DECISIONS (US)

[[email protected]]

I'm afraid the SSA is living with some well intended, but bad decisions
that were made a few years back. Remember the '80's, runaway inflation,
interest rates at 20%? The Board of Directors decided to offer life
memberships for $400 bucks. The annual dues were $28 bucks, $400 X 20%
= $80 bucks a year and it only took $28 to provide the services. Seemed
like a "no brain'er". What are the dues today, $65 bucks? I don't know
because I took advantage of that $400 life membership offered in the
80's. Raising dues again would be counterproductive, because some
members drop over higher rates.

Bad Decision #2, The hang gliders came to us and wanted to join as a
division of the SSA. What did we say? No way------we don't wan't
anything to do with those uncertified things, why ther're nothing but
lawn chairs hung under bed sheets. What did the hang gliders do? They
formed their own association and I believe they have something like 4
times the membership we now enjoy (11,306)

So, where are we now and what can we do? First off, solving our
problems doesn't have anything to do with moving the office. Secondly,
merging with EAA or AOPA won't solve a thing-------all that will do is
to insure the loss of our idenity. I'm surprised someone hasn't
recommended we merge with AARP, most of us are old enough!

We must hang in there and tough it out. I contribute $100 bucks a year
to the coffers, partially because I know my life membership was sold
way too cheap. If we get to the point where we can no longer pay the
bills-----------we might consider asking the hang gliders if we could
become a division of the USHGA.

JJ Sinclair

[Ken Kochanski (KK)]

The USHGA is currently taking a poll to come up with an alternate
popular name ... could we all vote to rename it to 'SSA' and slide in
the back door? :-)

KK

http://www.ushga.org/


> -----------we might consider asking the hang gliders if we could
> become a division of the USHGA.
>
> JJ Sinclair

[Eric Greenwell]

wrote:

> Bad Decision #2, The hang gliders came to us and wanted to join as a
> division of the SSA. What did we say? No way------we don't wan't
> anything to do with those uncertified things, why ther're nothing but
> lawn chairs hung under bed sheets.

That was over 30 years ago, and I don't think it was a bad decision
then. Hang gliders were VERY different from sailplanes, with much lower
performance, not "getting close" like they are today. No way to hold
events together, really, and they don't care about airports and we do,
we can't use their winches or towplanes or instructors and vice versa,
and so on.

I suspect the personalities of the pilots were very different, too,
since the sport (back then) attracted people that were more
"adventuresome" and not so tolerant of official regulation as sailplane
pilots.

It was definitely a much more dangerous sport then, and that might
reflected unfavorably on the SSA.

> What did the hang gliders do? They
> formed their own association and I believe they have something like 4
> times the membership we now enjoy (11,306)

According their website, they had about 10,000 members in 2002.

>
> So, where are we now and what can we do? First off, solving our
> problems doesn't have anything to do with moving the office. Secondly,
> merging with EAA or AOPA won't solve a thing-------all that will do is
> to insure the loss of our idenity.

I agree with this - this "solution" has come up several times over the
last 20 years, and this is the conclusion each time.

>
> We must hang in there and tough it out. I contribute $100 bucks a year
> to the coffers, partially because I know my life membership was sold
> way too cheap. If we get to the point where we can no longer pay the
> bills-----------we might consider asking the hang gliders if we could
> become a division of the USHGA.

I think the two sports and pilots are closer now than then, so perhaps
more interaction would benefit both groups, but frankly, I don't even
know how much interaction there is now.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Gary Evans]

One difference is USHGA's protection of dealers/instructors
at the expense of the general membership. I was a founding
USHGA member and continued for about 20 years even
after becoming inactive in the sport. My reason for
dropping membership was a new rule (at that time) that
you had to sign a waiver during renewal that absolved
instructors of all damages in the event of an accident
even if it was due to negligence on the part of the
instructor. Although I have never sued anyone in my
life I thought that was over the top. Perhaps the waiver
requirement has since been dropped.



At 22:30 08 January 2005, Eric Greenwell wrote:
wrote:
>
>> Bad Decision #2, The hang gliders came to us and wanted
>>to join as a
>> division of the SSA. What did we say? No way------we
>>don't wan't
>> anything to do with those uncertified things, why
>>ther're nothing but
>> lawn chairs hung under bed sheets.
>
>That was over 30 years ago, and I don't think it was
>a bad decision
>then. Hang gliders were VERY different from sailplanes,
>with much lower
>performance, not 'getting close' like they are today.
>No way to hold
>events together, really, and they don't care about
>airports and we do,
>we can't use their winches or towplanes or instructors
>and vice versa,
>and so on.
>
>I suspect the personalities of the pilots were very
>different, too,
>since the sport (back then) attracted people that were
>more
>'adventuresome' and not so tolerant of official regulation
>as sailplane
>pilots.
>
>It was definitely a much more dangerous sport then,
>and that might
>reflected unfavorably on the SSA.
>
>> What did the hang gliders do? They
>> formed their own association and I believe they have
>>something like 4
>> times the membership we now enjoy (11,306)
>
>According their website, they had about 10,000 members
>in 2002.
>
>>
>> So, where are we now and what can we do? First off,
>>solving our
>> problems doesn't have anything to do with moving the
>>office. Secondly,
>> merging with EAA or AOPA won't solve a thing-------all
>>that will do is
>> to insure the loss of our idenity.
>
>I agree with this - this 'solution' has come up several
>times over the
>last 20 years, and this is the conclusion each time.
>
>>
>> We must hang in there and tough it out. I contribute
>>$100 bucks a year
>> to the coffers, partially because I know my life membership
>>was sold
>> way too cheap. If we get to the point where we can
>>no longer pay the
>> bills-----------we might consider asking the hang
>>gliders if we could
>> become a division of the USHGA.
>
>I think the two sports and pilots are closer now than
>then, so perhaps
>more interaction would benefit both groups, but frankly,
>I don't even
>know how much interaction there is now.
>
>--
>Change 'netto' to 'net' to email me directly
>
>Eric Greenwell
>Washington State
>USA
>

[[email protected]]

JJ,

I got my life membership for $300 in 1979. As I recall, buying it was a
touchy decision. It was pricey at the time, and at age 21 there was no
telling how long I'd stay intereseted in the sport (having spent only a
few years in diving and auto racing). A lifetime affair with a 1-26
seemed improbable, but there was pressure on to help the society.

I have often thought of sending the annual dues anyway, as you are
doing (and then some). But I haven't done it. In 2001 I coughed up
quite a few hundreds of dollars to support protecting the airspace for
soaring, but having had a first hand view of how those dollars were
applied left me less than eager to forward more. I grant you, there've
been changes made, and perhaps I should reconsider, but I have another
concern: what exactly am I funding?

You are under the impression that we're in a down cycle - which implies
that there will be an up cycle at some point in the future. I wonder.
It's one thing to say that we want to grow the sport and sally forth
with good intentions on donated dollars, and quite another to examine
the market and understand if there really is any opportunity to grow
the sport, and if so, how. Some metrics are in order. How many student
licenses are granted each year? How many private glider ratings? What
is the demography of current SSA members? What is the best age for
someone to discover the sport? If we knew the answers to these and
many, many more questions, I'd feel like we had the right tools to make
a disciplined start of growing the society. But a handful of good ideas
without any emprical evidence? Present me with a business plan and my
checkbook will respond. Without it? Chances get slim.

Of course, I'd be happy to help fund the research, if we could convince
anyone that the research is a necessary first step. Alas, we have a
notion that such things can be accomplished by volunteers. Many things
can, but not a successful marketing campaign. No one does this stuff
for fun. Hey, what's your hobby? I like putting together marketing
plans for hopeless efforts... it's kind of a weekend thing.

As I've said in the past, I really don't care what becomes of the
society. I recognize that it serves me, but we don't need an
organization in order to fly. That said, I also recognize that I hold a
minority opinion. I am willing to walk in lock step with the majority,
but only so long as I think we're accomplishing something. If growing
the sport is vital, then we need to go about it appropriately. If we're
not willing to invest in the right tools, then it must not be so
critical as the rhetoric suggests.

So, why is the sport declining? Well, I think we all know the reasons.
Recent generations prefer more passive, often sedentary pleasures, of
which there are many, many to choose from. And there are many more cost
effective active pastimes. But I suspect there's one cause we haven't
really given much attention:

WOMEN

This is a sport dominated by men. While there are rare instances of
flying couples and a few single female glider pilots, most women who
come to the gliderport do it primarily out of love and/or duty to
spouse. Some even learn to enjoy the gliderport. But every man who
enters the sport is going to have to measure his passion for it against
the trouble it's likely to produce at home, especially among
career-driven spouses who hold weekends sacred as time for "us and
family." And more than once I've seen a young mother put her foot down
-- family comes first. Can you blame her? She knows he's a klutz, and
they have two kids to raise and put through college. Why should she
have to worry about their future every time he heads off to the
gliderport?

Soaring is going the route of the 2 seat sports car. A toy for the
young, the dream of the family man, and the bittersweet reward for the
fifty-something divorce.

[[email protected]]

WOMEN


This is a sport dominated by men. While there are rare instances of
flying couples and a few single female glider pilots, most women who
come to the gliderport do it primarily out of love and/or duty to
spouse. Some even learn to enjoy the gliderport. But every man who
enters the sport is going to have to measure his passion for it against
the trouble it's likely to produce at home, especially among
career-driven spouses who hold weekends sacred as time for "us and
family." And more than once I've seen a young mother put her foot down
-- family comes first. Can you blame her? She knows he's a klutz, and
they have two kids to raise and put through college. Why should she
have to worry about their future every time he heads off to the
gliderport?

Finally! Some words of true wisdom on this overwrought subject. As long
as soaring remains primarily a man's sport, men will have difficulty
convincing their women to give up family time to their husband's
obsession with climbing into the sky. If we can't convince women to
join us, then just maybe we should borrow a page from the hang gliders'
book and create a really interesting environment for the women and
children below. Let's face it, there ain't much of interest to do
around the old gliderport-- most places at least. If I were hanging out
waiting for my spouse to finish riding the waves, I'd be pretty nutty
after thumbing through the 13th dogeared copy of AOPA PILOT.

Better still, let's join with the hang gliders and learn from them. As
this thread makes abundantly clear, they've evolved to the point where
we have a lot in common.

[ken ward]

I've been advocating to regional directors of both organizations that a
merger would be a sound step. Are there reasons not to have a single
organization that represents a continuous range of soaring pilots, from
the paragliders up through the open class sailplanes? Both SSA and
USHGA could benefit, if through nothing other than sharing office
space/expenses, annual expos, and printing costs.

I think it would be a real win for the SSA in that the SSA would gain
access to a pool of soaring pilots ready to step up to higher
performance. This pool already includes pilots who know how to soar,
are absolutely in love with soaring, and have structured their leisure
time around soarable weather.

High end hang gliders already approach $8k (not to mention the $$$ 4wd
truck you need to get it up on top of the hill), so it would only take
two or three HG pilots to form a partnership and get started.

It couldn't hurt FBOs to have a new stream of students and renters
either, and some FBOs might also be able to add a stationary winch or
ultralight tug just to service the HG population.

I think both organizations have about the same number of dues paying
members, but there may be many more HG pilots who aren't USHGA members,
than there are sailplane pilots who aren't SSA members.

My own perception is that majorities of each group look down their noses
at the other group, not recognizing how much they have in common.

One downside is there would only need to be a single Executive Director,
fewer Regional Directors, and less office staff.

Ken

In article . com>,
wrote:

>
> Bad Decision #2, The hang gliders came to us and wanted to join as a
> division of the SSA. What did we say? No way------we don't wan't
> anything to do with those uncertified things, why ther're nothing but
> lawn chairs hung under bed sheets. What did the hang gliders do? They
> formed their own association and I believe they have something like 4
> times the membership we now enjoy (11,306)
>
> JJ Sinclair
>

[[email protected]]

I was working the back side of St. John's Mountain (30 west of
Williams, Ca) when I caught a wing flash out of the corner of my eye.
All right, got some company. Maybe he can find that get home thermal,
I'm not having much luck at it. We worked the 5 knot westerly breeze
for over an hour, finally caught a thermal off the southern spur and
climbed out. Who did I spend a very pleasant hour with? A PARAGLIDER.
The pilot knew all my tricks and had a few of his own, like pulling
hard on one riser and rotating on a dime. I can still see that
beautiful elliptical wing with its pilot that seemed to be suspended in
space. I never got above him in my 42:1 glass slipper.

Our local club has gained several ex-hang glider pilots as they turner
45 and felt the need for more structure around them. I would suggest we
have more in common than either group realizes.
JJ Sinclair