Why is Soaring declining

I look at soaring's lack of groth from a purely economic
point of view. When I got into the sport (1970) one
could buy a competitive sailplane for about the cost
of a 4-door family car ($10,000) Now days a competitive
sailplane costs almost 5 times as much as the family
car. Little wonder we can't attract new blood.
JJ

"John Sinclair" wrote in message
...
I look at soaring's lack of groth from a purely economic
point of view. When I got into the sport (1970) one
could buy a competitive sailplane for about the cost
of a 4-door family car ($10,000) Now days a competitive
sailplane costs almost 5 times as much as the family
car. Little wonder we can't attract new blood.
JJ

Hi JUJU,
In 1970 I was provided a company car, a Ford station wagon with all
the bells on it for about $4200.00. At that time the Dollar was near par.
Regards
Udo


"John Sinclair" wrote in message
...
I look at soaring's lack of groth from a purely economic
point of view. When I got into the sport (1970) one
could buy a competitive sailplane for about the cost
of a 4-door family car ($10,000) Now days a competitive
sailplane costs almost 5 times as much as the family
car. Little wonder we can't attract new blood.
JJ

I share John Sinclair's view.


At the risk of being labeled a 'Luddite' (see UK Industrial Revolution), and
stirring up a hornets nest, may I suggest to all pilots possessing pockets
deeper than the depth of their ability, that getting more gadgets on the
panel will do little to improve your knowledge, judgment, or skill as a
pilot though, like Viagra, they may well improve your performance.



Please do not misunderstand me: I am astonished and incredibly impressed
with the progress of all technology, not least glider design and
instrumentation. Now we have 'Thermi'... There is no stopping progress:
more strength to it - and to the many helpful suppliers who keep us informed
on this forum! But it seems to me that with the enormous strides in
technology, winning Regional, National, and International Contests today is
less dependent on pilot ability - despite 'Class' definition - and more
dependent upon using the latest 'cutting edge' equipment, be it hull or
instruments. More importantly, the cost of this is beyond the reach of many
(most?) would-be talented pilots. This is not to deny the prowess of
National and World-class Champion pilots who stretch the envelope and
exploit the new tools to the maximum They deserve their titles - but at what
price? The cost of a state-of-the-art panel today will buy a SG 1-26 - and
as a measure of pilot ability rather than size of billfold, check out the
number of pilots who have gained all three Diamonds in a 1-26.



This state of affairs has, of course, always been, and always will be so,
but as soaring technology accelerates, so also does the inability to afford
it in the eyes of the would-be pilot. On the one hand we acclaim the latest
(costly) soaring records, and on the other we deplore the decline of the
sport.



We are in danger of becoming more polarized. If we are really serious about
attracting newcomers to the sport we must place more emphasis on the
affordability of owning and flying gliders, competing, and plain having fun
on a budget within the reach of the man/woman in the street who is seeking
adventure.



Much worthwhile sponsored effort has been expended on introducing youth to
soaring - but how many can continue, what follow through?



If we want a less costly and more level playing field in which to compete,
look to the 1-26 Association and the World Class PW5 Contests. Let us bring
back the Olympic spirit and measure the pilot not the pocket. That's the
spirit we should light a fire under!



Maybe, just maybe, that's the way to grow the movement AND produce World
Champions!



And now I'll shut up.



Lou Frank



"John Sinclair" wrote in message
...
I look at soaring's lack of groth from a purely economic
point of view. When I got into the sport (1970) one
could buy a competitive sailplane for about the cost
of a 4-door family car ($10,000) Now days a competitive
sailplane costs almost 5 times as much as the family
car. Little wonder we can't attract new blood.
JJ

Cost, hassle-to-fun ratio, antiquated equipment, American
individualism....these all may have something to do
with the decline...

But skiing, windsurfing, hunting, Hobie-Catting, are
also in decline...so IMHO it just reflects where peoples
interests are/are not these days.

Most activities with steep learning curves and high
hassle factor are never going to compete with simple
to learn snowboarding, cycling, walking, etc.

And if you don't qualify as a 'cool' sport ie paragliding...then
it is even more difficult to attract participants.





At 22:30 30 December 2004, John Sinclair wrote:
I look at soaring's lack of groth from a purely economic
point of view. When I got into the sport (1970) one
could buy a competitive sailplane for about the cost
of a 4-door family car ($10,000) Now days a competitive
sailplane costs almost 5 times as much as the family
car. Little wonder we can't attract new blood.
JJ

At 00:00 31 December 2004, Lou Frank wrote:
I share John Sinclair's view.


At the risk of being labeled a 'Luddite' (see UK Industrial
Revolution), and
stirring up a hornets nest, may I suggest to all pilots
possessing pockets
deeper than the depth of their ability, that getting
more gadgets on the
panel will do little to improve your knowledge, judgment,
or skill as a
pilot though, like Viagra, they may well improve your
performance.

Errr, ok that has some validity I suppose...but not
sure how that ties into the discussion here.


Please do not misunderstand me: I am astonished and
incredibly impressed
with the progress of all technology, not least glider
design and
instrumentation. Now we have 'Thermi'... There is
no stopping progress:
more strength to it - and to the many helpful suppliers
who keep us informed
on this forum! But it seems to me that with the enormous
strides in
technology, winning Regional, National, and International
Contests today is
less dependent on pilot ability - despite 'Class' definition
- and more
dependent upon using the latest 'cutting edge' equipment,
be it hull or
instruments. More importantly, the cost of this is
beyond the reach of many
(most?) would-be talented pilots. This is not to deny
the prowess of
National and World-class Champion pilots who stretch
the envelope and
exploit the new tools to the maximum They deserve their
titles - but at what
price?

Well 95%+ of glider pilots don't race...so if 5% wanna
have expensive panels...more power to them.

The cost of a state-of-the-art panel today will buy
a SG 1-26 - and
as a measure of pilot ability rather than size of billfold,
check out the
number of pilots who have gained all three Diamonds
in a 1-26.

I see a lot of 1-26's with nice panels...

This state of affairs has, of course, always been,
and always will be so,
but as soaring technology accelerates, so also does
the inability to afford
it in the eyes of the would-be pilot. On the one hand
we acclaim the latest
(costly) soaring records, and on the other we deplore
the decline of the
sport.

I saw this in windsurfing...the sport started with
the stock Windsurfer and then mutated to wave and slalom
boards.


We are in danger of becoming more polarized. If we
are really serious about
attracting newcomers to the sport we must place more
emphasis on the
affordability of owning and flying gliders,

Hmm, not sure I agree there...about the owning part.


competing,

This sure gets pushed, so we double the racers and
get 10% of glider pilots active?

and plain having fun
on a budget within the reach of the man/woman in the
street who is seeking
adventure.

Google for some lengthy threads of what it costs to
build a glider these days...



Much worthwhile sponsored effort has been expended
on introducing youth to
soaring - but how many can continue, what follow through?



If we want a less costly and more level playing field
in which to compete,
look to the 1-26 Association and the World Class PW5
Contests. Let us bring
back the Olympic spirit and measure the pilot not the
pocket. That's the
spirit we should light a fire under!

Okay, gliding back in the Olympics? One-Design? I
would say lets sort out the PW5 situation first.



Maybe, just maybe, that's the way to grow the movement
AND produce World
Champions!



And now I'll shut up.



Lou Frank



'John Sinclair' wrote in message
...
I look at soaring's lack of groth from a purely economic
point of view. When I got into the sport (1970) one
could buy a competitive sailplane for about the cost
of a 4-door family car ($10,000) Now days a competitive
sailplane costs almost 5 times as much as the family
car. Little wonder we can't attract new blood.
JJ

At 22:30 30 December 2004, John Sinclair wrote:
I look at soaring's lack of groth from a purely economic
point of view. When I got into the sport (1970) one
could buy a competitive sailplane for about the cost
of a 4-door family car ($10,000) Now days a competitive
sailplane costs almost 5 times as much as the family
car. Little wonder we can't attract new blood.
JJ


Actually, it is worse than that. I bought a new Buick
Century Wagon in 1980 for $5600.

Bill Daniels wrote:
"John H. Campbell" wrote in message
...

Agreed. But my intended point was that the vision was wrong. The focus
of the article was "how can we get the SSA to grow" where the focus
should have been "how can we get the sport to grow".

Point taken, and I am among those constantly lobbying for SSA to shoulder
systematic PR for the sport (staff member, press room,...). However,
consider Bob Wander's point from years ago already that SSA membership is
the most convenient tool there is to draw people in! For a mere $64 (less
than the cost of a one-time ride at many operations) and a few clicks

online

or moments filling out a card, new prospects get 12 months of propaganda.
Like the HYCBAGP tri-fold says (originally written back in 1978 or so

IIRC)

"There's more, but there isn't room to say it here. What do you do next?
We suggest... you become a member of (SSA)..."





So, John, SSA membership causes soaring to grow? Isn't it the other way
around?

I don't think I have ever known of even one new glider pilot to come to the
sport through the SSA. On the other hand, hard working commercial soaring
operations promoting rides to the public are probably responsible for 90% of
the few new pilots we get. If they could get a little help with that
promotion from the SSA, they could do an even better job.

Bill you got me thinking (remembering really). I was an SSA member when
I was 15 for one year, intending to learn to fly. Even with a glider
operation within bike riding distance at that time (Old Black Forest) I
didn't start to fly until I was in my late 20's. Money wasn't the
issue, I was an industrious teen. Such an easy catch and they still
missed me for a dozen years.

Shawn

"Shawn Curry" wrote in message
news:lldfc.36026$wP1.136994@attbi_s54...
Bill Daniels wrote:
"John H. Campbell" wrote in message
...

Agreed. But my intended point was that the vision was wrong. The focus
of the article was "how can we get the SSA to grow" where the focus
should have been "how can we get the sport to grow".

Point taken, and I am among those constantly lobbying for SSA to
shoulder
systematic PR for the sport (staff member, press room,...). However,
consider Bob Wander's point from years ago already that SSA membership
is
the most convenient tool there is to draw people in! For a mere $64
(less
than the cost of a one-time ride at many operations) and a few clicks

online

or moments filling out a card, new prospects get 12 months of
propaganda.
Like the HYCBAGP tri-fold says (originally written back in 1978 or so

IIRC)

"There's more, but there isn't room to say it here. What do you do
next?
We suggest... you become a member of (SSA)..."





So, John, SSA membership causes soaring to grow? Isn't it the other way
around?

I don't think I have ever known of even one new glider pilot to come to
the
sport through the SSA. On the other hand, hard working commercial
soaring
operations promoting rides to the public are probably responsible for
90% of
the few new pilots we get. If they could get a little help with that
promotion from the SSA, they could do an even better job.

Bill you got me thinking (remembering really). I was an SSA member when
I was 15 for one year, intending to learn to fly. Even with a glider
operation within bike riding distance at that time (Old Black Forest) I
didn't start to fly until I was in my late 20's. Money wasn't the
issue, I was an industrious teen. Such an easy catch and they still
missed me for a dozen years.

Shawn

You know, that's a shame. Young people are the easiest catches - if we
cater to them.

I've actually been called names for spending time with young people,
listening to them and encouraging their flying.

We're really our own worst enemy. Sad...

Bill Daniels

writes:

I don't think I have ever known of even one new glider pilot to come to the
sport through the SSA.

I became an active pilot after my wife (girlfriend at the time) gave my an SSA
membership for my birthday.

Steve
OK, so I was flying hang gliders at the time and sometimes bought Soaring at
the newsstand. (You can't do that anymore.)