on a
task
>=
>that is designed to be challenging to them is quite intimidating. Of
>course=
> I wouldn't expect to be at or close the bottom but if I don't have the
>exp=
>erience I might not have a good idea as to my (or my planes) limits so
the
>=
>chances of me landing out trying because I thought I could make it would
>in=
>crease a lot.=20
>
>It would be great to have a task that would challenge me (and other
>inexper=
>ienced XC'ers) without making it too easy for the competent ones. This
>coul=
>d be a subset of turn points that make up a larger task. The more
>experienc=
>ed groups progressively have more turn points/areas...
>
>just my 0.5c
>
>Dan
>
This is exactly what handicap distance tasks where designed to, and do,
achieve

[Bruce Hoult]

On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 10:33:39 PM UTC+3, Frank Whiteley wrote:
> The SSA Group Plan does not allow club/chapter scenic passengers to manipulate the controls. Hence the FAST program.

The opposite in New Zealand. Scenic flights are not allowed. If you do not offer use of the controls during the flight then you are in danger of being reclassified as a commercial operation, not a club, and that means a whole other (much more onerous) maintenance and regulatory regime.

[[email protected]]

Hey Sean,

My club (Aero Club Albatross in Blairstown, NJ) does a great job inspiring pilots to take up cross country soaring. This is due to several reasons.

1) Cross Country flying is encouraged in club equipment.
2) There is an active group of cross country pilots that fly often, which consistently shows what can be done.
3) The social scene encourages people to stick around after landing, which helps in mentoring new folks and almost guaranteeing that someone will retrieve you if you land out.
4) Landouts are treated as an accomplishment, rather than a hassle and a burden.

One of the big reasons that my club is so relaxed about cross country flying in club equipment is due to its two 1-26Es. If you would like to get XC approved, the rules are quite simple. Get your Silver climb and duration in the 1-26 and then you are approved to do a Silver Distance. After completing your silver badge in a 1-26, you are free to fly XC in any glider that you are approved to fly.

This arrangement works out very nicely because the low-time pilots cut their teeth in a glider that is cheap, safe and durable. If they land out, they are unlikely to hurt it and if they do incur some minor damage, it isn't a big deal to the club because at the end of the day, it's still a 1-26. As a result, ACA encourages people to get on out there and fly rather than being reticent about cutting them loose.

Flying cross country in club equipment is a big reason why we retain membership. Our fleet allows people to progress from Schweizers through sleek German glass at low cost. It makes it a lot easier for people to really try out the sport and get hooked rather than being faced with the daunting decision of having to buy a glider before they are really ready to go headfirst into this activity.

I am forever thankful that I am fortunate enough to be a member of such an awesome club and incredible soaring site.

Daniel

[Papa3[_2_]]

On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 12:49:08 PM UTC-4, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
> On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 12:18:03 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> > Great post! The concept of a "catalyst" or "spark plug" is very important. It's also hard to quantify. It sometimes can be under-rated how important these kinds of people can be to local growth in many sports or groups.. The kind of person who gives time, knowhow and encouragement and basically does whatever it takes to help others move forward (short of paying their bills).
> >
> > Perhaps we need to more actively recognize and appreciate these folks wherever they may be at our annual convention. They are probably the glue that holds the sport together right now!
> >
> > Sean
>
> Not sure whom this was directed to..... but.... I know Hank has been honored before as has Dianne (by SSA).
> VSC (as well as HHSC) have been honored in the past for their junior programs as well (by SSA).
> In fact, I believe these 2 sites usually via against each other for their junior programs.
>
> You are correct though, ANY site can "help promote the sport"! All it takes is one or more people that see a stranger, walk up and say, "Hi, how are you? Do you have any questions??" Some new people are hesitant to talk to strangers at a strange place (what could be stranger than flying, with some of us that are at the airport??, LOL......)
>
> Sad but true story.....
> I used to travel a LOT, I had a free weekend in the SW US. Went to a "local but known site" hoping I could do a flight/share costs for a cross country flight (I know they have great weather compared to the NE US).
> I had generic clothes on, but a hat with a Gold "C" & 2 Diamonds pin on the front.
> I hung around for a couple hours, helped move some gliders, etc.
> Not ONCE did ANYONE come up to me and ask, "Hi, how are you? Do you have any questions??".
> I had decided to see what they did as well as see if they picked up on the pin.
> Needless to say, I didn't spend any money there...... At least, while it looked decent, overheard conversations were that it was not too good a day, thus I didn't push it.

I do think we sometimes make it more complicated than we need to. There's no silver bullet - it's a lot of hard work by a relatively few people that typically moves the ball forward. I suspect (though I don't have data to prove it) that my local SSA Region (Region 2) does disproportionately well in terms of getting folks into XC. That has to do with basically 2 or 3 locations that really go out of their way to mentor XC pilots, two Regionals (Mifflin and Wurtsboro) that really cater to newcomers, a very active decentralized contest (the Governor's Cup) and a few people who work really hard to push newcomers to "convert".

I don't think equipment is as much of a problem as some folks would like to believe. It would be nice, since it would "just" mean more money.

If I get around to it I'll publish the results of a survey I did two years ago. At least in this region, a surprising number of pilots do go XC, though not that many of them participate in either contests or the OLC.

Erik Mann (P3)

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 9:16:18 AM UTC-4, ND wrote:

> Morning Sean,
>
> I think your comments about mirroring european soaring clubs definitely has some merit. At harris hill, I think a huge thing for our club is that we have a discus CS, and a Duo Discus, as well as a number of pilots who are active in cross country as a baseline. Even if your father/grandfather is not involved in this case, you still end up with access to high performance equipment, and people to guide you along.
>
> my first cross country was with roy mcmaster in our duo. after about 5-7 cross country flights on my own, i flew a HUGE flight (for me at the time) with tim welles and he offered some pointers. i did the flying, he critiqued, and i saw that if i made the right decisions i could go fly cross country all afternoon too.
>
> also, harris hill offers two gliders to junior members free of hourly charge: the discus CS and the SGS 1-34. for those reasons, we are able to expose our junior members to flying and make it very attractive to them from a cost standpoint. so we're getting a younger crowd involved. we have four members under 25 right now who have completed silver badges, and several more who are on their way with one or two of the legs done. The majority of them aren't from soaring families. bottom line, make it affordable, and give them access to the equipment. No way could my dad have afforded normal flying lessons for me when i was a teen. harris hill offered instructional flights when i was junior 13 years ago for 3 bucks a flight. that was offset with commercial rides, and subsidized by senior member rates.
>
> as far as drawing adults to the cross country aspect, it needs to be turnkey, people need the have the ability to advance quickly if they want so that they dont get bored. a good training program is helpful. we do instruction every wednesday night during the flying months so that senior members can get focused weekly instruction. in the winter we do a condor night, where we set up a server and 6-8 members join and fly a cross country flight. we always debrief those and talk about the decision making. it gets everyone involved juiced up for spring.
>
> the formula is the same in your example as mine. there needs to be equipment available, and mentors available. one reason we see people getting into cross country at harris hill is because there are several people who go on a regular basis. it creates a cross country environment. tim welles (W3) is an ironman and flies more regularly, and and in poorer weather, than most.. i think it takes a catalyst in that regard. you need people who can shepherd and motivate others.

HHSC is not the only one doing this.....

Valley Soaring in Middletown, NY (where I fly) does similar.

It started back in the '70's with the commercial operation (also called Valley Soaring) by helping out "kids".
Basically, work a day, get a flight.
Some regulars added some money to a "pot" to help offset some of the costs as well.
This operation was started by Hank Nixon, his wife Dianne & Herb Reilly until it was turned into a club.
Hank & I own SGS-1-26 SN 002 which we let juniors use for "free". They cut the grass in the tiedown, wash the glider, etc.
Junior members at VS pay lower dues and tow rates. Instruction is also a lower rate.

Once they get some more flying time, there are quite a few pilots that fly cross country and will lead other pilots around and help out.
We also take people for cross country in a ASK-21 from our field as well as at contests so they can get a better idea of what goes on.

During the summer, we try to have at least one picnic/month so the "none flying" members of a family can come out and see some of what the "flying member" does for the day.

All of this has been modeled after Euro clubs and tweaked a bit for our site.

Maybe Sean just has not seen some of what IS going on in clubs/operations in the US.

As to "rides" for new people, we usually try and let them do some of the flying while up.
The resulting grin is usually rather large.

PS, yes, I've flown at HHSC lots of times. Many times for the Snowbird as well as contests held there.

PPS, I started flying there in the early '70's, so the current club is the 3rd entity I've flown with at the same airport.

[Frank Whiteley]

On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 5:14:20 PM UTC-6, Bruce Hoult wrote:
> On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 10:33:39 PM UTC+3, Frank Whiteley wrote:
> > The SSA Group Plan does not allow club/chapter scenic passengers to manipulate the controls. Hence the FAST program.
>
> The opposite in New Zealand. Scenic flights are not allowed. If you do not offer use of the controls during the flight then you are in danger of being reclassified as a commercial operation, not a club, and that means a whole other (much more onerous) maintenance and regulatory regime.

Interesting approach. The baseline for insurance here is commercial coverage. Under our SSA Group Plan, a club with 100% SSA members receives a discount, but will have some constraints, e.g., rides okay by current commercial rated pilot (and other FAA compliance such as Type Certificated glider, 100-hour inspections) but membership required to manipulate the controls. There are other insurance options, and other approaches. At least one club requires all members to have renter/non-owner insurance. This also allows members to fly with local commercial operations. This coverage is included under our group plan for private owners up to the insured limits of their hull value. The thinking behind the ride coverage is expectation of performance when the passenger pays for the service and how will the courts find that this expectation is met in case of a claim.

Frank Whiteley

[Bruce Hoult]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:43:38 AM UTC+3, wrote:
> One of the big reasons that my club is so relaxed about cross country flying in club equipment is due to its two 1-26Es. If you would like to get XC approved, the rules are quite simple. Get your Silver climb and duration in the 1-26 and then you are approved to do a Silver Distance. After completing your silver badge in a 1-26, you are free to fly XC in any glider that you are approved to fly.

Things work a bit differently at my club.

I'm not aware of any formal requirement to demonstrate soaring ability in order to go cross country. The requirement is to demonstrate ability to make a circuit and short precision landing over an obstacle (fence at least) to a place you haven't previously landed. This could be an unused corner of the airfield, or a nearby field with a friendly farmer (bonus points if it's far enough away in a suitable direction that you might actually need it in anger later). Cross country ratings are given for each glider type -- you might be allowed to take the PW5 cross country, but only fly the DG1000 locally.

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 03:04:30 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:

> On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:43:38 AM UTC+3,
> wrote:
>> One of the big reasons that my club is so relaxed about cross country
>> flying in club equipment is due to its two 1-26Es. If you would like to
>> get XC approved, the rules are quite simple. Get your Silver climb and
>> duration in the 1-26 and then you are approved to do a Silver Distance.
>> After completing your silver badge in a 1-26, you are free to fly XC in
>> any glider that you are approved to fly.
>
> Things work a bit differently at my club.
>
> I'm not aware of any formal requirement to demonstrate soaring ability
> in order to go cross country. The requirement is to demonstrate ability
> to make a circuit and short precision landing over an obstacle (fence at
> least) to a place you haven't previously landed. This could be an unused
> corner of the airfield, or a nearby field with a friendly farmer (bonus
> points if it's far enough away in a suitable direction that you might
> actually need it in anger later). Cross country ratings are given for
> each glider type -- you might be allowed to take the PW5 cross country,
> but only fly the DG1000 locally.

In the UK a lot of the preliminaries are covered by the BGA's Bronze
Badge, which as two parts:

Part 1
- 50 solo flights or 20 flights and 10 hours
- two soaring flights of 30mins each off a winch or 60mins from an aero
tow of 2000ft or less
- followed by
- three check flights with an instructor including stall&spin
checks, launch failure recovery
- two demonstrated field landings with altimeter covered.
May be done on the airfield but using a part that isn't a usual
landing area or approach
- a written test on Air Law and General flying
- the lot to be completed within 12 months.

Part 2 (XC endorsement)
- a one hour and a two hour soaring flight
- field selection, field landing and navigation exercises,
usually done in a motor glider.

At my club a new solo pilot converts to the SZD Juniors after 5 solos and
flying checks on the ASK-21 and almost immediately starts working on the
Bronze Badge, which gives them something concrete to aim at after solo.
They are encouraged to start work on their Silver Badge at the same time,
because both Silver height gain and duration can be done without leaving
the home field and, if conditions are suitable, Silver distance can be
attempted as soon as the Bronze XC endorsement has been signed off.

Then they're encouraged to go for the BGA 100km diploma, usually in a
club single seater (we have two Juniors, Pegase 90, Discus and ASW-24).
The 100 km diploma has 2 parts (a) flying the 100 km as a triangle or out
& return and (b) a similar flight with a handicapped speed of 65km/h or
faster. I did both parts in the club Pegase in a single flight on a
really good day: flew a 109km triangle, turned round and went round it
again in the opposite direction. The second time round was fast enough
for part B.

Last but not least, there's the InterClub League, in which the clubs in a
locality fly in a series of weekend competitions, with each club hosting
one of them. Each club enters teams of three:
- pundit (anybody can fly - no experience restrictions)
- intermediate (must not have flown a 500km Diamond distance or a
Nationals level competition)
- novice (must not have flown a 300km Gold task or a rated competition)

It seems to me that the InterClub League format might be something that
would work well in the US scene since it involves relatively small tasks,
lets pilots at various levels compete against each other and gives them
the experience of flying from different fields.


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

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 11:09:43 AM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> From another thread recently, thought it might be a good topic to paw around with everyone...
>
> For me, soaring is great fun. I've been doing it consistently for about 5 years now. I've met a bunch of amazing, great, kind people and have learned a tremendous amount about the sport (light years left to go). Thru and thru, as a group, soaring pilots, their friends and family are among the nicest, smartest most interesting people I have ever met. I am attracted to this immensely.
>
> Part of the reason I have devoted time and energy to the sport is that am truly inspired by what competition/cross country pilots are capable of doing in gliders. I am still fascinated by it and want to be a part of it. This, for me, was huge. Glider pilots are amazing pilots, PERIOD.
>
> I probably never would have truly learned of the sport (and what it really is at the highest levels), or been so attracted to it if my dad was not involved. Having a family member with a high performance glider, flying it regularly and promoting how amazing the sport could be all the time was key.. Having access to a high performance glider and a group of local friends who could mentor me and take me out on cross country flights shortly after I got my license was the key moment. Would I have got my license if the motivation was just flying around the airport? Probably not.
>
> Those experiences flying with the Ionio boys on short, mentored cross country's "set the hook" for me and eventually led to me buying a glider so that I could fly with everyone rather than leave my dad back at the airport whenever I was flying. Of course once I bought my first glider so I could fly with this gang regularly, the learning curve grew dramatically. The hook set deeper. And so on.
>
> Flying clubs are important to US soaring "health" I suppose but they also seem to lack in areas. They often don't have much to offer in terms of even moderate performance gliders. They often don't promote or in some cases even allow cross country.
>
> It seems that European clubs are more into cross country which is more challenging and more rewarding than local flight, which I think gets old after a year or so. If some inspirational figure is not actively encouraging and facilitating cross country glider flight (the whole point of the sport I think) at that key moment in a glider pilots career, I think they come to the conclusion that they have checked the box and move on.
>
> Obviously without glider clubs more focused on taking pilots into cross country levels, one has to have the financial means to do it on their own. I dont see that as a real problem as numerous 40:1 gliders are available for the same price as a small sailboat or powerboat, which almost everybody seems to have these days (jet skis, snowmobiles, etc). It's a matter of priority. Gliders I suppose are for one person (usually) where a boat (or other rec toy) is for the whole family.
>
> But Europe seems to have an entirely different dynamic with respect to soaring. More youth, larger numbers, etc. U.S. numbers have been steadily declining for 25 years.
>
> One thing I learned in business school. It's often better to adopt successful competitors methods even if at first you don't fully understand them yet. Our clubs (and the SSA) should be talking to European clubs and picking their brains for advise. I wonder how many have actually done that. Perhaps take a trip to Europe on summer and spend a few weeks with a successful club, talk to the people, etc.
>
> Oddly, my flying is at a location that actually IDs itself as IONIA NON CLUB. They don't like the politics. :-).
>
> The rules is a small thing overall but debating the rules is an important thing in terms of competition pilots. My suggestions usually would make getting into competition soaring simpler for the new pilot. I do think our rules are too complicated, but the rule makers are all GREAT PEOPLE, working hard and want nothing but the best for our sport.
>
> Sean
> 7T

How do you motivate pilots to fly X-C? You don't. Such a desire has to be innate. For us who think cross country flying is a sport too good for kings, it is hard to understand why it has no appeal to others, especially others who do, in fact like to fly. But that's the way it is, and you aren't going to change it. When instructing, I have always included X-C instruction to some degree in every flight, even if it was merely to point out where NOT to go or why this particular day wasn't good for leaving the area. I have always tried to go as far away from the airport as possible and still remain within gliding distance of a normal pattern.
Our BRSS has several club ships with good X-C performance, and many club pilots with the requisite skills to leave the airport. It doesn't happen.
This year we set up a X-C OLC to encourage club pilots to leave the nest. Here are the rules:

BRSS OLC Annual Award
This award will be presented at the BRSS AGM to the club member with the highest OLC score (above minumum) for the OLC period ending at the close of the OLC year . (mid Sept-mid Sept is currently the OLC year.) The minumum score for the award is a total of 300km.
A club member may only win the award once in a three year period.

This award is open to all club members who have never had an SSA competition ranking of 50 or greater. In a two-place glider, neither occupant may have ever had a ranking of 50 or higher. Distance in a two-place glider scores for only the PIC. In other words, only one pilot may claim the distance..

_______________________________________

We got two Nano3's for club use. We laid out short, ultrasafe circuits that would still give enough distance to score on OLC. We held a X-C lecture taylored to those who we thought might be interested.

So how has our program worked? It hasn't. To date, not one taker, not one X-C flight.
I wish that I could share X-C experience with more of my club members. It gets lonely flying all by myself all the time. But that's the way it is, and I don't see any change. But checking OLC in the evening after my flights, I see that there really are a lot of you out there flying X-C too, and it gives a sense of fellowship and comraderie.

And for the guys who are thrilled just to lull around for hours over New Castle - well, you couldn't pick a prettier place. I wish I could be so content.

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 10:01:23 PM UTC-4, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
> On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 9:16:18 AM UTC-4, ND wrote:
>
> > Morning Sean,
> >
> > I think your comments about mirroring european soaring clubs definitely has some merit. At harris hill, I think a huge thing for our club is that we have a discus CS, and a Duo Discus, as well as a number of pilots who are active in cross country as a baseline. Even if your father/grandfather is not involved in this case, you still end up with access to high performance equipment, and people to guide you along.
> >
> > my first cross country was with roy mcmaster in our duo. after about 5-7 cross country flights on my own, i flew a HUGE flight (for me at the time) with tim welles and he offered some pointers. i did the flying, he critiqued, and i saw that if i made the right decisions i could go fly cross country all afternoon too.
> >
> > also, harris hill offers two gliders to junior members free of hourly charge: the discus CS and the SGS 1-34. for those reasons, we are able to expose our junior members to flying and make it very attractive to them from a cost standpoint. so we're getting a younger crowd involved. we have four members under 25 right now who have completed silver badges, and several more who are on their way with one or two of the legs done. The majority of them aren't from soaring families. bottom line, make it affordable, and give them access to the equipment. No way could my dad have afforded normal flying lessons for me when i was a teen. harris hill offered instructional flights when i was junior 13 years ago for 3 bucks a flight. that was offset with commercial rides, and subsidized by senior member rates.
> >
> > as far as drawing adults to the cross country aspect, it needs to be turnkey, people need the have the ability to advance quickly if they want so that they dont get bored. a good training program is helpful. we do instruction every wednesday night during the flying months so that senior members can get focused weekly instruction. in the winter we do a condor night, where we set up a server and 6-8 members join and fly a cross country flight. we always debrief those and talk about the decision making. it gets everyone involved juiced up for spring.
> >
> > the formula is the same in your example as mine. there needs to be equipment available, and mentors available. one reason we see people getting into cross country at harris hill is because there are several people who go on a regular basis. it creates a cross country environment. tim welles (W3) is an ironman and flies more regularly, and and in poorer weather, than most. i think it takes a catalyst in that regard. you need people who can shepherd and motivate others.
>
> HHSC is not the only one doing this.....
>
> Valley Soaring in Middletown, NY (where I fly) does similar.
>
> It started back in the '70's with the commercial operation (also called Valley Soaring) by helping out "kids".
> Basically, work a day, get a flight.
> Some regulars added some money to a "pot" to help offset some of the costs as well.
> This operation was started by Hank Nixon, his wife Dianne & Herb Reilly until it was turned into a club.
> Hank & I own SGS-1-26 SN 002 which we let juniors use for "free". They cut the grass in the tiedown, wash the glider, etc.
> Junior members at VS pay lower dues and tow rates. Instruction is also a lower rate.
>
> Once they get some more flying time, there are quite a few pilots that fly cross country and will lead other pilots around and help out.
> We also take people for cross country in a ASK-21 from our field as well as at contests so they can get a better idea of what goes on.
>
> During the summer, we try to have at least one picnic/month so the "none flying" members of a family can come out and see some of what the "flying member" does for the day.
>
> All of this has been modeled after Euro clubs and tweaked a bit for our site.
>
> Maybe Sean just has not seen some of what IS going on in clubs/operations in the US.
>
> PS, yes, I've flown at HHSC lots of times. Many times for the Snowbird as well as contests held there.
>
> PPS, I started flying there in the early '70's, so the current club is the 3rd entity I've flown with at the same airport.

Fix some typos....

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 9:16:18 AM UTC-4, ND wrote:

> Morning Sean,
>
> I think your comments about mirroring European soaring clubs definitely has some merit. At Harris Hill, I think a huge thing for our club is that we have a discus CS, and a Duo Discus, as well as a number of pilots who are active in cross country as a baseline. Even if your father/grandfather is not involved in this case, you still end up with access to high performance equipment, and people to guide you along.
>
> my first cross country was with Roy McMaster in our duo. after about 5-7 cross country flights on my own, i flew a HUGE flight (for me at the time) with Tim Welles and he offered some pointers. i did the flying, he critiqued, and i saw that if i made the right decisions i could go fly cross country all afternoon too.
>
> also, Harris Hill offers two gliders to junior members free of hourly charge: the discus CS and the SGS 1-34. for those reasons, we are able to expose our junior members to flying and make it very attractive to them from a cost standpoint. so we're getting a younger crowd involved. we have four members under 25 right now who have completed silver badges, and several more who are on their way with one or two of the legs done. The majority of them aren't from soaring families. bottom line, make it affordable, and give them access to the equipment. No way could my dad have afforded normal flying lessons for me when i was a teen. Harris Hill offered instructional flights when i was junior 13 years ago for 3 bucks a flight. that was offset with commercial rides, and subsidized by senior member rates.
>
> As far as drawing adults to the cross country aspect, it needs to be turnkey, people need the have the ability to advance quickly if they want so that they don't get bored. a good training program is helpful. we do instruction every Wednesday night during the flying months so that senior members can get focused weekly instruction. in the winter we do a condor night, where we set up a server and 6-8 members join and fly a cross country flight. we always debrief those and talk about the decision making. it gets everyone involved juiced up for spring.
>
> The formula is the same in your example as mine. there needs to be equipment available, and mentors available. one reason we see people getting into cross country at Harris Hill is because there are several people who go on a regular basis. it creates a cross country environment. Tim Welles (W3) is an ironman and flies more regularly, and and in poorer weather, than most.. i think it takes a catalyst in that regard. you need people who can shepherd and motivate others.

************

HHSC is not the only one doing this.....

Valley Soaring in Middletown, NY (where I fly) does similar.

It started back in the '70's with the commercial operation (also called Valley Soaring) by helping out "kids".
Basically, work a day, get a flight.
Some regulars added some money to a "pot" to help offset some of the costs as well.
This operation was started by Hank Nixon, his wife Dianne & Herb Reilly until it was turned into a club.
Hank & I own SGS-1-26 SN 002 which we let juniors use for "free". They cut the grass in the tiedown, wash the glider, etc.
Junior members at VS pay lower dues and tow rates. Instruction is also a lower rate.

Once they get some more flying time, there are quite a few pilots that fly cross country and will lead other pilots around and help out.
We also take people for cross country in a ASK-21 from our field as well as at contests so they can get a better idea of what goes on.

During the summer, we try to have at least one picnic/month so the "none flying" members of a family can come out and see some of what the "flying member" does for the day.

All of this has been modeled after Euro clubs and tweaked a bit for our site.

Maybe Sean just has not seen some of what IS going on in clubs/operations in the US.

PS, yes, I've flown at HHSC lots of times. Many times for the Snowbird as well as contests held there.

PPS, I started flying there in the early '70's, so the current club is the 3rd entity I've flown with at the same airport.

[Sarah Arnold]

I am one of those few female glider racers and am friends with the others. I don't think any of us would appreciate being scored separately. Junior classing makes sense because the young ones have had a limited number of years to learn the sport. I'm interested in flying Women's World Gliding Championships because of the prestige a win would bring the US Team not because I think women belong in a different category.

Sarah Arnold
(the infamous racing pilot)

[Frank Whiteley]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 5:36:33 AM UTC-6, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 03:04:30 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:43:38 AM UTC+3,
> > wrote:
> >> One of the big reasons that my club is so relaxed about cross country
> >> flying in club equipment is due to its two 1-26Es. If you would like to
> >> get XC approved, the rules are quite simple. Get your Silver climb and
> >> duration in the 1-26 and then you are approved to do a Silver Distance.
> >> After completing your silver badge in a 1-26, you are free to fly XC in
> >> any glider that you are approved to fly.
> >
> > Things work a bit differently at my club.
> >
> > I'm not aware of any formal requirement to demonstrate soaring ability
> > in order to go cross country. The requirement is to demonstrate ability
> > to make a circuit and short precision landing over an obstacle (fence at
> > least) to a place you haven't previously landed. This could be an unused
> > corner of the airfield, or a nearby field with a friendly farmer (bonus
> > points if it's far enough away in a suitable direction that you might
> > actually need it in anger later). Cross country ratings are given for
> > each glider type -- you might be allowed to take the PW5 cross country,
> > but only fly the DG1000 locally.
>
> In the UK a lot of the preliminaries are covered by the BGA's Bronze
> Badge, which as two parts:
>
> Part 1
> - 50 solo flights or 20 flights and 10 hours
> - two soaring flights of 30mins each off a winch or 60mins from an aero
> tow of 2000ft or less
> - followed by
> - three check flights with an instructor including stall&spin
> checks, launch failure recovery
> - two demonstrated field landings with altimeter covered.
> May be done on the airfield but using a part that isn't a usual
> landing area or approach
> - a written test on Air Law and General flying
> - the lot to be completed within 12 months.
>
> Part 2 (XC endorsement)
> - a one hour and a two hour soaring flight
> - field selection, field landing and navigation exercises,
> usually done in a motor glider.
>
> At my club a new solo pilot converts to the SZD Juniors after 5 solos and
> flying checks on the ASK-21 and almost immediately starts working on the
> Bronze Badge, which gives them something concrete to aim at after solo.
> They are encouraged to start work on their Silver Badge at the same time,
> because both Silver height gain and duration can be done without leaving
> the home field and, if conditions are suitable, Silver distance can be
> attempted as soon as the Bronze XC endorsement has been signed off.
>
> Then they're encouraged to go for the BGA 100km diploma, usually in a
> club single seater (we have two Juniors, Pegase 90, Discus and ASW-24).
> The 100 km diploma has 2 parts (a) flying the 100 km as a triangle or out
> & return and (b) a similar flight with a handicapped speed of 65km/h or
> faster. I did both parts in the club Pegase in a single flight on a
> really good day: flew a 109km triangle, turned round and went round it
> again in the opposite direction. The second time round was fast enough
> for part B.
>
> Last but not least, there's the InterClub League, in which the clubs in a
> locality fly in a series of weekend competitions, with each club hosting
> one of them. Each club enters teams of three:
> - pundit (anybody can fly - no experience restrictions)
> - intermediate (must not have flown a 500km Diamond distance or a
> Nationals level competition)
> - novice (must not have flown a 300km Gold task or a rated competition)
>
> It seems to me that the InterClub League format might be something that
> would work well in the US scene since it involves relatively small tasks,
> lets pilots at various levels compete against each other and gives them
> the experience of flying from different fields.
>
>
> --
> martin@ | Martin Gregorie
> gregorie. | Essex, UK
> org |

Speaking of the Interclub League
http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/sport/devon_and_somerset_gliding_soar_to_new_heights_in_ inter_club_league_1_4198025

[Sean Fidler]

Hmmmmm. Last I checked, I did not see a large crowd of US female pilots who compete with the men. SKA is a fairly unique person! We need dozens more!

The reason why women are not competing in US contests is an interesting discussion point (new thread?). It is not a physical thing of course. In fact women have a physical advantage (in addition to their mental/emotional strengths!). It's also not a financial thing. So, what is it? I believe that both Europe and Australia have far more women competing in contests.

Personally, I would think that if: A) women's soaring was to grow in the US someday and B) 5-10 women were attending a future US contest...many of those women would appreciate a separate women's classification in the same way juniors would. Maybe I am wrong but I would definitely want to hear from "other women" as well when/if they hopefully materialize some day.

Remember, I am proposing an overall scoring for everyone (as normal) but individual clasifications (per suggestions) for beginner, various SSA ranking levels and of course feminine.

IOW, if we magically had 3 women at a contest in 2016, they should get a gold, silver and bronze medal no matter what their overall scores happen to be! They should be celebrated along with Jr's and beginners! Building numbers these competition categories (beginners, juniors and women) at our future events Is FAR MORE important to the US Soaring community than overall winners.

We simply have to do something significant to stem this tide of shrinking or stale numbers. It costs nothing to try these ideas. If it fails, so what? Let's not continue to sit on our hands in almost every aspect of our organization. We need some big ideas and some serious innovation. The sport of soaring is incredible...we need to market it and compete. Simple as that.

Just my opinion of course!

Sean
7T

[WAVEGURU]

Maybe the answer is to quit keeping score at all and everybody should get a trophy the way it is in American schools today? ;^)

Boggs

[Tango Eight]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:12:55 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Hmmmmm. Last I checked, I did not see a large crowd of US female pilots who compete with the men. SKA is a fairly unique person! We need dozens more!
>
> The reason why women are not competing in US contests is an interesting discussion point (new thread?). It is not a physical thing of course. In fact women have a physical advantage (in addition to their mental/emotional strengths!). It's also not a financial thing. So, what is it? I believe that both Europe and Australia have far more women competing in contests.
>
> Personally, I would think that if: A) women's soaring was to grow in the US someday and B) 5-10 women were attending a future US contest...many of those women would appreciate a separate women's classification in the same way juniors would. Maybe I am wrong but I would definitely want to hear from "other women" as well when/if they hopefully materialize some day.
>
> Remember, I am proposing an overall scoring for everyone (as normal) but individual clasifications (per suggestions) for beginner, various SSA ranking levels and of course feminine.
>
> IOW, if we magically had 3 women at a contest in 2016, they should get a gold, silver and bronze medal no matter what their overall scores happen to be! They should be celebrated along with Jr's and beginners! Building numbers these competition categories (beginners, juniors and women) at our future events Is FAR MORE important to the US Soaring community than overall winners.
>
> We simply have to do something significant to stem this tide of shrinking or stale numbers. It costs nothing to try these ideas. If it fails, so what? Let's not continue to sit on our hands in almost every aspect of our organization. We need some big ideas and some serious innovation. The sport of soaring is incredible...we need to market it and compete. Simple as that.
>
> Just my opinion of course!
>
> Sean
> 7T

You can't even stay on your own topic :-).

I'm much more interested in promoting XC. Competition is just one little piece of the whole.

People are just lazy. That's my opinion. My evidence includes the fact that one can join my own club (including one time initiation) for about 1/2 what most of us pay to insure *old* gliders and (when qualified) get the keys to an HpH 304c. Yep, a real, live 40+:1 glass slipper, equipped for basic XC and with a serviceable trailer too. The number of people who grab this opportunity is astonishingly small. Those that do almost invariably get smitten with the sport and move whatever pieces of heaven and earth are required to procure their own high performance glider (leaving the 304 available for the next convert!).

Most people, most *pilots* just don't want to put in the work.

It simply isn't possible to provide more encouragement than we already do.

Evan Ludeman / T8

[Sean Fidler]

No! I'm not saying that at all!!!

[Sean Fidler]

I can't disagree that a majority of people are generally pretty lazy. They generally want to be the master of the "sport"' or "activity" in minutes or hours, not months or years.

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 1:20:03 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> I can't disagree that a majority of people are generally pretty lazy. They generally want to be the master of the "sport"' or "activity" in minutes or hours, not months or years.

They also want to feel assured of a predictable favorable result pretty much all the time. That is, I think, why the list of people who want to go XC with me is very long, yet those that go by themselves later is much much shorter.
The worry about landing out is a really big deterrent, even where we fly in an area with a lot of airports to land on.
The best we can do is find the live ones and bring them along.
UH

[Tango Eight]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:41:16 PM UTC-4, Tango Eight wrote:
>
> It simply isn't possible to provide more encouragement than we already do.
>
> Evan Ludeman / T8

I forgot to mention: among the inducements is a chance to go fly the White Mountains -- the only real alpine soaring to be found in the Eastern US -- with airport landing options the whole way. It's the best XC milk run in the known universe.

Easy day: http://tinyurl.com/poj7tlk

Less easy day: http://tinyurl.com/ptx3lle

But objectively, we're the weirdos. Most people don't want to do this.

Evan Ludeman / T8

[Andrzej Kobus]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:41:16 PM UTC-4, Tango Eight wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:12:55 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> > Hmmmmm. Last I checked, I did not see a large crowd of US female pilots who compete with the men. SKA is a fairly unique person! We need dozens more!
> >
> > The reason why women are not competing in US contests is an interesting discussion point (new thread?). It is not a physical thing of course. In fact women have a physical advantage (in addition to their mental/emotional strengths!). It's also not a financial thing. So, what is it? I believe that both Europe and Australia have far more women competing in contests.
> >
> > Personally, I would think that if: A) women's soaring was to grow in the US someday and B) 5-10 women were attending a future US contest...many of those women would appreciate a separate women's classification in the same way juniors would. Maybe I am wrong but I would definitely want to hear from "other women" as well when/if they hopefully materialize some day.
> >
> > Remember, I am proposing an overall scoring for everyone (as normal) but individual clasifications (per suggestions) for beginner, various SSA ranking levels and of course feminine.
> >
> > IOW, if we magically had 3 women at a contest in 2016, they should get a gold, silver and bronze medal no matter what their overall scores happen to be! They should be celebrated along with Jr's and beginners! Building numbers these competition categories (beginners, juniors and women) at our future events Is FAR MORE important to the US Soaring community than overall winners.
> >
> > We simply have to do something significant to stem this tide of shrinking or stale numbers. It costs nothing to try these ideas. If it fails, so what? Let's not continue to sit on our hands in almost every aspect of our organization. We need some big ideas and some serious innovation. The sport of soaring is incredible...we need to market it and compete. Simple as that.
> >
> > Just my opinion of course!
> >
> > Sean
> > 7T
>
> You can't even stay on your own topic :-).
>
> I'm much more interested in promoting XC. Competition is just one little piece of the whole.
>
> People are just lazy. That's my opinion. My evidence includes the fact that one can join my own club (including one time initiation) for about 1/2 what most of us pay to insure *old* gliders and (when qualified) get the keys to an HpH 304c. Yep, a real, live 40+:1 glass slipper, equipped for basic XC and with a serviceable trailer too. The number of people who grab this opportunity is astonishingly small. Those that do almost invariably get smitten with the sport and move whatever pieces of heaven and earth are required to procure their own high performance glider (leaving the 304 available for the next convert!).
>
> Most people, most *pilots* just don't want to put in the work.
>
> It simply isn't possible to provide more encouragement than we already do..
>
> Evan Ludeman / T8

Evan, your club's approach is working! Why are you saying people are too lazy? Some got converted. For such a small club you probably have higher conversion rate than most clubs.
Andrzej

[RR]

I think it has been said, but if the culture of the club is an XC culture, then you will fledge more pilots. I fly with the Greater Boston Soaring Club. We are a large club, and have many regular XC pilots. When I started to fly with GBSC I joined the board, and made a few policy suggestions that would promote XC in the club. A fellow board member commented, "Promote XC, don't we discourage XC". And I think he was right, our policy's made it difficult, at the time I think I was the only cross country pilot on the board. Even with that headwind, we have made significant improvements in policy, and training. We have far to go, but the trailer trash end of the field is getting larger all the time.

Things we have done that helped.

Set up a XC mentor "dating service". If you are new, don't know the folks that are rigging their own gliders, I would match up a member that expressed interest in learning XC and matched them up with an experienced pilot. They could ask questions, perhaps get some encouragement etc.

We have 3 encampments each year, 2 "somewhat" focused on badge flying. One at Mifflin, and one at Mt Washington. A place like Mifflin where the off field options are so good, can ease the fear of leaving the nest.

We have put on a winter (or early spring) XC ground school. We put on a two evening presentation. The usual stuff, thermaling, fly to the next airport, call it home, repeat. Roy Bourgeois has a great off field landing review, with shots from the air, and on the ground for field selection.

I have done some lead follow, I now have a piece of a duo, and expect to do some dual.

Things I want to do:

Not all of our instructors are XC pilots, this is fine, but the elemental skills for XC can be taught locally, and I hope to put together a series of lessons, thermaling, gliding, a very local 25k triangle for confidence building, and an intentional land out at a nearby airport. I agree with Hank, that the fear of land outs is very high. In power flying, you end up at other airports all the time, but if you have learned to fly at our club, new pilots only fly from our local field. Landing "out", even at an airport is scary.

But the club culture is at the heart of this. If the club encourages advancement of your flying skills at least to silver, then that is a good place to decide if farther is for you. For some it is not, for others, they may move to competition, or records. But the bottom line, we have seen far more conversion to private ownership, and XC than we had in the past. You need to keep helping those along, not all will want to go, but those that do, tend to stick with it...

[pstrzel]

As a relative noob to the sport of soaring with just a handful of PIC hrs, perhaps my input may shed some light on this issue.

We need to accept that there nothing unique in soaring that isn't encountered in learning other challenging endeavors. Soaring doesn't lack excitement so we needn't be apologists for it. Learning a difficult skill is what lacks excitement for majority of people and that's nothing new. What's new is perhaps that more people are looking for easy fun. People will walk 26.2 miles and claim that they ran a marathon, but few are willing to train for many years and suffer the injuries to run it in under 3 hrs. Truth: there's no walking through aviation training and flying cross-country solo requires years of experience. Do prospective students know that or do they expect instant gratification coming into it?

It is a fact of life that not everyone who's inspired by a masterful performance (or a Youtube soaring video) has what it takes to become a master themselves. Think of a kid that listens to a concert pianist and wants to take piano lessons without considering how many scales and arpeggios they'll have to suffer through during the following 10 years. Those with talent and perseverance will get there, but the majority of students will move on to easier pursuits. Before my own checkride last year I had a conversation with another student. He seemed uninspired and to paraphrase, was "still waiting for the fun part". The pursuit of mastery isn't always fun. Mastery itself is always fun, but that has to be earned. I have frequently questioned my own desire to pursue soaring starting with the first few patterns to the more recent unsatisfying flights. Earlier this year I was still waiting for the fun part. That is until last month when I had what I would call a breakthrough flight, a glimpse of what the "masters" experience. It took perseverance.

In conclusion, soaring is not poetry. If fact, a student will quickly learn that initially if feels more like rap. If it is to be considered a legitimate sport, perhaps we should learn from other sports and provide students with mentoring and coaching, not just instruction. Explain to them all the steps involved and help them set realistic goals and create a plan for attaining them, and yes, help inspire them when they are discouraged. Cross-country flight or competition is the big prize and the end of a journey. If athletes are to be attracted to this sport the slogan needs to change from "Soaring - the poetry of aviation" to something like "Soaring - have you got what it takes to fly a plane without an engine?".

[Tango Eight]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 2:51:28 PM UTC-4, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:41:16 PM UTC-4, Tango Eight wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:12:55 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> > > Hmmmmm. Last I checked, I did not see a large crowd of US female pilots who compete with the men. SKA is a fairly unique person! We need dozens more!
> > >
> > > The reason why women are not competing in US contests is an interesting discussion point (new thread?). It is not a physical thing of course. In fact women have a physical advantage (in addition to their mental/emotional strengths!). It's also not a financial thing. So, what is it? I believe that both Europe and Australia have far more women competing in contests.
> > >
> > > Personally, I would think that if: A) women's soaring was to grow in the US someday and B) 5-10 women were attending a future US contest...many of those women would appreciate a separate women's classification in the same way juniors would. Maybe I am wrong but I would definitely want to hear from "other women" as well when/if they hopefully materialize some day.
> > >
> > > Remember, I am proposing an overall scoring for everyone (as normal) but individual clasifications (per suggestions) for beginner, various SSA ranking levels and of course feminine.
> > >
> > > IOW, if we magically had 3 women at a contest in 2016, they should get a gold, silver and bronze medal no matter what their overall scores happen to be! They should be celebrated along with Jr's and beginners! Building numbers these competition categories (beginners, juniors and women) at our future events Is FAR MORE important to the US Soaring community than overall winners.
> > >
> > > We simply have to do something significant to stem this tide of shrinking or stale numbers. It costs nothing to try these ideas. If it fails, so what? Let's not continue to sit on our hands in almost every aspect of our organization. We need some big ideas and some serious innovation. The sport of soaring is incredible...we need to market it and compete. Simple as that.
> > >
> > > Just my opinion of course!
> > >
> > > Sean
> > > 7T
> >
> > You can't even stay on your own topic :-).
> >
> > I'm much more interested in promoting XC. Competition is just one little piece of the whole.
> >
> > People are just lazy. That's my opinion. My evidence includes the fact that one can join my own club (including one time initiation) for about 1/2 what most of us pay to insure *old* gliders and (when qualified) get the keys to an HpH 304c. Yep, a real, live 40+:1 glass slipper, equipped for basic XC and with a serviceable trailer too. The number of people who grab this opportunity is astonishingly small. Those that do almost invariably get smitten with the sport and move whatever pieces of heaven and earth are required to procure their own high performance glider (leaving the 304 available for the next convert!).
> >
> > Most people, most *pilots* just don't want to put in the work.
> >
> > It simply isn't possible to provide more encouragement than we already do.
> >
> > Evan Ludeman / T8
>
> Evan, your club's approach is working! Why are you saying people are too lazy? Some got converted. For such a small club you probably have higher conversion rate than most clubs.
> Andrzej

The puzzle is that there isn't more demand.

Otoh, we're churning out CFIGs right now, a trio of which are in the process of founding a new club in Maine. I guess that counts for something too.

It is true that despite being only about two dozen active members, we can instruct & mentor just about anything.

-Evan

[[email protected]]

I'm a newly licensed glider pilot, and I can't wait to start flying XC. I recently restarted my training after an 8 year hiatus. One of the things that motivated me to get back into soaring is the development of electric sustainers. Having the ability to flip a switch and be confident that the motor will start every time makes XC way less intimidating to me. The risk, and more importantly, the massive hassle of a landout is a real turn-off, personally. I know that I will still have to be prepared for the possibility of a landout even with an e-sustainer, but it seems improbable enough to ease my anxiety about it.

Granted, I don't have a glider with an electric sustainer available to me right now, but after I gain some XC experience with my local club, one may be in my future.

Perhaps if/when electric sustainers become more common in soaring clubs, more people will be willing to fly XC. They may even bring in a new class of people to the sport who would be too afraid to try even local soaring due to the lack of self-propulsion.

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 3:25:06 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> I'm a newly licensed glider pilot, and I can't wait to start flying XC. I recently restarted my training after an 8 year hiatus. One of the things that motivated me to get back into soaring is the development of electric sustainers. Having the ability to flip a switch and be confident that the motor will start every time makes XC way less intimidating to me. The risk, and more importantly, the massive hassle of a landout is a real turn-off, personally. I know that I will still have to be prepared for the possibility of a landout even with an e-sustainer, but it seems improbable enough to ease my anxiety about it.
>
> Granted, I don't have a glider with an electric sustainer available to me right now, but after I gain some XC experience with my local club, one may be in my future.
>
> Perhaps if/when electric sustainers become more common in soaring clubs, more people will be willing to fly XC. They may even bring in a new class of people to the sport who would be too afraid to try even local soaring due to the lack of self-propulsion.

Perhaps if you crewed for someone and helped by doing a retrieve or 2 you would find out that while inconvenient(you're gonna be late for dinner), very few turn out to be a "massive hassle". Out of the many more than 100 field landings I have made, only a couple would fall in that category. Many were pleasant interesting experiences that allowed me to meet a bunch of very nice folks.
UH

[David Hirst]

>If it is to be considered a legitimate sport, perhaps we should learn from other sports and provide students with mentoring and coaching, not just instruction. Explain to them all the steps involved and help them set realistic goals and create a plan for attaining them, and yes, help inspire them when they are discouraged.

That there, ladies and gents, is an encapsulation of a lot of the prior discussion.

I'm not sure that a passion for XC is "innate" - people often get the gliding bug only after their first flight. Similarly, the passion for XC often comes only after you've been shown the possibilities. It's a series of stepping stones with no true ending; some of the hops are bigger than others and sometimes the waters seem deeper and scarier than they really are. For those instances, friends, mentors and coaches will get people onto the next stone and the next challenge. Sometimes you just need to add more stones to lessen the length of the leaps.

DH

[Sean Fidler]

Agreed! Spark plugs! One on one personal relationships and true mentorship.

The other side of the coin is the type of person with the perseverance and drive to seek out the mentor. It's one thing to try and motivate and inspire someone, it's a completely different thing to have them ID YOU as a source of help, knowledge and motivation and make it easy for you to do so. A pleasure to help them...etc.

But those are very rare birds indeed.

[Sean Fidler]

Well said!

I think I am going to bite the bullet and get my CFIG against the strong advise not to do it ;-).

I think teaching "beginner" cross country is what I would be most interested in.

Maybe I'll go to Chilhowee and know that out. How long does it take?

[Frank Whiteley]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 10:41:16 AM UTC-6, Tango Eight wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 12:12:55 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> > Hmmmmm. Last I checked, I did not see a large crowd of US female pilots who compete with the men. SKA is a fairly unique person! We need dozens more!
> >
> > The reason why women are not competing in US contests is an interesting discussion point (new thread?). It is not a physical thing of course. In fact women have a physical advantage (in addition to their mental/emotional strengths!). It's also not a financial thing. So, what is it? I believe that both Europe and Australia have far more women competing in contests.
> >
> > Personally, I would think that if: A) women's soaring was to grow in the US someday and B) 5-10 women were attending a future US contest...many of those women would appreciate a separate women's classification in the same way juniors would. Maybe I am wrong but I would definitely want to hear from "other women" as well when/if they hopefully materialize some day.
> >
> > Remember, I am proposing an overall scoring for everyone (as normal) but individual clasifications (per suggestions) for beginner, various SSA ranking levels and of course feminine.
> >
> > IOW, if we magically had 3 women at a contest in 2016, they should get a gold, silver and bronze medal no matter what their overall scores happen to be! They should be celebrated along with Jr's and beginners! Building numbers these competition categories (beginners, juniors and women) at our future events Is FAR MORE important to the US Soaring community than overall winners.
> >
> > We simply have to do something significant to stem this tide of shrinking or stale numbers. It costs nothing to try these ideas. If it fails, so what? Let's not continue to sit on our hands in almost every aspect of our organization. We need some big ideas and some serious innovation. The sport of soaring is incredible...we need to market it and compete. Simple as that.
> >
> > Just my opinion of course!
> >
> > Sean
> > 7T
>
> You can't even stay on your own topic :-).
>
> I'm much more interested in promoting XC. Competition is just one little piece of the whole.
>
> People are just lazy. That's my opinion. My evidence includes the fact that one can join my own club (including one time initiation) for about 1/2 what most of us pay to insure *old* gliders and (when qualified) get the keys to an HpH 304c. Yep, a real, live 40+:1 glass slipper, equipped for basic XC and with a serviceable trailer too. The number of people who grab this opportunity is astonishingly small. Those that do almost invariably get smitten with the sport and move whatever pieces of heaven and earth are required to procure their own high performance glider (leaving the 304 available for the next convert!).
>
> Most people, most *pilots* just don't want to put in the work.
>
> It simply isn't possible to provide more encouragement than we already do..
>
> Evan Ludeman / T8

My start was when the chief instructor handed me a barograph and said to smoke it right away as it was a good day to fly 50k. I wasn't given the opportunity to say no.

Frank Whiteley

[Sean Fidler]

Great post! I still would love to see something significant attempted in terms of marketing (new pilots, cross country pilots, etc)? Perhaps a website and YouTube channel specifically focused on these demographics? Bruno's stuff is awesome with a great following, but if I was brand new I think Inkight be terrified. I think we need something with that much appeal but focused on the baby steps from new pilot to early cross country learning.

I think I am going to bite the bullet and get my CFIG against the strong advise not to do it ;-).

I think teaching "beginner" cross country is what I would be most interested in. That really doesn't exist in my area.

Maybe I'll go to Chilhowee and knock that rating out. How long does it take to get a CFIG?

Sincerely,

Sean

[ND]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 3:45:36 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 3:25:06 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > I'm a newly licensed glider pilot, and I can't wait to start flying XC. I recently restarted my training after an 8 year hiatus. One of the things that motivated me to get back into soaring is the development of electric sustainers. Having the ability to flip a switch and be confident that the motor will start every time makes XC way less intimidating to me. The risk, and more importantly, the massive hassle of a landout is a real turn-off, personally. I know that I will still have to be prepared for the possibility of a landout even with an e-sustainer, but it seems improbable enough to ease my anxiety about it.
> >
> > Granted, I don't have a glider with an electric sustainer available to me right now, but after I gain some XC experience with my local club, one may be in my future.
> >
> > Perhaps if/when electric sustainers become more common in soaring clubs, more people will be willing to fly XC. They may even bring in a new class of people to the sport who would be too afraid to try even local soaring due to the lack of self-propulsion.


i would tend to agree with hank. and though i don't have as many land outs as him,the way i've been flying lately im hard on his heels ;)

A few comments about that. i think you are only anxious about off field landings because you haven't done one before. once you've done one (or a few) they become a non issue if you plan ahead properly. they can also be the most fun and interesting landings you make. i'll also concur with hank that you meet some nice folks and get to go for what usually amounts to a pretty drive, with a dinner out thrown in to sweeten the deal.

Lastly--and i don't mean this adversarially-- i would caution you in your attitude towards land-outs. you have to embrace them in order to deal with them. having an engine and not worrying about it until the offhand occurance the engine doesn't start will often mean that you are completely freaked-out, and underprepared for the moment both mentally, and as far as your landing set-up is concerned. again, that was not meant to be adeversarial or condescending.

[Papa3[_2_]]

Juggling a bunch of things right now, so adding thoughts in dribs-and-drabs.. One of the things that's remarkable to me is the wide variation in the percentage of pilots who go cross country in different clubs from the same area. In Region 2, for example, the largest club with the best (all glass) fleet which owns its own airport and clubhouse has almost no XC activity. With over 100 members, there are maybe a half-dozen who participate in the OLC or contests. On the other hand, two of the smaller operations that share public use airports generate the same or more XC flights with maybe 1/3 the number of pilots. In other words, in the largest club, less than 10% (probably dloser to 5%) participate in XC. In a couple of medium-sized clubs, the percentage is closer to 20%. In Aero Club Albatross (which has a very long history of encouraging XC) we have about 25 pilots actively contributing flights to the OLC with maybe 60 active members. So, at least 40% of the members actively go XC. Many of those flights are in 1-26s and our 1-34.

That tells me that it's more about the environment/operation/culture and less about either great conditions, facilities, or equipment. In ACA, there is a critical mass which I think makes XC culture somewhat self-sustaining. There are dozens of field retrieves every year, so most members are used to it. It's not viewed as a hassle so much as a badge of honor. When you land, the question isn't "how long were you up" so much as "how far did you go"? We try for records, add up OLC points, and go to competitions.

I think what's missing in many clubs is one or two sparkplugs who are willing to commit to changing the culture and encouraging more XC. Think of it as a grass-roots issue rather than a systemic one. We've certainly proven that more people will go XC given a supportive environment. I think it would be very interesting if more clubs measured the "health" of their operation in terms of the percentage of people who actively participate in XC.. It's my hunch that those operations would end up being more stable, active, and vibrant than those with fewer XC pilots.

Erik Mann (P3)

[BobW]

On 8/18/2015 2:33 PM, Frank Whiteley wrote:
>> People are just lazy. That's my opinion. My evidence includes the fact
>> that one can join my own club (including one time initiation) for about
>> 1/2 what most of us pay to insure *old* gliders and (when qualified) get
>> the keys to an HpH 304c. Yep, a real, live 40+:1 glass slipper,
>> equipped for basic XC and with a serviceable trailer too. The number of
>> people who grab this opportunity is astonishingly small. Those that do
>> almost invariably get smitten with the sport and move whatever pieces of
>> heaven and earth are required to procure their own high performance
>> glider (leaving the 304 available for the next convert!).
>>
>> Most people, most *pilots* just don't want to put in the work.
>>
>> It simply isn't possible to provide more encouragement than we already
>> do.
>
> My start was when the chief instructor handed me a barograph and said to
> smoke it right away as it was a good day to fly 50k. I wasn't given the
> opportunity to say no.
>
> Frank Whiteley

What Frank described is how I got 2/3 of my Silver when I got started, i.e.
being handed ("forced") opportunities to fly with a barograph. Since then, I
can recall exactly one attempt to bag Silver Distance, which failed. Somewhere
along in there I realized soaring could provide what I was looking for from
piloting: 1) flight, and 2) continuing challenge. Considered from that
perspective, my motivation was "purely selfish." Never did "bother" to obtain
any further badge recognition.

Yet somewhere(s) along the line I began considering/looking for ways to
(choose whichever apply to your worldview): "give back," share with others,
proselytize, etc. "Know thyself" played a part in that I've long considered
myself world's worst salesman in the sense that I've little interest/ability
preaching to a disinterested - or even neutral - audience...at least not
face-to-face. Books were about it for me - one on the proselytizing front, and
one to-the-choir/"possibly-interested-general-aviation-types" audience. Never
could talk myself into going the CFIG route. Been a member of clubs that
DIScouraged and ENcouraged XC. Ignored the naysayers; followed internal
motivation; did my own thing; looked out for potential other "XC weirdos;"
tried to encourage all considering/taking lessons & suggested they'd be helped
by "knowing themselves;" pondered the mysteries of life...

Seen a lot of good thoughts in this thread, and encourage everyone who now or
periodically feels extra motivation to
spread-the-word/sell-soaring/grow-the-sport/etc./etc./etc., to do so in ways
they can support and sustain, because the truism "if no one does anything,
nothing will happen," definitely applies. If there IS "a magic bullet" to sell
soaring (and I don't think there is), it's action. There ain't no panacea
approach; arguably all sales efforts have merit; there might BE something to
the Nike approach. (Just do it!)

Keep those ideas coming, keep those internal fires stoked, do "it" when you
can while recognizing "it" doesn't have to - although it *can* or *might*
(your choice) - be a "massive lifestyle change" on your part. In other words,
just because you obtain your CFIG doesn't preclude continuing solo XC "for
yourself". Nor do you have to reinvent your club over the winter, and failing
that, consider your efforts a failure. Do what's reasonable for you and your
circumstances.

Along the way, it may help your own internal "sales motivation" if (like me)
you find active selling to be a chore, you maintain a realistic view of your
efforts and their likely and actual effects. My own proselytizing efforts have
always been motivated mostly from a sense it was the right thing to do, as
distinct from (say) expecting to fundamentally change the world in the way any
casual observer could detect, or, because I expected attaboys from fellow club
members. I consider the former unrealistic, and the latter a good way to
increase one's personal disappointment quotient...which topically circles
around to the sentiment expressed above Frank's post! So like Mr. Spock in The
Simpsons cartoon; "I'll be leaving now. My work here is done."

Bob W.

P.S. Oh didn't I?

[[email protected]]

Hello jfitch...I would assume the reason for the decline in GA is the economy downturn worldwide over the last 10 years..but by the same token, Soaring should have increased as GA power pilots looked for another avenue...but who knows.....I have talked to several persons about the economy of soaring, and they have all been surprised at the much lower cost of a soaring club....commercial soaring operations are too expensive for many of us...but look to a club and air-time is very reasonable...

Willis Sutherland
TBSS Member
Florida

[[email protected]]

> i would tend to agree with hank. and though i don't have as many land outs as him,the way i've been flying lately im hard on his heels ;)
>
> A few comments about that. i think you are only anxious about off field landings because you haven't done one before. once you've done one (or a few) they become a non issue if you plan ahead properly. they can also be the most fun and interesting landings you make. i'll also concur with hank that you meet some nice folks and get to go for what usually amounts to a pretty drive, with a dinner out thrown in to sweeten the deal.
>
> Lastly--and i don't mean this adversarially-- i would caution you in your attitude towards land-outs. you have to embrace them in order to deal with them. having an engine and not worrying about it until the offhand occurance the engine doesn't start will often mean that you are completely freaked-out, and underprepared for the moment both mentally, and as far as your landing set-up is concerned. again, that was not meant to be adeversarial or condescending.

no offense taken. i don't fear landouts in terms of my ability to execute them safely. however, i don't think anyone would argue that there isn't at least a small increase in risk compared to airport landings. this sport is risky enough, and risk is what keeps some people out of it, i reckon.

i also don't doubt that there are upsides to landouts (camaraderie, etc), but the amount of time that a ground retrieve can take (some are shorter, some are very long) is the main downside. i'm a busy person, and don't look forward to spending long hours dealing with a retrieve and getting home late at night.

i'm a new pilot, so i realize i may have some mis-perceptions about landouts. however, those who are concerned with attracting more pilots to the sport should be aware of how the uninitiated perceive the sport, so hopefully my perspective is helpful in that regard.

[Bob Pasker]

as someone who needs no additional inspiration to become an XC glider pilot (I have Silver Altitude and Silver Distance, and have flown 4.5 and 8.0 with Kempton in his ASH-25), here are the obstacles:

A glider. I either have to buy a glider and only fly out of a local airpot (Blairstown or Wurstburo), since I don't neither have a vehicle that can tow a glider nor do I have the time to tow it anywhere. Or I have to find a club that allows XC flights. I have tried to contact Blairstown numerous times, and nobody answers their email. Wurstboro is only open week-ends, and is therefore less desirable. Lastly, I can continue to rent out of commercial operations, but all of them have been fairly unwilling to let me take a glider out of the local area without substantial time in the area, with the notable except of Soaring NV.

Graduated training flights. It would be great if the locals would put up on their website some proposed training flights of increasing difficulty suited to the terrain and the typical weather of for the area. These graduated training flights should be structured around Silver Distance, Gold Distance, and Diamond Goal. For example, for Silver Distance as a triangle, there could be two practice flights, out and back to each of the other two points on the triangle, and then the third for all three points.

Dual XC flights. For those of you who have single-seat gliders, get current in a mid-performance two-seater and take people on cross-country flights. Kempton took me on two flights last month (see OLC links below), and I learned more in one hour of XC with him than I have from anyone else. You don't have to be a CFI. Any one who is ready for XC should be able to learn just from watching and asking questions.

http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/flightinfo.html?flightId=-925876405
http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/flightinfo.html?flightId=-976935827

Contest training. No where have I seen any in-person training on how to actually fly a contest (which doesn't mean it doesn't exist). I would love to see a 1-hour training video that takes me through the entire process, or even a "contest training camp" (maybe the OLC camp?)

I guess this is a pretty good start.

--bob

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 12:19:16 -0700, pstrzel wrote:

> flying cross-country solo requires years of experience.
>
All due respect, but this is quite wrong given a suitable club culture.

A very high proportion of new solo pilots at my UK club will be flying XC
within 18 months of their first solo. Thats why the club owns two SZD
Juniors. It also owns three good standard class gliders, which are
intended for XC use by anybody with a Silver C who hasn't yet bought
their own glider.

> Do prospective students know that or do they expect instant
> gratification coming into it?
>
Instant gratification is the real problem. It is adversely affecting any
and all hobbys and sports, in short, anything that requires any more
learned skills than watching TV, texting or cracking another beer can.

Employable skills as well: why should your average numpty strain his
brain learning a profession when he 'knows' he can slide through school
and get loadsa money and as many girls as he can handle by kicking a
ball, joining a boy band or winning some reality stupid TV show? He knows
this because all the meeja and celebs say so and they can't possibly be
wrong or they wouldn't be so rich and famous.

> The pursuit of mastery isn't always fun.
>
I'd disagree: putting in the time, thought and practise to hone a complex
skill, such as soaring, can be very pleasurable. But, maybe I'm just
weird.


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

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 4:37:23 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Maybe I'll go to Chilhowee and knock that rating out. How long does it take to get a CFIG?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Sean

Why don't you ask the Chilhowee operator/instructor (and former U.S. National champion) who keeps telling you she doesn't appreciate being scored separately in a contest just because she's a woman. :)

Recognition good; condescension bad.

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
U.S.A.

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 5:49:54 PM UTC-4, Bob Pasker wrote:
> as someone who needs no additional inspiration to become an XC glider pilot (I have Silver Altitude and Silver Distance, and have flown 4.5 and 8.0 with Kempton in his ASH-25), here are the obstacles:
>
> A glider. I either have to buy a glider and only fly out of a local airpot (Blairstown or Wurstburo), since I don't neither have a vehicle that can tow a glider nor do I have the time to tow it anywhere. Or I have to find a club that allows XC flights. I have tried to contact Blairstown numerous times, and nobody answers their email. Wurstboro is only open week-ends, and is therefore less desirable. Lastly, I can continue to rent out of commercial operations, but all of them have been fairly unwilling to let me take a glider out of the local area without substantial time in the area, with the notable except of Soaring NV.
>
> Graduated training flights. It would be great if the locals would put up on their website some proposed training flights of increasing difficulty suited to the terrain and the typical weather of for the area. These graduated training flights should be structured around Silver Distance, Gold Distance, and Diamond Goal. For example, for Silver Distance as a triangle, there could be two practice flights, out and back to each of the other two points on the triangle, and then the third for all three points.
>
> Dual XC flights. For those of you who have single-seat gliders, get current in a mid-performance two-seater and take people on cross-country flights.. Kempton took me on two flights last month (see OLC links below), and I learned more in one hour of XC with him than I have from anyone else. You don't have to be a CFI. Any one who is ready for XC should be able to learn just from watching and asking questions.
>
> http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/flightinfo.html?flightId=-925876405
> http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/flightinfo.html?flightId=-976935827
>
> Contest training. No where have I seen any in-person training on how to actually fly a contest (which doesn't mean it doesn't exist). I would love to see a 1-hour training video that takes me through the entire process, or even a "contest training camp" (maybe the OLC camp?)
>
> I guess this is a pretty good start.
>
> --bob

Blairstown has one of the most active cross country clubs in the US, Aero Club Albatross. They has 1-26's to do XC in. They have a 1-34, an LS-4, and an LS-3. They also base a 1-34 at Wurtsboro which is open weekends an most week days.
I run a "rookie school" at the annual Region 2 contest which involves classroom training and active mentoring. That is done in coordination with the Region 2 "Bus class" contest which is flown using trainer class 2 seaters such as ASK-21's and Grob twins.
Our club members at Valley Soaring Club in Middletown either do their Silver distance by going to Blairstown, commonly in the club 1-26 or 1-34, or by doing a closed course that uses a declared remote start and remote finish.
Lots of people fly XC from sites around an hour from NYC.
UH

[pstrzel]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 3:51:50 PM UTC-6, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 12:19:16 -0700, pstrzel wrote:
>
> > flying cross-country solo requires years of experience.
> >
> All due respect, but this is quite wrong given a suitable club culture.
>
> A very high proportion of new solo pilots at my UK club will be flying XC
> within 18 months of their first solo.
>

Well, 1.5 years is still more than 1 year, so "years" is still technically correct. :-). I believe for the right person it can be done within a season, but goals need to be set by the individual and a road map to their attainment made available by the club. Your point about the suitable club culture is I believe the whole point of this discussion.

>
> > The pursuit of mastery isn't always fun.
> >
> I'd disagree: putting in the time, thought and practise to hone a complex
> skill, such as soaring, can be very pleasurable. But, maybe I'm just
> weird.
>
This may be semantics more than a disagreement as "isn't always" is in the same category as "can be".

Cheers,

Piotr S.

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:49:52 -0700, Bob Pasker wrote:

> Graduated training flights. It would be great if the locals would put up
> on their website some proposed training flights of increasing difficulty
> suited to the terrain and the typical weather of for the area. These
> graduated training flights should be structured around Silver Distance,
> Gold Distance, and Diamond Goal. For example, for Silver Distance as a
> triangle, there could be two practice flights, out and back to each of
> the other two points on the triangle, and then the third for all three
> points.
>
Just wanna pick one nit: hope you don't mind. You can't use a 50km closed
course for Silver C because its essentially awarded for a straight flight
of 50km, presumably to get you used to going out of gliding range from
home. Without that restriction you'd get people drawing a roughly
equilateral 50km triangle centred on the home airfield. But that wouldn't
really be an XC at all because its furthest points are barely 12 miles
from home.

Is the 100km diploma recognised in America? If so, just double the
triangle size and you've got a nice sized closed course for a new XC
pilot to tackle after the Silver distance. Besides, 50 km to gold 300 is
a bit of a leap. Even an older glider can do 100 km in 2 hours or less so
changing weather conditions probably isn't an issue, but even a mid-range
toy (Pegase or ASW-20) is going to need 4 - 4.5 hours to do 300 km in the
hands of a relative novice and so dealing with changing conditions, due
to both the time of day and to flying into different parts of the
country, become relevant.

But I agree that having a set of recognised club tasks is a good idea,
and even better if a few of them have a perpetual trophy for the fastest
flight during the year.


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

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 8:03:25 PM UTC-4, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:49:52 -0700, Bob Pasker wrote:
>
> > Graduated training flights. It would be great if the locals would put up
> > on their website some proposed training flights of increasing difficulty
> > suited to the terrain and the typical weather of for the area. These
> > graduated training flights should be structured around Silver Distance,
> > Gold Distance, and Diamond Goal. For example, for Silver Distance as a
> > triangle, there could be two practice flights, out and back to each of
> > the other two points on the triangle, and then the third for all three
> > points.
> >
> Just wanna pick one nit: hope you don't mind. You can't use a 50km closed
> course for Silver C because its essentially awarded for a straight flight
> of 50km, presumably to get you used to going out of gliding range from
> home. Without that restriction you'd get people drawing a roughly
> equilateral 50km triangle centred on the home airfield. But that wouldn't
> really be an XC at all because its furthest points are barely 12 miles
> from home.
>
> Is the 100km diploma recognised in America? If so, just double the
> triangle size and you've got a nice sized closed course for a new XC
> pilot to tackle after the Silver distance. Besides, 50 km to gold 300 is
> a bit of a leap. Even an older glider can do 100 km in 2 hours or less so
> changing weather conditions probably isn't an issue, but even a mid-range
> toy (Pegase or ASW-20) is going to need 4 - 4.5 hours to do 300 km in the
> hands of a relative novice and so dealing with changing conditions, due
> to both the time of day and to flying into different parts of the
> country, become relevant.
>
> But I agree that having a set of recognised club tasks is a good idea,
> and even better if a few of them have a perpetual trophy for the fastest
> flight during the year.
>
>
> --
> martin@ | Martin Gregorie
> gregorie. | Essex, UK
> org |

Unless there has been a change that I am not aware of, one can declare a remote start point, fly to a remote finish. and return to the home base. Altitude loss is calculated from release height to height at finish point. The task some of our folks have done for this turns out to require about a 130k flight which seems about right if one is flying modern glass.
UH

[son_of_flubber]

I'm forever indebted to the CFI-Gs who proved that with enough patience (and $s) almost anyone can learn to fly a glider.

CFI-Gs who don't have the skills or ambition to go farther than glide slope from the airport influence their students.

A highly respected CFI-G says "I NEVER want to land out" (to budding pilots gathered around the picnic table). "That's just dumb. Why would you get off tow below 1500 AGL? Why take that risk?"

Train CFI-Gs in XC, and train CFI-Gs how to develop those skills in students.

[Bob Whelan[_3_]]

On 8/18/2015 6:21 PM, son_of_flubber wrote:
> I'm forever indebted to the CFI-Gs who proved that with enough patience
> (and $s) almost anyone can learn to fly a glider.
>
> CFI-Gs who don't have the skills or ambition to go farther than glide slope
> from the airport influence their students.
>
> A highly respected CFI-G says "I NEVER want to land out" (to budding pilots
> gathered around the picnic table). "That's just dumb. Why would you get
> off tow below 1500 AGL? Why take that risk?"

Not to be too anal about this particular situation, but for that particular
instructor's (I infer) lack of landout-related skills, I'd agree that putting
him/herself in a landout situation *would* be dumb. The trick for listeners is
to be sufficiently knowledgeable so's to understand said instructor's hidden
assumptions (non-antagonistic conversation helpful?), and thus, to be able to
intelligently decide if they apply to the listener. If they don't, there's
plenty of available evidence that "all over the board" opinions about the
wisdom of XC & landouts exist in every little bit of the U.S. clubs' soaring
world to which I've ever been exposed. Entirely normal human behavior.

FWIW, so far as I know, I was the first tyro licensee to make a landout in my
first club's recent history...adequately and safely taught by an instructor,
as I subsequently learned while retrieving him from a landout, who'd yet to
make *his* first landout. The club back then had plenty of flagpole sitters,
and a few seriously-beyond-my-newbie-skill-set ridge runners. (My flight
examiner then held the world O&R record.) It was clear to me that each pilot
chose his/her level of soaring participation, and such an approach seemed
entirely normal to me; still does.

Point being, circling back to your instructor's picnic table expounding, in
the absence of some sort of enlightening conversation actually discussing
*why* an instructor feels as they expound, why would Joe Listener want to take
any of their opinions beyond those directly applying to J.L.'s growing skills,
as universal gospel? Looking back, for me it was dirt simple to distinguish
beyond instruction likely to be directly applicable to my next instructional
flight, and my instructor's opining about "the more-distant future's"
requisite, or merely desirable, skills. Even though I was convinced he could
walk on water...

Bob - genuinely curious - W.

[Dan Daly[_2_]]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 8:17:51 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 8:03:25 PM UTC-4, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:49:52 -0700, Bob Pasker wrote:
> >
> > > Graduated training flights. It would be great if the locals would put up
> > > on their website some proposed training flights of increasing difficulty
> > > suited to the terrain and the typical weather of for the area. These
> > > graduated training flights should be structured around Silver Distance,
> > > Gold Distance, and Diamond Goal. For example, for Silver Distance as a
> > > triangle, there could be two practice flights, out and back to each of
> > > the other two points on the triangle, and then the third for all three
> > > points.
> > >
> > Just wanna pick one nit: hope you don't mind. You can't use a 50km closed
> > course for Silver C because its essentially awarded for a straight flight
> > of 50km, presumably to get you used to going out of gliding range from
> > home. Without that restriction you'd get people drawing a roughly
> > equilateral 50km triangle centred on the home airfield. But that wouldn't
> > really be an XC at all because its furthest points are barely 12 miles
> > from home.
> >
> > Is the 100km diploma recognised in America? If so, just double the
> > triangle size and you've got a nice sized closed course for a new XC
> > pilot to tackle after the Silver distance. Besides, 50 km to gold 300 is
> > a bit of a leap. Even an older glider can do 100 km in 2 hours or less so
> > changing weather conditions probably isn't an issue, but even a mid-range
> > toy (Pegase or ASW-20) is going to need 4 - 4.5 hours to do 300 km in the
> > hands of a relative novice and so dealing with changing conditions, due
> > to both the time of day and to flying into different parts of the
> > country, become relevant.
> >
> > But I agree that having a set of recognised club tasks is a good idea,
> > and even better if a few of them have a perpetual trophy for the fastest
> > flight during the year.
> >
> >
> > --
> > martin@ | Martin Gregorie
> > gregorie. | Essex, UK
> > org |
>
> Unless there has been a change that I am not aware of, one can declare a remote start point, fly to a remote finish. and return to the home base. Altitude loss is calculated from release height to height at finish point. The task some of our folks have done for this turns out to require about a 130k flight which seems about right if one is flying modern glass.
> UH

No change - yet. In the Sporting Code that will become effective 1 Oct 2015:

"a. SILVER DISTANCE A distance flight (as defined in 1.4.2d to 1.4.2h) to a finish or turn point at least 50 km from release or MoP stop."

Look at http://www.fai.org/igc-documents , then Sporting Code, then Next Edition.

The current SC3 allows it; if anyone wants to do it as described above, the time is now (until 30 September).

Martin, the 100 km Diploma is not recognized in North America.

2D

[Frank Whiteley]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 7:39:45 PM UTC-6, Dan Daly wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 8:17:51 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 8:03:25 PM UTC-4, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> > > On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:49:52 -0700, Bob Pasker wrote:
> > >
> > > > Graduated training flights. It would be great if the locals would put up
> > > > on their website some proposed training flights of increasing difficulty
> > > > suited to the terrain and the typical weather of for the area. These
> > > > graduated training flights should be structured around Silver Distance,
> > > > Gold Distance, and Diamond Goal. For example, for Silver Distance as a
> > > > triangle, there could be two practice flights, out and back to each of
> > > > the other two points on the triangle, and then the third for all three
> > > > points.
> > > >
> > > Just wanna pick one nit: hope you don't mind. You can't use a 50km closed
> > > course for Silver C because its essentially awarded for a straight flight
> > > of 50km, presumably to get you used to going out of gliding range from
> > > home. Without that restriction you'd get people drawing a roughly
> > > equilateral 50km triangle centred on the home airfield. But that wouldn't
> > > really be an XC at all because its furthest points are barely 12 miles
> > > from home.
> > >
> > > Is the 100km diploma recognised in America? If so, just double the
> > > triangle size and you've got a nice sized closed course for a new XC
> > > pilot to tackle after the Silver distance. Besides, 50 km to gold 300 is
> > > a bit of a leap. Even an older glider can do 100 km in 2 hours or less so
> > > changing weather conditions probably isn't an issue, but even a mid-range
> > > toy (Pegase or ASW-20) is going to need 4 - 4.5 hours to do 300 km in the
> > > hands of a relative novice and so dealing with changing conditions, due
> > > to both the time of day and to flying into different parts of the
> > > country, become relevant.
> > >
> > > But I agree that having a set of recognised club tasks is a good idea,
> > > and even better if a few of them have a perpetual trophy for the fastest
> > > flight during the year.
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > martin@ | Martin Gregorie
> > > gregorie. | Essex, UK
> > > org |
> >
> > Unless there has been a change that I am not aware of, one can declare a remote start point, fly to a remote finish. and return to the home base. Altitude loss is calculated from release height to height at finish point. The task some of our folks have done for this turns out to require about a 130k flight which seems about right if one is flying modern glass.
> > UH
>
> No change - yet. In the Sporting Code that will become effective 1 Oct 2015:
>
> "a. SILVER DISTANCE A distance flight (as defined in 1.4.2d to 1.4.2h) to a finish or turn point at least 50 km from release or MoP stop."
>
> Look at http://www.fai.org/igc-documents , then Sporting Code, then Next Edition.
>
> The current SC3 allows it; if anyone wants to do it as described above, the time is now (until 30 September).
>
> Martin, the 100 km Diploma is not recognized in North America.
>
> 2D

For young pilots we, in the US, do have the Kolstad Century Awards, which can be qualifying flights for the Kolstad College Scholarship, currently $5000. Applications due September 30th.

If you ever needed a reason to mentor a junior pilot to fly cross country, you have one. FAI Silver badges or better also are qualifying flights.

http://www.ssa.org/Youth?show=blog&id=2406

Frank Whiteley

[Bruce Hoult]

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 3:21:16 AM UTC+3, son_of_flubber wrote:
> A highly respected CFI-G says "I NEVER want to land out" (to budding pilots gathered around the picnic table). "That's just dumb. Why would you get off tow below 1500 AGL? Why take that risk?"

I have a number of times had tow pilots approach me after I landed from a multi-hour flight and ask why I got off at 800 ft or 1000 ft above launch height. Was there something wrong with the tow? No -- we flew through a big fat thermal!

I'm actually amazed, when I fly with other pilots, how many carry on through juicy thermals to the launch height they already had in their heads.

If you're flying along and suddenly the towplane shoots up above you, start counting. If the vario is now reading 10 (5 for euros) and you've counted past ten before the townplane suddenly drops away below you then just release and turn back hard.

Of course, there's increased risk of it not really working and landing back for a relight. But I can't actually think of a time when it happened to me on a day when others were successfully soaring.

One of the closest was when I was visiting the US and found a club near Joliet IL. Jumped in a Duo (a type I hadn't flown before, though I knew the Janus pretty well) with an instructor and surprised the heck out of him by releasing at 700 ft AGL. It very nearly didn't work, with about 15 min of scratching at around launch height. But then I got away to 4000 ft and we went on a nice tour of the area. (there was never any question of not being able to make it back, of course)

[Nigel Pocock[_2_]]

Some random thoughts.
Our club has a briefing every day that covers weather, Notams etc. but
also briefs inexperienced pilots on cross country. This might be a task
with several turning points within gliding distance of the home airfield,
up to a 500k task for diamond distance.

We also have the "Compass" scheme where an experienced cross
country pilot will fly with you a high performance 2 seater. You can
learn a lot flying with an ex world champion in a Nimbus 3dt!.

The club culture is cross country orientated. Three weeks ago we had
over 80 club gliders on a club grid to fly cross country (on top of
normal training flights) We do field landing practice in a Faulke motor
glider that allows an instructor to put the pupil in a situation such as
"OK we have run out of lift choose a suitable field an set up a circuit to

land".
Fear of outlandings.
Once a year one of our members who is a farmer invites the club to
use one of his fields for outlanding practice. We take a 2 seater and
tug and do training flights with the altimeter obscured. This
encourages circuit planning and approaches in a strange environment.

Being a club it is quite a sociable environment. I was sat at a table
outside the club house the other day nattering to some cadets, some
members in their 80s still flying vintage gliders, some low hours cross
country pilots (like myself,) and 2 world champions! It is great to learn
from such wide ranging experiences.

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 17:17:46 -0700, unclhank wrote:

> Unless there has been a change that I am not aware of, one can declare a
> remote start point, fly to a remote finish. and return to the home base.
>
Yes, of course. A Silver distance can be done as you describe *provided
that* it has a 50km leg, which is all that counts for Silver.

I thought the post I replied to could be read as if flying a closed task
totalling 50km would count as Silver Distance but it would not.

> Altitude loss is calculated from release height to height at finish
> point. The task some of our folks have done for this turns out to
> require about a 130k flight which seems about right if one is flying
> modern glass.
>
Too true. The prospective Silver Badge holder should read the rulebook
before planning any of the three elements, but always remebering that the
Silver C can be and has been completed in one flight!


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

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 18:39:42 -0700, Dan Daly wrote:

> Martin, the 100 km Diploma is not recognized in North America.
>
Thanks for the clarification. I think its a useful sized task for a
fledging XC pilot, so its something that a club might want to use.

My club has a 109km triangle with easily recognised TPs and a 200km O/R
which both have annually awarded cups. Both are into the prevailing wind
from our field and both are commonly used by early XC pilots.


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

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 7:18:45 AM UTC-4, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 18:39:42 -0700, Dan Daly wrote:
>
> > Martin, the 100 km Diploma is not recognized in North America.
> >
> Thanks for the clarification. I think its a useful sized task for a
> fledging XC pilot, so its something that a club might want to use.
>
> My club has a 109km triangle with easily recognised TPs and a 200km O/R
> which both have annually awarded cups. Both are into the prevailing wind
> from our field and both are commonly used by early XC pilots.
>
>
> --
> martin@ | Martin Gregorie
> gregorie. | Essex, UK
> org |

For a few airports/groups in Eastern PA, North NJ & southern NY, we have:

http://gcup.tophatsoaring.org/GCUP/gc_home.php
Basic rules.... http://gcup.tophatsoaring.org/GCUP/gc_rules.php
North flights... http://gcup.tophatsoaring.org/scoring/g-cup_north_scoresheet.xml
South flights.... http://gcup.tophatsoaring.org/scoring/g-cup_south_scoresheet.xml
Flight comments..... http://gcup.tophatsoaring.org/GCUP/gc_flights.php .... use the arrow button to see comments from previous days...

This is good, lots of places to land, tend to fly in groups, add's a "bit of competition" between different groups/airports (we fly for individual points as well as group points).

As to "competition training", years ago in our region, we had a "little guys meet". It was divided into "silver" & "gold" based on experience of the pilot & sailplane performance.
It was 2 weekends in a row, had a briefing in the morning, turnpoints, cameras (yes, a long time ago), landing cards, etc., just like a real contest.
The difference was that it was mostly for fun (no national ranking points) but had everything a real contest did.

The other "training" was to crew for a number of contests. You did everything a pilot did (except fly) so you went to meetings/briefs, rigged, loaded cameras, discussed the days potential, gridded, launched, kept tabs on "your pilot", info submittal at the end of the day or retrieves.
This meant you had some exposure to the "contest workings" before having to fly the course.

Yes, I crewed for ~7 years (regionals & nationals) with 2+ contests/year and also flew the "little guys" contest a few times.

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 6:21:16 PM UTC-6, son_of_flubber wrote:

> A highly respected CFI-G says "I NEVER want to land out" (to budding pilots gathered around the picnic table). "That's just dumb. Why would you get off tow below 1500 AGL? Why take that risk?"

I've overheard this and worse many times. In one case the CFI-G pointed at a respected contest pilot and said, "Competition flying and XC is just insane."

It made me furious. I wanted to order him to get a Diamond Badge before his next renewal or find another line of work.

[Sean Fidler]

One big glaring issue I see in regards to encouraging XC is that a short cross country not a requirement of glider flight training?

If we let students get their "glider rating" by purely flying within gliding range of the airport, we unsurprisingly get a large portion of "rated" glider pilots who never venture outside of gliding range of the airport. This is really no surprise, is it?

"Train how you fight, fight how you train..."

If students (and their instructors), as part of their training, never have to truly think about, plan or execute XC skills we are setting them up for XC failure. More importantly, our CFIGs can happily exists as CFIGs without any skill, experience or desire for cross country flight! You can get a CFIG rating and keep it today without ever having ventured outside of "gliding range" of the airport! In fact, many openly discourage XC flight as irresponsible, etc. The same goes for most FAA glider "examiners(?)." This is incredible to me and frustrating to many of us.

Many (most?) glider "instructors" simply never learn XC skills and therefore never really teach (or meaningfully encourage it). They often don't have a great LOVE for cross country. Many see glider flight only close to the airport as normal and how it "should" be. Obviously, these glider "instructors" are not the greatest "spark-plugs" for preparing new glider pilots to get into the more advanced levels of the sport of soaring (XC). In certain cases they are "allowed" to actively discourage developing cross country skills (that's dangerous, etc). They know who they are.

This broken dynamic is a major problem that we face with soaring today. It is at least part of the reason why we are seeing fewer new pilots joining us on cross country's.

If I was "King" ;-) I would fundamentally change this FAA glider instruction dynamic.

1) Students would have to plan for and complete a short 50km cross country as part of the flight training process. Instructors would have to truly teach this XC skill, and help the student practice it! This short XC would be a required element. The student would not have to do this solo. Waivers for instruction in difficult terrain (why get flight training here?) or poor weather (why get holder training in the winter?) would be allowed, but in general it would be an important highlight of the glider flight training experience (vs something that is just glanced over). Just like the long cross country is a highlight of a private power rating, the XC element of the glider rating would be the most memorable (and inspirational) for the student! If I remember correctly the long cross country (power) is done both with an instructor and solo! Why is this not at least a requirement with the instructor with gliders? Even a 20 km cross country would be better than nothing.

2) CFIGs would need to compete a 100km cross country (with a student or solo) every 2 years to remain current. This would need to be verified like a silver badge with witnesses, etc. Period! No exceptions. You either love the sport of soaring (XC) and are competent at it OR you are not. We need CFIGs to be embasadors for cross country soaring and truly love it. Don't tell me...SHOW ME! Prove it.

3) FAA examiners would also need to have a 100km cross country every 2 years. They need to be able to evaluate the students ability to understand cross country soaring in the oral examination. Without some minimum cross country experience themselves, this is a total pushover.

I'll retreat to my bunker for the fallout this post will create! ;-). But I have to say we need some changes in this area of the sport.

Sean

[Dan Marotta]

As a newbie I was encouraged to fly in the TSA (Texas Soaring
Association) Labor Day lap races in Sports Class. On the practice day,
I was a couple of miles outbound when a woman who'd started with me was
finishing! After I landed, I asked her how she flew so fast. She told
me not to circle so much.

The first race day was a small triangle with a 50+ KM leg so I declared
a Silver Distance and was careful to take pictures for both the turn
points and for the badge leg. The quadrants were different! I achieved
the badge leg and, in fact, took first place in Sports. One more tug on
the line which set the hook even deeper.

On 8/19/2015 5:10 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 17:17:46 -0700, unclhank wrote:
>
>> Unless there has been a change that I am not aware of, one can declare a
>> remote start point, fly to a remote finish. and return to the home base.
>>
> Yes, of course. A Silver distance can be done as you describe *provided
> that* it has a 50km leg, which is all that counts for Silver.
>
> I thought the post I replied to could be read as if flying a closed task
> totalling 50km would count as Silver Distance but it would not.
>
>> Altitude loss is calculated from release height to height at finish
>> point. The task some of our folks have done for this turns out to
>> require about a 130k flight which seems about right if one is flying
>> modern glass.
>>
> Too true. The prospective Silver Badge holder should read the rulebook
> before planning any of the three elements, but always remebering that the
> Silver C can be and has been completed in one flight!
>
>

--
Dan Marotta

[Sean Fidler]

One big glaring issue I see in regards to encouraging XC is that a short cross country flight is not a requirement for earning a glider private rating (or a commercial rating for that matter)?

If we let students earn their "glider rating" purely by flying within gliding range of the airport, we unsurprisingly get a large portion of "rated" glider pilots who become very comfortable not venturing outside of gliding range of the airport. This is really no surprise, is it?

"Train how you fight, fight how you train..."

If students (and their instructors), as part of their training, never have to truly think about, plan or execute XC skills are we not setting them up for XC failure? More importantly, our CFIGs can happily exists as CFIGs without any skill, experience or desire for cross country flight! You can get a CFIG rating and keep it today without ever having ventured outside of "gliding range" of the airport! In fact, many CFIGs openly discourage XC flight as irresponsible, etc. Land outs are bad...mmm-Kay! The same goes for most FAA glider "examiners(?)." This is incredible to me and probably a little frustrating to many of us.

Many (most?, but not all!) glider "instructors" simply never learn XC skills and therefore never really teach it (or meaningfully encourage it). They often don't have a great LOVE for cross country. They often don't understand it. Many see glider flight close to the airport as normal and how it "should" be. Many are not passionate about moving their students towards cross country. Obviously, these glider "instructors" are not the greatest "spark-plugs" for preparing new glider pilots to get into the more advanced levels of the sport of soaring (XC). In certain cases they are "allowed" to actively discourage developing cross country skills (that's dangerous, etc). They know who they are.

This broken dynamic is a major problem that we face with soaring today. It is at least part of the reason why we are seeing fewer new pilots joining us on cross country's.

If I was "king" ;-) I would fundamentally change this FAA glider instruction dynamic.

1) Students would have to plan for and complete a short 50km cross country as part of the flight training process. Instructors would have to truly teach this XC skill, and help the student practice it! This short XC would be a required element. The student would not have to do this solo. Waivers for instruction in difficult terrain (why get flight training here?) or poor weather (why get glider training in the winter?) would be allowed, but in general XC would be an important highlight of the glider flight training experience (vs something that is just glanced over). Just like the long cross country is a highlight of a private power rating, the XC element of the glider rating would be the most memorable (and inspirational) for the student! If I remember correctly the long cross country (power) is done both with an instructor and solo! Why is this short XC not at least a requirement with the instructor with gliders? It makes no sense to me. Even a 20 km cross country would be better than nothing.

2) CFIGs would need to compete a 100km cross country (with a student or solo) every 2 years to remain current. This would need to be verified like a silver badge is today with witnesses, etc. Period! No exceptions. You either love the sport of soaring (XC) and are competent at it OR you are not. We need CFIGs to be ambassadors for cross country soaring and truly love it. Don't tell me...SHOW ME! Prove it.

3) FAA examiners would also need to have a 100km cross country every 2 years. They need to be able to evaluate the students ability to understand cross country soaring in the oral examination. Without some minimum cross country experience themselves, this is a total pushover.

I'll retreat to my bunker for the fallout this post will create! ;-). But I have to say we need some changes in this area of the sport.

Sean

[Sarah[_2_]]

You're very lucky to have had the support of a big club. Our club is smaller, and there's only a handful of us that fly X/C at the moment.

There's nothing else as convincing for showing you it's possible as other's doing it. The OLC is nice for this too, but in-person same-day is more fun..

> I was a couple of miles outbound when a woman who'd started
> with me was finishing!* After I landed, I asked her how she flew so
> fast.* She told me not to circle so much.

You mean... a "female"? ;) Awesome.

-- the other "Sarah A" in MN


On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 9:33:20 AM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
> As a newbie I was encouraged to fly in the TSA (Texas Soaring
> Association) Labor Day lap races in Sports Class.* On the practice
> day, I was a couple of miles outbound when a woman who'd started
> with me was finishing!* After I landed, I asked her how she flew so
> fast.* She told me not to circle so much.
>
>
>
> The first race day was a small triangle with a 50+ KM leg so I
> declared a Silver Distance and was careful to take pictures for both
> the turn points and for the badge leg.* The quadrants were
> different!* I achieved the badge leg and, in fact, took first place
> in Sports.* One more tug on the line which set the hook even deeper..
>
>
>
>
> On 8/19/2015 5:10 AM, Martin Gregorie
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 17:17:46 -0700, unclhank wrote:
>
>
>
> Unless there has been a change that I am not aware of, one can declare a
> remote start point, fly to a remote finish. and return to the home base.
>
>
>
> Yes, of course. A Silver distance can be done as you describe *provided
> that* it has a 50km leg, which is all that counts for Silver.
>
> I thought the post I replied to could be read as if flying a closed task
> totalling 50km would count as Silver Distance but it would not.
>
>
>
> Altitude loss is calculated from release height to height at finish
> point. The task some of our folks have done for this turns out to
> require about a 130k flight which seems about right if one is flying
> modern glass.
>
>
>
> Too true. The prospective Silver Badge holder should read the rulebook
> before planning any of the three elements, but always remebering that the
> Silver C can be and has been completed in one flight!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dan Marotta

[Dan Marotta]

Yes, a female. Sharon Smith. I wonder if she's still flying.

On 8/19/2015 8:43 AM, Sarah wrote:
> You're very lucky to have had the support of a big club. Our club is smaller, and there's only a handful of us that fly X/C at the moment.
>
> There's nothing else as convincing for showing you it's possible as other's doing it. The OLC is nice for this too, but in-person same-day is more fun.
>
>> I was a couple of miles outbound when a woman who'd started
>> with me was finishing! After I landed, I asked her how she flew so
>> fast. She told me not to circle so much.
> You mean... a "female"? ;) Awesome.
>
> -- the other "Sarah A" in MN
>
>
> On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 9:33:20 AM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
>> As a newbie I was encouraged to fly in the TSA (Texas Soaring
>> Association) Labor Day lap races in Sports Class. On the practice
>> day, I was a couple of miles outbound when a woman who'd started
>> with me was finishing! After I landed, I asked her how she flew so
>> fast. She told me not to circle so much.
>>
>>
>>
>> The first race day was a small triangle with a 50+ KM leg so I
>> declared a Silver Distance and was careful to take pictures for both
>> the turn points and for the badge leg. The quadrants were
>> different! I achieved the badge leg and, in fact, took first place
>> in Sports. One more tug on the line which set the hook even deeper.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 8/19/2015 5:10 AM, Martin Gregorie
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 17:17:46 -0700, unclhank wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Unless there has been a change that I am not aware of, one can declare a
>> remote start point, fly to a remote finish. and return to the home base.
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, of course. A Silver distance can be done as you describe *provided
>> that* it has a 50km leg, which is all that counts for Silver.
>>
>> I thought the post I replied to could be read as if flying a closed task
>> totalling 50km would count as Silver Distance but it would not.
>>
>>
>>
>> Altitude loss is calculated from release height to height at finish
>> point. The task some of our folks have done for this turns out to
>> require about a 130k flight which seems about right if one is flying
>> modern glass.
>>
>>
>>
>> Too true. The prospective Silver Badge holder should read the rulebook
>> before planning any of the three elements, but always remebering that the
>> Silver C can be and has been completed in one flight!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Dan Marotta

--
Dan Marotta

[Tango Whisky]

Very good point.
Under the new EASA rules, students have to demonstrate xc-capabilities before earning their licence.
In Germany, that has been mandatory ever since. And in Germany or France, a candidate for FI had to prove a total XC experience of at least 500 km (and the total training time obtaining the FI level is one year, typically).

Bert
Ventus cM TW

Am Mittwoch, 19. August 2015 16:43:14 UTC+2 schrieb Sean Fidler:
> One big glaring issue I see in regards to encouraging XC is that a short cross country flight is not a requirement for earning a glider private rating (or a commercial rating for that matter)?
>
> If we let students earn their "glider rating" purely by flying within gliding range of the airport, we unsurprisingly get a large portion of "rated" glider pilots who become very comfortable not venturing outside of gliding range of the airport. This is really no surprise, is it?
>
> "Train how you fight, fight how you train..."
>
> If students (and their instructors), as part of their training, never have to truly think about, plan or execute XC skills are we not setting them up for XC failure? More importantly, our CFIGs can happily exists as CFIGs without any skill, experience or desire for cross country flight! You can get a CFIG rating and keep it today without ever having ventured outside of "gliding range" of the airport! In fact, many CFIGs openly discourage XC flight as irresponsible, etc. Land outs are bad...mmm-Kay! The same goes for most FAA glider "examiners(?)." This is incredible to me and probably a little frustrating to many of us.
>
> Many (most?, but not all!) glider "instructors" simply never learn XC skills and therefore never really teach it (or meaningfully encourage it). They often don't have a great LOVE for cross country. They often don't understand it. Many see glider flight close to the airport as normal and how it "should" be. Many are not passionate about moving their students towards cross country. Obviously, these glider "instructors" are not the greatest "spark-plugs" for preparing new glider pilots to get into the more advanced levels of the sport of soaring (XC). In certain cases they are "allowed" to actively discourage developing cross country skills (that's dangerous, etc). They know who they are.
>
> This broken dynamic is a major problem that we face with soaring today. It is at least part of the reason why we are seeing fewer new pilots joining us on cross country's.
>
> If I was "king" ;-) I would fundamentally change this FAA glider instruction dynamic.
>
> 1) Students would have to plan for and complete a short 50km cross country as part of the flight training process. Instructors would have to truly teach this XC skill, and help the student practice it! This short XC would be a required element. The student would not have to do this solo. Waivers for instruction in difficult terrain (why get flight training here?) or poor weather (why get glider training in the winter?) would be allowed, but in general XC would be an important highlight of the glider flight training experience (vs something that is just glanced over). Just like the long cross country is a highlight of a private power rating, the XC element of the glider rating would be the most memorable (and inspirational) for the student! If I remember correctly the long cross country (power) is done both with an instructor and solo! Why is this short XC not at least a requirement with the instructor with gliders? It makes no sense to me. Even a 20 km cross country would be better than nothing.
>
> 2) CFIGs would need to compete a 100km cross country (with a student or solo) every 2 years to remain current. This would need to be verified like a silver badge is today with witnesses, etc. Period! No exceptions. You either love the sport of soaring (XC) and are competent at it OR you are not. We need CFIGs to be ambassadors for cross country soaring and truly love it. Don't tell me...SHOW ME! Prove it.
>
> 3) FAA examiners would also need to have a 100km cross country every 2 years. They need to be able to evaluate the students ability to understand cross country soaring in the oral examination. Without some minimum cross country experience themselves, this is a total pushover.
>
> I'll retreat to my bunker for the fallout this post will create! ;-). But I have to say we need some changes in this area of the sport.
>
> Sean

[Bob Pasker]

ACA people need to answer their email. I am not going to drive 90 minutes to their monthly meeting only to find out that it was moved/cancelled or that everyone is up in yenimsville at a contest.

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 6:54:22 PM UTC-4, wrote:
>
> Blairstown has one of the most active cross country clubs in the US, Aero Club Albatross. They has 1-26's to do XC in. They have a 1-34, an LS-4, and an LS-3. They also base a 1-34 at Wurtsboro which is open weekends an most week days.
> I run a "rookie school" at the annual Region 2 contest which involves classroom training and active mentoring. That is done in coordination with the Region 2 "Bus class" contest which is flown using trainer class 2 seaters such as ASK-21's and Grob twins.
> Our club members at Valley Soaring Club in Middletown either do their Silver distance by going to Blairstown, commonly in the club 1-26 or 1-34, or by doing a closed course that uses a declared remote start and remote finish.
> Lots of people fly XC from sites around an hour from NYC.
> UH

[Bob Pasker]

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 10:43:14 AM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> One big glaring issue I see in regards to encouraging XC is that a short cross country flight is not a requirement for earning a glider private rating (or a commercial rating for that matter)?

Honestly, at the time when I took my commercial glider checkride, I wasn't prepared to do a cross country.

Instead, i focused on the Silver badge achievements after my rating.

[Bob Pasker]

so i got one comment on the "graduated training flights" (which immediately devolved into a flurry of responses on the nuances of badge flights) and one comment on where to fly XC out of the NYC area.

is the lack of enthusiasm for adressing these 4 actual problems encountered by an actual interested newbie glider pilot a reflection of the sport's inability to attract and encourage new XC pilots?

--bob

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 5:49:54 PM UTC-4, Bob Pasker wrote:
> as someone who needs no additional inspiration to become an XC glider pilot (I have Silver Altitude and Silver Distance, and have flown 4.5 and 8.0 with Kempton in his ASH-25), here are the obstacles:
>
> A glider. I either have to buy a glider and only fly out of a local airpot (Blairstown or Wurstburo), since I don't neither have a vehicle that can tow a glider nor do I have the time to tow it anywhere. Or I have to find a club that allows XC flights. I have tried to contact Blairstown numerous times, and nobody answers their email. Wurstboro is only open week-ends, and is therefore less desirable. Lastly, I can continue to rent out of commercial operations, but all of them have been fairly unwilling to let me take a glider out of the local area without substantial time in the area, with the notable except of Soaring NV.
>
> Graduated training flights. It would be great if the locals would put up on their website some proposed training flights of increasing difficulty suited to the terrain and the typical weather of for the area. These graduated training flights should be structured around Silver Distance, Gold Distance, and Diamond Goal. For example, for Silver Distance as a triangle, there could be two practice flights, out and back to each of the other two points on the triangle, and then the third for all three points.
>
> Dual XC flights. For those of you who have single-seat gliders, get current in a mid-performance two-seater and take people on cross-country flights.. Kempton took me on two flights last month (see OLC links below), and I learned more in one hour of XC with him than I have from anyone else. You don't have to be a CFI. Any one who is ready for XC should be able to learn just from watching and asking questions.
>
> http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/flightinfo.html?flightId=-925876405
> http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/flightinfo.html?flightId=-976935827
>
> Contest training. No where have I seen any in-person training on how to actually fly a contest (which doesn't mean it doesn't exist). I would love to see a 1-hour training video that takes me through the entire process, or even a "contest training camp" (maybe the OLC camp?)
>
> I guess this is a pretty good start.
>
> --bob

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 10:43:14 AM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> One big glaring issue I see in regards to encouraging XC is that a short cross country flight is not a requirement for earning a glider private rating (or a commercial rating for that matter)?
>
> If we let students earn their "glider rating" purely by flying within gliding range of the airport, we unsurprisingly get a large portion of "rated" glider pilots who become very comfortable not venturing outside of gliding range of the airport. This is really no surprise, is it?
>
> "Train how you fight, fight how you train..."
>
> If students (and their instructors), as part of their training, never have to truly think about, plan or execute XC skills are we not setting them up for XC failure? More importantly, our CFIGs can happily exists as CFIGs without any skill, experience or desire for cross country flight! You can get a CFIG rating and keep it today without ever having ventured outside of "gliding range" of the airport! In fact, many CFIGs openly discourage XC flight as irresponsible, etc. Land outs are bad...mmm-Kay! The same goes for most FAA glider "examiners(?)." This is incredible to me and probably a little frustrating to many of us.
>
> Many (most?, but not all!) glider "instructors" simply never learn XC skills and therefore never really teach it (or meaningfully encourage it). They often don't have a great LOVE for cross country. They often don't understand it. Many see glider flight close to the airport as normal and how it "should" be. Many are not passionate about moving their students towards cross country. Obviously, these glider "instructors" are not the greatest "spark-plugs" for preparing new glider pilots to get into the more advanced levels of the sport of soaring (XC). In certain cases they are "allowed" to actively discourage developing cross country skills (that's dangerous, etc). They know who they are.
>
> This broken dynamic is a major problem that we face with soaring today. It is at least part of the reason why we are seeing fewer new pilots joining us on cross country's.
>
> If I was "king" ;-) I would fundamentally change this FAA glider instruction dynamic.
>
> 1) Students would have to plan for and complete a short 50km cross country as part of the flight training process. Instructors would have to truly teach this XC skill, and help the student practice it! This short XC would be a required element. The student would not have to do this solo. Waivers for instruction in difficult terrain (why get flight training here?) or poor weather (why get glider training in the winter?) would be allowed, but in general XC would be an important highlight of the glider flight training experience (vs something that is just glanced over). Just like the long cross country is a highlight of a private power rating, the XC element of the glider rating would be the most memorable (and inspirational) for the student! If I remember correctly the long cross country (power) is done both with an instructor and solo! Why is this short XC not at least a requirement with the instructor with gliders? It makes no sense to me. Even a 20 km cross country would be better than nothing.
>
> 2) CFIGs would need to compete a 100km cross country (with a student or solo) every 2 years to remain current. This would need to be verified like a silver badge is today with witnesses, etc. Period! No exceptions. You either love the sport of soaring (XC) and are competent at it OR you are not. We need CFIGs to be ambassadors for cross country soaring and truly love it. Don't tell me...SHOW ME! Prove it.
>
> 3) FAA examiners would also need to have a 100km cross country every 2 years. They need to be able to evaluate the students ability to understand cross country soaring in the oral examination. Without some minimum cross country experience themselves, this is a total pushover.
>
> I'll retreat to my bunker for the fallout this post will create! ;-). But I have to say we need some changes in this area of the sport.
>
> Sean

It's a really good thing you are not king.
Cross country training is good to have but is not a must to make good, safe pilots. That said, training should(must) be done in a way that teaches the skills and judgement needed to advance to cross country. I tell my students that I'm teaching them to be able to land in fields because they may well do it one day.
UH

[[email protected]]

Sean said: <<Many (most?, but not all!) glider "instructors" simply never learn XC skills and therefore never really teach it (or meaningfully encourage it).>>

I don't know to what extent this is true. I suspect many have some XC experience even if they don't practice it regularly, in particular because they enjoy and spend most of their cockpit time instructing.

That said, my father was always a very popular instructor at our club when I was growing up in part, I believe, because he taught soaring whenever possible, not just gliding. I enjoyed this popular demand during the brief years when I did some instructing, as well. The best way to learn for most is hands-on, either dual or lead-follow.

While I've never encountered an instructor who spoke against XC or competition per se, I did run across a fellow who was seeking a signoff for his CFI-G check ride. We got off tow on a dismal day and stumbled into a weak thermal. "Hey," I said, surprised, "Let's see if we can work this back up."

His voice was uncertain as he confessed he really didn't know how. He was a perfectly adequate pilot in every other respect and had been flying at our club for years, although (in retrospect), mostly rides and end-of-the-day smooth air flights.

It's been way too long since I took a written test so I don't know how many questions relate to soaring or XC but I suspect most examiners don't test for those skills. Getting that changed sounds like an imposing obstacle that will not easily be surmounted. Better to work within the model so ably proven by Hank Nixon, Erik Mann/Aero Club Albatross, Harris Hill Soaring, and others in this country. If your club/organization has the equipment and the intent but you're not getting comparable results, maybe a change in tactics is in order. I've seen the thriving XC/competition cultures at Blairstown/ACA and Valley Soaring up close and they work.

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
U.S.A.

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 9:20:55 AM UTC-6, Tango Whisky wrote:
> Very good point.
> Under the new EASA rules, students have to demonstrate xc-capabilities before earning their licence.
> In Germany, that has been mandatory ever since. And in Germany or France, a candidate for FI had to prove a total XC experience of at least 500 km (and the total training time obtaining the FI level is one year, typically).
>
> Bert
> Ventus cM TW
>
> Am Mittwoch, 19. August 2015 16:43:14 UTC+2 schrieb Sean Fidler:
> > One big glaring issue I see in regards to encouraging XC is that a short cross country flight is not a requirement for earning a glider private rating (or a commercial rating for that matter)?
> >
> > If we let students earn their "glider rating" purely by flying within gliding range of the airport, we unsurprisingly get a large portion of "rated" glider pilots who become very comfortable not venturing outside of gliding range of the airport. This is really no surprise, is it?
> >
> > "Train how you fight, fight how you train..."
> >
> > If students (and their instructors), as part of their training, never have to truly think about, plan or execute XC skills are we not setting them up for XC failure? More importantly, our CFIGs can happily exists as CFIGs without any skill, experience or desire for cross country flight! You can get a CFIG rating and keep it today without ever having ventured outside of "gliding range" of the airport! In fact, many CFIGs openly discourage XC flight as irresponsible, etc. Land outs are bad...mmm-Kay! The same goes for most FAA glider "examiners(?)." This is incredible to me and probably a little frustrating to many of us.
> >
> > Many (most?, but not all!) glider "instructors" simply never learn XC skills and therefore never really teach it (or meaningfully encourage it). They often don't have a great LOVE for cross country. They often don't understand it. Many see glider flight close to the airport as normal and how it "should" be. Many are not passionate about moving their students towards cross country. Obviously, these glider "instructors" are not the greatest "spark-plugs" for preparing new glider pilots to get into the more advanced levels of the sport of soaring (XC). In certain cases they are "allowed" to actively discourage developing cross country skills (that's dangerous, etc). They know who they are.
> >
> > This broken dynamic is a major problem that we face with soaring today. It is at least part of the reason why we are seeing fewer new pilots joining us on cross country's.
> >
> > If I was "king" ;-) I would fundamentally change this FAA glider instruction dynamic.
> >
> > 1) Students would have to plan for and complete a short 50km cross country as part of the flight training process. Instructors would have to truly teach this XC skill, and help the student practice it! This short XC would be a required element. The student would not have to do this solo. Waivers for instruction in difficult terrain (why get flight training here?) or poor weather (why get glider training in the winter?) would be allowed, but in general XC would be an important highlight of the glider flight training experience (vs something that is just glanced over). Just like the long cross country is a highlight of a private power rating, the XC element of the glider rating would be the most memorable (and inspirational) for the student! If I remember correctly the long cross country (power) is done both with an instructor and solo! Why is this short XC not at least a requirement with the instructor with gliders? It makes no sense to me. Even a 20 km cross country would be better than nothing.
> >
> > 2) CFIGs would need to compete a 100km cross country (with a student or solo) every 2 years to remain current. This would need to be verified like a silver badge is today with witnesses, etc. Period! No exceptions. You either love the sport of soaring (XC) and are competent at it OR you are not. We need CFIGs to be ambassadors for cross country soaring and truly love it. Don't tell me...SHOW ME! Prove it.
> >
> > 3) FAA examiners would also need to have a 100km cross country every 2 years. They need to be able to evaluate the students ability to understand cross country soaring in the oral examination. Without some minimum cross country experience themselves, this is a total pushover.
> >
> > I'll retreat to my bunker for the fallout this post will create! ;-). But I have to say we need some changes in this area of the sport.
> >
> > Sean

I expect the FAA will eventually change Part 61 to fall in line with EASA.

FWIW, the EASA experience requirements for the equivalent of a PP-G are:


10 hours of dual instruction
-
2 hours supervised solo flight time
-
45 launches and landings
-
1 cross country flight of at least 100km under the supervision of an instructor

[Sean Fidler]

That is FANTASTIC NEWS!

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 3:48:50 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 9:20:55 AM UTC-6, Tango Whisky wrote:
> > Very good point.
> > Under the new EASA rules, students have to demonstrate xc-capabilities before earning their licence.
> > In Germany, that has been mandatory ever since. And in Germany or France, a candidate for FI had to prove a total XC experience of at least 500 km (and the total training time obtaining the FI level is one year, typically).
> >
> > Bert
> > Ventus cM TW
> >
> > Am Mittwoch, 19. August 2015 16:43:14 UTC+2 schrieb Sean Fidler:
> > > One big glaring issue I see in regards to encouraging XC is that a short cross country flight is not a requirement for earning a glider private rating (or a commercial rating for that matter)?
> > >
> > > If we let students earn their "glider rating" purely by flying within gliding range of the airport, we unsurprisingly get a large portion of "rated" glider pilots who become very comfortable not venturing outside of gliding range of the airport. This is really no surprise, is it?
> > >
> > > "Train how you fight, fight how you train..."
> > >
> > > If students (and their instructors), as part of their training, never have to truly think about, plan or execute XC skills are we not setting them up for XC failure? More importantly, our CFIGs can happily exists as CFIGs without any skill, experience or desire for cross country flight! You can get a CFIG rating and keep it today without ever having ventured outside of "gliding range" of the airport! In fact, many CFIGs openly discourage XC flight as irresponsible, etc. Land outs are bad...mmm-Kay! The same goes for most FAA glider "examiners(?)." This is incredible to me and probably a little frustrating to many of us.
> > >
> > > Many (most?, but not all!) glider "instructors" simply never learn XC skills and therefore never really teach it (or meaningfully encourage it). They often don't have a great LOVE for cross country. They often don't understand it. Many see glider flight close to the airport as normal and how it "should" be. Many are not passionate about moving their students towards cross country. Obviously, these glider "instructors" are not the greatest "spark-plugs" for preparing new glider pilots to get into the more advanced levels of the sport of soaring (XC). In certain cases they are "allowed" to actively discourage developing cross country skills (that's dangerous, etc). They know who they are.
> > >
> > > This broken dynamic is a major problem that we face with soaring today. It is at least part of the reason why we are seeing fewer new pilots joining us on cross country's.
> > >
> > > If I was "king" ;-) I would fundamentally change this FAA glider instruction dynamic.
> > >
> > > 1) Students would have to plan for and complete a short 50km cross country as part of the flight training process. Instructors would have to truly teach this XC skill, and help the student practice it! This short XC would be a required element. The student would not have to do this solo. Waivers for instruction in difficult terrain (why get flight training here?) or poor weather (why get glider training in the winter?) would be allowed, but in general XC would be an important highlight of the glider flight training experience (vs something that is just glanced over). Just like the long cross country is a highlight of a private power rating, the XC element of the glider rating would be the most memorable (and inspirational) for the student! If I remember correctly the long cross country (power) is done both with an instructor and solo! Why is this short XC not at least a requirement with the instructor with gliders? It makes no sense to me. Even a 20 km cross country would be better than nothing.
> > >
> > > 2) CFIGs would need to compete a 100km cross country (with a student or solo) every 2 years to remain current. This would need to be verified like a silver badge is today with witnesses, etc. Period! No exceptions. You either love the sport of soaring (XC) and are competent at it OR you are not. We need CFIGs to be ambassadors for cross country soaring and truly love it. Don't tell me...SHOW ME! Prove it.
> > >
> > > 3) FAA examiners would also need to have a 100km cross country every 2 years. They need to be able to evaluate the students ability to understand cross country soaring in the oral examination. Without some minimum cross country experience themselves, this is a total pushover.
> > >
> > > I'll retreat to my bunker for the fallout this post will create! ;-).. But I have to say we need some changes in this area of the sport.
> > >
> > > Sean
>
> I expect the FAA will eventually change Part 61 to fall in line with EASA..
>
> FWIW, the EASA experience requirements for the equivalent of a PP-G are:
>
>
> 10 hours of dual instruction
> -
> 2 hours supervised solo flight time
> -
> 45 launches and landings
> -
> 1 cross country flight of at least 100km under the supervision of an instructor

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 10:43:14 AM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> One big glaring issue I see in regards to encouraging XC is that a short cross country flight is not a requirement for earning a glider private rating (or a commercial rating for that matter)?
>
> If we let students earn their "glider rating" purely by flying within gliding range of the airport, we unsurprisingly get a large portion of "rated" glider pilots who become very comfortable not venturing outside of gliding range of the airport. This is really no surprise, is it?
>
> "Train how you fight, fight how you train..."
>
> If students (and their instructors), as part of their training, never have to truly think about, plan or execute XC skills are we not setting them up for XC failure? More importantly, our CFIGs can happily exists as CFIGs without any skill, experience or desire for cross country flight! You can get a CFIG rating and keep it today without ever having ventured outside of "gliding range" of the airport! In fact, many CFIGs openly discourage XC flight as irresponsible, etc. Land outs are bad...mmm-Kay! The same goes for most FAA glider "examiners(?)." This is incredible to me and probably a little frustrating to many of us.
>
> Many (most?, but not all!) glider "instructors" simply never learn XC skills and therefore never really teach it (or meaningfully encourage it). They often don't have a great LOVE for cross country. They often don't understand it. Many see glider flight close to the airport as normal and how it "should" be. Many are not passionate about moving their students towards cross country. Obviously, these glider "instructors" are not the greatest "spark-plugs" for preparing new glider pilots to get into the more advanced levels of the sport of soaring (XC). In certain cases they are "allowed" to actively discourage developing cross country skills (that's dangerous, etc). They know who they are.
>
> This broken dynamic is a major problem that we face with soaring today. It is at least part of the reason why we are seeing fewer new pilots joining us on cross country's.
>
> If I was "king" ;-) I would fundamentally change this FAA glider instruction dynamic.
>
> 1) Students would have to plan for and complete a short 50km cross country as part of the flight training process. Instructors would have to truly teach this XC skill, and help the student practice it! This short XC would be a required element. The student would not have to do this solo. Waivers for instruction in difficult terrain (why get flight training here?) or poor weather (why get glider training in the winter?) would be allowed, but in general XC would be an important highlight of the glider flight training experience (vs something that is just glanced over). Just like the long cross country is a highlight of a private power rating, the XC element of the glider rating would be the most memorable (and inspirational) for the student! If I remember correctly the long cross country (power) is done both with an instructor and solo! Why is this short XC not at least a requirement with the instructor with gliders? It makes no sense to me. Even a 20 km cross country would be better than nothing.
>
> 2) CFIGs would need to compete a 100km cross country (with a student or solo) every 2 years to remain current. This would need to be verified like a silver badge is today with witnesses, etc. Period! No exceptions. You either love the sport of soaring (XC) and are competent at it OR you are not. We need CFIGs to be ambassadors for cross country soaring and truly love it. Don't tell me...SHOW ME! Prove it.
>
> 3) FAA examiners would also need to have a 100km cross country every 2 years. They need to be able to evaluate the students ability to understand cross country soaring in the oral examination. Without some minimum cross country experience themselves, this is a total pushover.
>
> I'll retreat to my bunker for the fallout this post will create! ;-). But I have to say we need some changes in this area of the sport.
>
> Sean

True...... at least in our group, most CFIG's have done some cross country in gliders. Some CFIG's have even competed (one of our current ones is a past 15M nationals winner!).

When I did my initial CFIG process, I was "doing poorly" in the oral with the FAA examiner, UNTIL he asked me my background. Since I was looking to "give back to soaring" and NOT "add a rating" (along with badge work & contest flying), he worked with me. He had done some soaring in the past.
Yes, I became a CFIG for 8 years.

Later on, a club member (a FAA DE) and I went flying in his 2 place glass. I wanted to get a biennial as well as a current checkout in his ship. When we had covered "what was required", he stated, "What do you want to do now?". We went cross country, it was simple for me, new to him.
I think it helped open his eyes towards what was possible, makes him a better DE in the long run.

[[email protected]]

Why do you have to wait for the FAA to mandate it? Can't clubs implement a similar policy of their own accord?

I can understand a commercial organisation employing any qualified instructor regardless of actual soaring experience, they're not interested in renting gliders for solo cross country. If gliding clubs want to grow their membership they need to offer goals & challenges beyond local soaring, so why on earth would they let instructors that don't believe in cross country flying anywhere near student pilots? At the very least restrict them to basic/early instruction only.

Cross country gliding should be seen as a natural progression - learning to fly, learning to soar, learning to fly cross country. An instructor that can't do all of those is only half an instructor.

Chip's story of an instructor who "confessed he really didn't know how" is truly jaw dropping. He might as well have confessed that he didn't really know how to land.

Ed


On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 3:43:14 PM UTC+1, Sean Fidler wrote:
> One big glaring issue I see in regards to encouraging XC is that a short cross country flight is not a requirement for earning a glider private rating (or a commercial rating for that matter)?
>
> If we let students earn their "glider rating" purely by flying within gliding range of the airport, we unsurprisingly get a large portion of "rated" glider pilots who become very comfortable not venturing outside of gliding range of the airport. This is really no surprise, is it?
>
> "Train how you fight, fight how you train..."
>
> If students (and their instructors), as part of their training, never have to truly think about, plan or execute XC skills are we not setting them up for XC failure? More importantly, our CFIGs can happily exists as CFIGs without any skill, experience or desire for cross country flight! You can get a CFIG rating and keep it today without ever having ventured outside of "gliding range" of the airport! In fact, many CFIGs openly discourage XC flight as irresponsible, etc. Land outs are bad...mmm-Kay! The same goes for most FAA glider "examiners(?)." This is incredible to me and probably a little frustrating to many of us.
>
> Many (most?, but not all!) glider "instructors" simply never learn XC skills and therefore never really teach it (or meaningfully encourage it). They often don't have a great LOVE for cross country. They often don't understand it. Many see glider flight close to the airport as normal and how it "should" be. Many are not passionate about moving their students towards cross country. Obviously, these glider "instructors" are not the greatest "spark-plugs" for preparing new glider pilots to get into the more advanced levels of the sport of soaring (XC). In certain cases they are "allowed" to actively discourage developing cross country skills (that's dangerous, etc). They know who they are.
>
> This broken dynamic is a major problem that we face with soaring today. It is at least part of the reason why we are seeing fewer new pilots joining us on cross country's.
>
> If I was "king" ;-) I would fundamentally change this FAA glider instruction dynamic.
>
> 1) Students would have to plan for and complete a short 50km cross country as part of the flight training process. Instructors would have to truly teach this XC skill, and help the student practice it! This short XC would be a required element. The student would not have to do this solo. Waivers for instruction in difficult terrain (why get flight training here?) or poor weather (why get glider training in the winter?) would be allowed, but in general XC would be an important highlight of the glider flight training experience (vs something that is just glanced over). Just like the long cross country is a highlight of a private power rating, the XC element of the glider rating would be the most memorable (and inspirational) for the student! If I remember correctly the long cross country (power) is done both with an instructor and solo! Why is this short XC not at least a requirement with the instructor with gliders? It makes no sense to me. Even a 20 km cross country would be better than nothing.
>
> 2) CFIGs would need to compete a 100km cross country (with a student or solo) every 2 years to remain current. This would need to be verified like a silver badge is today with witnesses, etc. Period! No exceptions. You either love the sport of soaring (XC) and are competent at it OR you are not. We need CFIGs to be ambassadors for cross country soaring and truly love it. Don't tell me...SHOW ME! Prove it.
>
> 3) FAA examiners would also need to have a 100km cross country every 2 years. They need to be able to evaluate the students ability to understand cross country soaring in the oral examination. Without some minimum cross country experience themselves, this is a total pushover.
>
> I'll retreat to my bunker for the fallout this post will create! ;-). But I have to say we need some changes in this area of the sport.
>
> Sean

[[email protected]]

Not really. The actual EASA requirement is for a solo 50km flight or a dual 100km flight.

These do not have to be FAI silver badge qualifying flights. It is possible to fly a 50km quadrilateral without getting more than 15km from the airfield, ie local soaring on a half decent day. Also, the cross country flight is training, not a test; the student can be a passenger while the instructor goes for a jolly & points out a few landmarks, the flight still qualifies. The dual flight can be done in a TMG so it's all a bit of a joke.

The likelihood in my part of EASA-land is that we will continue to do 100km dual cross country flights as a test & if flown in a TMG to simulate typical gliding flight (ie not in straight lines at a constant altitude.) The legal minimum & what is sensible are not necessarily the same.

Ed


On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 9:02:06 PM UTC+1, Sean Fidler wrote:
> That is FANTASTIC NEWS!
>
> On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 3:48:50 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 9:20:55 AM UTC-6, Tango Whisky wrote:
> > > Very good point.
> > > Under the new EASA rules, students have to demonstrate xc-capabilities before earning their licence.
> > > In Germany, that has been mandatory ever since. And in Germany or France, a candidate for FI had to prove a total XC experience of at least 500 km (and the total training time obtaining the FI level is one year, typically).
> > >
> > > Bert
> > > Ventus cM TW
> > >
> > > Am Mittwoch, 19. August 2015 16:43:14 UTC+2 schrieb Sean Fidler:
> > > > One big glaring issue I see in regards to encouraging XC is that a short cross country flight is not a requirement for earning a glider private rating (or a commercial rating for that matter)?
> > > >
> > > > If we let students earn their "glider rating" purely by flying within gliding range of the airport, we unsurprisingly get a large portion of "rated" glider pilots who become very comfortable not venturing outside of gliding range of the airport. This is really no surprise, is it?
> > > >
> > > > "Train how you fight, fight how you train..."
> > > >
> > > > If students (and their instructors), as part of their training, never have to truly think about, plan or execute XC skills are we not setting them up for XC failure? More importantly, our CFIGs can happily exists as CFIGs without any skill, experience or desire for cross country flight! You can get a CFIG rating and keep it today without ever having ventured outside of "gliding range" of the airport! In fact, many CFIGs openly discourage XC flight as irresponsible, etc. Land outs are bad...mmm-Kay! The same goes for most FAA glider "examiners(?)." This is incredible to me and probably a little frustrating to many of us.
> > > >
> > > > Many (most?, but not all!) glider "instructors" simply never learn XC skills and therefore never really teach it (or meaningfully encourage it). They often don't have a great LOVE for cross country. They often don't understand it. Many see glider flight close to the airport as normal and how it "should" be. Many are not passionate about moving their students towards cross country. Obviously, these glider "instructors" are not the greatest "spark-plugs" for preparing new glider pilots to get into the more advanced levels of the sport of soaring (XC). In certain cases they are "allowed" to actively discourage developing cross country skills (that's dangerous, etc). They know who they are.
> > > >
> > > > This broken dynamic is a major problem that we face with soaring today. It is at least part of the reason why we are seeing fewer new pilots joining us on cross country's.
> > > >
> > > > If I was "king" ;-) I would fundamentally change this FAA glider instruction dynamic.
> > > >
> > > > 1) Students would have to plan for and complete a short 50km cross country as part of the flight training process. Instructors would have to truly teach this XC skill, and help the student practice it! This short XC would be a required element. The student would not have to do this solo. Waivers for instruction in difficult terrain (why get flight training here?) or poor weather (why get glider training in the winter?) would be allowed, but in general XC would be an important highlight of the glider flight training experience (vs something that is just glanced over). Just like the long cross country is a highlight of a private power rating, the XC element of the glider rating would be the most memorable (and inspirational) for the student! If I remember correctly the long cross country (power) is done both with an instructor and solo! Why is this short XC not at least a requirement with the instructor with gliders? It makes no sense to me. Even a 20 km cross country would be better than nothing.
> > > >
> > > > 2) CFIGs would need to compete a 100km cross country (with a student or solo) every 2 years to remain current. This would need to be verified like a silver badge is today with witnesses, etc. Period! No exceptions. You either love the sport of soaring (XC) and are competent at it OR you are not. We need CFIGs to be ambassadors for cross country soaring and truly love it. Don't tell me...SHOW ME! Prove it.
> > > >
> > > > 3) FAA examiners would also need to have a 100km cross country every 2 years. They need to be able to evaluate the students ability to understand cross country soaring in the oral examination. Without some minimum cross country experience themselves, this is a total pushover.
> > > >
> > > > I'll retreat to my bunker for the fallout this post will create! ;-). But I have to say we need some changes in this area of the sport.
> > > >
> > > > Sean
> >
> > I expect the FAA will eventually change Part 61 to fall in line with EASA.
> >
> > FWIW, the EASA experience requirements for the equivalent of a PP-G are:
> >
> >
> > 10 hours of dual instruction
> > -
> > 2 hours supervised solo flight time
> > -
> > 45 launches and landings
> > -
> > 1 cross country flight of at least 100km under the supervision of an instructor

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> Not really. The actual EASA requirement is for a solo 50km flight or a dual 100km flight.

Those experience requirements were copy and pasted directly from the current EASA regulations without edit.

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 6:33:43 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> Why do you have to wait for the FAA to mandate it? Can't clubs implement a similar policy of their own accord?
>
> I can understand a commercial organisation employing any qualified instructor regardless of actual soaring experience, they're not interested in renting gliders for solo cross country.

True. Many instructors at commercial operation don't have XC qualifications. Unfortunately, commercial operations train more than 80% of US glider pilots simply because they are bigger and operate more days a year than clubs. To do much good, I think XC requirements have to be in the regulations.

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 2:46:04 AM UTC+1, wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 7:01:26 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> > Not really. The actual EASA requirement is for a solo 50km flight or a dual 100km flight.
>
> Those experience requirements were copy and pasted directly from the current EASA regulations without edit.

You're reading something wrong. FCL.110.S:
(4) 1 solo cross-country flight of at least 50 km (27 NM) or 1 dual cross-country flight of at least 100 km (55 NM).

Straight from EASA:
http://easa.europa.eu/document-library/regulations/commission-regulation-eu-no-11782011

[JPMarks]

I think that it is unfair to give a bad rap to GFIC's who are not cross country pilots! In my opinion, the primary responsibility of an Instructor is to train and develop a safe, competent pilot. My Instrutors taught me well.. They taught me to fly with precision and most importantly I was taught had to make good decisions. When I started flying, 5 miles miles from the Field might as well have been 50 miles. I was taught how to thermal, land using TLAR. These are skill sets which allowed me to later "get away" from the field. I'll always remember the first time one of my instructors had me thermal at 1500 ft Agl. He said " You need to know what this looks like". We were within one mile of the runway.

I became partners in a 1-26 will still a student, later I moved to another partnership in a Standard Libelle.
It wasn't until I bought my own ship, a LS4, that I began to go cross country. It was my ship. I didn't have to answer to anybody but myself if I damaged the Ship. I have since moved to a ASW 27 with one other Partner.

My home Club is CCSC in southern Ohio. The people who made the difference were the experienced cross country pilots who took me under their wing. They offered encouragement. They have helped me evaluate my skill sets. We discuss weather, set turn points, and talk about the day afterwards. I was taught how to think of the next airport as my new " Home Field". They told me not to worry if I landed out. I knew they would retrieve me.They took me in with open arms. These are the people who have the skills and experience to help Folks to the next level. I have my Gold Badge with one Diamond.

OLC has provided an incentive to me to set goals and review my flights comparing to the Others I flew with that day. Racing isn't the only way.

The answer to our diminishing membership is not resolved by solely developing cross country pilots. An individual needs to make that decision on his own. In fact, cross county pilots, can a discourage individuals by showing "superior attitudes"

It takes a broad range of talents to run a successful Club. Retention might be improved by welcoming and acknowledging all contributions including non cross country Instructors.

BTW, a lot of revenue is generated for Clubs from Folks who just " Fly around the Patch"

Just my Thoughts and Experiece.

[RR]

I agree that all instructors do not need to be XC qualified. First you need students flying, then you need them soaring. As long as the "general" policy, is to support XC training your club will fledge more pilots. In our club, much XC "instruction" is done by non instructors.

One other policy we put in place is your first aero retrieve is free. This was to help eliminate "get homeites". Don't sweat it, land safely, we will come get you...

RR

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 4:12:43 AM UTC-5, Bruce Hoult wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 3:21:16 AM UTC+3, son_of_flubber wrote:
> > A highly respected CFI-G says "I NEVER want to land out" (to budding pilots gathered around the picnic table). "That's just dumb. Why would you get off tow below 1500 AGL? Why take that risk?"
>
> I have a number of times had tow pilots approach me after I landed from a multi-hour flight and ask why I got off at 800 ft or 1000 ft above launch height. Was there something wrong with the tow? No -- we flew through a big fat thermal!
>
> I'm actually amazed, when I fly with other pilots, how many carry on through juicy thermals to the launch height they already had in their heads.
>
> If you're flying along and suddenly the towplane shoots up above you, start counting. If the vario is now reading 10 (5 for euros) and you've counted past ten before the townplane suddenly drops away below you then just release and turn back hard.
>
> Of course, there's increased risk of it not really working and landing back for a relight. But I can't actually think of a time when it happened to me on a day when others were successfully soaring.
>
> One of the closest was when I was visiting the US and found a club near Joliet IL. Jumped in a Duo (a type I hadn't flown before, though I knew the Janus pretty well) with an instructor and surprised the heck out of him by releasing at 700 ft AGL. It very nearly didn't work, with about 15 min of scratching at around launch height. But then I got away to 4000 ft and we went on a nice tour of the area. (there was never any question of not being able to make it back, of course)

Bruce,
Thanks for mentioning our Chicago Glider Club near Joliet IL - and your flight in our Duo. I practice what you are preaching all the time and our tow-pilots sometimes ask the "what was wrong" question if I stay on tow all the way up to 2,000'. But then, I was trained on a winch back in Germany, we were lucky to get 1,500'.
Herb

[son_of_flubber]

On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 8:26:04 AM UTC-4, RR wrote:
> I agree that all instructors do not need to be XC qualified.

But I'd suggest that all instructors should be able and ready to:

1)land out close to the airport (it happens) and

2)have the skills to climb in a weak and ragged thermal.


The two most useful comments that I gotten from XC pilots (well after I earned my PPL-Glider):

1)You suck at thermal centering. You need to get into the core.

2)You need to bank steeper and fly slower.

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 9:43:14 AM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
> One big glaring issue I see in regards to encouraging XC is that a short cross country flight is not a requirement for earning a glider private rating (or a commercial rating for that matter)?
>
> If we let students earn their "glider rating" purely by flying within gliding range of the airport, we unsurprisingly get a large portion of "rated" glider pilots who become very comfortable not venturing outside of gliding range of the airport. This is really no surprise, is it?
>
> "Train how you fight, fight how you train..."
>
> If students (and their instructors), as part of their training, never have to truly think about, plan or execute XC skills are we not setting them up for XC failure? More importantly, our CFIGs can happily exists as CFIGs without any skill, experience or desire for cross country flight! You can get a CFIG rating and keep it today without ever having ventured outside of "gliding range" of the airport! In fact, many CFIGs openly discourage XC flight as irresponsible, etc. Land outs are bad...mmm-Kay! The same goes for most FAA glider "examiners(?)." This is incredible to me and probably a little frustrating to many of us.
>
> Many (most?, but not all!) glider "instructors" simply never learn XC skills and therefore never really teach it (or meaningfully encourage it). They often don't have a great LOVE for cross country. They often don't understand it. Many see glider flight close to the airport as normal and how it "should" be. Many are not passionate about moving their students towards cross country. Obviously, these glider "instructors" are not the greatest "spark-plugs" for preparing new glider pilots to get into the more advanced levels of the sport of soaring (XC). In certain cases they are "allowed" to actively discourage developing cross country skills (that's dangerous, etc). They know who they are.
>
> This broken dynamic is a major problem that we face with soaring today. It is at least part of the reason why we are seeing fewer new pilots joining us on cross country's.
>
> If I was "king" ;-) I would fundamentally change this FAA glider instruction dynamic.
>
> 1) Students would have to plan for and complete a short 50km cross country as part of the flight training process. Instructors would have to truly teach this XC skill, and help the student practice it! This short XC would be a required element. The student would not have to do this solo. Waivers for instruction in difficult terrain (why get flight training here?) or poor weather (why get glider training in the winter?) would be allowed, but in general XC would be an important highlight of the glider flight training experience (vs something that is just glanced over). Just like the long cross country is a highlight of a private power rating, the XC element of the glider rating would be the most memorable (and inspirational) for the student! If I remember correctly the long cross country (power) is done both with an instructor and solo! Why is this short XC not at least a requirement with the instructor with gliders? It makes no sense to me. Even a 20 km cross country would be better than nothing.
>
> 2) CFIGs would need to compete a 100km cross country (with a student or solo) every 2 years to remain current. This would need to be verified like a silver badge is today with witnesses, etc. Period! No exceptions. You either love the sport of soaring (XC) and are competent at it OR you are not. We need CFIGs to be ambassadors for cross country soaring and truly love it. Don't tell me...SHOW ME! Prove it.
>
> 3) FAA examiners would also need to have a 100km cross country every 2 years. They need to be able to evaluate the students ability to understand cross country soaring in the oral examination. Without some minimum cross country experience themselves, this is a total pushover.
>
> I'll retreat to my bunker for the fallout this post will create! ;-). But I have to say we need some changes in this area of the sport.
>
> Sean

Sean,
While I fully agree with you regarding making x-country training a part of the instruction toward a private rating... That's what it's still like in Germany, I had to do my 50 km Überlandflug as part of my license there back in 1981 (and in an old Ka 8 to boot). However, when I asked for a club glider to go x-country on a regular basis I encountered all kinds of obstacles. I overcame those but still found appallingly few other club members interested in joining me.
Having the 50-100 km x-country experience does not seem to affect many pilots' view of doing it on a regular basis. As was said here before, you have to be motivated deep inside. I found that reading about long flights did that for me, today I guess YouTube would get new pilots hooked.
Herb

[Bruce Hoult]

On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 4:26:57 PM UTC+3, wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 4:12:43 AM UTC-5, Bruce Hoult wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 3:21:16 AM UTC+3, son_of_flubber wrote:
> > > A highly respected CFI-G says "I NEVER want to land out" (to budding pilots gathered around the picnic table). "That's just dumb. Why would you get off tow below 1500 AGL? Why take that risk?"
> >
> > I have a number of times had tow pilots approach me after I landed from a multi-hour flight and ask why I got off at 800 ft or 1000 ft above launch height. Was there something wrong with the tow? No -- we flew through a big fat thermal!
> >
> > I'm actually amazed, when I fly with other pilots, how many carry on through juicy thermals to the launch height they already had in their heads.
> >
> > If you're flying along and suddenly the towplane shoots up above you, start counting. If the vario is now reading 10 (5 for euros) and you've counted past ten before the townplane suddenly drops away below you then just release and turn back hard.
> >
> > Of course, there's increased risk of it not really working and landing back for a relight. But I can't actually think of a time when it happened to me on a day when others were successfully soaring.
> >
> > One of the closest was when I was visiting the US and found a club near Joliet IL. Jumped in a Duo (a type I hadn't flown before, though I knew the Janus pretty well) with an instructor and surprised the heck out of him by releasing at 700 ft AGL. It very nearly didn't work, with about 15 min of scratching at around launch height. But then I got away to 4000 ft and we went on a nice tour of the area. (there was never any question of not being able to make it back, of course)
>
> Bruce,
> Thanks for mentioning our Chicago Glider Club near Joliet IL - and your flight in our Duo. I practice what you are preaching all the time and our tow-pilots sometimes ask the "what was wrong" question if I stay on tow all the way up to 2,000'. But then, I was trained on a winch back in Germany, we were lucky to get 1,500'.
> Herb

Herb,

Seemed like a nice operation. Nice fleet and I liked the way some members had houses nestled in the trees on the edge of the field. If my job in Chicago had worked out (.com bust happened .. this was early 2001) I'd have been looking to join the club. As it was, I went back to New Zealand a few weeks before 9/11.

One other interesting point from that flight. We had radio trouble in the circuit. I did a high speed final glide to about 700 ft on the non circuit side (on the runway heading), then a military-style "break and pull" turn onto downwind, bleeding speed. The guy in back got distracted fiddling with the radio while I carried on flying the aircraft. I turned final where I would in the Janus, pulled brakes and ... holy cow ... nothing is happening!! Seems they didn't improve the brakes on the Duo to compensate for the lack of landing flap. Oops.

As it turned out, full brake was sufficient to come down to more or less the threshold, and then we closed the brakes and did a hangar landing anyway. So no big deal. And there was always sideslip available if needed.

[N97MT]

Make the SSA Bronze Badge and Silver Distance leg an FAR requirement for the Sport and Private Pilot Glider Certificates. These are relatively easy to do and makes you a better soaring pilot.

You have a cross-country requirement for the Private Certificate in Airplanes, and there are many more of those flying around. Why not for Gliders?

People fear what they don't have experiences in. When you've done it to get the Certificate, it becomes a non-issue, and puts you well on the way to competition or just doing the cross-country for yourself.

[gb]

You want to promote soaring by making it harder to get a pilot's certificate? How many pilots are you going to lose because weather and club glider availability never line up? It is a gliding license that takes gliding skills, soaring is simply a sport you first need a gliding license to partake in. Get people in gliders, if they come round again get them a glider license then ask what their goals are and give them a push if needed.
On Sunday, August 23, 2015 at 9:21:53 PM UTC-4, N97MT wrote:
> Make the SSA Bronze Badge and Silver Distance leg an FAR requirement for the Sport and Private Pilot Glider Certificates. These are relatively easy to do and makes you a better soaring pilot.
>
> You have a cross-country requirement for the Private Certificate in Airplanes, and there are many more of those flying around. Why not for Gliders?
>
> People fear what they don't have experiences in. When you've done it to get the Certificate, it becomes a non-issue, and puts you well on the way to competition or just doing the cross-country for yourself.

[[email protected]]

On Monday, August 24, 2015 at 9:46:13 PM UTC-4, GB wrote:
> You want to promote soaring by making it harder to get a pilot's certificate? How many pilots are you going to lose because weather and club glider availability never line up? It is a gliding license that takes gliding skills, soaring is simply a sport you first need a gliding license to partake in. Get people in gliders, if they come round again get them a glider license then ask what their goals are and give them a push if needed.

Very well said. The PP certificate is a license to continue to learn and to allow the pilot to take a friend.
My experience is that the areas of weakness in the existing training and licensing process do not include the lack of cross country experience. A pilot can be a long term, safe, satisfied person without flying cross country. for those that do experience XC and master it, it is even better.
From someone who REALLY enjoys XC and teaches it actively.
UH

[son_of_flubber]

On Tuesday, August 25, 2015 at 8:42:02 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> A pilot can be a long term, safe, satisfied person without flying cross country.

Those pilots pay dues, buy tows and volunteer time. They stick around long enough to progress to XC if that path is reasonably open and they want to take it.

[[email protected]]

Sean:
A few thoughts on this string, from somebody who is a CFI-G, who flies a fair amount of XC (many thousand km each year), and who sometimes tries to teach it:

1) The skill sets for being a good instructor and being a good XC pilot are different. Many good instructors are not XC pilots. Many great XC pilots haven't got a clue how to teach it. It takes courage and confidence to fly away from the airport. It takes courage and confidence to solo a new student.. Both endeavors deserve respect in our sport. But they are different.

2) Flying XC well is as much about mental discipline as it is about physical (stick and rudder) and observational (cloud reading) skills. There is a component to it that just can't be taught in the way that aerotow, or patterns can be taught.

3) Many of the very best XC (and competition) pilots were trained by CFIs that never flew a single kilometer of XC. Mandating XC experience for CFIs will only serve to limit student intake - it will not increase XC participation.

4) Very few who have invested large amounts of money in their equipment and many hours in mastering something they love to do, are willing to spend their limited time teaching what they would rather be doing themselves. The few that do are wonderful and generous people - but we cannot require that of all (or even most) instructors.

All we can really do is open the door to the sky. Those who want to explore more than what is just around the airport will do that. Those who don't - won't. In a few cases we can make it easier, or eliminate some fear, but after 42 years I still can't figure out why some people fall in love with gliding cross country and some give it no mind at all.

Roy

[N97MT]

Some of the replies here are truly uninspiring contrary to the title of this thread.

You are always within gliding distance of some landing spot. There is a true psychological barrier preventing new students from understanding this concept unless you have helped them to overcome this. They think that the home airport is the ONLY landing spot. Yes, some will do cross-country once and then never again. That's OK. At least they will have the experience to properly size up real landing spots along the way.

But many more will be grateful to you in the realization that the anxiety to never leave home base was all in their head. This is where real inspiration is born.

If you don't do this with them in practice, you are doing your students a tremendous disservice. Unfamiliarity is dangerous, and can lead to disaster. There is a reason why student airplane pilots are taught to practice instrument flying for emergencies - because they will eventually encounter VFR flying into IMC. It will save their life.

The same applies to practice cross-country soaring.

At the very least, the glider instructor should fly with the student to an unfamiliar airport and use that as an out landing spot. Or better yet, pick out three unfamiliar airports and do it. Teach them everything they need to do to size up the landing as if it were off-airport, like it is described in the Glider Flying Handbook.

Doing your first out landing alone (even close to your airport) after getting your Private ticket is exactly the wrong time to be experiencing it for the first time.

[Roger Hurley[_2_]]

Cross-country soaring is a thrill, and a challenge. N97MT is right enough,
there is almost always somewhere 'acceptable' to land out and we should (at
some point) show novice pilots how to do that so they don't fear it.

But this misses the elephant in the room. Today its true we are a cash
rich and time poor society. I think most of us just want to go fly and
then go home - we really do not want to land out. Take an afternoon off
work, go fly cross-country for 3 or 4 hours, come home, fantastic. Land
out miles away, what follows, not so much fantastic.

With the thread subject in mind.....To make cross-country soaring more
attractive and accessible, to encourage more to just go fly more, and
cross-country, the gamechanger is engines.

Roger H


At 03:02 28 August 2015, N97MT wrote:
>Some of the replies here are truly uninspiring contrary to the title of
>thi=
>s thread.
>
>You are always within gliding distance of some landing spot. There is a
>tru=
>e psychological barrier preventing new students from understanding this
>con=
>cept unless you have helped them to overcome this. They think that the
>home=
> airport is the ONLY landing spot. Yes, some will do cross-country once
>and=
> then never again. That's OK. At least they will have the experience to
>pro=
>perly size up real landing spots along the way.
>
>But many more will be grateful to you in the realization that the anxiety
>t=
>o never leave home base was all in their head. This is where real
>inspirati=
>on is born.
>
>If you don't do this with them in practice, you are doing your students a
>t=
>remendous disservice. Unfamiliarity is dangerous, and can lead to
>disaster.=
> There is a reason why student airplane pilots are taught to practice
>instr=
>ument flying for emergencies - because they will eventually encounter VFR
>f=
>lying into IMC. It will save their life.
>
>The same applies to practice cross-country soaring.
>
>At the very least, the glider instructor should fly with the student to
an
>=
>unfamiliar airport and use that as an out landing spot. Or better yet,
>pick=
> out three unfamiliar airports and do it. Teach them everything they need
>t=
>o do to size up the landing as if it were off-airport, like it is
>described=
> in the Glider Flying Handbook.
>
>Doing your first out landing alone (even close to your airport) after
>getti=
>ng your Private ticket is exactly the wrong time to be experiencing it
for
>=
>the first time.
>
>

[son_of_flubber]

On Friday, August 28, 2015 at 3:30:13 AM UTC-4, Roger Hurley wrote:

> To make cross-country soaring more
> attractive and accessible, to encourage more to just go fly more, and
> cross-country, the gamechanger is engines.

In particular FES? FES is a modern encouragement to balance out the modern deterrents. I understand that FES(s) are catching on big time in the UK. I wonder if any of them are club ships? It will be interesting to see how FES changes XC participation in the UK.

I wonder if new pilots will decide that they don't need FES after a few flights, or if they will decide that it is essential.

[[email protected]]

On Friday, August 28, 2015 at 8:11:50 AM UTC-4, son_of_flubber wrote:
> On Friday, August 28, 2015 at 3:30:13 AM UTC-4, Roger Hurley wrote:
>
> > To make cross-country soaring more
> > attractive and accessible, to encourage more to just go fly more, and
> > cross-country, the gamechanger is engines.
>
> In particular FES? FES is a modern encouragement to balance out the modern deterrents. I understand that FES(s) are catching on big time in the UK. I wonder if any of them are club ships? It will be interesting to see how FES changes XC participation in the UK.
>
> I wonder if new pilots will decide that they don't need FES after a few flights, or if they will decide that it is essential.

FES, at this time, is limited to what I would call high end, new single seat aircraft. These are not the machines that new pilots will be flying cross country. It will take a very long time before these ships trickle down to the group of pilots that we have been discussing.
UH

[Surge]

On Friday, 28 August 2015 14:22:59 UTC+2, wrote:
> FES, at this time, is limited to what I would call high end, new single seat aircraft. These are not the machines that new pilots will be flying cross country. It will take a very long time before these ships trickle down to the group of pilots that we have been discussing.
> UH

I'd love to purchase a FES equipped glider but I'm afraid these gliders are very unlikely to trickle down to the "affordable first ship for new pilots" category since battery packs have a limited lifespan and cost a significant amount of money to replace.
I can't see FES gliders dropping to the $10000 (G102, ASW-15) to $20000 (ASW-20, Ventus B) range any time soon which is the price range most first time owners are willing to pay in my part of the woods.

[Dan Marotta]

"Land out miles away, what follows, not so much fantastic."

Actually, land outs can be an entirely different adventure! You get to
visit a different airport or field, meet new people, share the
excitement of flying without an engine, etc. You get to have a meal
some place where you might never have gone before. Think of all the
stories you'll have to tell your friends upon your return.

You could also spend the night sleeping in the glider or in a motel in
Hawthorne, NV like someone I know did a few days ago... :-D

On 8/28/2015 1:16 AM, Roger Hurley wrote:
> Cross-country soaring is a thrill, and a challenge. N97MT is right enough,
> there is almost always somewhere 'acceptable' to land out and we should (at
> some point) show novice pilots how to do that so they don't fear it.
>
> But this misses the elephant in the room. Today its true we are a cash
> rich and time poor society. I think most of us just want to go fly and
> then go home - we really do not want to land out. Take an afternoon off
> work, go fly cross-country for 3 or 4 hours, come home, fantastic. Land
> out miles away, what follows, not so much fantastic.
>
> With the thread subject in mind.....To make cross-country soaring more
> attractive and accessible, to encourage more to just go fly more, and
> cross-country, the gamechanger is engines.
>
> Roger H
>
>
> At 03:02 28 August 2015, N97MT wrote:
>> Some of the replies here are truly uninspiring contrary to the title of
>> thi=
>> s thread.
>>
>> You are always within gliding distance of some landing spot. There is a
>> tru=
>> e psychological barrier preventing new students from understanding this
>> con=
>> cept unless you have helped them to overcome this. They think that the
>> home=
>> airport is the ONLY landing spot. Yes, some will do cross-country once
>> and=
>> then never again. That's OK. At least they will have the experience to
>> pro=
>> perly size up real landing spots along the way.
>>
>> But many more will be grateful to you in the realization that the anxiety
>> t=
>> o never leave home base was all in their head. This is where real
>> inspirati=
>> on is born.
>>
>> If you don't do this with them in practice, you are doing your students a
>> t=
>> remendous disservice. Unfamiliarity is dangerous, and can lead to
>> disaster.=
>> There is a reason why student airplane pilots are taught to practice
>> instr=
>> ument flying for emergencies - because they will eventually encounter VFR
>> f=
>> lying into IMC. It will save their life.
>>
>> The same applies to practice cross-country soaring.
>>
>> At the very least, the glider instructor should fly with the student to
> an
>> =
>> unfamiliar airport and use that as an out landing spot. Or better yet,
>> pick=
>> out three unfamiliar airports and do it. Teach them everything they need
>> t=
>> o do to size up the landing as if it were off-airport, like it is
>> described=
>> in the Glider Flying Handbook.
>>
>> Doing your first out landing alone (even close to your airport) after
>> getti=
>> ng your Private ticket is exactly the wrong time to be experiencing it
> for
>> =
>> the first time.
>>
>>

--
Dan Marotta

[[email protected]]

On Friday, August 28, 2015 at 11:20:23 AM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
> "Land out miles away, what follows, not so much fantastic."
>
>
>
> Actually, land outs can be an entirely different adventure!* You get
> to visit a different airport or field, meet new people, share the
> excitement of flying without an engine, etc.* You get to have a meal
> some place where you might never have gone before.* Think of all the
> stories you'll have to tell your friends upon your return.
>
>
>
> You could also spend the night sleeping in the glider or in a motel
> in Hawthorne, NV like someone I know did a few days ago...* :-D
>
>
>
>
> On 8/28/2015 1:16 AM, Roger Hurley
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Cross-country soaring is a thrill, and a challenge. N97MT is right enough,
> there is almost always somewhere 'acceptable' to land out and we should (at
> some point) show novice pilots how to do that so they don't fear it.
>
> But this misses the elephant in the room. Today its true we are a cash
> rich and time poor society. I think most of us just want to go fly and
> then go home - we really do not want to land out. Take an afternoon off
> work, go fly cross-country for 3 or 4 hours, come home, fantastic. Land
> out miles away, what follows, not so much fantastic.
>
> With the thread subject in mind.....To make cross-country soaring more
> attractive and accessible, to encourage more to just go fly more, and
> cross-country, the gamechanger is engines.
>
> Roger H
>
>
> At 03:02 28 August 2015, N97MT wrote:
>
>
> Some of the replies here are truly uninspiring contrary to the title of
> thi=
> s thread.
>
> You are always within gliding distance of some landing spot. There is a
> tru=
> e psychological barrier preventing new students from understanding this
> con=
> cept unless you have helped them to overcome this. They think that the
> home=
> airport is the ONLY landing spot. Yes, some will do cross-country once
> and=
> then never again. That's OK. At least they will have the experience to
> pro=
> perly size up real landing spots along the way.
>
> But many more will be grateful to you in the realization that the anxiety
> t=
> o never leave home base was all in their head. This is where real
> inspirati=
> on is born.
>
> If you don't do this with them in practice, you are doing your students a
> t=
> remendous disservice. Unfamiliarity is dangerous, and can lead to
> disaster.=
> There is a reason why student airplane pilots are taught to practice
> instr=
> ument flying for emergencies - because they will eventually encounter VFR
> f=
> lying into IMC. It will save their life.
>
> The same applies to practice cross-country soaring.
>
> At the very least, the glider instructor should fly with the student to
>
>
> an
>
>
> =
> unfamiliar airport and use that as an out landing spot. Or better yet,
> pick=
> out three unfamiliar airports and do it. Teach them everything they need
> t=
> o do to size up the landing as if it were off-airport, like it is
> described=
> in the Glider Flying Handbook.
>
> Doing your first out landing alone (even close to your airport) after
> getti=
> ng your Private ticket is exactly the wrong time to be experiencing it
>
>
> for
>
>
> =
> the first time.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dan Marotta

Thanks Dan, so true. I never had a bad experience on a landout, no angry farmer, no unhelpful police. Many good memories of meeting interesting people out in the country who were thrilled to have me as their guest.
Covington VA, ca. 1995, the land owner called the local newspaper, they sent a reporter who expertly interviewed me and took pictures. The land owner takes me aside and exclaims: trust me Herb, WE are going to make the front page tomorrow. He was right and he did send me the article and picture. Wouldn't want to miss that kind of experience.
Next time I'll tell you the story of the farmer's wife who brought us (me and Mike???, flies a Libelle, works at Scaled Composites) a 5 course dinner into the meadow when we were still waiting for our crews at 9 PM in the mountains of Southern Idaho.
Herb

[son_of_flubber]

On Saturday, August 29, 2015 at 10:20:03 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> On Friday, August 28, 2015 at 11:20:23 AM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
> > "Land out miles away, what follows, not so much fantastic."
> >
> > Actually, land outs can be an entirely different adventure!

I believe that the 'good old days' of soaring really did happen and that they still do at some popular locations, but the 'little woman' is no longer eager to crew, and there may only be one or two tired (and older) pilots on the ground late in the day.

I'm confident that my club could muster a retrieve, but the XC participation rates have fallen below the threshold that makes land outs routine.

OLC, Badge and Wave camps are another story because there are a large number of pilots present (like in the old days), they are on vacation from their normal evening activities and commitments, and they're looking for a late afternoon/evening adventure. I'm willing (even eager) to help with a retrieve, but the only one that I've ever done was at a wave camp.

So for the foreseeable future, I'll be flying with a zero MacReady. Maybe relocate to a more popular XC location. Maybe FES someday.

[kirk.stant]

On Saturday, August 29, 2015 at 10:14:28 AM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:

> So for the foreseeable future, I'll be flying with a zero MacReady. Maybe relocate to a more popular XC location. Maybe FES someday.

Zero Macready? Really? May I suggest you read up a little more on the theory and practice of Macready settings. Reichman is good, also John Cochrane's articles at http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john.cochrane/soaring/index.htm

XC is more a matter of state of mind than of the weather. I've flown 500+ k XCs out west that required almost no skill and were borderline boring, and <100k XCs in the midwest that required all the skill I could summon to complete without ending up in a field. Guess which were more fun...

Kirk
66

[son_of_flubber]

On Saturday, August 29, 2015 at 11:51:06 AM UTC-4, kirk.stant wrote:

> Zero Macready? Really? May I suggest you read up a little more on the theory and practice of Macready settings. Reichman is good, also John Cochrane's articles at http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john.cochrane/soaring/index.htm

I understand that Zero Macready is totally wimpy, not flying XC, but it gives me a good chance of not landing out, and that is my priority. Having lots of fun though.

[Bob Whelan[_3_]]

>>>> "Land out miles away, what follows, not so much fantastic."
>>>
>>> Actually, land outs can be an entirely different adventure!
>
> I believe that the 'good old days' of soaring really did happen and that
> they still do at some popular locations...

Ah, the Good Old Days! No matter what activity (or even industry) we're
talking about, we all hear of 'em...and if we stick with something long
enough, maybe we'll even remember 'em ourselves. Or maybe...

Back when I'd heard tales of soaring's good old days from others, but before
I'd been in it long enough to have my own such perspective, I could (and did)
look around the club to which I'd recently moved, and saw "a
convenience-based-club" of mostly flagpole sitters, knew of a few weirdos
(e.g. myself) with dreams of XC, and even had a few geezer members (they were
older than I then was) pointed out to me in terms of awe as having actually
done some.

Convinced it was possible, knowing really very few other club members I felt I
knew well enough to pre-ask to crew, hoping I had enough savvy to not land out
"foolishly" - my goal was to not do it unless it was "a real retrieve" and not
just across a few fences - I kept my mouth shut and routinely did O&Rs as far
I thought each day would permit. By the time I needed retrieve help (on the
way back, and "just across a few fences" [sigh]), the geezer guy who came and
got me had surpassed my feeble efforts by self-retrieving many times, using
thumb and Trailways/Greyhound, from as far as 200 road miles away, sometimes
over multiple days. He was married. His wife didn't soar (actually, I met her
only at their house many years later; by then they were grandparents). Bob
(began soaring several years later than I) remains one of my many soaring
heroes...

Ah the Good Old Days. In soaring, they're *always* here!!!

Bob - never a TRULY bad landout experience (chortle!), mine or others - W.

[joesimmers[_2_]]

> I understand that Zero Macready is totally wimpy, not flying XC, but it gives me a good chance of not landing out, and that is my priority. Having lots of fun though.



If you "don't" want to land out you need to "increase" your macready setting, you
have it backwards.

A higher macready setting increases the chances that you will make your chosen field even if you fly through more sink than expected.

I usually just leave mine set on 3 all the time.

[kirk.stant]

On Saturday, August 29, 2015 at 11:12:20 AM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:

> I understand that Zero Macready is totally wimpy, not flying XC, but it gives me a good chance of not landing out, and that is my priority. Having lots of fun though.

Nothing to do with being wimpy, it's just not efficient - and flying gliders is all about being efficient!

There are a few situations where MC 0 (or basically L/D max speed) is appropriate; and they usually occur just prior to a landout: trying to stretch a glide late in the day when all the lift has stopped, or down low scratching around for a thermal (with your landout field already picked) - but if you have any altitude to play with you should be flying the MC for the lift you expect to find.

Of course, the MC you use needs to be adjusted with your expectation and altitude - up high, MC 3 or 4 is common, down low, MC 2 or even 1 (if really desperate on a weak day). Again, the classic soaring texts explain all this in detail.

Even flying locally you should be using the correct XC techniques if you expect to master the art.

Cheers,

Kirk
66

[Dan Marotta]

Zero MC will get you landing out quicker... (Unless you always fly with
a tail wind and, in fact, you fly more with a head wind).

On 8/29/2015 9:14 AM, son_of_flubber wrote:
> On Saturday, August 29, 2015 at 10:20:03 AM UTC-4, wrote:
>> On Friday, August 28, 2015 at 11:20:23 AM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
>>> "Land out miles away, what follows, not so much fantastic."
>>>
>>> Actually, land outs can be an entirely different adventure!
> I believe that the 'good old days' of soaring really did happen and that they still do at some popular locations, but the 'little woman' is no longer eager to crew, and there may only be one or two tired (and older) pilots on the ground late in the day.
>
> I'm confident that my club could muster a retrieve, but the XC participation rates have fallen below the threshold that makes land outs routine.
>
> OLC, Badge and Wave camps are another story because there are a large number of pilots present (like in the old days), they are on vacation from their normal evening activities and commitments, and they're looking for a late afternoon/evening adventure. I'm willing (even eager) to help with a retrieve, but the only one that I've ever done was at a wave camp.
>
> So for the foreseeable future, I'll be flying with a zero MacReady. Maybe relocate to a more popular XC location. Maybe FES someday.

--
Dan Marotta

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

Sorry if this has already been covered as I am late to this party. How about having more xc camps with structured learning and someone to follow around a course. I know when I started to fly xc I was frustrated by the lack of any structured learning. I asked several xc pilots where I was flying if they could take me around a course and teach me a few things, every one said I have to keep up with them. I searched away from my glider port to find instructors who would take me xc. I flew a Grob 109 on a simulated course then found an instructor in the Sierras who took me on a long flight in a Janus. Then I started out on my own usually not getting more than 50 to 75 miles away finally I started doing the long flights. I had to seek out training from three different glider operations to get all the training and skill I thought I needed to be safe and competent to fly xc far from home base. Believe it or not Bill Bartel actually took several days off work to show me around the flying in Arizona. I had been flying xc for about a year or two already, still so much to learn. I still remember Bill opening his airbrakes to come back down to my height in the thermal to thermal up again with me.

We have many sanctioned contests and much emphasis on this news group and in Soaring Magazine is about racing. In addition to having a race committee how about having a pilot development committee. Hold multiple sanctioned youth, women, family day and xc flying meets with activities for all and a training syllabus. Just a thought

[Ron Gleason]

On Sunday, 30 August 2015 12:01:25 UTC-6, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
> Sorry if this has already been covered as I am late to this party. How about having more xc camps with structured learning and someone to follow around a course. I know when I started to fly xc I was frustrated by the lack of any structured learning. I asked several xc pilots where I was flying if they could take me around a course and teach me a few things, every one said I have to keep up with them. I searched away from my glider port to find instructors who would take me xc. I flew a Grob 109 on a simulated course then found an instructor in the Sierras who took me on a long flight in a Janus. Then I started out on my own usually not getting more than 50 to 75 miles away finally I started doing the long flights. I had to seek out training from three different glider operations to get all the training and skill I thought I needed to be safe and competent to fly xc far from home base. Believe it or not Bill Bartel actually took several days off work to show me around the flying in Arizona. I had been flying xc for about a year or two already, still so much to learn. I still remember Bill opening his airbrakes to come back down to my height in the thermal to thermal up again with me.
>
> We have many sanctioned contests and much emphasis on this news group and in Soaring Magazine is about racing. In addition to having a race committee how about having a pilot development committee. Hold multiple sanctioned youth, women, family day and xc flying meets with activities for all and a training syllabus. Just a thought

Jonathan, make it happen. DO not just talk about it with a keyboard make it happen. Remember that we are they

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, August 30, 2015 at 8:48:57 PM UTC-4, Ron Gleason wrote:
> On Sunday, 30 August 2015 12:01:25 UTC-6, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
> > Sorry if this has already been covered as I am late to this party. How about having more xc camps with structured learning and someone to follow around a course. I know when I started to fly xc I was frustrated by the lack of any structured learning. I asked several xc pilots where I was flying if they could take me around a course and teach me a few things, every one said I have to keep up with them. I searched away from my glider port to find instructors who would take me xc. I flew a Grob 109 on a simulated course then found an instructor in the Sierras who took me on a long flight in a Janus. Then I started out on my own usually not getting more than 50 to 75 miles away finally I started doing the long flights. I had to seek out training from three different glider operations to get all the training and skill I thought I needed to be safe and competent to fly xc far from home base. Believe it or not Bill Bartel actually took several days off work to show me around the flying in Arizona. I had been flying xc for about a year or two already, still so much to learn. I still remember Bill opening his airbrakes to come back down to my height in the thermal to thermal up again with me.
> >
> > We have many sanctioned contests and much emphasis on this news group and in Soaring Magazine is about racing. In addition to having a race committee how about having a pilot development committee. Hold multiple sanctioned youth, women, family day and xc flying meets with activities for all and a training syllabus. Just a thought
>
> Jonathan, make it happen. DO not just talk about it with a keyboard make it happen. Remember that we are they

This group is full of great thinkers, but pretty thin on doers. My impression is that they think we're short of idea guys.
I get to editorialize because I do at least one training event each year.
UH

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

Wow, tough crowd. Even the header asks for ideas "How do we inspire pilots to truly take up cross country soaring?" So I presented a few ideas and get dis'd for the effort.

Perhaps the poster below does not understand the purpose of an interrogative? And this tread specifically requests ideas.

On Monday, August 31, 2015 at 5:12:41 AM UTC-7, wrote:

>
> This group is full of great thinkers, but pretty thin on doers. My impression is that they think we're short of idea guys.
> I get to editorialize because I do at least one training event each year.
> UH

[John Carlyle]

Jonathan (if that's your real name), it's hard for a long established group to take seriously an unknown newcomer who offers shop-worn advice on one of the most difficult challenges in soaring. UH has not only been talking the talk but walking the walk for decades. You are of course free to express your opinions, but don't complain when your ignorance earns you a rebuke.

-John, Q3

On Wednesday, September 2, 2015 at 11:01:23 PM UTC-4, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
> Wow, tough crowd. Even the header asks for ideas "How do we inspire pilots to truly take up cross country soaring?" So I presented a few ideas and get dis'd for the effort.
>
> Perhaps the poster below does not understand the purpose of an interrogative? And this tread specifically requests ideas.
>
> On Monday, August 31, 2015 at 5:12:41 AM UTC-7, wrote:
>
> >
> > This group is full of great thinkers, but pretty thin on doers. My impression is that they think we're short of idea guys.
> > I get to editorialize because I do at least one training event each year.
> > UH

[Sean Fidler]

The British held their annual Junior National Championships last week.
http://www.soaringspot.com/en/uk-junior-nationals-and-cotswold-regionals-aston-down-2015/pilots

SEVENTY SIX Junior pilots entered the event. Say that with me slowly.... S E V E N T Y S I X. Britian is a country of 63 million. Roughly 1/6 of the United States. If seventy six jr pilots are attending their Jr nationals, what does that say about the health of their youth programs? What does that say about the growth and development of British soaring? How many youth pilots are training within the British soaring system with the goal of one day competing with their peers in a major, highly prestigious and recognized Jr Narionals competition? Imagine the social events at this contest? Imagine the bonds that it creates. The enthusiasm it creates? Imagine the learning and personal development the Jrs experience.

Meanwhile, back In the USA, a country of some 330 million, we have 3 or 4 Jrs who competed in adult contests this year. we do not hold Jr contests anymore. I can't tell you the last time we did. And we wonder why we are having problems. This is a disaster and we are completely blind.

We need to be FAR smarter. We need our best people absolutely focused on this. We need a strategy. We need leadership. We need to put more effort into this problem. WE NEED ALL HANDS ON DECK! This should be, without question, the # 1 problem to be worked on at all levels of the SSA and soaring clubs. It simply IS NOT. We are failing, miserably.

The SSA has a growth and development committee. It gets very little attention. I think we need to put a lot more effort into this commitee. Perhaps 10x more. This is without question the most important topic within the SSA because, frankly stated, the sport of soaring is a disaster in the U.S. right now in terms of growth.

For starters, I think we need a monthly column in the soaring magazine, a dedicated website and dramatically more focus. We should not be worried about ADSB 1/10th as much as we are worried about growth, youth participation, etc. ADSB of course just saw the front page of Soaring Magazine. When was the last time our monthly publication addressed growth on its cover?

I am very frustrated by our present course. It's a shame.

Sean
7T

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

Dear John, you are missing The point. As you stated I am somewhat of a new comer, hence I was unaware the idea presented was so obvious it not merit mentioning. Yes, it is my real name. The post asked for ideas! UH, while a legend chided me for presenting an idea, actually writing "my impression if that they think we're short of idea guys". If stifling ideas in any form is a good way to coming up with new ideas I would be interested in learning how you came to this conclusion. Back in the corporate world we had brainstorming sessions, no idea how well worn or however "silly" was discounted as you never know what series of ideas or questions about that idea will grow into the desired result. "If you change the way you think about things, the things you think about change". Maybe a new comer rehashing old ideas is not so bad. What is bad is stifling any idea, or anyone willing to take the time to write an idea.



On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 8:35:20 AM UTC-7, John Carlyle wrote:
> Jonathan (if that's your real name), it's hard for a long established group to take seriously an unknown newcomer who offers shop-worn advice on one of the most difficult challenges in soaring. UH has not only been talking the talk but walking the walk for decades. You are of course free to express your opinions, but don't complain when your ignorance earns you a rebuke.
>
> -John, Q3

[John Carlyle]

Jonathan, here's the thing: in the case of soaring being unable to attract new XC pilots there is nothing new under the sun. Every idea mentioned in this thread (plus many others) has been tried. The brainstorming has been done- yet we still can't reverse the trend.

Unfortunately, this cycle is part of sports and leisure activities. How many new boxers are there? How many new jockeys? How many new ice boaters? How many new scullers (did you know that in the 1920s sculling was broadcast on national radio)? Interest ebbs, and there isn't a magic bullet to reverse it.

Realistically all we can try is more one-on-one personal interaction, and maybe the other activities that are enticing potential XC pilots from soaring will ebb in their popularity. I've helped pique the interest of some new XC pilots by engaging with them, if other pilots do the same perhaps we'll made headway.

-John, Q3

On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 12:53:08 PM UTC-4, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
> Dear John, you are missing The point. As you stated I am somewhat of a new comer, hence I was unaware the idea presented was so obvious it not merit mentioning. Yes, it is my real name. The post asked for ideas! UH, while a legend chided me for presenting an idea, actually writing "my impression if that they think we're short of idea guys". If stifling ideas in any form is a good way to coming up with new ideas I would be interested in learning how you came to this conclusion. Back in the corporate world we had brainstorming sessions, no idea how well worn or however "silly" was discounted as you never know what series of ideas or questions about that idea will grow into the desired result. "If you change the way you think about things, the things you think about change". Maybe a new comer rehashing old ideas is not so bad. What is bad is stifling any idea, or anyone willing to take the time to write an idea.

[Sean Fidler]

Hmmm. I do not believe that everything has been done to improve soaring participation in the USA. In my opinion, clearly, we are focusing on the wrong goals. I would argue that we have been executing a very poor high-level strategy (or perhaps NO STRATEGY). Growing soaring in the USA is, in my opinion, an achievable goal. We MUST achieve it in fact. Stating (basically) that it is not possible is an unfortunate thing to say. I'm truly sorry that you feel this way.

I'm sure that it is frustrating when you have probably been an excellent promoter in the area's that you could affect. To see the national numbers continue to slowly fade is painful for all of us to watch, especially the ones who put a lot effort in locally. I think local, individual efforts are simply not enough. We need national leadership and a coordinated approach (between clubs, regions and the SSA). We need careful attention, and constant care and feeding. We need to become inspired again, and very smart marketing to maintain it. We need a clear, bold strategy that the entire national soaring community is truly invested in and pays attention to.

Again, for example, Great Britain just had roughly 60 (the same attendance as our largest US contests, the Seniors and Perry) in their 2015 Junior National Championship last week. This is an incredible statistic. Britain has 1/6 the USA's population! This should be making our heads explode. It is basically unacceptable. The United States largest contest is a Seniors event. Britains largest contest might be a junior event! Wow! Incredible. How do they do this? We should be studying them like a science book. We should be emulating. When are the US East Coast junior Nationals next year? When are the US West Coast junior Nationals? Where are the junior Contest pilots in the USA Britain's soaring community must compete with all the same leisure activities, smartphones, video games, economic downturns, etc that we do here in the USA. They have the same competition from major sports and their busy lives, etc. Regardless, those excuses do not seem to impact their junior numbers even though they have only 1/6 the population to draw from. Essentially, the US should be able to run junior nationals on 2 coasts and still have roughly 3x the population to draw from in each event when compared to Britain!

The problem with the USA's soaring growth is, plain and simply, us. We have collectively failed, long ago and up until now, to focus on these challenges and address them effectively. Today we are paying the price. In fact, we have essentially stopped trying altogether.

This topic should not contained in a RAS thread. It should be front and center in SSA committee meetings, it should be front and center at the upcoming SSA convention, it should be front and center at the clubs, it should be front and center at the contests, etc.

We need to wake up and open our eyes. We need to organize ourselves and get this addressed and moving in the right direction. We need to build a strategy, set some short and long term goals and manage towards them. We need this challenge to be our TOP PRIORITY at every level.

We need a thriving youth soaring scene in the US or the sport is going to die.

Sean
7T

On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 7:51:13 PM UTC-4, John Carlyle wrote:
> Jonathan, here's the thing: in the case of soaring being unable to attract new XC pilots there is nothing new under the sun. Every idea mentioned in this thread (plus many others) has been tried. The brainstorming has been done- yet we still can't reverse the trend.
>
> Unfortunately, this cycle is part of sports and leisure activities. How many new boxers are there? How many new jockeys? How many new ice boaters? How many new scullers (did you know that in the 1920s sculling was broadcast on national radio)? Interest ebbs, and there isn't a magic bullet to reverse it.
>
> Realistically all we can try is more one-on-one personal interaction, and maybe the other activities that are enticing potential XC pilots from soaring will ebb in their popularity. I've helped pique the interest of some new XC pilots by engaging with them, if other pilots do the same perhaps we'll made headway.
>
> -John, Q3
>
> On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 12:53:08 PM UTC-4, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
> > Dear John, you are missing The point. As you stated I am somewhat of a new comer, hence I was unaware the idea presented was so obvious it not merit mentioning. Yes, it is my real name. The post asked for ideas! UH, while a legend chided me for presenting an idea, actually writing "my impression if that they think we're short of idea guys". If stifling ideas in any form is a good way to coming up with new ideas I would be interested in learning how you came to this conclusion. Back in the corporate world we had brainstorming sessions, no idea how well worn or however "silly" was discounted as you never know what series of ideas or questions about that idea will grow into the desired result. "If you change the way you think about things, the things you think about change". Maybe a new comer rehashing old ideas is not so bad. What is bad is stifling any idea, or anyone willing to take the time to write an idea.

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

Well stated and it is appropriate to be concerned! We have lost two soaring site in the last 13 years in Southern Cal, plus untold number of pilots.

SSA does need to to focus on this matter as a number one priority!

On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 8:58:32 PM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Hmmm. I do not believe that everything has been done to improve soaring participation in the USA. In my opinion, clearly, we are focusing on the wrong goals. I would argue that we have been executing a very poor high-level strategy (or perhaps NO STRATEGY). Growing soaring in the USA is, in my opinion, an achievable goal. We MUST achieve it in fact. Stating (basically) that it is not possible is an unfortunate thing to say. I'm truly sorry that you feel this way.
>
> I'm sure that it is frustrating when you have probably been an excellent promoter in the area's that you could affect. To see the national numbers continue to slowly fade is painful for all of us to watch, especially the ones who put a lot effort in locally. I think local, individual efforts are simply not enough. We need national leadership and a coordinated approach (between clubs, regions and the SSA). We need careful attention, and constant care and feeding. We need to become inspired again, and very smart marketing to maintain it. We need a clear, bold strategy that the entire national soaring community is truly invested in and pays attention to.
>
> Again, for example, Great Britain just had roughly 60 (the same attendance as our largest US contests, the Seniors and Perry) in their 2015 Junior National Championship last week. This is an incredible statistic. Britain has 1/6 the USA's population! This should be making our heads explode. It is basically unacceptable. The United States largest contest is a Seniors event. Britains largest contest might be a junior event! Wow! Incredible. How do they do this? We should be studying them like a science book. We should be emulating. When are the US East Coast junior Nationals next year? When are the US West Coast junior Nationals? Where are the junior Contest pilots in the USA Britain's soaring community must compete with all the same leisure activities, smartphones, video games, economic downturns, etc that we do here in the USA. They have the same competition from major sports and their busy lives, etc. Regardless, those excuses do not seem to impact their junior numbers even though they have only 1/6 the population to draw from. Essentially, the US should be able to run junior nationals on 2 coasts and still have roughly 3x the population to draw from in each event when compared to Britain!
>
> The problem with the USA's soaring growth is, plain and simply, us. We have collectively failed, long ago and up until now, to focus on these challenges and address them effectively. Today we are paying the price. In fact, we have essentially stopped trying altogether.
>
> This topic should not contained in a RAS thread. It should be front and center in SSA committee meetings, it should be front and center at the upcoming SSA convention, it should be front and center at the clubs, it should be front and center at the contests, etc.
>
> We need to wake up and open our eyes. We need to organize ourselves and get this addressed and moving in the right direction. We need to build a strategy, set some short and long term goals and manage towards them. We need this challenge to be our TOP PRIORITY at every level.
>
> We need a thriving youth soaring scene in the US or the sport is going to die.
>
> Sean
> 7T
>
> On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 7:51:13 PM UTC-4, John Carlyle wrote:
> > Jonathan, here's the thing: in the case of soaring being unable to attract new XC pilots there is nothing new under the sun. Every idea mentioned in this thread (plus many others) has been tried. The brainstorming has been done- yet we still can't reverse the trend.
> >
> > Unfortunately, this cycle is part of sports and leisure activities. How many new boxers are there? How many new jockeys? How many new ice boaters? How many new scullers (did you know that in the 1920s sculling was broadcast on national radio)? Interest ebbs, and there isn't a magic bullet to reverse it.
> >
> > Realistically all we can try is more one-on-one personal interaction, and maybe the other activities that are enticing potential XC pilots from soaring will ebb in their popularity. I've helped pique the interest of some new XC pilots by engaging with them, if other pilots do the same perhaps we'll made headway.
> >
> > -John, Q3
> >
> > On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 12:53:08 PM UTC-4, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
> > > Dear John, you are missing The point. As you stated I am somewhat of a new comer, hence I was unaware the idea presented was so obvious it not merit mentioning. Yes, it is my real name. The post asked for ideas! UH, while a legend chided me for presenting an idea, actually writing "my impression if that they think we're short of idea guys". If stifling ideas in any form is a good way to coming up with new ideas I would be interested in learning how you came to this conclusion. Back in the corporate world we had brainstorming sessions, no idea how well worn or however "silly" was discounted as you never know what series of ideas or questions about that idea will grow into the desired result. "If you change the way you think about things, the things you think about change". Maybe a new comer rehashing old ideas is not so bad. What is bad is stifling any idea, or anyone willing to take the time to write an idea.

[[email protected]]

I don't think soaring needs to grow much. We don't need, and don't have the capacity for lots of pilots. What we need are a handful of obsessed pilots. Obsessed soaring pilots make the wheel go round. Said this before the big recruitment hurdle is cultural, men no longer command their recreational time. Pool to chose from is never married chaps with no girlfriend or kids or old guys with grown kids.

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

Simple economies of scale. Less pilots, less soaring sites, more regulation, less of a lobby effort before the FAA, fewer companies to supply insurance, repair services, higher insurance costs, fewer tow planes, fewer manufacturers of sailplanes ...in short less of everything we need to go soaring. Yes, we DO need more pilots. Both younger pilots and women as pilots will help grow our sport. I was out of soaring for 13-14 years and was shocked at how much it has contracted in that time. Within a four hour drive the 6 soaring sites are now 3. On a weekend instead of twenty private pilots there are only a hand full. Pilots need camaraderie to stay interested. It is fun to share the time both on the ground and in the air with friends. Not sure how you arrived at your conclusion that soaring does not need to grow much, but you could not be more wrong. There is a maxim "Strength in numbers".



On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 4:47:46 AM UTC-7, wrote:
> I don't think soaring needs to grow much. We don't need, and don't have the capacity for lots of pilots. What we need are a handful of obsessed pilots. Obsessed soaring pilots make the wheel go round. Said this before the big recruitment hurdle is cultural, men no longer command their recreational time. Pool to chose from is never married chaps with no girlfriend or kids or old guys with grown kids.

[[email protected]]

If every glider club in the US got 50 new members, few thousand total new pilots I guess. Clubs wouldn't scale to private airports with cafe's and a fleet of Duos. They'd be crushed, who is going to put in all the 2-33 backseat time to fix the world? Besides 50 new weekend punters are useful $ wise but can be more of a operational drag then boon. You really need a few that are obsessed. Preferably obsessed and having money and time, although an abundance of one can some what make up for a lack of the other.

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 8:59:07 AM UTC-6, wrote:
> If every glider club in the US got 50 new members, few thousand total new pilots I guess.

100 clubs x 50 = 5,000.

> Clubs wouldn't scale to private airports with cafe's and a fleet of Duos.

Probably not - need new club management.

> who is going to put in all the 2-33 backseat time to fix the world?

Very few in 2-33's but in DUO's you'd find many more willing instructors.

[Jim White[_3_]]

At 18:59 06 September 2015, wrote:
At the age of 17 I did a weeks course at North Weald in a KA7 on a reverse
auto-tow. Launches to 600ft or so, quick circuit and landing. I didn't see
the point!

At the age of 38 I did a weeks course at Booker in a K21 and got to fly XC
in the Duo with an expert. I was hooked.

IMO it is important to demonstrate to potential new members that gliding is
a sport, not transport. Learning to fly is challenging, flying XC is life
changing.

Jim

[Bruce Hoult]

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 5:59:07 PM UTC+3, wrote:
> If every glider club in the US got 50 new members, few thousand total new pilots I guess. Clubs wouldn't scale to private airports with cafe's and a fleet of Duos. They'd be crushed, who is going to put in all the 2-33 backseat time to fix the world? Besides 50 new weekend punters are useful $ wise but can be more of a operational drag then boon. You really need a few that are obsessed. Preferably obsessed and having money and time, although an abundance of one can some what make up for a lack of the other.

It a horde descended overnight then I guess clubs could get crushed, but how likely is that? If it's over 5 - 10 years then no problem.

If numbers are increasing then why on earth would you train in 2-33's? Hell, I don't know why you do it NOW -- most of the rest of the world has been training in glass for several decades. My club switched from Blaniks to Grobs in 1995 (and we were on the trailing edge in NZ I'd say), and then to DG1000s a dozen years later.

Is anyone doing basic training in Duos? The DG1000 is just fine (especially with the 18m tips). The Duo would be no problem in the air, but unsprung undercarriage doesn't seem like a good idea for student landings.

[C-FFKQ (42)]

On Monday, 7 September 2015 07:19:10 UTC-4, Bruce Hoult wrote:
> Is anyone doing basic training in Duos? The DG1000 is just fine (especially with the 18m tips). The Duo would be no problem in the air, but unsprung undercarriage doesn't seem like a good idea for student landings.

Bruce, how many flights does it take to get to solo using the DG1000 ?

At my club, we have a youth camp of 3 weeks duration where we train using 2-33's. We solo our kids usually around 24-28 flights. The 2-33 is a tough ship and can handle the abuse, a great workhorse.

[[email protected]]

Change the PTS! How successful would light airplanes be if pilots were never required to train x/c in them? A newly minted private pilot has four choices at my club. Fly Schwizers locally, spend 20k+ on a glass ship you don't know how to fly, quit, teach others how to do take offs and landings in a 2-33. That last option is the real root of the problem. The core of our nation's clubs and greatest influence on those new to soaring never learned to actually soar! Until x/c is a requirement only people with time, money, and the ability to self teach will be able to it. (Old retired guys)...

[David Hirst]

> If numbers are increasing then why on earth would you train in 2-33's? Hell, I don't know why you do it NOW -- most of the rest of the world has been training in glass for several decades.

In a lot of the world, including clubs in NZ, numbers are static or declining. This means that the fixed costs per head are increasing; a big lump of that is insurance and maintenance. Clubs with older non-glass gliders (i.e. Puchatek, ASK13, Ka7, 2-33) have much lower insurance costs and the gliders are (relatively) cheap to repair. This keeps the smaller clubs in the black - THAT's why clubs keep training in older gliders.

The difficulty with this is that, at some point, the student will need to progress into something with "longer legs" or they'll just get bored. Most students don't mind doing the hard yards of basic training IF they can see a series of stepping stones to going cross-country.

Often the thing that forces clubs to move to glass (or fold) isn't the L/D of their trainers, it's the increasing rarity of people who are qualified to inspect and repair wood, metal and fabric. Oh, and the limited lifetime of glue.

DH

[Bob Whelan[_3_]]

> Change the PTS! How successful would light airplanes be if pilots were
> never required to train x/c in them? A newly minted private pilot has four
> choices at my club. Fly Schweizers locally, spend 20k+ on a glass ship you
> don't know how to fly, quit, teach others how to do take offs and landings
> in a 2-33. That last option is the real root of the problem. The core of
> our nation's clubs and greatest influence on those new to soaring never
> learned to actually soar! Until x/c is a requirement only people with time,
> money, and the ability to self teach will be able to it. (Old retired
> guys)...

And the argument has previously been made that increasing the barriers to
obtaining a license (cost, time, etc.) has its own discouraging effects.
Consider your own paradox: "Until x/c is a requirement only people with time,
money, and the ability to self teach will be able to it."

I doubt the perpetual chicken-or-egg conundrum as it applies to soaring will
(or can) ever be satisfactorily laid to rest. That said, learning to soar and
learning how to fly XC are different - if complementary - skills. Knowing how
to soar is a prerequisite to flying XC; not true the other way around...

Somehow, despite doing all my primary training and obtaining my private pilot
(glider-only) license in a club having only a 2-33 and a 1-26 and but one
instructor (not mine) with any XC experience, the "XC seed" was planted and
took root in my mind even before I'd taken my first lesson. How? My officemate
was an XC glider pilot, and from breeze-shooting with him as well as
accompanying him to do glass repairs on the gear doors/belly of the Libelle of
the one instructor with XC experience - land-out-induced damage (really!) - as
well (perhaps) as my innately realizing flagpole sitting as an idea seemed
boring merely as an idea, "it was obvious" to me that my PP(Glider)
certificate was but a license to learn without always having an instructor in
the back. Point being that it was the *idea* of XC that was the crucial part
of the picture for me. And the idea cost me nothing but some enjoyable
breeeze-shooting and hanging out time.

I actually obtained my license before ever soaring (i.e. climbing) on my own,
and only once experienced my instructor climbing in a thermal, so I suppose my
second point is that *neither* soaring nor XC need be crucial elements of
obtaining one's license...while the *ideas* of both, most certainly *are*
crucial elements to going XC in a glider...and opening one door to a lifetime
of (good!) life-altering experiences. How a person thinks, matters!

Bob W.

[Bruce Hoult]

On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 1:30:50 AM UTC+3, C-FFKQ (42) wrote:
> On Monday, 7 September 2015 07:19:10 UTC-4, Bruce Hoult wrote:
> > Is anyone doing basic training in Duos? The DG1000 is just fine (especially with the 18m tips). The Duo would be no problem in the air, but unsprung undercarriage doesn't seem like a good idea for student landings.
>
> Bruce, how many flights does it take to get to solo using the DG1000 ?
>
> At my club, we have a youth camp of 3 weeks duration where we train using 2-33's. We solo our kids usually around 24-28 flights. The 2-33 is a tough ship and can handle the abuse, a great workhorse.

We sell a 40 flight "Pre-paid to solo" package (with disclaimer of course), but most younger people (up to 40ish?) do get there by 40 flights.

And then, of course, they're already rated in high performance glass. How many total flights does it take to train in a 2-33 and then convert to modern glass?

24 - 28 is way lower than our average even when we were using Blaniks, so perhaps we have different goals. I soloed on flight 31 (at age 22) and that was below average.

But then our field is not that huge (600m), surrounded by housing, and we do a lot of soaring flights when the opportunity arises during training including flying on gusty windy ridge/wave days when we don't expect a student (even a post-solo one) to be able to handle the tow or landing. We pretty much expect people to be able to do a 30+ minute flight as soon as they are solo, not just a quick circuit.

The number of flights to solo did increase a bit when we moved to Twin Astir (original retract ~38:1 model), though not as much as we expected, possibly because the average flight time got a lot longer. I don't think we observed any measurable difference going from Grobs to DG1000.

We put people in the PW5 after five or so solo flights in the DG1000.

[Bruce Hoult]

On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 3:39:08 AM UTC+3, David Hirst wrote:
> > If numbers are increasing then why on earth would you train in 2-33's? Hell, I don't know why you do it NOW -- most of the rest of the world has been training in glass for several decades.
>
> In a lot of the world, including clubs in NZ, numbers are static or declining. This means that the fixed costs per head are increasing; a big lump of that is insurance and maintenance. Clubs with older non-glass gliders (i.e. Puchatek, ASK13, Ka7, 2-33) have much lower insurance costs and the gliders are (relatively) cheap to repair. This keeps the smaller clubs in the black - THAT's why clubs keep training in older gliders.

Looking at the annual accounts, insurance on the DG1000s isn't even close to being a major factor.

It's the tow plane that eats all the money. And next is the rent for the land our clubhouse and hangars sit on and the landing fees and control tower fees. Those are 10x bigger than the glider insurance.

We're in the process of moving to an airfield we'll own ourselves -- or at least have a 99 year lease on -- with 2 km of space to play in. And we're getting a brand new european winch. That and new buildings are costing a bit up front, but hopefully will reduce the costs in future.

[Tango Whisky]

Am Dienstag, 8. September 2015 00:30:50 UTC+2 schrieb C-FFKQ (42):
> On Monday, 7 September 2015 07:19:10 UTC-4, Bruce Hoult wrote:
> > Is anyone doing basic training in Duos? The DG1000 is just fine (especially with the 18m tips). The Duo would be no problem in the air, but unsprung undercarriage doesn't seem like a good idea for student landings.
>
> Bruce, how many flights does it take to get to solo using the DG1000 ?
>
> At my club, we have a youth camp of 3 weeks duration where we train using 2-33's. We solo our kids usually around 24-28 flights. The 2-33 is a tough ship and can handle the abuse, a great workhorse.

I've been training ab-initio students in Ka7, Twin Astir, Janus B and ASK21, and I haven't seen any significant difference in how long it takes to solo.

I can't imagine how you would attract people to gliding if you offering them to train in a 2-33... It's the year 2015. ASK21 are very tough workhorses, and an repairs on glass ships are *much* easier and faster done than on wood and fabric. That's one of the main reasons clubs in Europe changed from training in Ka7 and ASK13 to ASK21 - almost maintainance free, and cheap to repair.

But I guess that states of mind are quite different on both sides on the pond: From what I learned, you can get a glider licence in the US without having thermalled once, and you can be trained by instructors who have no XC experience at all. In Europe, that would just be impossible.

We typically try to "snatch" the youngsters, starting from age 14, and we offer them training up to their first 50 or 100 km solo (well, we have to as it is mandatory). And we don't teach people to glide, but to soar. A 2h solo flight is mandatory before they move on to initial XC training.

All of this is not seen as "additional barrier", but part of the game.
And we dont threat them with 2-33 or 1-26. In modest clubs, a beginner is trained in an ASK13 and then moves on to Ka8 and Ka6, and then relatively quickly to some glass club class glider. In my club, our fleet is 2x ASK21, 2x DuoDiscus, 2x LS4 and 2x LS-18-18 for about 50 actively flying members, and days where you won't get a seat in one of these ships are extremely rare: There are about 15 private ships owned by club members. We have a total of 9 instructors, all with XC experience, two of them doing >700 km through the Alps on a regular basis.

And no, we don't have the problem that our membership is declining.

[[email protected]]

So what sort of fee structure do you have at your club to support all of those aircraft? Initial buy in cost? Monthly dues? Price per tow? Price for use of each plane?

2-33: $8-10k
ASK21: $80k (???)
Duo: $100k
LS4: $40k


>
> In my club, our fleet is 2x ASK21, 2x DuoDiscus, 2x LS4 and 2x LS-18-18 for about 50 actively flying members, and days where you won't get a seat in one of these ships are extremely rare: There are about 15 private ships owned by club members. We have a total of 9 instructors, all with XC experience, two of them doing >700 km through the Alps on a regular basis.
>
> And no, we don't have the problem that our membership is declining.

[Tango Whisky]

If you want to be a member, you need to buy a share worth $400. If you want to leave, the club will buy it back at the same price. (I take 1 CHF = 1 US$).
Annual membership fee is $500-600.
Cost per hour is $20-40. However, you can buy 30h block for $700, or unlimited hours for $1400.
Tows are expensive because (1) we pay the fuel with $10/gal or more, and (2) we have to get from 400m MSL to 2000m MSL in order to connect with thermals. At $5-6/min, a tow is typically $100. Early students pay $30-40 for their 600m AGL tows. We can't operate a winch on our field (700 m rwy, gliders, SEP, helicopters, commercial parachuting operation, high-power lines parallel to the runway).
Each member is required to supervise operations for 1 or 2 days per season (that is, making sure that things run well on the ground). That does not include instruction. Each member is also required to participate 1 weekend per winter in glider maintainance (it typicall takes a team of 4 for 1.5 days to do annual maintainance of one glider).
Instructors don't do ground service or maintainance (well, they are at least not required to...), but they spent 5-10 days per season instructing. Instruction is for free.
We sell introductory rides (something like $200 for 1 hour); that and the tows is what brings in the biggest part of the funds.

Bert
Ventus cM TW

Am Dienstag, 8. September 2015 14:38:38 UTC+2 schrieb :
> So what sort of fee structure do you have at your club to support all of those aircraft? Initial buy in cost? Monthly dues? Price per tow? Price for use of each plane?
>
> 2-33: $8-10k
> ASK21: $80k (???)
> Duo: $100k
> LS4: $40k

[ND]

On Saturday, August 29, 2015 at 12:12:20 PM UTC-4, son_of_flubber wrote:
> On Saturday, August 29, 2015 at 11:51:06 AM UTC-4, kirk.stant wrote:
>
> > Zero Macready? Really? May I suggest you read up a little more on the theory and practice of Macready settings. Reichman is good, also John Cochrane's articles at http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john.cochrane/soaring/index.htm
>
> I understand that Zero Macready is totally wimpy, not flying XC, but it gives me a good chance of not landing out, and that is my priority. Having lots of fun though.


What he's saying is that it's fine to fly zero MacCready speed, as long as that's not the setting you have input in the box. you want to have something like 2-4 MacCready in the box, and then fly slower than what it's suggesting. that's what gives you an altitude margin.

I watched a kid scrape in realllly low on a final glide and basically do a straight in once, because he input zero maccready then flew 70knots all the way home. he was briefed on maccready after landing.

[Sean Fidler]

We need to inspire our Jr glider pilots to go beyond a "pattern license." Most of them never actually experience "true soaring!" This is our fault. At current, the goal we set for these pilots is achieving a "glider license" which actually includes zero cross country skills, training or experience. The goal should be (for all clubs, all instructors and all commercial operations) to get all new glider pilots (especially Jrs) comfortable, confident and p
PROFICIENT with flying cross country. Sure, some are not going to achieve this goal. So what?

Clubs, in my opinion, are almost exclusively focused on rides and basic training (no cross country). In fact, most U.S. Soaring Clubs have almost zero interest in inspiring or developing cross country skills for their students. In order to improve on our present course, U.S. clubs must be re-tooled and refocused on a new goal (less trainers, more cross country able gliders for members to train in and rent). When a new student comes along, the conversation should not be how do we get you your glider license, it should be how do we build you into a cross country soaring pilot capable of competing in your first soaring contest! The license itself should not be the goal, the first 100km solo cross country should be the goal!

Train how you fight, fight how you train. This is such a fantastic quote, perhaps the best I have ever learned. In other words, we are getting exactly what we are asking for in U.S. soaring circles today. We are getting pattern pilots who do not stick with or progress further in the sport. It is no surprise that pilots move on when the sport (for them) is limited to flying around the home airport. Most new glider pilots in the U.S., unsurprisingly, eventually get bored and go do something else. We wonder why we are failing (in terms of growth and development) and why all the effort we are putting into basic training at our clubs is producing fewer pilots who stick with a sport which is, to them, essentially pattern sleigh rides.

Glider clubs build their "business" on whipping new students (members) thru this primary training cycle. They are happy as pigs in mud when the gliders are flying locally and generally have no concerns that no cross country is being conducted. In fact, many clubs actively discourage cross country ("in club ships"). Heaven forbid a "club" glider is not on the ground for the next revenue producing rental time!

We need to fundemetally chance our priorities, mindset and strategy. We need to change almost everything about our current way of thinking about glider training. Clubs, instructors and especially the SSA's goals and strategy. We are a marketing disaster that should be taught in graduate schools actually. On so many levels...

Again, Great Britain just hosted its nearly 70 strong youth gliding national championship. They have this kind of attendance year after year! Meanwhile, the USA does not even have a single Jr soaring event and the USA has only a handful of youth pilots who are capable of contest or real cross country soaring. In short, WE SUCK! Can anyone tell me when the last Jr contest was held in the USA? The USA is SIX TIMES the size of the UK. So don't tell me geography. We should have 6 regional youth events of equal size (NE, SE, S, NC, NW, SW) in the USA just to be equal to Britian. Don't tell me we can't. We have not even tried.

The first step is holding on US Jr Nationals with 20 pilots in 2016. An achievable goal.

The second step is "changing the guard" and getting some new leadership capable of truly inspiring our youth pilots to go further and motivate them to take the sport of soaring to its full potential. This is at every club and within the SSA. Does your club leadership have a cross country development strategy? Does your club even care about cross country or is cross country entirely outside of their focus? Does your club have statistics on cross country utilization? A strategy? Youth? Adult? What percentage of newly licensed pilots achieve a cross country badge in the first 1-2 years after being licensed? Is your club a success or a failure?

Unfortunately, right now, cross country training is far beyond the capabilities and comfort zones of most clubs and instructors. We have to begin digging out of this hole someday. Why not start now?

Or, just stay the course? Keep bumbling along into oblivion.

Will 2016 be any different that 2015? I wonder...

[Sean Fidler]

We need to consider strongly inspiring our Jr glider students to go beyond a "pattern license." In fact, we need to standardize our training to make achievement of cross-country proficiency the goal rather than something that we might do later in life! Most U.S. glider students never actually experience "true soaring!" It is our fault that this is happening. At current, the goal we set for these pilots is achieving a "glider license" that includes zero cross-country skills, training or experience. The goal should be (for all clubs, instructors, and all commercial operations) to get all new glider pilots (especially Jrs) comfortable, confident and PROFICIENT with flying cross-country. Sure, some are not going to achieve this goal. So what? Let's aim higher. Much higher.

Gliding clubs are focused on rides and basic training (no cross-country). What a tragedy. In fact, most U.S. Soaring Clubs have almost zero interest in inspiring or developing cross-country skills for their students or newly licensed pilots. U.S. clubs must be re-tooled and refocused on an entirely new training goal. We need fewer trainers and more cross-country capable gliders for members to train in and rent. The conversation should not be how do we get you your glider license, it should be how do we build you into a cross-country soaring pilot capable of competing in your first soaring contest! The glider license itself should not be the goal, the first 100km solo cross-country should be the goal. We are capable of SO MUCH MORE than we are currently achieving.

Train how you fight, fight how you train. Such a fantastic quote, perhaps the best I have ever learned. In other words, we are getting what we are asking for in U.S. soaring circles today. We are getting pattern pilots who do not stick with or progress further into the sport of soaring. They get bored. It is no surprise that pilots move on when the sport consists of flying near the home airport. We wonder why we are failing (in terms of growth and development) and why all the effort we are putting into basic training at our clubs is producing fewer pilots who stick with a sport which is, to them, essentially pattern sleigh rides. We wonder why we are failing yet we have not changed the way we do things, in the slightest. We need to stop measuring how many new glider pilots were licensed this season. We need to start measuring ourselves by how many new cross-country pilots were developed this season! Clearly, how many licenses we complete is entirely irrelevant to U.S. soaring health.

Glider clubs literally build their "business" on whipping new students (members) thru the primary training cycle. The old guard within most soaring clubs are happy as pigs in "mud" when their club gliders are flying locally. Generally, they have little focus on if cross-country is being conducted. In fact, many clubs actively discourage cross-country soaring ("in club ships"). Heaven forbid a "club" glider is not on the ground on time for the next revenue producing rental! Blasphemy!

We need to fundamentally change our priorities, our mindset, and our strategy. We need to change almost everything about our current way of thinking about glider training. This includes our clubs, instructors and especially the SSA's goals and strategy. US Soaring is a marketing disaster that should be studied at graduate schools. On so many levels...

Again, Great Britain just hosted it's nearly 70 strong youth gliding national championship. They appear to have strong Jr. attendance year after year and an armada of young, highly capable cross country pilots being developed year after year! Meanwhile, the USA does not host even have a single Jr soaring event. The USA has only a handful of youth pilots who are capable of entering a contest. In short, WE SUCK!

Can anyone tell me when the last Jr contest was held in the USA? The USA is SIX TIMES the size of the UK. So don't tell me geography. We could have 6 regional youth events of equal size (NE, SE, S, NC, NW, SW) in the USA just to be equal to Britain. Don't tell me we can't do this. Of course we can. We simply do not try anymore. We are simply not focused on youth soaring. We are simply not very bright.

The first step is setting a goal to hold on US Junior Nationals with 20 pilots in 2016. A very achievable goal. All US clubs should share this goal. We need to make this happen. In time, this Junior event should be our most important of all contests, and it should be how we measure the health of our sport. The second step is "changing the guard" and getting some new leadership capable of truly inspiring our youth pilots to go further and motivate them to take the sport of soaring to its full potential. The fact that we still have embedded leadership that is not focused on growing youth contests in the US is unacceptable. Does your club leadership have a cross-country development strategy? Does your club even care about cross-country or is cross-country entirely outside of their focus? Does your club keep statistics on cross-country utilization? A strategy? Youth? Adult? How many of your clubs instructors are proficient cross-country pilots? What percentage of newly licensed pilots (from your clubs training program) achieve a cross-country badge in the first 1-2 years after being licensed? How does your club measure success? Is your club a success or a failure?

Unfortunately, right now, effective cross-country training is far beyond the capabilities and comfort zones of many instructors. We have to begin digging out of this hole someday. Why not start now?

Or, just stay the course? Keep doing what we are doing now? Keep bumbling along into oblivion.

Will 2016 be any different that 2015? Will we develop a meaningful strategy? I wonder...

Great Britain sure seems to be showing us how it is done...

[ND]

On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 7:47:46 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> I don't think soaring needs to grow much. We don't need, and don't have the capacity for lots of pilots. What we need are a handful of obsessed pilots. Obsessed soaring pilots make the wheel go round. Said this before the big recruitment hurdle is cultural, men no longer command their recreational time. Pool to chose from is never married chaps with no girlfriend or kids or old guys with grown kids.

i don't agree with the last two sentences at all. our club has several family guys who take up soaring. a family woman too... and guess what, her KIDS started flying too. so i vehemently disagree. i'm going to get married next year, and i'll have kids too. does that mean i have to quit flying? i dont think so. i recognize that i'm someone who already is engrossed before family and marriage, but my partner in our ASW 20 learned to fly with two kids in highschool, and is happily married. i think your perception of our pool to draw from is incredibly black and white, and inaccurate as well.

[John Carlyle]

Sean, while much of your analysis is correct you're discounting a huge factor - club income. If US clubs continue with their current business plans and switch to the XC mode you suggest, they'll go broke. If you can post a different business plan that keeps clubs on a solid financial footing I'm sure it would receive great attention.

-John, Q3

On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 10:57:15 AM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> We need to consider strongly inspiring our Jr glider students to go beyond a "pattern license." In fact, we need to standardize our training to make achievement of cross-country proficiency the goal rather than something that we might do later in life! Most U.S. glider students never actually experience "true soaring!" It is our fault that this is happening. At current, the goal we set for these pilots is achieving a "glider license" that includes zero cross-country skills, training or experience. The goal should be (for all clubs, instructors, and all commercial operations) to get all new glider pilots (especially Jrs) comfortable, confident and PROFICIENT with flying cross-country. Sure, some are not going to achieve this goal. So what? Let's aim higher. Much higher.
>
> Gliding clubs are focused on rides and basic training (no cross-country). What a tragedy. In fact, most U.S. Soaring Clubs have almost zero interest in inspiring or developing cross-country skills for their students or newly licensed pilots. U.S. clubs must be re-tooled and refocused on an entirely new training goal. We need fewer trainers and more cross-country capable gliders for members to train in and rent. The conversation should not be how do we get you your glider license, it should be how do we build you into a cross-country soaring pilot capable of competing in your first soaring contest! The glider license itself should not be the goal, the first 100km solo cross-country should be the goal. We are capable of SO MUCH MORE than we are currently achieving.
>
> Train how you fight, fight how you train. Such a fantastic quote, perhaps the best I have ever learned. In other words, we are getting what we are asking for in U.S. soaring circles today. We are getting pattern pilots who do not stick with or progress further into the sport of soaring. They get bored. It is no surprise that pilots move on when the sport consists of flying near the home airport. We wonder why we are failing (in terms of growth and development) and why all the effort we are putting into basic training at our clubs is producing fewer pilots who stick with a sport which is, to them, essentially pattern sleigh rides. We wonder why we are failing yet we have not changed the way we do things, in the slightest. We need to stop measuring how many new glider pilots were licensed this season. We need to start measuring ourselves by how many new cross-country pilots were developed this season! Clearly, how many licenses we complete is entirely irrelevant to U.S. soaring health.
>
> Glider clubs literally build their "business" on whipping new students (members) thru the primary training cycle. The old guard within most soaring clubs are happy as pigs in "mud" when their club gliders are flying locally. Generally, they have little focus on if cross-country is being conducted. In fact, many clubs actively discourage cross-country soaring ("in club ships"). Heaven forbid a "club" glider is not on the ground on time for the next revenue producing rental! Blasphemy!
>
> We need to fundamentally change our priorities, our mindset, and our strategy. We need to change almost everything about our current way of thinking about glider training. This includes our clubs, instructors and especially the SSA's goals and strategy. US Soaring is a marketing disaster that should be studied at graduate schools. On so many levels...
>
> Again, Great Britain just hosted it's nearly 70 strong youth gliding national championship. They appear to have strong Jr. attendance year after year and an armada of young, highly capable cross country pilots being developed year after year! Meanwhile, the USA does not host even have a single Jr soaring event. The USA has only a handful of youth pilots who are capable of entering a contest. In short, WE SUCK!
>
> Can anyone tell me when the last Jr contest was held in the USA? The USA is SIX TIMES the size of the UK. So don't tell me geography. We could have 6 regional youth events of equal size (NE, SE, S, NC, NW, SW) in the USA just to be equal to Britain. Don't tell me we can't do this. Of course we can. We simply do not try anymore. We are simply not focused on youth soaring. We are simply not very bright.
>
> The first step is setting a goal to hold on US Junior Nationals with 20 pilots in 2016. A very achievable goal. All US clubs should share this goal. We need to make this happen. In time, this Junior event should be our most important of all contests, and it should be how we measure the health of our sport. The second step is "changing the guard" and getting some new leadership capable of truly inspiring our youth pilots to go further and motivate them to take the sport of soaring to its full potential. The fact that we still have embedded leadership that is not focused on growing youth contests in the US is unacceptable. Does your club leadership have a cross-country development strategy? Does your club even care about cross-country or is cross-country entirely outside of their focus? Does your club keep statistics on cross-country utilization? A strategy? Youth? Adult? How many of your clubs instructors are proficient cross-country pilots? What percentage of newly licensed pilots (from your clubs training program) achieve a cross-country badge in the first 1-2 years after being licensed? How does your club measure success? Is your club a success or a failure?
>
> Unfortunately, right now, effective cross-country training is far beyond the capabilities and comfort zones of many instructors. We have to begin digging out of this hole someday. Why not start now?
>
> Or, just stay the course? Keep doing what we are doing now? Keep bumbling along into oblivion.
>
> Will 2016 be any different that 2015? Will we develop a meaningful strategy? I wonder...
>
> Great Britain sure seems to be showing us how it is done...

[Bruce Hoult]

On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 6:03:21 PM UTC+3, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Where are you?
>
>
>
>
> On 9/8/2015 1:09 AM, Bruce Hoult wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 3:39:08 AM UTC+3, David Hirst wrote:
>
>
>
> If numbers are increasing then why on earth would you train in 2-33's? Hell, I don't know why you do it NOW -- most of the rest of the world has been training in glass for several decades.
>
>
> In a lot of the world, including clubs in NZ, numbers are static or declining. This means that the fixed costs per head are increasing; a big lump of that is insurance and maintenance. Clubs with older non-glass gliders (i.e. Puchatek, ASK13, Ka7, 2-33) have much lower insurance costs and the gliders are (relatively) cheap to repair. This keeps the smaller clubs in the black - THAT's why clubs keep training in older gliders.
>
>
> Looking at the annual accounts, insurance on the DG1000s isn't even close to being a major factor.
>
> It's the tow plane that eats all the money. And next is the rent for the land our clubhouse and hangars sit on and the landing fees and control tower fees. Those are 10x bigger than the glider insurance.
>
> We're in the process of moving to an airfield we'll own ourselves -- or at least have a 99 year lease on -- with 2 km of space to play in. And we're getting a brand new european winch. That and new buildings are costing a bit up front, but hopefully will reduce the costs in future.

Wrong question :-)

I've been in Moscow for the last four months and for probably the next couple of years.

My gliding club, which I was writing about above, is in New Zealand.

[Dan Marotta]

I recall the joy of simply staying up! Seeing how high I could get -
even getting higher than my instructor who was up with another student.
But that soon became old hat. Already having an ATP license, I took the
commercial glider check ride and was, for a while, happy with giving
rides, but that, too, got old.

Then I moved to a club which had a lot of private owners and XC pilots.
I recall sitting on the porch with them at the end of the day sipping a
cold one and listening to their stories. The spark was ignited! I
simply had to get my own ship and learn how to fly cross country.

It seems that, nowadays, most people who come to the airport are simply
looking to add another token to their bucket of adventures and move on
to the next. It's very sad. Still, I take the time to talk with each
of them, answer their questions, point to the mountains and tell them
how wonderful it is to soar over there and spend the day enjoying the
scenery, and the wonder of having an eagle fly along side (or out climb
me!).

Dan
5J
>> choices at my club. Fly Schweizers locally, spend 20k+ on a glass
>> ship you
>> don't know how to fly, quit, teach others how to do take offs and
>> landings
>> in a 2-33. That last option is the real root of the problem. The core of
>> our nation's clubs and greatest influence on those new to soaring never
>> learned to actually soar! Until x/c is a requirement only people with
>> time,
>> money, and the ability to self teach will be able to it. (Old retired
>> guys)...
>
> And the argument has previously been made that increasing the barriers
> to obtaining a license (cost, time, etc.) has its own discouraging
> effects. Consider your own paradox: "Until x/c is a requirement only
> people with time,
> money, and the ability to self teach will be able to it."
>
> I doubt the perpetual chicken-or-egg conundrum as it applies to
> soaring will (or can) ever be satisfactorily laid to rest. That said,
> learning to soar and learning how to fly XC are different - if
> complementary - skills. Knowing how to soar is a prerequisite to
> flying XC; not true the other way around...
>
> Somehow, despite doing all my primary training and obtaining my
> private pilot (glider-only) license in a club having only a 2-33 and a
> 1-26 and but one instructor (not mine) with any XC experience, the "XC
> seed" was planted and took root in my mind even before I'd taken my
> first lesson. How? My officemate was an XC glider pilot, and from
> breeze-shooting with him as well as accompanying him to do glass
> repairs on the gear doors/belly of the Libelle of the one instructor
> with XC experience - land-out-induced damage (really!) - as well
> (perhaps) as my innately realizing flagpole sitting as an idea seemed
> boring merely as an idea, "it was obvious" to me that my PP(Glider)
> certificate was but a license to learn without always having an
> instructor in the back. Point being that it was the *idea* of XC that
> was the crucial part of the picture for me. And the idea cost me
> nothing but some enjoyable breeeze-shooting and hanging out time.
>
> I actually obtained my license before ever soaring (i.e. climbing) on
> my own, and only once experienced my instructor climbing in a thermal,
> so I suppose my second point is that *neither* soaring nor XC need be
> crucial elements of obtaining one's license...while the *ideas* of
> both, most certainly *are* crucial elements to going XC in a
> glider...and opening one door to a lifetime of (good!) life-altering
> experiences. How a person thinks, matters!
>
> Bob W.

[Dan Marotta]

Where are you?

On 9/8/2015 1:09 AM, Bruce Hoult wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 3:39:08 AM UTC+3, David Hirst wrote:
>>> If numbers are increasing then why on earth would you train in 2-33's? Hell, I don't know why you do it NOW -- most of the rest of the world has been training in glass for several decades.
>> In a lot of the world, including clubs in NZ, numbers are static or declining. This means that the fixed costs per head are increasing; a big lump of that is insurance and maintenance. Clubs with older non-glass gliders (i.e. Puchatek, ASK13, Ka7, 2-33) have much lower insurance costs and the gliders are (relatively) cheap to repair. This keeps the smaller clubs in the black - THAT's why clubs keep training in older gliders.
> Looking at the annual accounts, insurance on the DG1000s isn't even close to being a major factor.
>
> It's the tow plane that eats all the money. And next is the rent for the land our clubhouse and hangars sit on and the landing fees and control tower fees. Those are 10x bigger than the glider insurance.
>
> We're in the process of moving to an airfield we'll own ourselves -- or at least have a 99 year lease on -- with 2 km of space to play in. And we're getting a brand new european winch. That and new buildings are costing a bit up front, but hopefully will reduce the costs in future.

[kirk.stant]

On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 9:57:15 AM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:

Sean, look at a map of the US and of England. Take a guess at the density of junior pilots. The reason they can get the numbers (aside from a much more social club environment, I agree) is that they are a lot closer to the racing venue - If every junior pilot in the US could get to a Junior contest with a club or loaned glider within a day's drive, we would see the same or better numbers!

And you are getting a bit tiring, up on your soap box. NOT EVERYONE WANTS TO FLY XC, MUCH LESS RACE! Most of our long time club members, including private owners of some nice glass, have no desire to stress out flying XC. And they are perfectly happy (and pretty good pilots).

Personally, I agree with you that XC and racing is most fun in soaring, along with acro, intro rides for grandmas who have never flown, end of day sled rides with the wife in glassy air as the sun goes down - hmm, I guess it's all good!

Oh, and "low approaches, circling to land..." ;^)

My solution? It's the social aspect, not the flying. THAT'S THE BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EURO AND MOST US CLUBS! We need nice, appealing facilities more than we need nicer gliders; we need clubhouses with bars (or even restaurants), weekend sleeping accommodations, nice areas to park the RVs, things for the spouses and kids to do - When the locals stop by to sit in the shade, sip a cold one, and watch the pretty shiny gliders fly, then you are on the right track!

Kirk
66

[[email protected]]

Focusing on the strategies employed by Great Britain or Germany is misguided, because the proximal problems for U.S. Juniors are distal problems to European Juniors. The proximal problems for U.S. Juniors, which need to be addressed before the British/German strategies are viable, are:

1. Travel. You need to shrink the continental U.S. (3 million sq. miles) by 98.3% for it to be the same size as England (50 thousand sq. miles). That presents a travel nightmare for U.S. pilots wanting to travel to contests. DS has done some epic road trips to fly in contests, but it isn't reasonable to expect other Juniors to have the means/desire to do the same.

2. Access. The fleet of gliders available for use by the U.S. Junior is shockingly small. DS and JPS both have benefactors who allow travel with race-quality gliders, but how many other Juniors have that kind of access?

Solve both of those problems, then start looking at how Germany/Britain address [all the other problems, many of which are common to both the U.S. and the Europeans].

Allowing free contest entry for Juniors was a good first step. Next steps would be to find a way to fund travel expenses and access to quality gliders.

Cheers,
-Mark Rebuck

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 08:33:02 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:

> My gliding club, which I was writing about above, is in New Zealand.
>
I know your current field - visited in 2003 and met you briefly - but was
in Wgton for about 7 years (VUW then work) back in the 60s & 70s, mostly
flying models on the Trentham rifle range for my aviation fix, so I'm
curious about where the club is likely to move to. Is the plot to stay W
of the ranges and just go a few km north, or would a move to the
Wairarapa make more sense?


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

[Tango Whisky]

I think that a lot of contributor's here mix up xc and contests. You can love xx, but don't mind contests (as in my case). In our club we train xc, but we don't push people towards contest participation.

Bert
Ventus cM TW

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 2:32:07 PM UTC-4, kirk.stant wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 9:57:15 AM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
>
> Sean, look at a map of the US and of England. Take a guess at the density of junior pilots. The reason they can get the numbers (aside from a much more social club environment, I agree) is that they are a lot closer to the racing venue - If every junior pilot in the US could get to a Junior contest with a club or loaned glider within a day's drive, we would see the same or better numbers!
>
> And you are getting a bit tiring, up on your soap box. NOT EVERYONE WANTS TO FLY XC, MUCH LESS RACE! Most of our long time club members, including private owners of some nice glass, have no desire to stress out flying XC. And they are perfectly happy (and pretty good pilots).
>
> Personally, I agree with you that XC and racing is most fun in soaring, along with acro, intro rides for grandmas who have never flown, end of day sled rides with the wife in glassy air as the sun goes down - hmm, I guess it's all good!
>
> Oh, and "low approaches, circling to land..." ;^)
>
> My solution? It's the social aspect, not the flying. THAT'S THE BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EURO AND MOST US CLUBS! We need nice, appealing facilities more than we need nicer gliders; we need clubhouses with bars (or even restaurants), weekend sleeping accommodations, nice areas to park the RVs, things for the spouses and kids to do - When the locals stop by to sit in the shade, sip a cold one, and watch the pretty shiny gliders fly, then you are on the right track!
>
> Kirk
> 66

Steve Bennis, our mentor at Middletown NY, took me aside one day 30 years ago or so and asked me if I wanted to know the most important thing to keep people coming to our soaring operation.
Not stupid, said tell me the secret.
He did:
Drum roll..................................
Picnics!
The message was that the social environment is very important to capturing and retaining members or customers, in addition to a stimulating flying environment.
UH

[son_of_flubber]

On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 2:32:07 PM UTC-4, kirk.stant wrote:
>The reason they can get the numbers (aside from a much more social club environment, I agree) is that they are a lot closer to the racing venue.

And winch launching in UK lets large numbers of fledglings test their wings.

We had one 13 year old visiting UK pilot take his first aerotow (ever) while visiting relatives in Vermont. He had 150+ winch launches in his log book @ $5 a pop. 30+ kids in his youth program.

By contrast...We have 5-6 kids working on our line crew where they get one aerotow/lesson/glider_rental for each day that they work as line crew (paid for by a separate non-profit).

[Sean Fidler]

The British are holding a Jr winter series! They already have 50 Jr pilots registered for the first event of the series. They are soliciting 2 place gliders from clubs and associated instructors to participate. See attached photo...

Absolutely amazing. The contrast between the UK and US with respect to youth soaring. Talk about getting ones clock cleaned...

https://www.icloud.com/sharedalbum/#B0255Z2WM8lGXY

[Sean Fidler]

Common! We have 6x the population of the UK and 10x the wealth! Divide the U.S. into NE, SE, SC, SW, Great Lakes, and Mountian West, etc. 6 regions of our highest population density. Take out the entire center of the U.S.., forget about it. Distance is simply NOT AN EXCUSE for our low or non existent (in the case of Jr soaring) participation. We need to stop making excuses for our complete and utter failure at developing a vibrant and successful youth soaring culture in the USA. We need to accept this failure and change. We need to wake up and fix it. Complacency is not going to help us improve the situation.

Bottom line. Few care!

Cross country soaring and youth participation is the foundation of any healthy soaring community. We simply HAVE NO FOUNDATION anymore! XC is "the" goal to strive towards achieving in soaring. Pattern glider flying is unsustainable and uninspiring. The U.S. has become a country of pattern glider flying.

I wonder what percentage of UK instructors are highly experienced XC pilots vs US instructors. My guess. 85% in the UK vs 15% in the USA. I wonder how many XC hours a UK instructor hour flys per year (on average) vs a U.S. Instructor? Shouldn't a glider instructor have to have a 100km cross country every 2 years at minimum to remain. Urgent as a glider instrucor? Shouldn't a student be encouraged to ask their glider instructor how many XC flights they have competed in the last 1,2,5 years and what their OLC URL is so they can see how experienced they are?

What a shame for potential U.S. Jr pilots.

[Sean Fidler]

Common! We have 6x the population of the UK and 10x the wealth! Divide the U.S. into NE, SE, SC, SW, Great Lakes, and Mountian West, etc. That is 6 small regions of our highest population density. Take out the entire center of the country. These 6 regions are what the USA is to the vast majority of our pilots. Each of these regions are equal in population to the UK! Coast to coast distance is simply NOT AN EXCUSE for the USA's low or non existent (in the case of Jr soaring) participation.

We need to stop making excuses for our complete and utter failure at developing a vibrant and successful youth soaring culture in the USA. We need to accept this failure and change. We need to wake up and fix it. Complacency is not going to help us improve the situation.

Bottom line. Few care!

Cross country soaring and youth participation are the foundation of any healthy soaring community. We simply HAVE NO FOUNDATION anymore! XC is "the" goal to strive towards achieving in soaring. This focus is why the UK is thriving. Pattern glider flying is unsustainable and uninspiring. Our lack of focus is why we are failing. The U.S. has become a country of pattern glider flying.

I wonder what percentage of UK instructors are highly experienced XC pilots vs US instructors. My guess. 85% in the UK vs 15% in the USA. I wonder how many XC hours a UK instructor hour flys per year (on average) vs a U.S. Instructor? Shouldn't a glider instructor have to have a 100km cross country every 2 years at minimum to remain current as a glider instrucor? Shouldn't a student be encouraged to ask their glider instructor how many XC flights they have competed in the last 1,2,5 years and what their OLC URL is so they can see how experienced they are?

What a shame for potential U.S. Jr pilots. Maybe we should hire some of the UK Jr Development Team?

[Bruce Hoult]

On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 10:19:16 PM UTC+3, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Sep 2015 08:33:02 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:
>
> > My gliding club, which I was writing about above, is in New Zealand.
> >
> I know your current field - visited in 2003 and met you briefly - but was
> in Wgton for about 7 years (VUW then work) back in the 60s & 70s, mostly
> flying models on the Trentham rifle range for my aviation fix, so I'm
> curious about where the club is likely to move to. Is the plot to stay W
> of the ranges and just go a few km north, or would a move to the
> Wairarapa make more sense?

Unfortunately, staying west of the ranges would require either developing a new airfield a minimum of 20 - 30 km further north (somewhere between extremely expensive and time consuming, and impossible, due mostly to planning procedures, objections from "neighbours" etc), or going to existing airfields at Fielding, Foxton or the like. Foxton is 60 km more from Wellington, and is too far from the ranges. Fielding is 110 km more from Wellington.

Joining the Upper Valley club at Kaitoke would be a possibility, but there is limited space and a lot of improvements would be needed. Definitely aerotow only.

Masterton would be a possibility. Very nice large WW2 airfield (as was Paraparaumu), and we use it for an away weekend most years (and sometimes contests). But it runs the same future risk as Paraparaumu, and is far too busy with warbirds, parachuting etc to be able to operate a winch.

The best option appears to be joining a small existing club at Greytown. They've been operating for several decades on a nice long strip (2 km of winch run on the main vector) on a dairy farm owned by the club president. He is now elderly and recently sold the farm to the local council who want it in future to spread treated waste water instead of discharging it into the river. The council is encouraging multiple recreational uses of the land, and are willing to give a very long term lease and other security of tenure provisions.

For anyone in the Hutt Valley it's the same travel time or less as Paraparaumu. For Wellington it's about 20 minutes more (60 min vs 40 min). From Porirua is the same travel time as from Wellington (but Paraparaumu was 15 min closer from Porirua). And of course it gets progressively worse for people living further up the west coast from Porirua.

This video gives a nice idea of the location (and the freedom to do what we want):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8p7i85rvMG8

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Wed, 09 Sep 2015 02:35:04 -0700, Bruce Hoult wrote:

> Masterton would be a possibility. Very nice large WW2 airfield (as was
> Paraparaumu), and we use it for an away weekend most years (and
> sometimes contests). But it runs the same future risk as Paraparaumu,
> and is far too busy with warbirds, parachuting etc to be able to operate
> a winch.
>
Around 1970 we (Wellington MAC) used to fly free flight model comps on
Hood Aerodrome about once a year, but I understand its got quite busy
since, so not going there isn't a surprise.

> The best option appears to be joining a small existing club at Greytown.
>
Is that the club formerly known as Jury Hill? I see the web site now
calls itself Gliding Wairarapa. Being addicted to winching, if I'd moved
back to NZ I'd have considered pitching up somewhere near it. I know the
general area from flying models on Rayner's Farm, which is about 6km east
of Carterton and 9km from where the video was shot (not hard to find on
Google Earth.

It does look good, and well placed for Tararua wave, too.


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8p7i85rvMG8



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

[Bruce Hoult]

On Wednesday, September 9, 2015 at 2:48:33 PM UTC+3, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> Is that the club formerly known as Jury Hill?

Yes. One of the small wrinkles in the paperwork is that the main runway is divided into two by a paper access road owned by the Jury family (or their successors?).

[[email protected]]

A European perspective here:
1. We have the same problems. (Numbers, Retention, Youth, Over-regulation) Grass ain't greener over here.

2. Soaring has IMO a major image problem.
- Missunderstood (what we do, how we do it.)
- Missconceptions (Cost, Skills needed, Time Required)
- The Rewards are not apparent.

Due to this we attract/train the wrong people. There are people who want to become a pilot in the power plane sense. Yes, its a challenge on its own, but the major challenge while power flying is doing it right according to method X.

Basic glider training matches the above. But when it comes to fly on your own, its suddenly a different story:

Soaring requires to develop your own processes, your own instincts and there isn't a clear right / wrong. Its a different mind set.

We are more adventurers/explorers/pioneers than pilots in the classic sense..

We need to attract the people who cater to the above values, more than that of piloting an air plane.

At least here in Switzerland we have a major competitor: Paragliding. They have 30000+ Pilots, Glider pilots: 2200. And its exactly that mindset that is the difference. People go PGing because they think of adventure, close to nature etc. even though they are doing the same thing as we do, albeit on a different scale.

Other Frequent citied points:
* No dependency on infrastructure (take back pack and run off a mountain)
* No club dependency (volunteer work, politics, cost of association etc)

An EGU Paper suggested we do something similar as PADI did for the diving community.

I call B$ on the argument that people don't have enough time. I see how many hours people spend on social media, games and general assisted procrastination. In the end its all a deviation from their internal dissatisfaction with themselves. If they where offered a perspective, they would find it important enough to dedicate themselves to soaring.

For me Soaring has been a major character development driver. Its made me strive for goals previously thought unattainable, upped my self confidence, reliance and planning skills. Its also made me accustomed to "take the plunge/leap" often and willingly. Soaring fundamentally changes you.

I really think we can bank on that. It should be part of the sales-pitch at any Soaring presentation.

You see all these "Go pro" videos with millions of hits on youtube? That is people wanting to experience the same as the person shooting the video. But they don't even try because they think its unattainable to them.

Soaring need to break into new communities. I love for that the Soaring Grand Prix. Especially if its televised. I think we need a sports tv channel to adopt regular screening of this. It should be an easy sale. Its fresh, fast and its got major visual power.

Cheers,
- Folken

[Soartech]

There are some very good points brought up here. However I think we are overlooking a basic change in youth behavior that has occurred nearly world-wide over the last ~20 years. That is the tendency of young people to A. avoid risky activities outside the relative safety of "experiences" such as amusement park rides and other programmed events, and B. a decreased tendency to initiate an activity such as building or repairing things. I am sure all of you have witnessed both these characteristics in today's youths. The reasons for this are many and may include "helicopter parenting", child coddling and easy availability of simulated electronic experiences.
Now add to that the reduced amount of income experienced by many youth as "good" jobs get harder to obtain. Soaring is expensive. Hang gliding and paragliding are far less expensive. Hence the huge difference in numbers (see Swiss post above) of the remaining youth who still have the "adventure" gene active within them.
In short, there is little we can do to attract youth into sailplane flying in any large numbers. As someone pointed out, that is probably just as well as there are not enough resources to handle such an influx anyway. The best we can manage is to introduce youth to it and hope they return later in life when they can afford it.

[Soartech]

Here is yet another example of why people that have the urge to soar don't need to spend lots of money to experience great XC. The distances are not as far but the view is better.
https://vimeo.com/138445187

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, September 9, 2015 at 8:24:35 PM UTC+2, Soartech wrote:
> There are some very good points brought up here. However I think we are overlooking a basic change in youth behavior that has occurred nearly world-wide over the last ~20 years. That is the tendency of young people to A. avoid risky activities outside the relative safety of "experiences" such as amusement park rides and other programmed events, and

I agree that this is there. Although I wouldn't limit to youth. We live in a risk averse society to the point where people are no longer able to judge risk, because of infrequent exposure.

However there is a difference between precieved risk and actual risk. I know no PG pilot who hasn't been to the doctor or worse due to a landing related incident.

Insurances here think the same. You need a special insurance for PGing here, not the case for soaring.

> B. a decreased tendency to initiate an activity such as building or repairing things.
There is hope there. Have a look at the large Maker movement currently grabbing the states and europe. Sure its in an organized fashion. But that may be a key argument there, providing a more structured approach to gliding.

I am sure all of you have witnessed both these characteristics in today's youths. The reasons for this are many and may include "helicopter parenting", child coddling and easy availability of simulated electronic experiences.
> Now add to that the reduced amount of income experienced by many youth as "good" jobs get harder to obtain. Soaring is expensive. Hang gliding and paragliding are far less expensive. Hence the huge difference in numbers (see Swiss post above) of the remaining youth who still have the "adventure" gene active within them.
> In short, there is little we can do to attract youth into sailplane flying in any large numbers. As someone pointed out, that is probably just as well as there are not enough resources to handle such an influx anyway. The best we can manage is to introduce youth to it and hope they return later in life when they can afford it.

At least the way I see it PGing is more expensive than gliding.

You need to buy your own equipment. The PGschool is commercial. The calculation I saw here was (Swiss prices so brace yourself):
3500.- For instruction
4500.- For the Wing and equipment. (low end)
Thats about 8200 USD.

In addition you need to travel to the mountains every time you want to go flying.
Basel <-> Rigi costs you 45 CHF there and back again.

In addtion you need to replace the wing every 5-7 years. If you are serious about safety.

Compare to that Gliding:
4500.- for instruction (non commercial)
1500.- Per year for about 80h of flying. (3.5h in 22 Flights + Club Charge)

This isn't to shoot against Paraglider pilots. Its just that costs cannot be the factor why there are 10x more PG pilots than Glider Pilots.

I heard that soaring was more expensive than powered flight in the US. If that is the case we need to identify the cost driving factors and eliminate or find ways to distribute them differently.

[gb]

It takes a village to launch a sailplane, a pair of sneakers to launch a PG.. Private ownership to private ownership is no contest. PG gear advertised prices are much higher then experienced PG pilots pay. You can keep yourself in good gear for same or less then club dues(unfortunately PG students do get bled.) Price aside, I think it is more the autonomy of self launch. No one wants to say it but we all know there are a lot of cranky miserable people in sailplane villages. If you don't get on with your local sailplane club all the fun is gone. If you don't get on with your local PG club, as long as you are waivered up and meet local rating rules you don't have to deal with them much.

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, September 10, 2015 at 2:37:22 PM UTC+2, GB wrote:
> It takes a village to launch a sailplane, a pair of sneakers to launch a PG. Private ownership to private ownership is no contest. PG gear advertised prices are much higher then experienced PG pilots pay. You can keep yourself in good gear for same or less then club dues(unfortunately PG students do get bled.) Price aside, I think it is more the autonomy of self launch.. No one wants to say it but we all know there are a lot of cranky miserable people in sailplane villages. If you don't get on with your local sailplane club all the fun is gone. If you don't get on with your local PG club, as long as you are waivered up and meet local rating rules you don't have to deal with them much.

I finally found that EGU Paper. Its the results of a 2012 workshop on how to retain, train and future development of gliding. I think it should be circulated a lot more widely.

http://www.egu-info.org/dwnl/EGU%20Proceedings%20Amsterdam%20workshop%2020122.p df

If you are short on time, read section 3 "Gliding is the Answer � But what is the Question?" Why Gliding? Steps towards creating a Brand.

As you correctly state the club dependency is a big problem for one particular potential demographic: the middle aged pilot.

Although he/she has income, he has little time to dedicate, but still wants to fly.

What the author suggests is to create a brand like PADI for scuba divers. Its a common acronym which stand for certification, equipment, services available from a PADI certified organisation. If you are certified for a certain PADI level, its clear what you can and cannot do. Its clear what equipment you can operate and what your level of experience is.

It basically would allow you to come to an airport and rent a glider. Without membership in a particular club. If you are self-launch certified and a glider with that capability is available, you can operate on your own.

[Bruce Hoult]

On Thursday, September 10, 2015 at 3:37:22 PM UTC+3, GB wrote:
> It takes a village to launch a sailplane, a pair of sneakers to launch a PG.

Not a whole village :-)

There are many many times I've wanted to fly on a day that the club is not "open". All I've needed is a tow pilot. Two is enough to push the tow plane and glider out of the hanger, get them onto the runway, and do a wing-down takeoff using the radio for "take up slack" and "all out" signals.

There is the question of who does the hookup. I guess the safest is for either pilot to do it before the tug starts its engine, but it's a lot quicker for the glider pilot to do it before getting in, with the towplane warming up just off to the side facing crosswind, with plenty of slack rope.

[Sean Fidler]

Folken,

Amazing post. Great insight. I agree with you.

Paragliding is cleaning "traditional soaring's" clocks in much the same way kiteboarding and multihulls are exceeding traditional sailboats and yacht clubs. They are generally younger, more agile and more free.

Sean

[gb]

On Thursday, September 10, 2015 at 11:08:22 AM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Folken,
>
> Amazing post. Great insight. I agree with you.
>
> Paragliding is cleaning "traditional soaring's" clocks in much the same way kiteboarding and multihulls are exceeding traditional sailboats and yacht clubs. They are generally younger, more agile and more free.
>
> Sean
I've found the PG population is older and better off then sailplane pilots assume. Maybe it is just this part of the country, lots of 50, 60 year olds, slightly less 30 year olds, 40 year olds seem to be the rarest, probably divorces taking up all their resources. No real young dude types. Guessing most PG pilots that I've met could afford a sailplane if they wanted one.. Number one factor for being a soaring pilot(of anything) is time.

[Dan Marotta]

Something like the PADI model sounds very promising. I've often
wondered why I could not simply drop in to an FBO (Fixed Base Operator)
and rent an airplane or glider and go. There's always a checkout
requiring stalls, slow flight, traffic patterns, landings, ad. nauseum.
I would think simply showing my log book and licenses would suffice.
Imagine going to the Hertz/Avis counter to rent a car and being told
you'd have to demonstrate parallel parking!

I know... It's the insurance companies.

On 9/10/2015 6:49 AM, wrote:
> On Thursday, September 10, 2015 at 2:37:22 PM UTC+2, GB wrote:Someadvertised prices are much higher then experienced PG pilots pay. You can keep yourself in good gear for same or less then club dues(unfortunately PG students do get bled.) Price aside, I think it is more the autonomy of self launch. No one wants to say it but we all know there are a lot of cranky miserable people in sailplane villages. If you don't get on with your local sailplane club all the fun is gone. If you don't get on with your local PG club, as long as you are waivered up and meet local rating rules you don't have to deal with them much.
> I finally found that EGU Paper. Its the results of a 2012 workshop on how to retain, train and future development of gliding. I think it should be circulated a lot more widely.
>
> http://www.egu-info.org/dwnl/EGU%20Proceedings%20Amsterdam%20workshop%2020122.p df
>
> If you are short on time, read section 3 "Gliding is the Answer � But what is the Question?" Why Gliding? Steps towards creating a Brand.
>
> As you correctly state the club dependency is a big problem for one particular potential demographic: the middle aged pilot.
>
> Although he/she has income, he has little time to dedicate, but still wants to fly.
>
> What the author suggests is to create a brand like PADI for scuba divers. Its a common acronym which stand for certification, equipment, services available from a PADI certified organisation. If you are certified for a certain PADI level, its clear what you can and cannot do. Its clear what equipment you can operate and what your level of experience is.
>
> It basically would allow you to come to an airport and rent a glider. Without membership in a particular club. If you are self-launch certified and a glider with that capability is available, you can operate on your own.
>
>
>
>

[Craig Funston]

On Thursday, September 10, 2015 at 9:35:07 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Something like the PADI model sounds very promising.Â* I've often
> wondered why I could not simply drop in to an FBO (Fixed Base
> Operator) and rent an airplane or glider and go.Â* There's always a
> checkout requiring stalls, slow flight, traffic patterns, landings,
> ad. nauseum.Â* I would think simply showing my log book and licenses
> would suffice.Â* Imagine going to the Hertz/Avis counter to rent a
> car and being told you'd have to demonstrate parallel parking!
>
>
>
> I know...Â* It's the insurance companies.
>
>
>
>
> On 9/10/2015 6:49 AM,
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, September 10, 2015 at 2:37:22 PM UTC+2, GB wrote:Someadvertised prices are much higher then experienced PG pilots pay. You can keep yourself in good gear for same or less then club dues(unfortunately PG students do get bled.) Price aside, I think it is more the autonomy of self launch. No one wants to say it but we all know there are a lot of cranky miserable people in sailplane villages. If you don't get on with your local sailplane club all the fun is gone. If you don't get on with your local PG club, as long as you are waivered up and meet local rating rules you don't have to deal with them much.
>
>
> I finally found that EGU Paper. Its the results of a 2012 workshop on how to retain, train and future development of gliding. I think it should be circulated a lot more widely.
>
> http://www.egu-info.org/dwnl/EGU%20Proceedings%20Amsterdam%20workshop%2020122.p df
>
> If you are short on time, read section 3 "Gliding is the Answer � But what is the Question?" Why Gliding? Steps towards creating a Brand.
>
> As you correctly state the club dependency is a big problem for one particular potential demographic: the middle aged pilot.
>
> Although he/she has income, he has little time to dedicate, but still wants to fly.
>
> What the author suggests is to create a brand like PADI for scuba divers. Its a common acronym which stand for certification, equipment, services available from a PADI certified organisation. If you are certified for a certain PADI level, its clear what you can and cannot do. Its clear what equipment you can operate and what your level of experience is.
>
> It basically would allow you to come to an airport and rent a glider. Without membership in a particular club. If you are self-launch certified and a glider with that capability is available, you can operate on your own.

Resurrecting an old thread about inspiring pilots to take up Cross-Country. Come to Ephrata, WA in June and join us for our annual XC camp / mentoring session. http://www.thedustup.info/

[Christopher Schrader]

On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 5:03:19 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 2:32:07 PM UTC-4, kirk.stant wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 9:57:15 AM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
> >
> > Sean, look at a map of the US and of England. Take a guess at the density of junior pilots. The reason they can get the numbers (aside from a much more social club environment, I agree) is that they are a lot closer to the racing venue - If every junior pilot in the US could get to a Junior contest with a club or loaned glider within a day's drive, we would see the same or better numbers!
> >
> > And you are getting a bit tiring, up on your soap box. NOT EVERYONE WANTS TO FLY XC, MUCH LESS RACE! Most of our long time club members, including private owners of some nice glass, have no desire to stress out flying XC.. And they are perfectly happy (and pretty good pilots).
> >
> > Personally, I agree with you that XC and racing is most fun in soaring, along with acro, intro rides for grandmas who have never flown, end of day sled rides with the wife in glassy air as the sun goes down - hmm, I guess it's all good!
> >
> > Oh, and "low approaches, circling to land..." ;^)
> >
> > My solution? It's the social aspect, not the flying. THAT'S THE BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EURO AND MOST US CLUBS! We need nice, appealing facilities more than we need nicer gliders; we need clubhouses with bars (or even restaurants), weekend sleeping accommodations, nice areas to park the RVs, things for the spouses and kids to do - When the locals stop by to sit in the shade, sip a cold one, and watch the pretty shiny gliders fly, then you are on the right track!
> >
> > Kirk
> > 66
>
> Steve Bennis, our mentor at Middletown NY, took me aside one day 30 years ago or so and asked me if I wanted to know the most important thing to keep people coming to our soaring operation.
> Not stupid, said tell me the secret.
> He did:
> Drum roll..................................
> Picnics!
> The message was that the social environment is very important to capturing and retaining members or customers, in addition to a stimulating flying environment.
> UH

This is very true. We had 4 picnics this year and it has done amazing things for morale. Santa Claus even brought the club a nice 6.5qt crockpot so on busy weekend days the members can grab a hot dog, chips, and a soda, drop a couple bucks in the donation bucket and know they wont go hungry spending the day with their friends at the airfield. I want to thank the guys at Thermal Research and Kendall Gliderport circa 1985 for that (my brothers and I ate a lot of hot dogs at the gliderport growing up as kids). In any case, Costco and Sam's Club can make this an affordable proposition for any club.. What's required is a decent clubhouse kitchen and on that front I'm proud we re-modeled our clubhouse this year. We may even start doing pancake breakfasts next winter (once we get hot water installed) just to give everyone an excuse to get together when its snowing outside (we did put in heat and insulation). But without further digressing, you are absolutely right. You can see the excitement in peoples eyes when they come out to the field now.. Picnics, BBQ's, and other themed outdoor parties do a lot to bring people together and get people flying again! And more importantly, the social environment is the key to progress. Unfriendly clubs tend not to keep their new members around for very long. Conversely, clubs whose members take the time to make their new (and existing) members always feel welcome, extend a hand, or sometimes just a healthy shot of encouragement, get this small investment returned to them in spades. Usually, it results in untold volunteer support that you can't always put a price on but nor could a club survive without. Lastly, there's Grinch among all of us. My advice is don't let the resident grouch sit around and poison the well. Circumvent the grouch and steer the newcomer in a positive direction and the grouch won't have anyone left to complain to but himself.

- Chris Schrader, Sandhill Soaring Club, near Ann Arbor, MI

[Casey[_2_]]

My $0.02 from a newly mint pilot aspiring for XC.

First of all I think there is a unique internal fortitude that glider pilots have. And let me also say, I think it’s even more so for the XC pilot. I have met pilots from varying skill and experience that some gave me the impression that they were terrified of XC. Being a student gave me a unique advantage of asking questions versus someone with experience would probably not have asked those types of questions I had asked. I also realize that individuals have their own comfort level. Now with that said, I think that internal fortitude can be broken down into two areas; churn and retention of when pilots either do not seek XC or the student drops out. Either way, it affects long-term retention.

I do not know if there are two ideas or paths to solo but I was on the path of training to know almost all there is about soaring prior to solo. I think I would have stopped training if I did not know the end game of XC. I think a student should solo as soon as practical with the guidance that much more training is ahead. The student will discover more quickly if they have the internal fortitude to continue. To over-train a student for solo creates a long path for later discouragement and only ties up club time. The only advantage seems to be the clubs increase in revenue or CFI’s log time.

Now for XC: My last CFI said if I did not XC and only glided around the field that I would eventually give up soaring. This is from a well-known, high hr, high student CFI.
From his past experience as well as my observation of the millennia’s and Gen-X, I think as others have mentioned that exposure to XC from the beginning of training is key. I do think the internal fortitude required of experienced or seasoned pilots for XC is greater. Or put another way, the older the pilot the longer it takes to break the home field barrier.
I could be in this later category, however, I also have not completed my Silver Badge. I could have attempted XC and landed out by now, but (1) I know the hassle of retrieve of my heavy glider, (2) gaining more comfort with new vario and GPS, (3) just enjoying soaring around, (4) realize I need to work on perfect thermaling skills, (5) would like booming conditions for first XC to ensure success. I currently do a lot of scratching and only do this around home field and would not attempt during XC. But with average cloud base of 3k and average glide at 2-2.5K, that does not give much room to travel far and have a good margin for land out.

Oh, another observation which could be an obstacle to XC is many gliders trailers I’ve seen at clubs I would not pull down the road. Either the pilot is experienced enough to get back home, or does not care about leaving area, or is older or out of shape and does not want to deal with retrieve. Trailer care and upkeep should be talked about more at clubs and with students. If a student never hears anything about trailer maintenance then acquires own trailer, I think they are more likely to neglect. As well as if they see neglected trailers about, they may follow suit out of sub-consciousness.

Once I have achieved my silver badge, I would like to enter a XC comp. And I think the badges are all a pilot needs for motivation prior to first comp. I do like the idea of team comps where an experience pilot has two less experienced pilots to bring along. I also like the idea of fun comps, and fun fly in’s that have an element of XC. I also think a yearly training camp/comp made up of 2 place gliders would be fun and very beneficial. One of the biggest obstacles I see to camps and comps is proximity. Within 300 miles would be ideal, but at least each region. If one compares any other sports, soaring has less comps.

I was fortunate to have been able to visit 6 different facilities to soar at after acquiring my ticket. The people I have met and the views, and tips have been great. I’m at the point where I’m acquiring skill, and do not foresee myself as CFI or top comp pilot, but I hope I can pass something to others to help our sport.

[JS]

Great observations, Casey.
Jim

[BobW]

On 12/21/2016 10:39 AM, JS wrote:
> Great observations, Casey.
> Jim
>

Agreed, and FWIW here's one glider pilot's version of that grade school
english exercise, "What I did Over My Summer Vacation" entitled...

"How I 'Got Into' XC soaring"

I include my experience here strictly by way of noting that at the outset I
had no clues about, knowledge of, or 'plans for using' my PP/Glider rating. I
was simply one of those kids thoroughly enamored with flight, and who - upon
graduating college - happened to bumble into a sailplane pilot (my office
mate) who invited me to that side of the shared field before I'd had a chance
to make a cold call over at the power FBO. That was in 1972. It got me into
the air sooner, at less cash-flow. I never did obtain a power license, and I'm
still a flying nut.

I should also add that, despite 'being a hardcore flying nut' I was already
having slight problems imagining my power flying future beyond the license:
$100 hamburgers forever? aerobatics? ???. Nut that I was I was already
wondering if/how fight might retain its imperative power over me.

My soaring introduction/lessons obviated similar wonderings ever arising.
Somewhen during basic instruction, I learned 'that XC existed,' and, that 'I
would be expected to do it...someday.' IOW, XC was to soaring, as breathing
was to life. The way it was presented made perfectly good sense back then,
despite me being 'relatively normal' in that my second question about soaring
was, "What do you do when you can't find lift?"

My (sole) instructor 'taught me all I needed to basically know about selecting
good fields,' in a few sentences during my ab-initio training (probably mostly
to shut me up). I accidentally/unintentionally/successfully put his summary
knowledge to use within a month of obtaining my certificate, and exactly one
week before I, my instructor, and his other newly-licensed partner in our
1-26, went to a 3-day fun contest, whereat I completed my day's O&R task at
the blazing speed of 12 mph (the 1-26 winner that day averaging ~30). My
instructor landed out on his day (other 1-26s finished). We each had a blast,
and over the course of those two weeks, every significant and fundamental
question related to the sensibility-of/risks-accompanying XC that may have
been fermenting beneath my fevered brow, had vanished forever.

IOW, XC *was* a Big Deal, but in ways Completely Unrelated to my initial,
self-preservatory, ignorance-based concerns. Looking back, it was undoubtedly
then that for me the sport set its lifetime hook.

Bob W.