Soar Oshkosh 2006

There is a little misconception evident in Robert Mudd
and Diogenes's comments on the soaring booth which
will be at Oshkosh this year.

Robert wrote '..non-SSA Chapter clubs will not be mentioned..'
and Diogenes replied 'Basically the SSA is in the business
of promoting the SSA, not soaring per se - though that
can result in soaring also being promoted. I thought
the organizers solicited donations from many sources
- perhaps if a non-SSA-affiliated club donated they
also get on the list.'

As a practical matter, there is no easy way to contact
all non-SSA affiliated clubs. One of the advantages
of being an SSA affiliated club is that you are then
included on the 'where-to-fly' map. And as an organizational
matter, since the SSA is the sponsoring organization
and the booth renter, EAA expects and demands that
only SSA members can be actively promoted from it.

That said, the declared purpose of the booth is SOARING,
sponsored by but not restricted to the SSA. We would
be more than happy to include non-SSA clubs in an auxiliary
list of places to soar, and mention them to interested
potential recruits to the sport. We would also be
very happy to have non-SSA glider pilots come by and
see what's happening. And those manufacturers of soaring-related
products who are not SSA members but have their own
separate booths at Oshkosh ? We would like to cooperate
with them by directing prospective customers to their
booths and in exchange having them direct their contacts
to the SOARING booth.

The SSA today is in the process of shedding some old
habits and becoming more responsive to the real needs
of the entire soaring community. The SSA needs the
support of the whole community, and the whole community
does benefit from the activities of the SSA - if it
didn't already exist we'd have to invent it.

Ian

Ian Cant wrote:
The SSA today is in the process of shedding some old
habits and becoming more responsive to the real needs
of the entire soaring community. The SSA needs the
support of the whole community, and the whole community
does benefit from the activities of the SSA - if it
didn't already exist we'd have to invent it.

Ian
================================================== ==

Mr. Cant:

First, a well done for pushing the rock back up the hill and getting a
display for gliders at the premier aviation event of OSH. I cannot
agree with your assessment of the current direction of the SSA given my
personal interactions for the past several years. I have found an
organization that appears wholly dedicated to the care and feeding of a
small rural office building and staff. And a directorate complicit
with that assessment.

Recently, I found an old cache of SOARING magazines and looked up my A,
B, and C badges. The names in that 25 year old magazine would be very
familiar to today's readers--same volunteers, same directors, same
concerns about membership only now we are 2/3 of the 1981 size.

SSA's problems are organizational. Any area with an ineffective
director has no means of change. Other areas are just as fossilized
and any attempts to offer aid or direction are ignored. Eventually one
just gives up. Remember what the SSA did NOT do once ADSB and other
equipment requirements finally kill our sport.

Terry Claussen
DPEG AZ

Hi Terry:

Having been a close observer and persistant critic of the SSA during
the dog days of the computer system disaster and all that it signified,

I would disagree that nothing has changed:

1. SSA's finances are now handled competently and, importantly, with
considerable transparency.
2. The website, by virtue of an all volunteer effort, has improved
dramatically.
3. Cindy Brickner's efforts to maintain and even increase our access
to airspace in the Owens by opening and maintaining communications

with the authorities have yielded spectacular results as did her
work on
radio frequency misuse. Her efforts are usually low key,
persistent and,
as a result, effective. I'd be surprised if she wasn't involved
in the Phoenix
matter (and more surprised if her involvement was anything but
beneficial).
4. The Hobbs operation, while still not all it could be, has improved
greatly
since a visit I made some years ago when I walked through the
front door
and was completely ignored, even when I wandered behind the
counter.
5. My guess is that the resistance to the OSH effort had to do with
where the
money would come from, not its desirability.

Are there still problems? Sure! Big ones!

1. An organization with a shrinking membership needs to publicise and
recruit as if
it's life depended on it.
2. Hobbs is not an ideal home for a national organization if for no
other reason than
its limited access for members and volunteers. Isolation tends to
create a bunker
mentality in the staff as well.
3. Equipment requirements are not, IMHO, our biggest regulatory
threat; that honour
goes to TSA's orgy of TFR's, etc..
4. Do-nothing directors can be voted out; failing that, bylaws could
be written setting
out a director's duties and penalties for failure to perform them.
(Really bad ones
could be encouraged to run for Congress.)

Many of these problems are being addressed; some wait to be addressed.

Some may never be addressed. Never-the-less, real changes have taken
place,
on balance for the better.

Raphael Warshaw
1LK

Ian Cant wrote:
That said, the declared purpose of the booth is SOARING,
sponsored by but not restricted to the SSA.

Thanks for the clarification. What you are doing helps spread the
soaring bug to others who might be susceptible, yet takes a lot of
work and would not get done without your volunteering so deserves
praise and appreciation. I've no intention of disparaging the Oshkosh
display effort, quite the contrary since I myself have made a donation
- but I did so because I had understood it was to be a "soaring" booth
and not an "SSA" booth (at that time the SSA had made no
contribution, to my knowledge). I'm an SSA member, but that does not
mean that I think of soaring as an SSA-only arena. My understanding
is that 2/3 of the donated money has come from individuals so SSA is
"a" sponsor of this event, not that the event is "SSA sponsored".

Were I making the decision I'd include non-SSA clubs in the SSA's
on-line "Where to Fly" list (with no frills, and with a disclaimer
indicating that the information is less reliable than for
SSA-affiliated organizations). Their decision is otherwise.
Personally I've always gotten a feeling of cliquishness when dealing
with the SSA, yet perhaps that is just me. But I don't want to turn
what you are doing, and the good it will do, into a discussion of the
SSA so will say no more.