On Sunday, August 10, 2014 3:41:21 PM UTC-6, Frank Whiteley wrote:
On Sunday, August 10, 2014 7:01:29 AM UTC-6, Kevin Brooker wrote:

Money is not the issue. People have plenty of cash to spend on



recreation and discretionary activities. Money is not the barrier to



entry. Look at the ski industry. A one day lift ticket costs more then



a tow, maybe to tows depending upon the ski area and glider operation.



New skis will set the skier back anywhere from $500-2000 depending upon



what they purchase. Look at motorcycling, off road vehicles; pick



something. Most are on-par with soaring or more expensive to begin



participating.







What the sport needs is more time in a day and longer attention spans. I



stopped flying because I didn't have enough time to participate how I



enjoyed it. Soaring is a selfish activity which requires a lot of time.











American's do not have the attention span. How much time is spent



hanging out at the strip compared to flying. If someone is interested in



taking up soaring look at the standing around time to flight/active



participation time ratio. Glider pilots spend a huge volume of time



standing around. By comparison, look at the stand around to



participation in the ski industry.







With gliders we cannot have the complete noob help out in a meaningful



way. Gliders are too expensive and having the "never before touched a



glider" person help us rig a ship doesn't happen. The hands on



participation of newcomers is really low. Instructors /club members talk



and they listen. We talk too much and do too little.







The mindset of people in 2014 is much different then in 1950-2000. To



survive and grow, the soaring (GA too) population has to change its



attitude and methods to capture today's youth. Aviation is trying to



adapt old ways to today and it isn't working. Aviation has to change the



paradigm and change is scary and difficult.







While seeking this new paradigm there will be lots of failures and some



success. What is there to lose by trying? Nothing since what is



happening now isn't working yet the aviation community seems to believe



if they keep going at the status quo it will work. This is a bit like



speaking louder to someone who doesn't understand our language. More



volume will not breed instant fluency.







Beside believing the aviation community should try something new, not



fear failure, and stop pinning the decline on expense, I have no



solutions to offer at this time.



















--



Kevin Brooker

True for some Kevin.



I once called a lapsed SSA member to see why he'd dropped out after a year. Turns out he was president of a local Corvette owner's club. He tried soaring for a week, but hadn't soloed and gave it up. His expectation was way out of line. For some it's simply not a good fit. For others, given the chance, it becomes a lifetime pursuit. How do we give them that chance?



Frank Whiteley

The starting point for understanding the growth problem is the fact that soaring is a very small sport embedded in a vast and incredibly diverse population. In that population there are probably enough wealthy "annuity kids" who will never need to work who could increase the number of glider pilots by an order of magnitude. There are a huge number of other special situations where individuals could take up the sport if they chose to. There is a target "market" "out there".

We fall into a trap when we project our own situations onto the general population. When we say "people" we are unconsciously saying "people like us".. We are too unique as individuals for that to work.

It's really not "the economy" or "kids these days" or a "70 hour week work ethic" etc... that's causing the growth problem. In fact, I don't think there's an external problem at all. Instead, I think we would do much better to look hard at our "product" and how it's marketed.

When a company's product is not selling, it's pointless to blame the customer. The route to success is always the same - improve the product and then do a better job of marketing it. Those go hand in hand - marketing won't help if the product is inferior nor will a better product succeed if no one knows about it. It's basic business 101.

Another poster nailed it when he suggested that most airports and glider operations in the US are simply not nice places to hang out. For every hour a student flies in a glider, probably three or more hours are spent on the ground at the airfield so it had better be a comfortable, interesting place if we expect them to come back. It's even more critical if the student brings family.

Old, ratty trainers are just as problematic. Even if a student can be persuaded that training in one is acceptable, a watching family member who can only judge appearances may think otherwise.

Both on the ground and in the air, our image is critical to success. The European model is a great place to start - then improve on it.