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 |
#201
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On Nov 8, 3:00*pm, Jim Beckman wrote:
At 15:40 08 November 2010, sisu1a wrote: And what of it if today's youth want 'instant gratification'? Should that not then be the goal for soaring operations to provide? If that is our reality, than we either need to adapt to it or fade into irrelevance. Isn't that a fair working definition of a dilettante? * Are those really the people that we want to attract into our sport? *On the other hand, it is most certainly the folks that the commercial ride operations want to attract. I notice that when a 2-32 is available as a ride ship, it gets a lot of use. *And it's always sort of entertaining to see how they can pack two folks into the back seat. Jim Beckman As a former ride pilot, I can assure you "Those People" aren't "dilettantes", they're just people - mostly very nice people, who decided to give gliding a try. Judging them to be dilettantes is just one of many examples of how we chase people away. Treating them warmly is how we convert them - and we DO want to convert them. A percentage of ride passengers do come back to learn to fly gliders - a significantly larger percentage come back if their first ride was in a decent glider and they were offered training in something better than a 2-33. Many more say they would love to learn to fly gliders if their personal and financial situation permitted and I believe them. |
#202
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On 11/8/2010 11:48 AM, Ian Cant wrote:
Paul Hanson wrote: And what of it if today's youth want 'instant gratification'? Should that not then be the goal for soaring operations to provide? If that is our reality, than we either need to adapt to it or fade into irrelevance. -Paul That is a very perceptive comment. If instant gratification is the primary demand from our marketplace, and our primary goal is to expand our customer base, then we should aim for that instant gratification. A single long introductrory flight in the highest-performance self-launcher to be found; with the promise of solo in a couple of days, private license within a week ? But perhaps the soul of our sport is that it does NOT provide that kind of instant gratification, that instead it rewards prolonged effort. Then we restrict our market to that minority of people with similar tastes. We will not grow so big or so fast. And perhaps people like that are happy to start out at the bottom of the ladder, learn all the fundamental skills and work their way to the top. Blaniks or Schweizers as workhorses, with just a tantalizing glimpse of slippery glass to keep the long-term goal in mind, might then be appropriate. The glider does not matter so much compared to the inherent motivation of the pilot and the skill and dedication of the instructor. What we often do lose sight of is the need to offer a ladder with all the rungs in place. There must be an affordable - that means cheap - entry rung, intermediate rungs to gradually increase capabilities, and top rungs for the most skilled and competitive. That suggests a mixed fleet. Perhaps a 2-33 or Blanik, a 1-26 or similar to enjoy solo flight, an ASK-21 to transition to glass, a Cirrus or Libelle to taste peformance and a Duo or DG-1000 [possibly self-launching] before the new pilot needs to buy his personal sailplane of choice. Just a thought. Ian 1st impressions make a huge difference. When you are dealing with a new person who is interested in the sport, you want to make sure that his/her 1st glider experience is a positive one. It's not just what kind of glider it is, but also what condition it is in. A pristine L-13 can make a very good impression, matching a mediocre K-21. The same goes for a museum quality 2-33. However, a worn glider that sits outside just, doesn't do it for a lot of people, including power pilots who are just putting their toes in the water. -- Mike Schumann |
#203
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On 11/8/2010 10:09 AM, Frank Whiteley wrote:
On Nov 8, 12:30 am, Darryl wrote: On Nov 7, 11:02 pm, Jim wrote: wrote: The current issues with the L-13 Blaniks has our club looking at alternatives and developing a plan for the future training gliders we will need. We would be very interested in other club's experience with other trainers, and what you are using and planning to use in the future. Our evaluation parameters include high useful load for heavy students and instructors, ease and availability of parts for maintenance and repair, durability for student solo operations, and up front cost . Sonex Xenos perhaps? I have no experience with it and am not sure what the general consensus is (I doubt there is much informed opinion on them since not too many have been built, so few would have first-hand experience; but unless I am missing something their performance seems more than adequate for training purposes.) Upfront new: ~US$34,000 + ~1200 club man-hours to build. Side-by-side seating: good for training? Motorglider: Dispense with towplane costs. Experimental: Lower part and labor costs. Sonex provides directions on how to get it registered with the FAA as a glider. http://www.sonexaircraft.com/images/...Comparison.jpg With a motorglider you do not "dispense with towplane costs" you "replace towplane costs with motorglider costs" (and quite possibly many more issues). I would be surprised if a 24:1 (i.e. non-glider), homebuilt, lightweight aluminum glider in a tail dragger configuration is meet many of the practical needs of most glider clubs. I wonder what getting insurance coverage for instruction on that would take. The question was to replace L-13 Blaniks and looking for practical experience. Is there anybody in the USA using any motorglider for primary training? Can they share cost and operational experiences? How many students per year go through to complete their licenses? --- Wait, I know how about a ASK-21 and a towplane (or winch). Darryl Here are the FAA numbers of all glider ratings, abinitio and add-ons http://www.soaringchapters.org/world_report/ I am very surprised at the extremely low number of add-on glider ratings. Can this be right? Last year, only 10 power pilots added on a glider rating in the entire US? If that's true, then we should be doing a serious marketing campaign aimed at power pilots who have let their medicals lapse. That's the really low hanging fruit. -- Mike Schumann |
#204
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On 11/8/2010 3:17 AM, Jim Beckman wrote:
At 13:32 07 November 2010, Burt Compton - Marfa wrote: On Nov 7, 5:52=A0am, Jim Beckman wrote: Turning away from soaring because of how the glider looks just doesn't seem valid to me, but that's just me. Yes. As somebody else mentioned, it exhibits a serious shallowness on the part of the person who rejects the experience. Maybe it really has to do with current youth expecting instant gratification in all things. On the other hand ... I remember how many pilots that were definitely beyond the "shallow" stage that did not like the PW-5 (some ferociously so) because of it's looks. I don't agree with them about the PW5, but that's not important: what is important is *looks do matter* to some people who will become glider pilots. And why shouldn't looks matter? For many of us, soaring is a treat to the eyes, and a sleek glider with bendy wings is one of those treats. There are many reasons for getting into, and staying in, soaring, and the way a glider looks seems just sensible as any other reason. An operation that offers just a 2-33 or similar is going to have a smaller group to draw from. -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me) - "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz |
#205
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On Nov 8, 2:24*pm, Andy wrote:
On Nov 8, 7:09*am, Frank Whiteley wrote: Here are the FAA numbers of all glider ratings, abinitio and add-ons http://www.soaringchapters.org/world_report/ Whatever we did in 1996, we should do it again. Can anyone explain the spike upward in glider ratings? 9B Also note the ratios of ab-initio to add-on ratings in that period and now. Perhaps the world wide web, increasing costs of flying power, generation of WWII/post WWII pilots losing medicals, increase disposable income, 125% loan to value home equity loans? |
#206
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
Funnily enough, my first trial flight was at Cambridge Club: I was
launched in a K13 and had a short thermalling flight, but never went back because I was expecting a sleek fibreglass machine rather than something that was older than I was (29 at the time). I ended up joining London gliding club, whos had a fleet of 6 K21's, and went solo in one of their K23's (a single seat version of a K21) On Nov 6, 9:02*am, Martin Gregorie wrote: On Fri, 05 Nov 2010 15:44:18 -0500, Jim Logajan wrote: "noel.wade" wrote: On Sep 15, 10:14*am, "Surfer!" wrote: But since the Schweizer seems to be the training ship of choice in most U S clubs that shouldn't be a surprise. *It's certainly not (IMHO) an endorsement of them. I couldn't agree more! *As a "younger" glider pilot myself (29 when I started), let me make a few assertions: 1) Do you think you can get *ANY* young person interested in soaring if what they see is a 2-33? After playing any modern computer game? After watching movies like "The Fast and the Furious"? *The 2-33 looks like a dog and flies slowly. I started lessons when I was 52. I didn't have a problem with the club's 2-33 because it is possible I'm not a shallow youth anymore. ;-) I started learning when I was 54, and that was certainly thanks to a ride in an ASK-21. I'd had a couple of trial flights 8-10 years previously in an ASK-13, but though it was a nice experience it didn't inspire me to take up gliding. However, and I don't know why, that flight in an ASK-21 in the fall of '99 at Front Royale set the hook and I joined Cambridge GC in the UK at the start of the 2000 season, picking them for no better reason than they were the only local club with a glass training fleet. As it happened I couldn't have chosen better given the club's strong xc culture. This became apparent at the 2001 Regionals when I got my first cross-country ride in the club's G103: I had a ring-side seat as my P1 won the day on handicap. -- martin@ * | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org * * * |- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
#207
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On Nov 8, 5:45*pm, Mike Schumann
wrote: On 11/8/2010 10:09 AM, Frank Whiteley wrote: On Nov 8, 12:30 am, Darryl *wrote: On Nov 7, 11:02 pm, Jim *wrote: *wrote: The current issues with the L-13 Blaniks has our club looking at alternatives and developing a plan for the future training gliders we will need. We would be very interested in other club's experience with other trainers, and what you are using and planning to use in the future. Our evaluation parameters include high useful load for heavy students and instructors, ease and availability of parts for maintenance and repair, *durability for student solo operations, and up front cost |
#208
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
On 11/8/2010 8:11 PM, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 11/8/2010 3:17 AM, Jim Beckman wrote: At 13:32 07 November 2010, Burt Compton - Marfa wrote: On Nov 7, 5:52=A0am, Jim Beckman wrote: Turning away from soaring because of how the glider looks just doesn't seem valid to me, but that's just me. Yes. As somebody else mentioned, it exhibits a serious shallowness on the part of the person who rejects the experience. Maybe it really has to do with current youth expecting instant gratification in all things. On the other hand ... I remember how many pilots that were definitely beyond the "shallow" stage that did not like the PW-5 (some ferociously so) because of it's looks. I don't agree with them about the PW5, but that's not important: what is important is *looks do matter* to some people who will become glider pilots. And why shouldn't looks matter? For many of us, soaring is a treat to the eyes, and a sleek glider with bendy wings is one of those treats. There are many reasons for getting into, and staying in, soaring, and the way a glider looks seems just sensible as any other reason. An operation that offers just a 2-33 or similar is going to have a smaller group to draw from. You are absolutely right. Looks matter a LOT. Just look at Apple's success. -- Mike Schumann |
#209
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
At 23:29 08 November 2010, bildan wrote:
As a former ride pilot, I can assure you "Those People" aren't "dilettantes", they're just people - mostly very nice people, who decided to give gliding a try. Judging them to be dilettantes is just one of many examples of how we chase people away. I was referring specifically to potential rides who walk away from the opportunity when they see that the vehicle is going to be something less than what Thomas Crown (latest version) flew. Those folks, if not dilettante, are something even denser. Jim Beckman |
#210
|
|||
|
|||
Future Club Training Gliders
At 00:32 09 November 2010, Mike Schumann wrote:
1st impressions make a huge difference. When you are dealing with a new person who is interested in the sport, you want to make sure that his/her 1st glider experience is a positive one. It's not just what kind of glider it is, but also what condition it is in. A pristine L-13 can make a very good impression, matching a mediocre K-21. The same goes for a museum quality 2-33. However, a worn glider that sits outside just, doesn't do it for a lot of people, including power pilots who are just putting their toes in the water. I would suggest that the attitude of the ride pilot is just as important, if not more so, than pure appearances. And a ride pilot is obviously going to treat a pilot passenger differently than a novice. Not to mention the attitude of the other people assisting with the flight or just hanging around the gliders. When I first starting taking lessons to transition from power to gliders, the club on the field took absolutely *no* interest in what I was doing, or explaining what the club had to offer, or attempting to interest me in joining. I practically had to force myself on them (damn glad I did it, too). We generally present an unfortunate impression of aloofness and distraction. The gregarious, outgoing, friendly glider folks are a valuable exception. Jim Beckman |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Club Class Gliders | Sam Giltner[_1_] | Soaring | 4 | December 3rd 08 03:28 AM |
Basic Training Gliders | Derek Copeland | Soaring | 35 | December 26th 05 02:19 PM |
Basic Training Gliders | Justin Craig | Soaring | 0 | December 6th 05 10:07 PM |
Basic Training Gliders | Justin Craig | Soaring | 0 | December 6th 05 10:07 PM |
Soaring club close to NYC, with high-performance gliders | City Dweller | Soaring | 9 | September 29th 05 11:55 AM |