[Bob Kuczewski]

My opinion is that a national paragliding association and a national hang gliding association would be more effective as separate entities

That sounds like a platform that's equally as valid as removing over two thirds of the elected representatives.

Run Rick. Run.   

[Bob Kuczewski]

More comments from the original site....

Alan

I've submitted my comments, but I fully expect your thread title has given away the end to this little story. USHPA has a history of requesting "input" from membership - and then going on as if our opinions didn't matter.

For the record, I think it's a terrible idea. Sure, you may be able to get more things done with a tiny Board, but are they things we HG pilots would want? I suspect not. We're in the minority now, and organizational reshaping to further marginalize us is to be expected.

That doesn't mean it will have my support.

RM

It might sound different, as in 7 people vs 26 all chanting Dilly-Dilly but the results are the same. Face it, they threw foot launch hang gliding under the bus over a decade ago. WE had No say in this crappy RRG. Only a new HG org separate from all the other junk will bring about positive change

Voted with my feet a long time ago. You USHPA Clowns deserve a very special place in Hell.

If anyone can communicate with these pilots, please invite them to join the U.S. Hawks.

Hang glider pilots should abandon the USHPA and form a real national hang gliding association because there currently is none and they really, really need one.

That's what we're trying to build here at the U.S. Hawks.
Thanks for helping us with your posts and excellent writing!!   

The opening of Dockweiler (thanks to Frank Colver and Joe Faust), Ed Levin (thanks to Mike Jefferson), and now all Utah State Parks (thanks to Logan) to non-USHPA pilots is a big step in making that happen. We just need to get the word out to more pilots.

[Rick Masters]

Only a separate national hang gliding association will place hang glider pilots in an equal footing in negotiations with the national paragliding association on matters of aviation law.
Those of you who think that minority hang gliding pilots will have significant influence in the majority paragliding association that subsumed it are deluding yourselves.
Your best negotiating stance will never be more than to beg those focused on paragliding to throw you crumbs.
You will certainly never see a renaissance of hang gliding as long as hang glider pilots continue with the USHPA.

The USHGA was a prize for the picking when paragliding arrived on the scene.
Our hang gliding association was established nationally.
It had a magazine. Clubs. Lobbyists. Sites. FAI recognition.
It had everything paragliding needed to rise to prominence.
You all saw this happen.
Now hang gliding no longer has value to paragliding.
It is a nuisance. It is in the way. It is a problem.

And the problem is deeper than most are willing to admit.
Hang gliding and paragliding are two different cultures.
Paragliding accepts death by random collapse (although publically they falsely call it pilot error).
Hang gliding did away with in-flight failure long ago.
Many hang glider pilots such as myself regard the acceptance of death by random collapse as incomprehensible.
The continuing acceptance of this by soaring parachutists is closely tied to the acceptance of the occasional malfunction by skydivers.
The strong reliance on emergency reserves and the many reserve rides soaring parachutists accumulate over their carreers is evidence of the chasm between cultures.

For the USHGA to accept paragliding into its ranks, it was necessary to set aside all the previous years of sacrifice and design safety and invite new risk.
Collapse. Twist. Cascade. Autorotation. Locked-in spiral dives.
All had to now be accepted.
These inherent deadly defects of soaring parachutes were cynically blamed on pilot error to hide the truth.
It was lipstick on a pig.
But the really unsettling thing was this was not ignorance of safety on the part of those who flew paragliders.
It was acceptance.
Where hang gliding could never stomach the death rate from the full luff dive or dangerous design, paragliding ignored it.
This is the divergence between parachuting and structural aircraft.
This is a divide too far.
There is no middle ground.
The situation demands a stand.

What would you call compromise in this?
"Oh, only 70% of my dues went to promote paragliding," says the USHPA hang glider pilot.
This means you have given up 70% of your support for hang gliding.
How does this make sense?
It doesn't.
It is only a measure of stupidity.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Excellent choice of videos Rick!!!!

Are "we" winning? Seems so small from back here I can't really tell.

Then later (after doing nothing to stop the carnage) ...

Wow, somebody likes attention.

Only a separate national hang gliding association will place hang glider pilots in an equal footing in negotiations with the national paragliding association on matters of aviation law.
Those of you who think that minority hang gliding pilots will have significant influence in the majority paragliding association that subsumed it are deluding yourselves.
Your best negotiating stance will never be more than to beg those focused on paragliding to throw you crumbs.

I agree with this completely. The problem is how to get that message out to the thousands of hang gliding pilots needed to make it happen. With that thought in mind, I'd like to offer a suggestion that could be sent to the USHPA Board in response to their recent solicitation for input:

I am responding to USHPA's request for input regarding the proposed reorganization.

Rather than reduce the size of the Board, why not cut costs by conducting all meetings in an on-line forum where Board members and regular members can participate openly as they do on the U.S. Hawks?

This eliminates the need for the expensive travel costs paid to all the Directors. This eliminates the need for the "EC" since the full Board is always in session. It eliminates the need for a secretary to keep minutes (and possibly distort them) because everything that's said is right there in print. It saves money by eliminating staff positions needed to support Board meetings. It saves money by eliminating the need for the new communication manager position because all communication will be direct and continuous.

Most importantly, this would allow - and even encourage - active participation by ALL members. In fact there could even be a section where former members could tell USHPA why they left and what they'd like to see changed. It would break up the common perception that USHPA is run by a bunch of non-responsive elitists who put their own interests ahead of the members.

Of course all those very good reasons for this proposal are exactly the reasons why USHPA won't do it. USHPA is run by a bunch of non-responsive elitists who put their own interests ahead of the members. But making that suggestion and having USHPA refuse it helps to make the situation clear.

[Rick Masters]

I expect your suggestion is destined for the circular file, Bob, because
        1) You are no longer a USHPA member.
        2) You are likely not on their short list of people with worthy opinions.

[Bob Kuczewski]

I expect your suggestion is destined for the circular file, Bob, because
        1) You are no longer a USHPA member.
        2) You are likely not on their short list of people with worthy opinions.

I think you're right on both counts.

But I posted the message as a suggestion for someone else to submit. Maybe someone who is a member and who might feel that USHPA values their opinion.