On 04/01/20 13:29, in article 400d8fb4$1@darkstar, "Mark James Boyd"
wrote:

I have two CFIs who will quickly and eagerly add a "sport-CFI-glider"
endorsement with two signatures if SP goes through. They will not,
on the other hand, get a CFIG.

Why not?

Are we wasting our time catering to people who are not motivated enough or
economically able to continue in the sport, just because we want to see some
raw numbers? This may aid the commercial training operations, as it does in
the power world, but it doesn't help retention.

The SSA, too, seems to be caught up in the general hand-wringing over
declining numbers, but that's the nature of organizations. I think the idea
of requiring a x-c is a good one, both from a motivation/retention point of
view and from a safety point of view -- any glider pilot can be forced to
divert, or land out on any given flight, because of winds, weather, field
operations, etc., and it shouldn't be the first time he has been somewhere
other than the home field, especially if he is the type that only flys the
two-seater because he only glides in order to take friends for a quiet ride.

As matter of fact, it might not be a bad idea for clubs to require on an
annual basis that every member prove he can go somewhere else and land in
order to maintain his qualifications to use club aircraft.

Towing out of the chosen divert field to return to the home 'drome would be
a nice change of pace for everybody. CFIGs, tow pilots, and supervisors all
need to blow the cobwebs out and get some new perspective from time to time.
Nearby clubs could conduct this training on the same weekend and serve as
the recovery fields for each other, simplifying the process, reducing the
costs, and providing an opportunity to cement ties between clubs, as well as
enhancing pilot capabilities.

Telling people they are not likely to be successful in x-c work unless they
go for glass is not going to help retention either. Fly what you can afford
to fly often. If you don't have a club supportive of your x-c efforts in a
lower performance, affordable sailplane, perhaps what you really need is a
new club.

The records for the 1-26 in Region 7, of all places, a

Distance in a Straight Line James E. Hard MN 413.68 mi. 4- 6-1990
Distance to a Goal James E. Hard MN 320.24 mi. 6-24-1984
Out and Return Distance James E. Hard MN 192.10 mi. 5- 2-1995
100 Km Triangle Speed James E. Hard MN 33.87 mph 5-26-1998
200 Km Triangle Speed James E. Hard MN 29.30 mph 7-30-1997
150 Km Out and Return Speed Kevin B. Ford IL 26.40 mph 5-28-1992
Absolute Altitude Kevin B. Ford IL 9,500 ft. 5-28-1992
Gain of Height Kevin B. Ford IL 6,950 ft. 5-23-1994

There's no wave or ridge in MN, nor in IL, as far as I know.



Jack


Sent using the Entourage X Test Drive.