I hope I will know more later in the year ,I have volunteered to fly some
in
my duo when the circus visits my club in October .
From what I remember when my kids were juniors ,
They learn at a ferocious rate though not necessary consciously and have
reflexes that you have forgotten about.
The partying is nearly as important and it's the peer pressure keeps them
trying.
My old Chief flying instructors worried more about the conciencious 60 year

old early solo pilot than the 16 year old ,the junior will sort it out ,the
senior
will still be thinking about it when the sinsipient has turned into a
......
Remember fighter pilots are usually young or at least used to be.

At 16:41 15 September 2015, Sean Fidler wrote:
Seems to be working a little bit!

"If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him."
-Sun
=
Tzu

Sean
7T

On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 11:34:01 AM UTC-4, Papa3 wrote:
On Monday, September 14, 2015 at 3:15:51 PM UTC-4, Andy Gough
wrote:
On Monday, September 14, 2015 at 2:45:41 AM UTC-4, Andy
Blackburn
wrote=
:
On Sunday, September 13, 2015 at 11:22:38 PM UTC-7, Andy
Blackburn
wr=
ote:
=20
I've been noodling on a few ideas for about a year now and have
com=
e to the conclusion that we really need to understand better where the
bott=
leneck is: intake (seems not from the data), getting to solo, getting to
fi=
rst XC or getting to advanced XC/racing-ready? We also need to understand
t=
he state of the junior population and what the constraints are. The
solutio=
n really needs to fit the problem - even then it would take energy,
commitm=
ent and resources.=20
=20
=20
In addition to the bottlenecks to progress there needs to be an
asses=
sment of where we lose juniors in the process because it's pretty obvious
t=
hat not all of them are making it into full-fledged XC and racing pilots
as=
adults. Do the commitments of the last couple of years of high school
get
=
them? College? Moving into the working world? It's not just development,
bu=
t retention that need a hard, analytical look. Right now we have a good
num=
ber of opinions and anecdotes that can lead us where to look, but how
much
=
of what effects prevail when and where probably needs to be assessed at
mor=
e than a cursory level. I've heard heartfelt proposed solutions over the
ye=
ars that I suspect a first-order look at the actual data would show to be
f=
ruitless.
=20
Andy
=20
There is a long way to go before we can begin to emulate the European
g=
liding scene and as Alexander Schwagermakers pointed out you need to
start
=
somewhere. I believe the start point is long before the provision of
contes=
t aircraft for juniors to fly.
=20
Club's must be willing to promote cross country and just as important
i=
s the organization of club resources to attain the objective. The clever
on=
es would plan their fleets to provide aircraft for a variety of flying
oppo=
rtunities and promote standards that once attained would allow pilots to
ad=
vance to higher performance aircraft. The aircraft at the top of the
scale
=
would be maintained expressly for cross country. The example citing the
inc=
onvenience to a member who would have to forfeit his flight to a cross
coun=
try pilot would not occur, e.g. an LS4 is not a local soaring aircraft,
for=
a one hour float around the airfield a 1-26, Ka8 or similar glider is
perf=
ectly adequate. Some clubs in Europe refine this process by allocating
airc=
raft on a daily basis for cross country soaring. Not only is an aircraft
al=
located, also a weather briefing is conducted and a task set. Pilots who
ar=
e not allocated an aircraft become willing retrieve crew knowing they
will
=
have the benefit of the same when it is their turn to fly. Pilots who are
a=
llocated an aircraft have the incentive to attempt the task knowing help
ha=
s already been organized should they need a retrieve. Just like gaggle
flyi=
ng, groups can get better results even when conditions are not optimal.
=20
The Europeans who have contributed to this discussion have intimated
th=
e club culture in Europe encourages cross country regardless of age. Sean
i=
s convinced this is not the case this side of the pond, I concur. Not
every=
pilot is going to become a contest pilot, the same for juniors but many
mo=
re would if cross country flying was made available and promoted in a
meani=
ngful way. Low costs and the availability of aircraft go a long way to
enab=
ling more pilots to gain the time and skills cross country flying
requires.=
Convince the clubs that it is in their best interests to organize their
ac=
tivities to promote higher standards that lead to cross country flying
and
=
we might have a starting point for a revival.
=20
+100. It requires real work to create an XC culture in a club. There
a=
re plenty of clubs in the US with high-class fleets that never go more
than=
10 miles from the home field. There are clubs with ratty (but capable)
g=
liders that rack up the OLC points and badges. While a well-organized
appr=
oach would be best, even seemingly tactical activities are better than
noth=
ing. =20
=20
Greg Delp just organized a very successful OLC weekend at a small club
in=
Connecticut. I'd venture a guess that there wasn't a large committee
invo=
lved. Just a couple of sparkplugs.=20
=20
If each SSA Director or State Governor simply made an effort to promote
X=
C and Junior XC in particular in his/her region, it would only take a
rel=
atively small number of "hits" to generate a reasonable population of
junio=
r XC pilots in the US. Once there are a few converts in a club or
region,=
there's a critical mass to hold a local junior get together with maybe
10
=
pilots. But, typing on RAS and bashing the "system" won't get it done.
=
=20
=20
To steal a line from Nike: Just Do It. =20
=20
p3