![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What's Wrong with Economics and how can it be Fixed | What's Wrong with Economics and how can it be Fixe | Naval Aviation | 5 | August 21st 04 12:50 AM |
What's Wrong with Economics and how can it be Fixed | What's Wrong with Economics and how can it be Fixe | Military Aviation | 3 | August 21st 04 12:40 AM |
Why was the Fokker D VII A Good Plane? | Matthew G. Saroff | Military Aviation | 111 | May 4th 04 05:34 PM |
Yep - 9-11 attacks predicted in 1994 | Laura Bush murdered her boy friend | Military Aviation | 172 | April 20th 04 02:20 AM |
12 Dec 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 12th 03 11:01 PM |