Some excellent writing about dwindling numbers

[Stewart Kissel]

JJ's post in regards to the latest issue of Soaring motivated me to rerea=
d the post in one of the hang-glider sites. They are also losing numbers=
, and this topic gets beat around quite often in the winter in RAS. I en=
courage you guys to read the post about "branding" on this linked site, p=
articular paragraph 8. Rather then waxing on about the glamour of the sp=
ort, he states some facts that I think need to be discussed more often by=
our group. Learning is hard, progressing from beginner to intermediate =
may be even more difficult. This is as true for sailplanes as hang-glide=
rs. =20
http://ozreport.com/toc.php?7.279

[Bruce Hoult]

In article >,
Stewart Kissel > wrote:

> JJ's post in regards to the latest issue of Soaring motivated me to
> reread the post in one of the hang-glider sites. They are also
> losing numbers

That's interesting. It seems like only a couple of years ago we were
being told that we were losing numbers because hang gliding was more
attractive (and "sexy").

-- Bruce

[Stewart Kissel]

Bruce-

I suppose at one time hang-gliding probably was more
hip then sailplanes, but they to are struggling to
keep their numbers up. Remember Hobie Cats? Don't
see to many of them around anymore. Skiing, windsurfing,
hunting are all in a state of decline. What I thought
relevant about the posting in the hang-glider site
was the description of learning the sport as 'hard,
gritty, hot work done in remote conditions'. Also
the hurdle to get over from beginner to intermediate.
He could very well be describing our sport of soaring.


At 01:54 10 November 2003, Bruce Hoult wrote:
>In article ,
> Stewart Kissel wrote:
>
>> JJ's post in regards to the latest issue of Soaring
>>motivated me to
>> reread the post in one of the hang-glider sites.
>>They are also
>> losing numbers
>
>That's interesting. It seems like only a couple of
>years ago we were
>being told that we were losing numbers because hang
>gliding was more
>attractive (and 'sexy').
>
>-- Bruce
>