[Rick Masters]

One of the biggest swindles on hang gliding that the USP a** ever executed was eliminating the Special Observer. For decades, the Special Observer served eager new rural hang glider pilots who could not afford the expense of traveling to obtain certification in their local area. Historically, this was a KEY ELEMENT IN GROWING THE SPORT OF HANG GLIDING! I know. I was one. Now, what the USP a** has done opens a tremendous opportunity for the US Hawks to gain a foothold and grow. Especially because HANG GLIDERS LOVE MOUNTAINS AND THE USP a** SCHOOLS ARE ON THE COASTS. Go for it, Bob, start issuing Special Observer licenses. In time, it could become one of the US Hawks best strategies.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Hi Rick,

I think it's a great idea, but I don't know how to implement it.

I suppose we could use the prior USHGA SO qualifications for our Special Observers. But what would they actually do? Do they just witness tasks to be signed off by full instructors? Or do they give out ratings?

Now this does bring up another good point. If we had US Hawks Instructors issuing US Hawks Ratings, what would that mean? Right now they would not be honored by any flying sites, but I don't suppose there's any reason why they couldn't give them out just the same.

Let's say that we allowed all USHPA instructors (or previous SOs?) who met the USHPA guidelines to issue US Hawks ratings at the same time that they issued USHPA ratings. What would be the down side?

Of course, this brings up another issue and that is honoring past and existing USHxA ratings. It's always been my plan that we would allow current ratings to be transferred directly into the US Hawks rating system. But we haven't actually done that yet. In other words, we haven't issued (or tracked) a single rating at this time. Maybe it's time to start.

This is a very good topic, and I'd really like to hear some ideas on how we might do this. Thanks for bringing it up Rick!!

Bob Kuczewski

[SamKellner]

This smells like real progress

[miguel]

I was also a special observer. We had training hills, old gliders,harnesses and people to teach and mentor. It was possible to learn to fly by simply helping out with lz work and driving. Other than obtaining equipment, it was possible to learn without a large outlay of cash.
U* never bothered to notify me when they stopped the program. I found out when one of my appointments did not go through.I talked with the fellow who was in charge at the time. It was strictly a $$$$ issue and they felt that a motivated pilot should be able to raise the money to go to the schools in the bay area. Enough sob story.

I hope you can get an observer program going.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Thanks for sharing that story miguel.

Technically, we can start right away. We can begin our observer program based on the same criteria that USHxA used. The only problem is that ratings from the US Hawks aren't backed by insurance until we can get enough members. So it would really help if we can build our membership.

But just because we don't have insurance doesn't mean that we can't start building a rating / instructor / observer program. Would you mind putting together a proposal?

Thanks.

[Bill Cummings]

Over in region (redacted to protect the misbehaving.) they have been showing interested pilots how they go about the sport of hang gliding. It has been more of a, “This is how we’ve been doing it for thirty some odd years,” than it has been, “You have to do it this way because I’m a pseudo-instructor.”

Then they send them out to a real instructor where they prove up on day one and get a H2 rating. But then again the rating instructor is more interested in the sport of HG and will rate the pilots according to their ability and will not hold them to a higher standard just because the instructor wasn’t hired to do all the instruction.
Call me cynical but I only expect that from maybe 5 or 10% of the instructors in the USHPA.

Now let’s talk insurance! If an instructors get insurance on a local site all this misbehaving will have to come to an end. It’s a double edged sword. The insurance protects the instructor but it stops the unofficial “mentoring/instruction.” In this economy probably the only mentoring/instruction that many with a desire to hang glide can afford. But hey that’s okay. Times are tough. If the sport dies it dies. At least the school/instructors will be able to drive up in their Hummer’s to apply for a new job in style.

[Bob Kuczewski]

I've been thinking about the US Hawks rating program for over a year now, and here's what I propose.

I propose that we begin honoring all USHPA hang gliding ratings for any member of the US Hawks who asks to have their rating held in our records. We will require proof of their USHPA rating (USHPA card or equivalent information). We will follow the same procedure that USHPA follows for holding a rating - they must remain a member of the US Hawks. There will be no cost for holding a rating without insurance, but if we end up getting insurance, then there will be a fee to cover those costs for those members who wish to be insured. Our primary requirement is that if a rated member loses their USHPA rating (whether it's an instructor rating or pilot rating), then they must report it to the US Hawks. We will perform our own independent investigation (to the best of our limited ability). If we find (through some yet-to-be-defined process) that the rating should not have been removed, then the member will be able to keep their US Hawks rating.

This is just a starting point, so any thoughts are surely welcome. Of course, without insurance, our rating system isn't of any great advantage to pilots. However, our review process for revocations might give USHPA a second thought before abusing their rating revocation system. But we will have to have a process that's administered fairly and by people who are respected if we want this to have any real value.

The one case that comes to mind here is Mike J's case. I haven't investigated it fully, but from what I can tell, the penalties were inconsistent with the infraction. So if Mike held a US Hawks rating, then we might determine that he should have been given a warning or maybe a much shorter suspension. We might publish a report detailing our reasons for that finding. This could possibly help him in regaining his USHPA ratings sooner.

So, what does everyone think of this system? Does anyone see any problems?

[SamKellner]

More progress

I second Bob's proposal. And, I'll do more to grow the Hawks membership.

Mike's revocation is a good example and might be a "poster case". I sure don't know the details, but tend to believe it was unjust and driven by $$/turf.

Dave Broyles appointed me as Observer earlier this year. Our area is one that can really benefit by the Special Observer or even Observer appointment.
Already the psudo-instructors (good one Bill ) are starting the Mike treatment.

Of coures Bob's case, being recalled after winning the electon, fair and square, is the most flagrant violation, IMO. That sequence of events really destroyed any hope I had that U* would ever turn around and be fair, just, transparent.

These ideas about a rating program sound good to me. UnitesStatesHawksGliderAssn.

,
Sam

[TadEareckson]

1. I'm a USHGA Advanced Instructor.

2. The requirement for EVERY USHGA rating says:

With each flight, demonstrates a method of establishing that the pilot is hooked in just prior to launch.

3. But I NEVER adhere to it. I instead teach:

Do a hang check wherever and whenever you want and assume you're hooked in from that point on.

4. I sign a student off on his One, Two, and Three.

5. That student runs off a ramp without his glider and dies below the base of the escarpment.

6. I respond at my school with heavier emphasis on the hang check.

Will there be any problem with me being recognized as a US Hawks Advanced Instructor?

[Bob Kuczewski]

1. I'm a USHGA Advanced Instructor.
. . .
Will there be any problem with me being recognized as a US Hawks Advanced Instructor?

Not initially. I think if we want to get insurance easily (or possibly at all), our best hope is to say that we are meeting or exceeding USHPA standards. OK, that's easy to say, but how would a prospective insurance company know that our standards are as good as USHPA's standards (whether you approve of USHPA's standards or not)? The answer is that we don't judge the meeting of standards for ourselves, and instead we accept USHPA's judgement of standards. If they say you're an Advanced Instructor, then we say you're an Advanced Instructor.

I suspect you won't like that answer Tad (and others might not either), but you must understand that there will have to be a transitional period where we rely on the judgement of an organization that the insurance industry already trusts - USHPA. I think that's the only way we can get affordable insurance to get us started.

Can anyone see any other way to get our members insured?