A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

USHGA vision



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 12th 05, 04:35 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default USHGA vision

The forward-looking strategic planning of a powerless-flight
organization facing challenges similar to those of sailplane
organizations makes for interesting reading for those concerned with
the future of our sport - it can be downloaded from:

http://ozreport.com/docs/USHGASTRATEGICPLAN10.10.pdf

To identify critical issues for the USHGA future, they hired a
consulting service to guide and keep them focussed, went through
weekly meetings capped by a two-day intensive session, and came up
with specific actions (including estimated costs in money and time).

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.

Jack

  #2  
Old December 12th 05, 01:34 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default USHGA vision

Slightly off topic but related to the health of the USHGA...

Interestingly for those of us that race.....the fees to enter a USHGA
contest are several times higher than for sailplanes (SSA)....something like
$750 (including tows). Can't imagine that is helping encourage pilots to
enter contests.

Casey Lenox
KC
Phoenix


  #3  
Old December 12th 05, 01:57 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default USHGA vision

At 04:36 12 December 2005, Jack Glendening wrote:
The forward-looking strategic planning of a powerless-flight
organization facing challenges similar to those of
sailplane
organizations makes for interesting reading for those
concerned with
the future of our sport - it can be downloaded from:

http://ozreport.com/docs/USHGASTRATEGICPLAN10.10.pdf

To identify critical issues for the USHGA future, they
hired a
consulting service to guide and keep them focussed,
went through
weekly meetings capped by a two-day intensive session,
and came up
with specific actions (including estimated costs in
money and time).

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.

Jack



Buried way back on page 58 of their 59-page document
they pretty well sum up their direction with the following
statement.

PG is replacing HG—HG was the king, the king is dead—long
live the king. PG & PPG will dominate the future of
USHGA & this may keep HG alive.

For the uninformed HG (Hangglider), PG (Paraglider)
and PPG (Powered Paraglider).
Having been a Charter member of USHGA I find it more
than sad that parachutes will now be leading USHGA.
What a great solution! I would rather see it close.




  #4  
Old December 12th 05, 02:51 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default USHGA vision

KC -- why are the fees so much higher? Do they have an expense to cover
that we don't?

~tuno

  #5  
Old December 12th 05, 06:56 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default USHGA vision

I've been following this and the resulting divisiveness.

The only way an all encompassing organization might thrive (IMVHO)
would be a national, division based organization, something akin to the
EAA, with divisions, each with its own periodicals.
United States Soaring Association USSA
with divisions for sailplanes, hanggliders, and paragliders and perhaps
other subcategories.

I don't expect to see this.

Frank Whiteley

  #6  
Old December 12th 05, 11:55 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default USHGA vision

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
  #7  
Old December 13th 05, 02:59 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default USHGA vision


wrote in message
oups.com...
KC -- why are the fees so much higher? Do they have an expense to cover
that we don't?

~tuno


Not sure 2NO. From what I can gather so far they have opted to pay a single
person to organize and set up most of their contests. The pilots I spoke
with did not have knowledge of any budget or expense sheets for any prior
contests being published.

It would be nice to not have to worry about organizing all of our contests
and if the money were available certainly would be worth paying someone to
travel the US each year to do that. On the other hand it would appear at
least theoretically to be more expensive that relying upon local volunteer
help at each site. As best as I can gather the pilots and USHGA have opted
to do the former. It just seems to me that some pilots are in hang gliding
vs. sailplanes (at least part of the reasons) due to limited funds and that
these types of entry fees are certainly keeping the numbers of contestants
down.

I don't wish to imply that someone is embezzling funds.....the organizers
may in fact be making minimum wage and the cash may be spent on many other
things (e.g. trophies, meals, housing tow pilots, insurance, etc). It is a
bunch of money though......I'm told that there are around 60 contestants per
contest so that's $45,000 USD per contest in entry fees.

My interest is that I've got a close friend that competes. They don't think
that the fees are high but I'm not sure that many of them know what we pay
in our sport. I'm probably just worrying too much about someone elses
business as usual.

Casey


  #8  
Old December 13th 05, 03:40 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default USHGA vision

BTW, one eye-opener (or head-shaker, perhaps) is their aspiration to
double their membership every decade!

  #9  
Old December 13th 05, 04:58 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default USHGA vision

Eric Greenwell wrote:

[snip] Remember how sailplane pilots used imagine hang gliding did=20
so well compared to sailplanes was because it was a much cheaper sport =

(...).

It seems that the cost in any amateur sport or hobby tends to increase =
to a limit defined by the average available income in the specific =
country/society. Therefore, serious participation may involve comparable =
levels of committment and expense, be it in models gliders, =
hang-gliding, sailplanes (or target shooting, potholing, scuba diving, =
alpinism, whatever...)

Notwithstanding, the barriers to entry are lower in HG and PG than in =
soaring.

Regards,
F. Almeida





  #10  
Old December 13th 05, 05:37 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default USHGA vision

Francisco De Almeida wrote:
Eric Greenwell wrote:


[snip] Remember how sailplane pilots used imagine hang gliding did=20
so well compared to sailplanes was because it was a much cheaper sport =


(...).

It seems that the cost in any amateur sport or hobby tends to increase =
to a limit defined by the average available income in the specific =
country/society. Therefore, serious participation may involve comparable =
levels of committment and expense, be it in models gliders, =
hang-gliding, sailplanes (or target shooting, potholing, scuba diving, =
alpinism, whatever...)

Notwithstanding, the barriers to entry are lower in HG and PG than in =
soaring.


And yet, at least in the USA, they have the same number of members in
their national organizations. I expected there would be a lot more HG/PG
members. Perhaps (again, in the USA) the barriers for HG/PG aren't as
low as we imagine. Maybes some sailplane pilots that also hang-glider
pilots can inform us of the realities.

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

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What is Sikorskys Vision for Future Rotorcraft? CTR Rotorcraft 5 April 26th 05 05:27 PM
Vision aircraft (2nd try) Rick Pellicciotti Home Built 1 October 23rd 04 08:15 PM
Modifying Vision plans for retractable gear... Chris Home Built 1 February 27th 04 09:23 PM
Navy eyes new aviation vision Otis Willie Naval Aviation 0 December 19th 03 10:50 PM
A Vision 1st Flight Today! Scott VanderVeen Home Built 4 October 6th 03 02:02 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.