Continuing the digression, successful clubs rely on members to do much or most of the work. There's always a question of whether to allow affluent and/or time-challenged members to buy their way out of their work obligation. When I was learning to fly at what is now Caesar Creek Soaring Club in the mid 60s, most of us worked one weekend day a month instructing, towing, or crewing. If you didn't, your fee for a 2,000' tow was a dollar higher (IIRC, $4.50 instead of $3.50 in a club glider. Yeah, times change.). Most members worked. A few didn't. Yes, there was a loss of camaraderie with those who just showed up to fly, but the philosophy was that we'd rather have them as club members than not.

Decades later, there was related discussion involving another club. I sensed some resentment about a few more affluent members not working. I've always wondered if that led to at least one active pilot I knew gradually dropping out of soaring. Probably not the deciding factor. But not feeling 100% welcome at your own soaring club doesn't seem like a formula for success.

It's a fine balance. We want club members to "pay their dues", literally and figuratively. We want them to show their commitment, not just because we need their support but because we resent investing in them if they're just going to wander away a year later.

But...if they're not as committed, would we rather send them to a commercial operation or see them drop out? It's a question; I don't have the answer.

Chip Bearden