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
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 11:22:58 -0600, "F.L. Whiteley"
wrote: "Martin Gregorie" wrote in message .. . On 26 Apr 2004 21:19:48 -0700, (Michael) wrote: I have nothing against the L-23; it's a perfectly acceptable primary trainer. However, for soaring flight I think the 1-26 (or better yet a Ka-8) makes a far better glider. Add the SZD Junior to this list - I know there are only 5 in the USA, but they are more common elsewhere.. 8 at the moment. That's good news. -- martin@ : Martin Gregorie gregorie : Harlow, UK demon : co : Zappa fan & glider pilot uk : |
#202
|
|||
|
|||
|
#203
|
|||
|
|||
"ADP" wrote in message ...
I prefer top posting. Since I'm a snipper, my suggestion: If you don't like top posting don't read my posts. Allan See below: "The Lion's Grove: Ramblings: Top Posting: The Source Of All Evil? 'Kay, so I'm reading the newsgroups. Yeah, I know. I generally dislike them because they seem to be only good for flamewars, but I've been extremely bored lately, and it's something to pass the time. In the rare instances that legitimate topics are actually discussed, there will come along a person who wants to contribute to the conversation and will post the information at the top of the message, known as "top-posting." And of course, this person will be jumped on, ridiculed, humiliated, beat about the head and shoulders with a salami, and generally be made to feel very unwelcome. I've just read another of these threads. One person top-posted and there followed a coupla dozen posts saying how it is poor netiquette, how it is generally accepted practice not to do so, and one giving a link to a list of FAQs explaining how it has been decided this should be so. There were messages saying that the top-posting person "violated the social morays[sic] of the group" and should basically conform to their standards because it is somehow more polite. There was also much unnecessary name-calling and insults directed at people who are different. [*Note: I'm really having to fight the urge to go off on a rant about how "morays" should be spelled "mores" and the fact that if people aren't familiar with a word and its use, they shouldn't be throwing the damn thing around. A "moray" is, in fact, an eel and of course should never be violated. "Mores" are social norms taken so seriously that laws tend to be created based on them. Oh wait...] I don't understand what the big deal is. I actually like it when people top-post. Reading through hundreds of messages goes by much faster when I can see at a glance what's being said without having to constantly I think that replies should be inserted at random points within the quoted text. My reasoning is explained below. scroll through the entire message. I don't get all huffy and insult the person. I move on to the next message and continue with my reading. Why is it so difficult for others to do the same? Went and found a site that gives some admittedly good reasons why folks should not top-post. I'm going to use these from http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/gey_stv0.htm cuz they're a lot shorter and to the point than most other sites. "First, top posters tend never to snip, never to shorten that to which they reply. So people whose download time costs money are wasting money downloading enormous lengths of stuff they have already read." This I can understand. But it is the lack of snippage that should be addressed. "Second, and connected, is that you do not know with top posting whether someone has written something else later on, so do you waste your time going through it?" Is this really a problem? Isn't it usually pretty obvious that the poster has said all he has intended to say? if he hasn't attached his top-posted comments directly to a portion of the previous post, what makes you think he's going to do it further along in the message? And is it really that big a deal to scroll down and check? You're going to scroll through other messages anyway. But I guess a top-poster's messages are a waste of time... "Third, it is much easier to read things in order, and you can see with good Netiquette how easily it flows." This is usually followed by an insanely simple example which, incidentally, could all use a bit of snipping for the "he wrote:, she wrote:, bob wrote:, god wrote:" prefixes. Newsgroup posts are rarely that simple, at least from what I've seen. It's usually more along the lines of: [obscene amount of header crap left on so someone can show off their "witty" personalization] [more header crap] [still more header crap] [and even more header crap] Hi, my name is Lisa and I'm new to the group. I just wanted to share that I just read this great book on pasta, it's called "The Joy of Pasta." You should really check it out. [no longer crossposted as this person finally got a clue] I read that book and really like it too. I love the recipes! Did I mention that Lennie is a jerk? [crossposted to a dozen other completely unrelated newsgroups] i'll show ya pasta baybeeee [followed by a signature, usually trying to show how "l33t" the poster is] [also posted to the dozen other groups because the poster forgot to take them off of the To: field] If you don't have anything productive to say, don't say anything at all. Oh, get off your high horse. By responding to them you're only encouraging them. Get over it. [yada yada] I look forward to being a part of the group! [followed by long irritating signature] Welcome to the group! [followed by a signature] Hope you like it here! [followed by more signature] Throw in some bad spelling, some obscenities from a troll, and some bad formatting, and you've got a rather difficult message to read. Which leads me to a) if you can understand that mess, a person posting at the top shouldn't throw you off that much, and b) if you can't understand that mess, what does it matter where the next person puts their message? You're not gonna get it anyway. The main issue here is snippage. If people would just learn to cut out all the irrelevent and unnecessary crap, there wouldn't be any problems understanding where the message is going. I think what it really comes down to is that people don't like when someone comes in and disrupts their structured little world. Top-posting isn't going to cause California to fall off into the ocean [yes, this would be a bad thing, at least to the Californians], so why act like it will?" . 2nd source: "BUT not snipping is a far worse disease. If you read a five screen article, and you like it, it is the height of selfishness to leave the whole five screens while you add a single line to say how much you like it - and it does not matter which end you put it, it is still very unfair on others and shows a lack of respect for your fellow posters. You should leave in a paragraph or two, not more, unless you are specifically referring to bits. Then you leave in the bits to which you refer, and reply just after them. So, please snip, that is vital, please do not top post, but that is not so important." |
#204
|
|||
|
|||
"Liam Finley" wrote in message om... Good post. I hope it doesn't get buried beneath the hundreds of Lennie-related bloviations in this thread. (John Seaborn) wrote in message . com... While growth in soaring is a world wide problem, what follows is a USA centric viewpoint. First, believe growth can be accomplished. There is so much negative talk about growing the sport, so many splintered ideas that it seems like making a real difference in the trend can only be done by magic. Its also safe to say what we are doing now is not making a big long term difference in the members trend line. Any marketing person worth their salt can come up with 50-100 easy, affordable and effective ways to grow soaring. The biggest obstacle to growing the sport is that there is no one with the background needed responsible on a day-to-day basis for this activity in the USA - with a budget to get things done. Volunteers can't do the job, it has to be a paid activity as it requires much more focus and longevity than what can be expected out of a volunteer effort. No budget means no real action. Growth in soaring happens at the local FBO and Club level. A simple pull strategy is what is needed. With pull marketing the objective is to pull "customers" into the established retail selling points. The sport already has a great "product", and established "retailers" in the form of clubs and commercial operators, but no focused long-term strategy to pull the right customers into these retail centers. Step one is to form a triad between the clubs, commercial operators and the promotion team around the idea that Promotion will be developing opportunities to pull customers into their retail locations. It is critical to separate the thrill a minute ride customer that you never see again from the "want to learn to soar" customer. Its also critical that once the customers show at the retailer they get a warm reception. Develop several "entry" points that are inviting to potential members. For example, a First Flight Certificate printable off the SSA Web Site redeemable at any participating club or FBO. A targeted direct mail campaign to target demo and psychographics within x miles of participating retailers, a 1-800 number that can answer customer questions and direct them to their nearest retailer, a First Flight Kit that can be sent to prospects, cooperative marketing with other aviation organizations like AOPA and EAA, an First Flight invitation letter to every retiring airline pilot, First Flight coupons in magazines and Sporty's, a First Flight video with 800 number and web address shown before targeted movies, promotion of the sport in film, print and web featuring First Flight information... you get the idea. Develop and refine a pull program, work it for a couple of years and see what happens. A final note, while many think youth is the future of our sport I think that 35-55 year olds with time, money and interest are the future of our sport. How to pay for this strategy is a good topic for RAS. John Seaborn Step one for funding. Deny the dues rebate to any SSA chapter that doesn't meet a growth quota. Clubs with a stated "no-growth" or "limited membership" policy don't even get to ask for a rebate. The funds thus retained go to marketing. Step two. Add a check box to the individual SSA membership renewal form that contributes $5 of the annual membership fee to marketing soaring. Step three. Ask (or require) business members to contribute $200 (or more) to the marketing fund. Step four. Reward individual SSA members who, during the preceding year, are responsible for 10 new members by waiving their membership renewal fee. Add a space on the SSA application form for the name of the SSA member who recruited the new member. List the names of these "Star Recruiters" in Soaring and ask the business members to offer them a discount on merchandise, tows etc... Step five. Create a reward for the most productive recruiter of the year to be presented at the SSA convention. Bill Daniels |
#205
|
|||
|
|||
soarski wrote:
Eric Greenwell wrote in message ... f.blair wrote: The L-13 is a great trainer, especially for spin training. Compared to a 1-26 it is certainly less nimble, but weighs about 2 X as much. The L-13 will take a student through any maneuver they need to learn about before you let them solo. In our area, the L13 has plenty of performance to make cross-country flights, but the thought of retrieving it from a field discourages most people from trying. I think I remember a team that took it apart, or even put it together in 12 Minutes! Dieter B Having dismantled and re-assembled our much loved (and hated) L13 repeatedly I must note that I have done a couple of very conservative cross countries in the L13. But the thought of having to take it apart in a field in the dark and get it secure on the trailer, and then re-assemble it again is enough to put any but the most hardened masochist off. 12 minutes is about what it generally takes us to line up the wings. Maybe we need practise, as we generally avoid rigging anything, there is space in the hangar for them all. Lots of fun for gentle aerobatics, and a good trainer but easy to rig she is not. |
#206
|
|||
|
|||
Bill Daniels wrote:
Step one for funding. Deny the dues rebate to any SSA chapter that doesn't meet a growth quota. Clubs with a stated "no-growth" or "limited membership" policy don't even get to ask for a rebate. The funds thus retained go to marketing. Step two. Add a check box to the individual SSA membership renewal form that contributes $5 of the annual membership fee to marketing soaring. Step three. Ask (or require) business members to contribute $200 (or more) to the marketing fund. Step four. Reward individual SSA members who, during the preceding year, are responsible for 10 new members by waiving their membership renewal fee. I wouldn't even set the bar that high: 5 new members would be quite an achievement. Make it 3 members to get half off the dues. Add a space on the SSA application form for the name of the SSA member who recruited the new member. List the names of these "Star Recruiters" in Soaring and ask the business members to offer them a discount on merchandise, tows etc... -- Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA |
#207
|
|||
|
|||
Soaring is declining because the experience of flight is highly accessible.
It is more common to find young people in North America and Europe that have flown somewhere on a jet, achieving FL350 or greater, than would be the common youthful experience of many following RAS. I would expect that if I were to survey the local high school, I would find more than 50% of the students had flown at least once. In my HS days, this would have been 5-10%. Many of my generation fly because we seek the mystic of flight, soaring being one of the venues. EAA has a whole host of greybeards, because propellars have always been more accessible. Flying high, fast, and far has been de-mystified for a much larger segment of my society. As a result, I expect the number seeking to soar to be a lesser percentage. As the population grows however, I also expect the total number of seekers to grow. Now, how do we reach them? Frank Whiteley |
#208
|
|||
|
|||
F.L. Whiteley wrote:
Soaring is declining because the experience of flight is highly accessible. It is more common to find young people in North America and Europe that have flown somewhere on a jet, achieving FL350 or greater, than would be the common youthful experience of many following RAS. I would expect that if I were to survey the local high school, I would find more than 50% of the students had flown at least once. In my HS days, this would have been 5-10%. Many of my generation fly because we seek the mystic of flight, soaring being one of the venues. EAA has a whole host of greybeards, because propellars have always been more accessible. Flying high, fast, and far has been de-mystified for a much larger segment of my society. As a result, I expect the number seeking to soar to be a lesser percentage. As the population grows however, I also expect the total number of seekers to grow. Now, how do we reach them? Frank, your general thesis is absolutely correct. We reach them by concentrating on the group which you correctly describe as already interested but not blase about the flight experience. These are not the under thirties, they are the over-55s. Certainly in my country, this is also the age group where the growth is occurring while the under thirties are a shrinking group (both absolutely and relatively). I know it will make many of our clubs unpalatable socially to a number of younger enthusiasts but hey - we all have to suffer for our pleasures. As you rightly point out, the EAA has an aged population - and that is one of the most popular flying clubs ever. Does AOPA release membership statistics broken down by age? Graeme Cant |
#209
|
|||
|
|||
The airline marketing departments have unintentionally helped create this
problem by creating a "superman" aura around their pilots. By inference, their message says all other pilots have lesser skills and it would be folly for mere mortals to attempt flight by their own hand. Yet, I think the interest in flying is still there. I haven't checked recently, but first person flight simulators were the best selling computer games on the market. Airshows are the best attended outdoor events of all. It's hard to argue that a fairly large segment of the general public doesn't have a fascination with flight. I find it easy to elicit the interest of non pilots in the concept of soaring. The problem arises when it is suggested that they, all by themselves, could learn to take the controls and soar. To a degree, they are right. Not everyone can learn to fly. The difficult part is to light a spark in those that can learn. I have long suspected that PC based Flight Simulators might be a key since they are such a successful product. Most of these simulators are open systems to the degree that new 'aircraft' can be designed for them. Unfortunately, there is a dearth of really good simulated gliders. There are a lot of really good computer people in this sport. If they built some great simulated gliders that could be downloaded free from soaring web sites along with a pitch that the real experience is available at their local gliderport, we might see small but steady stream of real talent showing up for lessons. For those just taking rides, handing them a CD with flight sim 'gliders' that matched what they just rode in might be a pretty good marketing tool too. Bill Daniels "F.L. Whiteley" wrote in message ... Soaring is declining because the experience of flight is highly accessible. It is more common to find young people in North America and Europe that have flown somewhere on a jet, achieving FL350 or greater, than would be the common youthful experience of many following RAS. I would expect that if I were to survey the local high school, I would find more than 50% of the students had flown at least once. In my HS days, this would have been 5-10%. Many of my generation fly because we seek the mystic of flight, soaring being one of the venues. EAA has a whole host of greybeards, because propellars have always been more accessible. Flying high, fast, and far has been de-mystified for a much larger segment of my society. As a result, I expect the number seeking to soar to be a lesser percentage. As the population grows however, I also expect the total number of seekers to grow. Now, how do we reach them? Frank Whiteley |
#210
|
|||
|
|||
"Martin Gregorie" wrote in message ... On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 11:22:58 -0600, "F.L. Whiteley" wrote: "Martin Gregorie" wrote in message .. . On 26 Apr 2004 21:19:48 -0700, (Michael) wrote: I have nothing against the L-23; it's a perfectly acceptable primary trainer. However, for soaring flight I think the 1-26 (or better yet a Ka-8) makes a far better glider. Add the SZD Junior to this list - I know there are only 5 in the USA, but they are more common elsewhere.. 8 at the moment. That's good news. -- It's also on my club's wish list. Frank |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Advanced Soaring Seminar - Eastern PA | B Lacovara | Home Built | 0 | February 9th 04 01:55 AM |
Advanced Soaring Seminar - Eastern PA | B Lacovara | Soaring | 0 | January 26th 04 07:55 PM |
Soaring Safety Seminar - SSA Convention | Burt Compton | Soaring | 0 | January 26th 04 03:57 PM |
Soaring Safety Seminar Wednesday - Atlanta | Burt Compton | Soaring | 0 | January 19th 04 02:51 AM |
January/February 2004 issue of Southern California Soaring is on-line | [email protected] | Soaring | 8 | January 4th 04 09:37 PM |