[Bob Kuczewski]

Scott Wise started an OzReport topic on August 19th, 2006. Here's the link:

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3777

Here's what that poll looks like today:

Scott_Wise_Poll_2016.png (177.35 KiB) Viewed 930 times

[Bob Kuczewski]

This was Scott's first post to that topic:

New National HG Org. Would you join?
Post Sat, Aug 19 2006, 06:34:32 pm

Scott_Wise_1872.jpg (10.59 KiB) Viewed 109 times

If a new national HG (only) organization was formed, would you be interested in joining considering the following memebrship features:

Solicitation of members would, initially, be limited only to Intermediate and higher rated pilots.

Full Liability insurance for intermediate and higher rated pilots.
(Insurance premiums should be less for this group and therefore allow for the lower memebership fees)

Intermediate skill (and higher) ratings - based on proven exisiting USHGA ratings (to begin).

A professional web site incorporating a serious "on line" magazine.

Possible, occational (US mail) newsletter.

$35 - $45 yearly membership fee.

Please Note: This is an idea - not a reality. The more interest the more real it will become. The less interest, . . .

_______________________________________
I like my wings with bones.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Tommy made a reasonable comment, and said that he'd join if they did some direct promotions:

Tommy Thompson Sr.
Post Sat, Aug 19 2006, 07:54:36 pm

If a new national HG (only) organization was formed, would you be interested in joining

S C Wise
Not if it didn't do more then what I already have, now if it would undertake an effort
to increase Hang Gliding pilots through direct promotions of Hang Gliding to the
public I'd send $40 a year, if everyone here did there could be Hang Gliding add
in the PEOPLE magazine. The point is, don't remake the wheel, make something new
something that really benifits Hang Glider pilots(getting more of them does the trick)

PS:If you make more Hang Glider pilots then Paraglider pilots you'll keep more say
in a split organation and keep your Hang Gliding costs down.
Tommy

[Bob Kuczewski]

Jim Rooney was quick to throw some cold water on the idea:

Jim Rooney
Post Sat, Aug 19 2006, 09:54:59 pm

Uh... exactly what purpose would this serve?

Let's take an already tiny org and kick out all the new blood... then lets drop anything that doesn't interest me... er, the more advanced pilots. Oh yeah, and those PG freaks can piss off too. Let's call it the "only people like me club".

Let me burst your bubble on something too... the serious accidents ARE advanced pilots. Those noobs have lots of people making sure they don't do stupid stuff... it's the "advanced" ones that really bugger themselves up. You've been around long enough to know this, but you somehow choose to ignore it. Good luck with that cheaper insurance policy... clue for ya... to the rest of the world, we're all nuts.

Do you see no value in the people around you?
Where would you be if when you were learning, people treated you like this?

Jim

[Bob Kuczewski]

Scott had some good answers for Jim Rooney:

S C Wise
Post Sun, Aug 20 2006, 01:56:50 am

JR Said: Uh... exactly what purpose would this serve?

It would serve the target Hang glider pilot members with services they need at a fair cost. That's the initial Idea.

JR Said: Let's take an already tiny org and kick out all the new blood...

The idea has nothing to do with kicking anyone out. It has to do with who is let in. It's not feasable for such a new Org to step in and completely throw out the authority and usefulness of the USHPA. As in the complete rating system and such. This could not be reproduced with the snap of the fingers.

JR said: then lets drop anything that doesn't interest me...

Huh? The goal is to supply the bare essentials at a bare essential cost. You can keep all the things that interest you like the glossy pictures in USHpA magazine. And if cost is no issue, and if you love the direction of USHpA then ignore this post and this topic. I'll assume you voted "no". So be it.

JR said: er, the more advanced pilots.

I have no idea what you're saying here.

JR said: Oh yeah, and those PG freaks can piss off too. Let's call it the "only people like me club".

By the looks of your user name pict, I'm surprised to here you call yourself a "freak". Personally, I don't consider PG pilots freaks, unless you prefer to be considered as such. Do you speak for all PG pilots?

To your "only people like me" point:

Before the HG leadership decided to absorb the PG org, the PGers had their own "only people like me" club. And the USHGA was a "only people like me" club (or was it? Let's see, single surface flex wings - double surface flex wings - and rigid wings. Sure, that sounds like a "only people like me club". Yup). NOW, the USHPA is a "only people like us AND people like you club. It IS NOT a "we're all Hang Glider pilots" org.

Why? Because a big enough group (of PG pilots?) demanded that they not be blended in as part of the larger hang gliding community. Instead, they wanted to be specifically identified as Paraglider pilots - to deferentiate and seperate themselves from the supposedly greater group of "general hang glider pilots" that had otherwise been formed out of the "merger". The spirit of "we're all hang glider pilots" was killed by that act. And that act was initiated by PG pilots - not (flex wing and rigid wing) HG pilots.

JR said: Let me burst your bubble on something too... the serious accidents ARE advanced pilots. Those noobs have lots of people making sure they don't do stupid stuff... it's the "advanced" ones that really bugger themselves up.

Here again, you miss the point of LIABILITY insurance. It doesn't matter one iota if you "bugger" YOURSELF up. It's if you crash into someone else, their house, car, fence - other glider or aircraft. This happens so rarely (as I've stated in another topic's post) that the insurance is more or less only a symbol that the Org uses to show that it's looking out for the damage (almost never done) by it's memebers. And yes, I know, serious claims are made. The insurance is not worthless.

And do you think an insurance company would accept that the more experienced pilots cause the most damage to third parties? It's the "noobs" as you so respectfully call them, who insurance companies are afraid of. Insurance companies regularly charge new drivers high rates and claim it's because they are more dangerous. But in fact, elderly (really old, and feable) drivers actually have more accidents - and they pay the lowest rates. If insurance companies changed their typical pricing structure for HG related activities it would surprise me. Then again, I am sometimes surprised.

JR said: You've been around long enough to know this, but you somehow choose to ignore it.

If the highest flight time pilots have the most (claimable, liability) accidents, this doesn't mean they have the most accidents per hour of flight time. We may need a sport aviation insurance expert to clear up who's right here.

JR said: Good luck with that cheaper insurance policy... clue for ya... to the rest of the world, we're all nuts.

On that I would have to generaly agree - but only because USHPA is doing such a good job on improving the image of the sport(s) it represents.

JR said: Do you see no value in the people around you?

Huh? Why wouldn't I? Perhaps the question should be: Do people around (pilots like myself) see any value in us? If not then perhaps we can give our lolalty and money to an Org that that does appreciate our value.

JR said: Where would you be if when you were learning, people treated you like this?

The question here has nothing to do with treating beginners in any poor or unfair manner. USHpA would have to deal with the new people - until (or really, IF) a sucessor Organization were to completely take over. Maybe if the USHpA woke up a bit none of this would be getting suggested.

S C W
_______________________________________
I like my wings with bones.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Jim began complaining about Scott not wanting to subsidize instructors and students.

Jim Rooney
Post Sun, Aug 20 2006, 06:09:12 am

You're looking for a system where you pay for your stuff and only your stuff.
You want the benifits of an organisation without being part of an organisation.

Everything you're suggesting is about what would benifit you personally... what would drive your costs down.
You can call it not kicking people out... you call it "not letting people into the new club" but it's all the same thing. You're being exclusionary for the sake of your pocketbook, you're just trying to make it more palatable.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Marc added a diversionary comment:

Leadsled
Re: New National HG Org. Would you join?
Post Sun, Aug 20 2006, 08:08:07 am

S C Wise wrote:
If a new national HG (only) organization was formed, would you be interested in joining considering the following memebrship features:

Solicitation of members would, initially, be limited only to Intermediate and higher rated pilots.

Full Liability insurance for intermediate and higher rated pilots.
(Insurance premiums should be less for this group and therefore allow for the lower memebership fees)

Intermediate skill (and higher) ratings - based on proven exisiting USHGA ratings (to begin).

A professional web site incorporating a serious "on line" magazine.

Possible, occational (US mail) newsletter.

$35 - $45 yearly membership fee.

Please Note: This is an idea - not a reality. The more interest the more real it will become. The less interest, . . .

If this new organization will undergo a program of importing cute foreign girls who are trained to drive retrieve and the finer arts of stocking beer coolers--I'd switch clubs in a heartbeat and wouldn't even care if there was a division for those who fly cows or picnic tables.

marc

[Bob Kuczewski]

Hangwind commented that USHPA's membership fees were "cheap" but didn't address any of Scott's other points:

Hangwind
Post Sun, Aug 20 2006, 10:30:05 am

I'll pass on voting in this poll.

I think our USHPA dues are cheap and that's coming from a father of two young boys who makes around $35,000 per year and pays child support too! If the dues were twice as much, I would pay so I can fly at regulated sites and vote for people who want to run the organization in the ways I want them to.


I find it odd that the organization that allowed you a Master rating that you enjoy and that I respect has you theorizing against it?


I agree with the counter-points that are offered in other responses, i.e. Tommy, Jim and Marc.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Scott agreed about promotion, but argued that USHPA had gotten too "fat and sloppy" about it:

S C Wise
Re: New National HG Org. Would you join?
Post Sun, Aug 20 2006, 03:21:35 pm

Marc Fink wrote:
If this new organization will undergo a program of importing cute foreign girls who are trained to drive retrieve and the finer arts of stocking beer coolers--I'd switch clubs in a heartbeat and wouldn't even care if there was a division for those who fly cows or picnic tables. marc

Well, Mark, we (only me me me, as of now) will take your suggestions to heart and see if we can sneek them into the by-laws.

But on a more serious note: This is not about me me me - however long and hard you cry it out. It's about a proposition. I am reading the feed back and listening to the responses. The concept is either a good idea or a bad idea. Perhaps it's an idea that can be improved, maybe it should simply be flushed down the old toilet with out further consideration.

As for Tommy T's questions and suggestions:

Yes. I think that any HG oriented org should contribute to the promotion of the sport. A new Org, if one existed, should not neglect such a responsibility. To even promote it's own future, this would be critical. And operating on a leaner budget would force such an Org to find new and novel ways to draw attention to themselves and the sport of HG. Dare I say that the leadership of such a new upstart Org would likely be desperate to find promotional mechanisms. As they say: Necessity is the mother of Invention. Lean and mean beats fat and sloppy, every time.

Open to discussion: Is a fancy mag the current Org.'s excuse to sit on it's laurels and claim that that's enough to promote HG - all on it's own? An org without such a high profile publication and without a huge investment in that mode of promotion, could and would have to seek out less costly and more innovative alternatives - or parish.

Does that answer your questions Tommy? Good questions by the way.
_______________________________________
I like my wings with bones.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Christian accused Scott of being out of touch, but didn't really address any of Scott's points:

Christian Williams
Quote
Post Sun, Aug 20 2006, 06:59:31 pm

You're just spitballing, S.C. Youve been out of touch a while and you really need to catch up.

You should read the Oz Report files on site insurance, personal liability insurance, the long debate over the USHGA name change, the exhaustive discussions about declining hang gliding numbers, the informative debates about the role of a national organization, the political value of ratings. You need to study the USHPA budget, which is available on the Web Site (sorry, you'll have to join).

Sound like homework?