Jack Glendening wrote:
snip

For those unfamiliar with the the USHGA, it has around 12,000 members
(about same as SSA) but with falling HangGlider membership, til-now
partially compensated by a growing ParaGlider segment. Like the SSA
they are volunteer-based and put out a magazine (80 pages vice the
SSA's 60) but also handle their sport's licensing requirements and
monitor their launch/land sites.

I haven't read the report, but the 12,000 USHGA membership size is
disturbing. Remember how sailplane pilots used imagine hang gliding did
so well compared to sailplanes was because it was a much cheaper sport
without the FAA licensing requirements, and you could fly just about
anywhere since you didn't need an airport?

On the other, some this was a myth. Hang glider pilots that have
converted to sailplanes have told me it was cheaper for them to fly and
own sailplanes, took less time and effort to get more flying, didn't
injure them so frequently, and their spouses thought it was a huge
improvement.

Even so, perhaps the obvious differences between the sports weren't the
cause of membership retention, and the difficulty in increasing
membership (in both sports) may have causes external to the sports. If
this true, efforts to reduce costs and add convenience may only slow the
loss of members, and what is needed is a fundamental change to the
sports, instead of tweaking some of the factors involved.

I know I'm not the first to suggest this, and no, I don't have clue
about what to do, either.


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

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA