Have you seen the new SSA 'Where to fly' web-site?

[[email protected]]

A lot of critcal or negative comments were published here recently
about the new look of the SSA web-site. I want to congratulate the SSA
web-designers for the nice layout of the new 'Where to fly' section.
Well done - I like it. Go check it out!

Uli Neumann

[Greg Arnold]

Good job, though I could do without the moving images.

Unfortunately, it doesn't include all operations, perhaps because it
limits itself to SSA Chapters and Commercial Operators. For example, in
California it doesn't include Crazy Creek (commercial operation with
rental glass ships), Bishop (towplane), or Inyokern (club).



wrote:
> A lot of critcal or negative comments were published here recently
> about the new look of the SSA web-site. I want to congratulate the SSA
> web-designers for the nice layout of the new 'Where to fly' section.
> Well done - I like it. Go check it out!
>
> Uli Neumann
>

[Ray Lovinggood]

EXCELLENT JOB, SSA!!!

I like the moving parts. However, the only movement
I've seen so far is a Discus(?) thermalling below a
nice little cu, and I like it!

I really like the interactive map. I just checked
my home state of North Carolina and see two of the
four operations that I'm aware of. I bet SSA doesn't
show the other two because the operators at those two
locations probably haven't provided the information
to the SSA. If sites aren't on the map, my bet it
isn't SSA's fault.

It appears SSA can post a photo on each soaring site's
page. I'll have to ask fellow club members if they
might have an appropriate photo of one of the club
ships to fill that slot.

This part of the web site is a definite improvement.

Well Done, SSA Team!

Ray Lovinggood
Carrboro, North Carolina, USA

At 02:00 15 May 2005, Greg Arnold wrote:
>Good job, though I could do without the moving images.
>
>Unfortunately, it doesn't include all operations, perhaps
>because it
>limits itself to SSA Chapters and Commercial Operators.
> For example, in
>California it doesn't include Crazy Creek (commercial
>operation with
>rental glass ships), Bishop (towplane), or Inyokern
>(club).
>
>
>
wrote:
>> A lot of critcal or negative comments were published
>>here recently
>> about the new look of the SSA web-site. I want to
>>congratulate the SSA
>> web-designers for the nice layout of the new 'Where
>>to fly' section.
>> Well done - I like it. Go check it out!
>>
>> Uli Neumann
>>
>

[Tony Verhulst]

wrote:
> A lot of critcal or negative comments were published here recently
> about the new look of the SSA web-site. I want to congratulate the SSA
> web-designers for the nice layout of the new 'Where to fly' section.
> Well done - I like it. Go check it out!


OOOOOOOO, they fixed the pull down menues. Now, *that's* nice!. Thank you.

Tony V.

[Eric Greenwell]

Tony Verhulst wrote:
> wrote:
>
>> A lot of critcal or negative comments were published here recently
>> about the new look of the SSA web-site. I want to congratulate the SSA
>> web-designers for the nice layout of the new 'Where to fly' section.
>> Well done - I like it. Go check it out!
>
>
>
> OOOOOOOO, they fixed the pull down menues. Now, *that's* nice!. Thank you.

It seems to work perfectly in Netscape 7.2, so I'm happy! And, I do like
the "Where to fly": it does a good job in our state, missing only one
club. I don't know if they are affiliated with the SSA, or not.


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

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[CLewis95]

WOW!!! Very cool!

Thanks for pointing this out Uli.

Curt Lewis - 95


wrote:
> A lot of critcal or negative comments were published here recently
> about the new look of the SSA web-site. I want to congratulate the
SSA
> web-designers for the nice layout of the new 'Where to fly' section.
> Well done - I like it. Go check it out!
>
> Uli Neumann

[F.L. Whiteley]

I noticed a missing link from the old site for Colorado. I'll have a word.
However, I believe several organizations still may not have answered
multiple requests to update their info, which included LAT/LON info. State
governors and regional directors, if you see something missing, get in
touch with them.

BTW, I posted here that Director-at-large Doug Easton was working on a new
map based 'Where to Fly' several weeks ago. Kudos to Doug.

Frank

Greg Arnold wrote:

> Good job, though I could do without the moving images.
>
> Unfortunately, it doesn't include all operations, perhaps because it
> limits itself to SSA Chapters and Commercial Operators. For example, in
> California it doesn't include Crazy Creek (commercial operation with
> rental glass ships), Bishop (towplane), or Inyokern (club).
>
>
>
> wrote:
>> A lot of critcal or negative comments were published here recently
>> about the new look of the SSA web-site. I want to congratulate the SSA
>> web-designers for the nice layout of the new 'Where to fly' section.
>> Well done - I like it. Go check it out!
>>
>> Uli Neumann
>>

[cfinn]

I agree that the new page looks good. However, I tried for over a year
to get our club information updated. Finally, with Dennis' help, the
information was update a few weeks ago. Guess what? The new page
returns all the information back to the old incorrect info. Oh well,
here we go again.

I'd suggest that every club check their info again.

Charlie

[cfinn]

I agree that the new page looks good. However, I tried for over a year
to get our club information updated. Finally, with Dennis' help, the
information was update a few weeks ago. Guess what? The new page
returns all the information back to the old incorrect info. Oh well,
here we go again.

I'd suggest that every club check their info again.

Charlie

[[email protected]]

Shouldn't a prospect in Sacramento, CA see Minden even if they don't
ask about Nevada? Should a DC resident really have to look up DEL, MD,
PA, VA, and WVA and take notes to find the sites within 2 hours drive?

The new "where to fly" is a big improvement over the original. It's
just too bad that the focus is still limited to one state at a time.
The sites should be listed in order of their lat/longs' distances from
the prospect's requested zip code or click. The zoomed map should be
centered on the prospect's requested zip code or click. All sites in
all the states appearing on the zoomed in map should show their icons.

Some roads, towns and a scale of miles would also be nice. The
background maps for any rectangle requested by its lat/long corners are
readily available online now at no charge.

Jonathan Gere

[cfinn]

FYI, I sent a message off to Dennis at 3:35 this afternoon, about the
incorrect club info on the new page. I received a message from Doug
Easton at 8:09 asking me to check the corrections.

That's a turn around time of 4 1/2 hours on a Sunday afternoon! Way to
go SSA.

Charlie

[Go]

Greg,
I have mentioned this to Rod at Hangar One two times over the past few
years and he just shrugged his shoulders. I don't know what it takes
to get on the web page but he sure wasn't interested in doing anything
about it.

BTW: Is he operating this summer? I had heard he was perhaps
'retiring'.

[BlueGliderGuy]

I would like to see a better reason to spend money.
This site now suffers from the Cadillac syndrome when we need a Model
T.
Sites all over the Web are far too flashy requiring more bandwith for
less content.
As several poster's have noted numerous sites previousy reported are
now missing requiring MORE time to troubleshoot.
Another example: the Illini GLider Club, one of the oldest glider clubs
in the United States with roots back to the 1920's, is now missing.
Spending more money to fix a web site thats not broken is a wasteof
money.
IMHO

[[email protected]]

BlueGliderGuy wrote:
> I would like to see a better reason to spend money.
> This site now suffers from the Cadillac syndrome when we need a Model
> T.
> Sites all over the Web are far too flashy requiring more bandwith for
> less content.
> As several poster's have noted numerous sites previousy reported are
> now missing requiring MORE time to troubleshoot.
> Another example: the Illini GLider Club, one of the oldest glider
clubs
> in the United States with roots back to the 1920's, is now missing.
> Spending more money to fix a web site thats not broken is a wasteof
> money.
> IMHO

BlueGliderGuy
Is the Illini Glider club a chapter of SSA? If not, they should become
one.
This would then,once info is provided, get them listed on where to fly.
Where to fly shows chapters and business members, but does not show non
affiliated organizations.
No money was spent on this. It is the result of hard work by a number
of creative and dedicated volunteers led bt Doug Easton.
More improvements will be coming from these guys.
I say WELL DONE!
UH

[Albert Gold]

wrote:

> BlueGliderGuy
> Is the Illini Glider club a chapter of SSA? If not, they should become
> one.
> This would then,once info is provided, get them listed on where to fly.
> Where to fly shows chapters and business members, but does not show non
> affiliated organizations.
> No money was spent on this. It is the result of hard work by a number
> of creative and dedicated volunteers led bt Doug Easton.
> More improvements will be coming from these guys.
> I say WELL DONE!
> UH
>

Concerned as we are about serving glider pilots and potential glider
pilots and about the growth, or at least arresting the decline of the
sport, it seems to me that this section of the web site should have as
its objective making it easy for people, members and non-members, to
find soaring sites, not the rewarding of clubs or operators who choose
to affiliate with the SSA. Rather than being self-righteous about those
who, "should," affiliate, we might rather ask the questions, "Why
have they chosen not to do so, and how can we change their minds?"

Al
Trustee
Soaring Society of America Foundation

[Wayne Paul]

I would like to see all known soaring locations displayed on the map.
Different symbols could be used for those who have chosen to affiliate with
the SSA and the ones who are not affiliated.

Wayne
http://www.soaridaho.com/

"Albert Gold" > wrote in message
...
> wrote:
>
> Concerned as we are about serving glider pilots and potential glider
> pilots and about the growth, or at least arresting the decline of the
> sport, it seems to me that this section of the web site should have as
> its objective making it easy for people, members and non-members, to
> find soaring sites, not the rewarding of clubs or operators who choose
> to affiliate with the SSA. Rather than being self-righteous about those
> who, "should," affiliate, we might rather ask the questions, "Why
> have they chosen not to do so, and how can we change their minds?"
>
> Al
> Trustee
> Soaring Society of America Foundation
>

[Greg Arnold]

>
>
> BlueGliderGuy
> Is the Illini Glider club a chapter of SSA? If not, they should become
> one.
> This would then,once info is provided, get them listed on where to fly.
> Where to fly shows chapters and business members, but does not show non
> affiliated organizations.

Is this the best way to grow the sport (and provide future members to
the SSA)? To provide no information about glding sites that don't
affiliate with the SSA? I think the SSA is suffering some confusion
about what is good for the SSA (at least in the short run), and what is
good for the sport.

[F.L. Whiteley]

Albert Gold wrote:

> wrote:
>
>> BlueGliderGuy
>> Is the Illini Glider club a chapter of SSA? If not, they should become
>> one.
>> This would then,once info is provided, get them listed on where to fly.
>> Where to fly shows chapters and business members, but does not show non
>> affiliated organizations.
>> No money was spent on this. It is the result of hard work by a number
>> of creative and dedicated volunteers led bt Doug Easton.
>> More improvements will be coming from these guys.
>> I say WELL DONE!
>> UH
>>
>
> Concerned as we are about serving glider pilots and potential glider
> pilots and about the growth, or at least arresting the decline of the
> sport, it seems to me that this section of the web site should have as
> its objective making it easy for people, members and non-members, to
> find soaring sites, not the rewarding of clubs or operators who choose
> to affiliate with the SSA. Rather than being self-righteous about those
> who, "should," affiliate, we might rather ask the questions, "Why
> have they chosen not to do so, and how can we change their minds?"
>
> Al
> Trustee
> Soaring Society of America Foundation
I would ask the SSA state governors to spearhead this.

Frank Whiteley

[5Z]

I agree that the SSA should list all sites with soaring activities.

However, I also feel the SSA should ensure complete accuracy of the
information it provides. I'd hate to drive out to some location all
ready to take an intro ride or learn more about the sport only to find
an abandoned building or office. How would SSA look to me then?

There needs to be an "official" relationship between the site and SSA
(not necessarily financial) so that anyone looking for information has
some hope of it being correct and current. I suspect that some of the
missing operations have not communicated their existence directly to
the SSA.

Like it or not, SSA is THE voice and presence of soaring in the USA.
If a club or FBO refuses to acknowledge its existence by not being
affiliated (maybe we need more than a business membership / club
chapter), then the SSA cannot recommend that operation as a place to
fly, since any information SSA may have about it does not come from the
operator, but instead a third party or the rumor mill.

I'm not trying to force SSA onto anyone, but I think there needs to be
some type of affiliation so both organizations can recognize each other
and share resources.

-Tom

[Albert Gold]

5Z wrote:

> I agree that the SSA should list all sites with soaring activities.
>
> However, I also feel the SSA should ensure complete accuracy of the
> information it provides. I'd hate to drive out to some location all
> ready to take an intro ride or learn more about the sport only to find
> an abandoned building or office. How would SSA look to me then?
>
> There needs to be an "official" relationship between the site and SSA
> (not necessarily financial) so that anyone looking for information has
> some hope of it being correct and current. I suspect that some of the
> missing operations have not communicated their existence directly to
> the SSA.
>
> Like it or not, SSA is THE voice and presence of soaring in the USA.
> If a club or FBO refuses to acknowledge its existence by not being
> affiliated (maybe we need more than a business membership / club
> chapter), then the SSA cannot recommend that operation as a place to
> fly, since any information SSA may have about it does not come from the
> operator, but instead a third party or the rumor mill.
>
> I'm not trying to force SSA onto anyone, but I think there needs to be
> some type of affiliation so both organizations can recognize each other
> and share resources.
>
> -Tom
>

I'm not suggesting that the SSA site directory does or should recommend
sites any more than the phone book recommends numbers to call. Perhaps,
as someone has proposed in this thread, it could indicate whether or not
a site is affiliated with the SSA. If volunteer labor were available to
do so, using Google will find most soaring web sites in any state very
quickly. Assuming the site's own web site is up to date -- granted, a
large assumption -- most of the relevant facts can easily be confirmed.
A simple asterisk could be used to indicated that current information
has not been verified.

No matter how good our intentions, the information in the "Where to fly"
section will become outdated fairly quickly, as was the case with its
predecessor. There's just not enough available free labor to prevent
that from happening. However, with appropriate disclaimers, highly
useful information can and should still be provided, even at the risk of
occasional error.

[[email protected]]

Seems to me that being listed is another value provided by being a
member, business or chapter.
Question keeps getting asked- what do we get for our money?
I know of one site that, upon seeing Where to Fly on Friday, is signing
up as a business member on Monday.
UH

[Greg Arnold]

wrote:
> Seems to me that being listed is another value provided by being a
> member, business or chapter.
> Question keeps getting asked- what do we get for our money?
> I know of one site that, upon seeing Where to Fly on Friday, is signing
> up as a business member on Monday.
> UH
>

That is one point of view. Another is that SSA should be doing whatever
it can to promote soaring, and that involves publicizing all soaring
sites, even if that means that the SSA must forego some revenue in the
short run. After all, what is the purpose of SSA? An organization with
the goal of maximing its revenue, or an organization with the goal of
promoting soaring?

[Marc Ramsey]

Greg Arnold wrote:
> wrote:
>
>> Seems to me that being listed is another value provided by being a
>> member, business or chapter.
>> Question keeps getting asked- what do we get for our money?
>> I know of one site that, upon seeing Where to Fly on Friday, is signing
>> up as a business member on Monday.
>> UH
>>
>
> That is one point of view. Another is that SSA should be doing whatever
> it can to promote soaring, and that involves publicizing all soaring
> sites, even if that means that the SSA must forego some revenue in the
> short run. After all, what is the purpose of SSA? An organization with
> the goal of maximing its revenue, or an organization with the goal of
> promoting soaring?

Give business members the full treatment (picture, web site link,
mapquest link, etc.) along with a prominent SSA Business Member logo,
limit non-members to name, address, phone number, email...

[Jack]

Albert Gold wrote:

> "Why have they chosen not to do so, and how can we change their minds?"

If they join, maybe we could offer them free advertising on the "where to
Fly" page.


Jack

[[email protected]]

The source of the information on Where to Fly comes from Chapter and
Business members themselves. Much of that is not yet current despite
several reminders to update this info by Dianne Black Nixon.
How would you suggest that info for others be gathered and confirmed to
be correct?
Seems to me that if a club or operator spent the money to be a business
member, $200/yr I think, that it quite likely would pay off much more
than that in additional business.
UH

[Greg Arnold]

wrote:

> Seems to me that if a club or operator spent the money to be a business
> member, $200/yr I think, that it quite likely would pay off much more
> than that in additional business.

In other words, most or all soaring operations would be listed if they
were rational profit-maximizers. Assuming that is the case, some have
made a bad business decision by not joining. But I don't understand the
argument that -- since they have made a bad business decision -- it is
OK to deny information about them to soaring pilots and prospective
soaring pilots.


> UH
>

[Jack]

Greg Arnold wrote:

> In other words, most or all soaring operations would be listed if they
> were rational profit-maximizers. Assuming that is the case, some have
> made a bad business decision by not joining. But I don't understand the
> argument that -- since they have made a bad business decision -- it is
> OK to deny information about them to soaring pilots and prospective
> soaring pilots.

If they can't support the SSA, what other corners are they cutting?


Jack

[Greg Arnold]

Jack wrote:
> Greg Arnold wrote:
>
>> In other words, most or all soaring operations would be listed if they
>> were rational profit-maximizers. Assuming that is the case, some have
>> made a bad business decision by not joining. But I don't understand
>> the argument that -- since they have made a bad business decision --
>> it is OK to deny information about them to soaring pilots and
>> prospective soaring pilots.
>
>
> If they can't support the SSA, what other corners are they cutting?
>
>
> Jack

So the SSA's decision to include or not on the webpage really is a
safety decision, and the SSA makes that safety decision on the basis of
whether the operation has enough sense to affiliate with the SSA?

[5Z]

Greg Arnold wrote:
> So the SSA's decision to include or not on the webpage really is a
> safety decision, and the SSA makes that safety decision on the basis of
> whether the operation has enough sense to affiliate with the SSA?

No, the SSA will (probably) list any entity that makes the effort to
provide reliable contact information. It seems to make perfect sense
that the proprietor of an operation should be the one to decide whether
they will be listed by the SSA.

-Tom

[Jack]

Greg Arnold wrote:

> So the SSA's decision to include or not on the webpage really is a
> safety decision, and the SSA makes that safety decision on the basis of
> whether the operation has enough sense to affiliate with the SSA?

Humor- and patience-deprived today are we, Greg?

I believe there are any number of good reasons -- from the economic, to the
practical, to the political. I wonder why you are so adamantly opposed to
the current revitalization of the SSA and the choices of it's leadership
that you can't give it a reasonable time to work out?

Huge changes, with limited resources, are afoot and the SSA needs to
apologize to no one for the progress we are currently making and that which
we can see not far off. Anything which shores up the current base is a good
choice.

There are those, both here and in the wider soaring community, that will
never get on board with the SSA, no matter what its future holds -- for
reasons I consider irrational, but that's just part of human nature. Whether
they are individuals, or clubs, or commercial operations, their inability or
unwillingness to be part of the solution doesn't really make them part of
the problem -- it just leaves them increasingly nowhere as the SSA's
momentum increases. Those less obtuse will, eventually, see the light. The
SSA would be doing its current and future membership no favors if it
legitimized the rest by including them.


Jack

[[email protected]]

OK- Please answer my question- How would SSA get reliable information
on these non affiliated organizations?
BTW at dinner last nite , my director indicated there is consideration
for some kind of listing for these kinds of organizations- possible a
contact phone # or such. If this comes to pass, the organization would
still have to provide info to SSA.
And yes, my opinion is that these folk do make a bad business decision
by not having at least a minimal SSA presence, in addition to not
supporting an organization that works hard to ensure they can continue
to operate.
I am admittedly pretty close to a lot of what is being done in SSA ,
but can tell you that the view that the SSA doesn't see promoting and
fostering the sport as #1 is flat wrong.
UH

[Greg Arnold]

wrote:
> OK- Please answer my question- How would SSA get reliable information
> on these non affiliated organizations?

I would be happy to provide the SSA with accurate contact info for the
operations I know about.

> BTW at dinner last nite , my director indicated there is consideration
> for some kind of listing for these kinds of organizations- possible a
> contact phone # or such. If this comes to pass, the organization would
> still have to provide info to SSA.
> And yes, my opinion is that these folk do make a bad business decision
> by not having at least a minimal SSA presence, in addition to not
> supporting an organization that works hard to ensure they can continue
> to operate.

It may be a bad business decision, but soaring pilots (and potential
pilots) are the ones who are punished when they don't learn of all
soaring operations.

> I am admittedly pretty close to a lot of what is being done in SSA ,
> but can tell you that the view that the SSA doesn't see promoting and
> fostering the sport as #1 is flat wrong.
> UH
>

[M B]

I think it's great! I called up the
interactive map and clicked on the state
of California, and I found
Soar Minden!

Finally, despite what Al says,
it's plaintively clear that Minden, CA is
an SSA soaring gliderport.

;P

At 20:30 25 May 2005, Greg Arnold wrote:
wrote:
>> OK- Please answer my question- How would SSA get reliable
>>information
>> on these non affiliated organizations?
>
>I would be happy to provide the SSA with accurate contact
>info for the
>operations I know about.
>
>> BTW at dinner last nite , my director indicated there
>>is consideration
>> for some kind of listing for these kinds of organizations-
>>possible a


>> contact phone # or such. If this comes to pass, the
>>organization would
>> still have to provide info to SSA.
>> And yes, my opinion is that these folk do make a
>>bad business decision
>> by not having at least a minimal SSA presence, in
>>addition to not
>> supporting an organization that works hard to ensure
>>they can continue
>> to operate.
>
>It may be a bad business decision, but soaring pilots
>(and potential
>pilots) are the ones who are punished when they don't
>learn of all
>soaring operations.
>
>> I am admittedly pretty close to a lot of what is being
>>done in SSA ,
>> but can tell you that the view that the SSA doesn't
>>see promoting and
>> fostering the sport as #1 is flat wrong.
>> UH
>>
>
>
Mark J. Boyd

[5Z]

Operators have the option to cross post to other states. The Reno area
operators tend to cater to a large CA crowd, so this makes sense.

It would be nice to be a ble to select a radius, then either click on
the map, or enter a zip code.

-Tom

[[email protected]]

Contact Doug Easton with your suggestion and I'm sure he would give it
some thought.
UH

[F.L. Whiteley]

5Z wrote:

> Operators have the option to cross post to other states. The Reno area
> operators tend to cater to a large CA crowd, so this makes sense.
>
> It would be nice to be a ble to select a radius, then either click on
> the map, or enter a zip code.
>
> -Tom
There appear to be some borderline area captures. Click on Wyoming, for
example. Owl Canyon, Driggs, and Rapid City pop-up, but not Bozeman. So
there is some 'distance value' at work. Wyoming has no organized SSA
soaring organizations. Note also that North Dakota and Louisiana are
dimmed. Apparently both no SSA organizations and the nearest are beyond
the 'distance value'. This 'distance value' can probably be adjusted if
deemed necessary.

Frank Whiteley

[F.L. Whiteley]

Jack wrote:

> Greg Arnold wrote:
>
>> So the SSA's decision to include or not on the webpage really is a
>> safety decision, and the SSA makes that safety decision on the basis of
>> whether the operation has enough sense to affiliate with the SSA?
>
> Humor- and patience-deprived today are we, Greg?
>
> I believe there are any number of good reasons -- from the economic, to
> the practical, to the political. I wonder why you are so adamantly opposed
> to the current revitalization of the SSA and the choices of it's
> leadership that you can't give it a reasonable time to work out?
>
> Huge changes, with limited resources, are afoot and the SSA needs to
> apologize to no one for the progress we are currently making and that
> which we can see not far off. Anything which shores up the current base is
> a good choice.
>
> There are those, both here and in the wider soaring community, that will
> never get on board with the SSA, no matter what its future holds -- for
> reasons I consider irrational, but that's just part of human nature.
> Whether they are individuals, or clubs, or commercial operations, their
> inability or unwillingness to be part of the solution doesn't really make
> them part of the problem -- it just leaves them increasingly nowhere as
> the SSA's momentum increases. Those less obtuse will, eventually, see the
> light. The SSA would be doing its current and future membership no favors
> if it legitimized the rest by including them.
>
>
> Jack
In several cases, those not having an SSA affiliation are also missing from
the local phone/yellow pages directory (regional coverage is very
expensive), have no web presence (cheap), and are hard to find or contact.
Indeed, some seem reluctant. Although we seem to agree that self promotion
and soaring promotion are both important as there is a regular level of
churn in the participants in this activity, the SSA club/chapter survey
revealed that there are a number of groups that are very nervous or fearful
of any significant influx of members or business. (We have a new
commercial tow service in our state that would rather charge high prices
for 10 glider pilots than entertain 25-30 at market prices. But that's a
different issue.) Generally, this is related to operational limitations of
not enough instructors, gliders, or tow pilots. Other clubs suffer from
provincialism. Substantial growth is just not on their map at the present
time. Let's be sure of our assumptions are the right ones before we start
complaining. Let's also hear directly from the leaders of those
non-affiliated groups, not their advocates. Too much gets lost in
translation. IMVHO, this should start at the SSA state governor level.
That being said, the governance links are behind the member door. That
keeps my e-mail from being spammed to death by bots, but the web site
probably needs a way to contact us. Perhaps a page that promotes soaring
by directing group or individual inquiries to the appropriate governor by
state.

In many ways, SSA functions as the chamber of commerce of soaring. Like any
chamber, you will not get any notice on their website, recognition for your
efforts in the community, or rights of participation without paying your
dues. Chambers are both promotional and representative and may be
advocates, though not politically active if they are 501c(3) incorporated,
as most are. The model is a good one to consider and the organization must
continuously add value to membership, or it will wither and die. EAA is
similar, though from a different lineage. One aspect of EAA membership
(often referred to as so much cheaper than SSA) is that there are special
interest areas that add to the incremental cost, including special
periodicals for specialty areas. EAA memberships can cost more than SSA
memberships if you really like Experimenter and Warbirds, for example.
Likewise, it's more than the magazines. Many of us also assign value to
being AOPA members in addition to being SSA members.

Remember, SSA, like a chamber, is a membership organization and at least in
the case of the SSA, it's a represetative membership. There has to be some
value-added to membership and efforts are underway to keep increasing that
value. Shame on the SSA if that process ever again languishes. The
inclusion/exclusion argument is like pulling the 'safety card'. If the SSA
body elects to exclude non-affiliated members, then it's 'not promoting
soaring for the greater good'. Rather I think it's those that stand apart
that may be robbing the SSA of promotional funding. The office, staff, and
daily operations have pretty much fixed costs. The magazine has
incremental costs that may be offset by volume discounts. What would be
the net effect of doubling or tripling the current membership? It could
certainly open the door to possibilities. Doable? Perhaps. There are
nearly three times as many glider ratings listed in my state (~1440) than
the ~530 SSA members.

Frank Whiteley

[M B]

Louisiana, if my memory serves,
was the only state to have no 1-26s or 2-33s or 2-22s
registered in the state.

Alll of the other states had at least one of these
venerable gliders.

One wonders if this is because of lack of soaring
conditions or if there are other factors (too
much other fun stuff to do). :)

At 15:30 26 May 2005, F.L. Whiteley wrote:
>5Z wrote:
>
>> Operators have the option to cross post to other states.
>> The Reno area
>> operators tend to cater to a large CA crowd, so this
>>makes sense.
>>
>> It would be nice to be a ble to select a radius, then
>>either click on
>> the map, or enter a zip code.
>>
>> -Tom
>There appear to be some borderline area captures.
>Click on Wyoming, for
>example. Owl Canyon, Driggs, and Rapid City pop-up,
>but not Bozeman. So
>there is some 'distance value' at work. Wyoming has
>no organized SSA
>soaring organizations. Note also that North Dakota
>and Louisiana are
>dimmed. Apparently both no SSA organizations and the
>nearest are beyond
>the 'distance value'. This 'distance value' can probably
>be adjusted if
>deemed necessary.
>
>Frank Whiteley
>
Mark J. Boyd

[F.L. Whiteley]

FWIW, the Louisiana State Governor owns an HP-14 and is associated with this
club.

http://www.d.umn.edu/~cprince/ShreveportSoaringClub/

Maybe they are registered off shore.

Frank


M B wrote:

> Louisiana, if my memory serves,
> was the only state to have no 1-26s or 2-33s or 2-22s
> registered in the state.
>
> Alll of the other states had at least one of these
> venerable gliders.
>
> One wonders if this is because of lack of soaring
> conditions or if there are other factors (too
> much other fun stuff to do). :)
>
> At 15:30 26 May 2005, F.L. Whiteley wrote:
>>5Z wrote:
>>
>>> Operators have the option to cross post to other states.
>>> The Reno area
>>> operators tend to cater to a large CA crowd, so this
>>>makes sense.
>>>
>>> It would be nice to be a ble to select a radius, then
>>>either click on
>>> the map, or enter a zip code.
>>>
>>> -Tom
>>There appear to be some borderline area captures.
>>Click on Wyoming, for
>>example. Owl Canyon, Driggs, and Rapid City pop-up,
>>but not Bozeman. So
>>there is some 'distance value' at work. Wyoming has
>>no organized SSA
>>soaring organizations. Note also that North Dakota
>>and Louisiana are
>>dimmed. Apparently both no SSA organizations and the
>>nearest are beyond
>>the 'distance value'. This 'distance value' can probably
>>be adjusted if
>>deemed necessary.
>>
>>Frank Whiteley
>>
> Mark J. Boyd

[F.L. Whiteley]

F.L. Whiteley wrote:

> Jack wrote:
>
>> Greg Arnold wrote:
>>
>>> So the SSA's decision to include or not on the webpage really is a
>>> safety decision, and the SSA makes that safety decision on the basis of
>>> whether the operation has enough sense to affiliate with the SSA?
>>
>> Humor- and patience-deprived today are we, Greg?
>>
>> I believe there are any number of good reasons -- from the economic, to
>> the practical, to the political. I wonder why you are so adamantly
>> opposed to the current revitalization of the SSA and the choices of it's
>> leadership that you can't give it a reasonable time to work out?
>>
>> Huge changes, with limited resources, are afoot and the SSA needs to
>> apologize to no one for the progress we are currently making and that
>> which we can see not far off. Anything which shores up the current base
>> is a good choice.
>>
>> There are those, both here and in the wider soaring community, that will
>> never get on board with the SSA, no matter what its future holds -- for
>> reasons I consider irrational, but that's just part of human nature.
>> Whether they are individuals, or clubs, or commercial operations, their
>> inability or unwillingness to be part of the solution doesn't really make
>> them part of the problem -- it just leaves them increasingly nowhere as
>> the SSA's momentum increases. Those less obtuse will, eventually, see the
>> light. The SSA would be doing its current and future membership no favors
>> if it legitimized the rest by including them.
>>
>>
>> Jack
> In several cases, those not having an SSA affiliation are also missing
> from the local phone/yellow pages directory (regional coverage is very
> expensive), have no web presence (cheap), and are hard to find or contact.
> Indeed, some seem reluctant. Although we seem to agree that self
> promotion and soaring promotion are both important as there is a regular
> level of churn in the participants in this activity, the SSA club/chapter
> survey revealed that there are a number of groups that are very nervous or
> fearful
> of any significant influx of members or business. (We have a new
> commercial tow service in our state that would rather charge high prices
> for 10 glider pilots than entertain 25-30 at market prices. But that's a
> different issue.) Generally, this is related to operational limitations
> of
> not enough instructors, gliders, or tow pilots. Other clubs suffer from
> provincialism. Substantial growth is just not on their map at the present
> time. Let's be sure of our assumptions are the right ones before we start
> complaining. Let's also hear directly from the leaders of those
> non-affiliated groups, not their advocates. Too much gets lost in
> translation. IMVHO, this should start at the SSA state governor level.
> That being said, the governance links are behind the member door. That
> keeps my e-mail from being spammed to death by bots, but the web site
> probably needs a way to contact us. Perhaps a page that promotes soaring
> by directing group or individual inquiries to the appropriate governor by
> state.
>
> In many ways, SSA functions as the chamber of commerce of soaring. Like
> any chamber, you will not get any notice on their website, recognition for
> your efforts in the community, or rights of participation without paying
> your
> dues. Chambers are both promotional and representative and may be
> advocates, though not politically active if they are 501c(3) incorporated,
> as most are. The model is a good one to consider and the organization
> must continuously add value to membership, or it will wither and die. EAA
> is similar, though from a different lineage. One aspect of EAA membership
> (often referred to as so much cheaper than SSA) is that there are special
> interest areas that add to the incremental cost, including special
> periodicals for specialty areas. EAA memberships can cost more than SSA
> memberships if you really like Experimenter and Warbirds, for example.
> Likewise, it's more than the magazines. Many of us also assign value to
> being AOPA members in addition to being SSA members.
>
> Remember, SSA, like a chamber, is a membership organization and at least
> in
> the case of the SSA, it's a represetative membership. There has to be
> some value-added to membership and efforts are underway to keep increasing
> that value. Shame on the SSA if that process ever again languishes. The
> inclusion/exclusion argument is like pulling the 'safety card'. If the
> SSA body elects to exclude non-affiliated members, then it's 'not
> promoting
> soaring for the greater good'. Rather I think it's those that stand apart
> that may be robbing the SSA of promotional funding. The office, staff,
> and
> daily operations have pretty much fixed costs. The magazine has
> incremental costs that may be offset by volume discounts. What would be
> the net effect of doubling or tripling the current membership? It could
> certainly open the door to possibilities. Doable? Perhaps. There are
> nearly three times as many glider ratings listed in my state (~1440) than
> the ~530 SSA members.
>
> Frank Whiteley

As an after thought, it may be possible to allow non-SSA affiliated sites to
buy a point on the map and space on the web site.

Frank

[M B]

Very, very cool. Thanks for that, Frank.
It looks like maybe they are pretending the 1-26 is
actually
a 152? ;)

I couldn't quite make out the small #s on the tail,
so
can't look it up, but there ain't no 1-26, 2-33, or
2-22
registered in LA according to aircraft reg. database...so
yep, maybe registered elsewhere...

At 21:30 26 May 2005, F.L. Whiteley wrote:
>FWIW, the Louisiana State Governor owns an HP-14 and
>is associated with this
>club.
>
>http://www.d.umn.edu/~cprince/ShreveportSoaringClub/
>
>Maybe they are registered off shore.
>
>Frank
>
>
>M B wrote:
>
>> Louisiana, if my memory serves,
>> was the only state to have no 1-26s or 2-33s or 2-22s
>> registered in the state.
>>
>> Alll of the other states had at least one of these
>> venerable gliders.
>>
>> One wonders if this is because of lack of soaring
>> conditions or if there are other factors (too
>> much other fun stuff to do). :)
>>
>> At 15:30 26 May 2005, F.L. Whiteley wrote:
>>>5Z wrote:
>>>
>>>> Operators have the option to cross post to other states.
>>>> The Reno area
>>>> operators tend to cater to a large CA crowd, so this
>>>>makes sense.
>>>>
>>>> It would be nice to be a ble to select a radius, then
>>>>either click on
>>>> the map, or enter a zip code.
>>>>
>>>> -Tom
>>>There appear to be some borderline area captures.
>>>Click on Wyoming, for
>>>example. Owl Canyon, Driggs, and Rapid City pop-up,
>>>but not Bozeman. So
>>>there is some 'distance value' at work. Wyoming has
>>>no organized SSA
>>>soaring organizations. Note also that North Dakota
>>>and Louisiana are
>>>dimmed. Apparently both no SSA organizations and the
>>>nearest are beyond
>>>the 'distance value'. This 'distance value' can probably
>>>be adjusted if
>>>deemed necessary.
>>>
>>>Frank Whiteley
>>>
>> Mark J. Boyd
>
>
Mark J. Boyd