Soaring and Critical Mass of Participation.

At 12:00 01 February 2005, Stephanevdv wrote:

Sometimes I wonder if soaring hasn't already reached
a kind of critical
mass.

Apart from other competing interests and local availability
factors,
the cost will always limit many people in their endeavours
to become a
soaring pilot.

To get the costs down sufficiently to really interest
a new kind of
public, you would have to multiply the number of sailplanes
and pilots
so much, that our already cluttered airspace would
be completely
saturated.


--
stephanevdv

Lots of truth in that statment; we can't expect the
numbers to quadruple.
------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Posted via OziPilots Online [ http://www.OziPilotsOnline.com.au
]
- A website for Australian Pilots regardless of when,
why, or what they fly -

The numbers will continue to shrink in the current environment.

BUT, there is a way that soaring can move into the forefront. And, in this
way, the numbers of pilots could indeed quadruple. But the status quo itself
is the main impediment. There are too many entities that have a vested
interest in keeping things exactly the same...presiding over their own
eventual disappearance.

It is not that these entities know what they are doing. In fact, they are
just trying to survive in some cases and doing what they see are the best
methods for improving and expanding the sport. In any endeavor, the
establishment acts in this manner.

And, in any endeavor with a steady input of youth, the status quo is
eventually either replaced or swept aside. As one of many, many examples,
take snowboards. Skills derived from skateboarding went to the ski slopes
over the dead bodies of the skiers. Now, the growth is in shredding, not
skiing. It is not because the establishment of skiers decided to switch. It
is because the young wanted them out of the way and when they did not move,
they were ignored.

This analogy can be replaced with dozens more but how does it apply to
soaring and what I see as a dilemna in participation? I think a similar act
by ANY young pilots could revive the sport...or reverse it in certain ways.
First, they must ignore sailplane racing as it exists today. It is, in fact,
a baseball game being played with a corked bat.

First, a hundred grand for an airplane that you cannot fly but four months a
year is a luxury and one that youth cannot afford and most people cannot
justify. It is hard enough justifying an airplane that actually goes places.
Sailboats can sail year round even if they don't. There are cheaper
alternatives, though. The 13M ship is that alternatives. Still not cheap, it
costs less than many of the cars that kids drive today.

But how can a less capable aircraft compete against more capable ones? It
cannot. So screw them. Play your own game. Instead of competing in "vacation
eating", death-march-tasked boredom festivals in desolate back country, hold
sprint races wherever you can find lift.

A Sprint Race (invented by ME) involves a few aircraft starting in a
cylinder at the same time (yes, i know the Euros are doing something similar
now but I proposed it long before them), flying a short task (to quarter
mile AST turnpoints) designed to last no more than an hour and a half, and
finishing at a FINISH LINE in front of the gate/audience/crews. The time
limit is important for several reasons; not the least of which is the
boredom that exists back at the strip while you are out in your ship
scratching around in two knots. Fellows: She isn't coming back out to help
you ever again after you put her through that. But if she doesn't have to
commit the family vacation and the entire lifestyle, gets to visit with
other people who are excited about a race they are watching, then she just
might. And with 30:1 ships, you just might need a crew again.....

The ships and trailers will be painted in a variety of bright colors and
covered with vinyl advertisements not unlike the vehicles of the most
popular sport in America. If one wants to push it, then the production
methods proposed by me for a televised race bought by Fox to be shown ten
times could be employed. Lipstick cameras, camera ships, computer images
(held to a minimum) and all that stuff could be used to create a venue that
is watchable, exciting and inviting...especially when a young pilot crawls
out of the winning ship to stand on the podium to collect his/her check and
put his Red Bull cap on for the cameras to see.

It is a race that favors skill just like it does now. You have to find lift.
You have to have situation awareness. You have to practice. But you don't
need anyone to call a PST so you can stay in the lead over a week of racing.
The guy in front is in the lead. Got it? Like a RACE! Local eliminations
create a hierarchy that competes in the Nationals.

In two years, I could have the National Champion of Sprint Racing on the
front cover of Outside Magazine. That's when it would quadruple. Sky Racing.
Cloud Sprints. Skyluges. Not gliders. Crash helmets. Not silly old man's
doofus hats. Reflexes. Not reflection. And the cool thing is that there is
no reason that the same people cannot compete. It just favors gamblers a
little more than bookies like the current thing does.

No. It's not the kindly old gentleman's sport that is now dying of
constipation. But, on the other hand, it kicks ass. It is something that
someone (spelled A M E R I C A N) would want to do. We couldn't beat the
Euros at open wheel Formula One racing. So what did we do? We started drag
racing. Honestly, the idea of being alone way the hell out in nowhere while
all my friends are getting laid is not exactly what I have in mind for a fun
weekend. On the other hand, winners get laid. Right. Get laid.

Don't be so naive as to ask what the relevance of that phrase is to growth,
attraction of youth, attraction of sponsors and money, or survival of the
fittest sport. Winners get laid and they get rewarded and they get famous.
Think about all the dead guys you know in soaring while I think about all
the dead guys I know in aviation in general. The other guys were trying to
make money, win a prize, or do the impossible. In soaring, you can lose big
but you cannot ever win big.

Cost too much for what you get. Requires too much time for what you get.
Involves too risk for what you get. It is not all those things that everyone
says about money, time and risk. It is WHAT YOU GET that your fellow
Americans don't recognize as worth it. Ever notice how their eyes glaze over
when you try to tell them about the beauty of flying with an eagle? Now tell
them about passing someone in the final stretch of a race in your bright red
Sparrowhawk to finish just out of the money and see how they follow every
word. They are the market.

Duh.

So, we have the manufacturers of 13M gliders. They have to wait until the
infrastructure creates enough pilots before they start to sell gliders in
any numbers. And the infrastructure cannot do it. And the status quo will
just want to start yet another class thereby burying these less capable
machines. No. If they want to sell, they have to sell into their own sport
with their own marketing. And they need someone like me to do it. Otherwise,
they will be a minor footnote. They must separate now, in my not so humble
opinion.

Ahhh. That felt good.

Say, John,

Have you seen the latest gliders? $4,000 and they look real, real cool.
Well, at least the pilot and the FAA think it's a glider.
But don't tell anybody, ok, this will just be our little secret...shhhhh

http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~mjboyd/cfi/...lverGlider.jpg

Shhhhhh...

In article . net,
John Shelton wrote:
The numbers will continue to shrink in the current environment.

BUT, there is a way that soaring can move into the forefront. And, in this
way, the numbers of pilots could indeed quadruple. But the status quo itself
is the main impediment. There are too many entities that have a vested
interest in keeping things exactly the same...presiding over their own
eventual disappearance.

It is not that these entities know what they are doing. In fact, they are
just trying to survive in some cases and doing what they see are the best
methods for improving and expanding the sport. In any endeavor, the
establishment acts in this manner.

And, in any endeavor with a steady input of youth, the status quo is
eventually either replaced or swept aside. As one of many, many examples,
take snowboards. Skills derived from skateboarding went to the ski slopes
over the dead bodies of the skiers. Now, the growth is in shredding, not
skiing. It is not because the establishment of skiers decided to switch. It
is because the young wanted them out of the way and when they did not move,
they were ignored.

This analogy can be replaced with dozens more but how does it apply to
soaring and what I see as a dilemna in participation? I think a similar act
by ANY young pilots could revive the sport...or reverse it in certain ways.
First, they must ignore sailplane racing as it exists today. It is, in fact,
a baseball game being played with a corked bat.

First, a hundred grand for an airplane that you cannot fly but four months a
year is a luxury and one that youth cannot afford and most people cannot
justify. It is hard enough justifying an airplane that actually goes places.
Sailboats can sail year round even if they don't. There are cheaper
alternatives, though. The 13M ship is that alternatives. Still not cheap, it
costs less than many of the cars that kids drive today.

But how can a less capable aircraft compete against more capable ones? It
cannot. So screw them. Play your own game. Instead of competing in "vacation
eating", death-march-tasked boredom festivals in desolate back country, hold
sprint races wherever you can find lift.

A Sprint Race (invented by ME) involves a few aircraft starting in a
cylinder at the same time (yes, i know the Euros are doing something similar
now but I proposed it long before them), flying a short task (to quarter
mile AST turnpoints) designed to last no more than an hour and a half, and
finishing at a FINISH LINE in front of the gate/audience/crews. The time
limit is important for several reasons; not the least of which is the
boredom that exists back at the strip while you are out in your ship
scratching around in two knots. Fellows: She isn't coming back out to help
you ever again after you put her through that. But if she doesn't have to
commit the family vacation and the entire lifestyle, gets to visit with
other people who are excited about a race they are watching, then she just
might. And with 30:1 ships, you just might need a crew again.....

The ships and trailers will be painted in a variety of bright colors and
covered with vinyl advertisements not unlike the vehicles of the most
popular sport in America. If one wants to push it, then the production
methods proposed by me for a televised race bought by Fox to be shown ten
times could be employed. Lipstick cameras, camera ships, computer images
(held to a minimum) and all that stuff could be used to create a venue that
is watchable, exciting and inviting...especially when a young pilot crawls
out of the winning ship to stand on the podium to collect his/her check and
put his Red Bull cap on for the cameras to see.

It is a race that favors skill just like it does now. You have to find lift.
You have to have situation awareness. You have to practice. But you don't
need anyone to call a PST so you can stay in the lead over a week of racing.
The guy in front is in the lead. Got it? Like a RACE! Local eliminations
create a hierarchy that competes in the Nationals.

In two years, I could have the National Champion of Sprint Racing on the
front cover of Outside Magazine. That's when it would quadruple. Sky Racing.
Cloud Sprints. Skyluges. Not gliders. Crash helmets. Not silly old man's
doofus hats. Reflexes. Not reflection. And the cool thing is that there is
no reason that the same people cannot compete. It just favors gamblers a
little more than bookies like the current thing does.

No. It's not the kindly old gentleman's sport that is now dying of
constipation. But, on the other hand, it kicks ass. It is something that
someone (spelled A M E R I C A N) would want to do. We couldn't beat the
Euros at open wheel Formula One racing. So what did we do? We started drag
racing. Honestly, the idea of being alone way the hell out in nowhere while
all my friends are getting laid is not exactly what I have in mind for a fun
weekend. On the other hand, winners get laid. Right. Get laid.

Don't be so naive as to ask what the relevance of that phrase is to growth,
attraction of youth, attraction of sponsors and money, or survival of the
fittest sport. Winners get laid and they get rewarded and they get famous.
Think about all the dead guys you know in soaring while I think about all
the dead guys I know in aviation in general. The other guys were trying to
make money, win a prize, or do the impossible. In soaring, you can lose big
but you cannot ever win big.

Cost too much for what you get. Requires too much time for what you get.
Involves too risk for what you get. It is not all those things that everyone
says about money, time and risk. It is WHAT YOU GET that your fellow
Americans don't recognize as worth it. Ever notice how their eyes glaze over
when you try to tell them about the beauty of flying with an eagle? Now tell
them about passing someone in the final stretch of a race in your bright red
Sparrowhawk to finish just out of the money and see how they follow every
word. They are the market.

Duh.

So, we have the manufacturers of 13M gliders. They have to wait until the
infrastructure creates enough pilots before they start to sell gliders in
any numbers. And the infrastructure cannot do it. And the status quo will
just want to start yet another class thereby burying these less capable
machines. No. If they want to sell, they have to sell into their own sport
with their own marketing. And they need someone like me to do it. Otherwise,
they will be a minor footnote. They must separate now, in my not so humble
opinion.

Ahhh. That felt good.




--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd

Mark James Boyd wrote:
Say, John,

Have you seen the latest gliders? $4,000 and they look real, real cool.
Well, at least the pilot and the FAA think it's a glider.
But don't tell anybody, ok, this will just be our little secret...shhhhh

I doubt _anyone_ thinks it's a glider, but apparently they do registered
that way sometimes. It's certainly not going to work for what John wants
to do. It might serve to introduce pilots to slope soaring and
thermalling, especially if there are two seaters, and maybe this would
whet the appetite of someone for glider that could fly cross country (or
even just to the next thermal occasionally).

Potentially, having aircraft that aren't gliders being registered as
gliders could cause us problems, such as rules and regulations (FAA,
airport, insurance) that address their operation and safety record,
which could screw up sailplane operations. I think we've been lucky that
touring motorgliders have been included in the glider category for so
long without causing apparent problems, and maybe having ultralight
airplanes in the mix won't either. Maybe all the players will understand
these are gliders by registration only, and treat them appropriately,
rather that treating all registered gliders the same.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

I think it's a glider. The pilot thinks it's a glider. The AC
defines it as a glider. The DAR thinks it's a glider. The FAA
thinks it's a glider. The instructor who signed him off
for self-launch thinks it's a glider.

And there are now at least several dozen ultralight pilots who
think it is a glider. Eric, if you're so sure it isn't a glider,
you better get in and STOP this craziness, before it ruins gliding!
Call and write the people who make the rules and tell them how
wrong it is to use span and weight calculations to define a glider.
And how wrong it is to use minimum sink as a parameter, and
how penetration is what really matters.

Of course, you might want to be careful. If you're too
convincing, they'll cancel making ultralights gliders, but
will start certifying jet airliners all as gliders. Then
you'll need a type rating and part 121 check to fly
your self-launcher!!!!

:P

Hmmm...thinking about John's idea, yeah I'd love to watch
a half dozen of these gliders jamming around a short triangle course
at Avenal. And a toilet paper cutting contest too...

But that's ok, Eric. If you don't want them, we'll take them.
After all, they have to spend their money SOMEWHERE, right?

:PPPPP

In article ,
Eric Greenwell wrote:
Mark James Boyd wrote:
Say, John,

Have you seen the latest gliders? $4,000 and they look real, real cool.
Well, at least the pilot and the FAA think it's a glider.
But don't tell anybody, ok, this will just be our little secret...shhhhh

I doubt _anyone_ thinks it's a glider, but apparently they do registered
that way sometimes. It's certainly not going to work for what John wants
to do. It might serve to introduce pilots to slope soaring and
thermalling, especially if there are two seaters, and maybe this would
whet the appetite of someone for glider that could fly cross country (or
even just to the next thermal occasionally).

Potentially, having aircraft that aren't gliders being registered as
gliders could cause us problems, such as rules and regulations (FAA,
airport, insurance) that address their operation and safety record,
which could screw up sailplane operations. I think we've been lucky that
touring motorgliders have been included in the glider category for so
long without causing apparent problems, and maybe having ultralight
airplanes in the mix won't either. Maybe all the players will understand
these are gliders by registration only, and treat them appropriately,
rather that treating all registered gliders the same.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA


--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd

The actuaries think that these gliders are the same risk as even the
safest gliders available. Fortunately there are enough already registered
as experimentals they already have a track record.

Avemco quotes about $280 for the single seat Quicksilver glider,
about $330 for two seat Quicksilver glider.
1-800-874-9125 (I don't have any financial interest in this company,
but I am a customer).

This is similar to what it charges for the same coverage in 1-26 and 2-33.
And similar to the coverage of Baby Ace and Cessna 172.

The rates quoted are for basic liability only, $100,000/$400,000.

As far as I can tell, as an insurance outsider, it seems that
these gliders fall into the same "lowest risk group"
as the other aircraft mentioned.

Could there be a rash of accidents in Quicksilver gliders that
might damage the sport of gliding as a whole? Require transponders
and ELTs in all gliders? Perhaps. But I don't see this.

*******Transponders become mandatory?*******

If transponders (especially mode S) and ELTs end up becoming mandated
in gliders, I don't see the Quicksilver gliders being the cause.
If transponders become mandatory, I'd point my finger directly at
Delta, Continental, regional airlines, etc. The ones that brought
you the 10,000 foot limit for Rec pilot, and who have a large
number of "retirees" who are FSDO employess now. Get a list of your
local FSDO ASI names and check:
http://registry.faa.gov/amquery.asp

A typical entry:
ATP
Type ratings: A/AVR-146 A/BAE-146 A/EMB-110 A/EMB-120 A/SD-3

Many FAA ASIs have airline time. The thought of a non-transpondered
aircraft doing mach .05 while they are closing with 100+ passengers
at mach .50+ makes them a bit nervous even to talk about.

Fortunately for soaring, airliners seem to generally avoid turbulence,
while sailplanes seek it, so there seems to be some natural tendency
towards separation already. And something like the Quicksilver glider
just isn't going to fly above 10,000 anyway with the power on, since
the engine doesn't have that much UMPH!

I think if we see transponders, it will be TSA or maybe a jet/glider midair
precipitating it. I don't think Quicksilver is gonna make that happen...

Eric Greenwell wrote:

Potentially, having aircraft that aren't gliders being registered as
gliders could cause us problems, such as rules and regulations (FAA,
airport, insurance) that address their operation and safety record,
which could screw up sailplane operations. I think we've been lucky that
touring motorgliders have been included in the glider category for so
long without causing apparent problems, and maybe having ultralight
airplanes in the mix won't either. Maybe all the players will understand
these are gliders by registration only, and treat them appropriately,
rather that treating all registered gliders the same.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA


--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd


--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd

Mark James Boyd wrote:



Could there be a rash of accidents in Quicksilver gliders that
might damage the sport of gliding as a whole? Require transponders
and ELTs in all gliders? Perhaps. But I don't see this.

*******Transponders become mandatory?*******

If transponders (especially mode S) and ELTs end up becoming mandated
in gliders, I don't see the Quicksilver gliders being the cause.

It would depend on the numbers, I think. A few hundred won't enlarge the
number "gliders" flying, and hence the increased risk of causing a
serious accident that would be attributed to a glider are small. But if
a few thousand become "gliders"...

Any idea of the numbers we might be talking about? How many Quicksilver
type aircraft are there out there?


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

Mark James Boyd wrote:
I think it's a glider.

Really? If that's a glider, then the term "glider" is a worthless one,
isn't it? It becomes the name of catch-all category, not a description
of the aircraft.

The pilot thinks it's a glider.

Why does the pilot think it's a glider? Has he never seen even a 2-33?

The AC
defines it as a glider. The DAR thinks it's a glider.

He may accept is as fitting in the glider category, but I doubt that he
thinks it's a glider.

The FAA
thinks it's a glider.

And I'm sure they know it's not a glider, but some of them are willing
to go along with registering it that way.

The instructor who signed him off
for self-launch thinks it's a glider.

I'd like to hear the instructor say that with a straight face.


And there are now at least several dozen ultralight pilots who
think it is a glider.

I suspect they are also willing to go along with the charade. Bonus
time! It doesn't have to make sense if you get to do what you want.

Eric, if you're so sure it isn't a glider,
you better get in and STOP this craziness, before it ruins gliding!

The glider category has a number of regulatory perks we treasure, and I
don't want these to disappear by filling the category with such
enormously different aircraft. I'm not sure that they will disappear,
especially if the numbers of ultralights remains low. It might even be
an asset, if it leads those pilots to discover soaring and the aircraft
that do it (I call them gliders and sailplanes, almost interchangeably),
but it's an experiment that likely can't be undone if it goes badly.

Call and write the people who make the rules and tell them how
wrong it is to use span and weight calculations to define a glider.
And how wrong it is to use minimum sink as a parameter, and
how penetration is what really matters.

Isn't this the problem? None of these criteria apply to experimentally
licensed aircraft. Surely, the Quicksilver is not _certified_ as glider?


Of course, you might want to be careful. If you're too
convincing, they'll cancel making ultralights gliders, but
will start certifying jet airliners all as gliders.

Jet airliners don't meet the certification requirements for gliders,
regardless of how convincing I am.

Then
you'll need a type rating and part 121 check to fly
your self-launcher!!!!

In some European countries (maybe all), a self-launcher is NOT treated
like a glider, but instead requires a license much like a power plane. I
hope that never happens here, but I get very uneasy when I see such
non-glider aircraft like the Quicksilver being considered
"motorgliders". If problems occur because of "motorgliders" of any sort
(ultralight or powered sailplanes), it's easy to imagine that an FAA
solution might be separating them from the glider category and treating
them more like airplanes. That would be loss for everyone and sport. I
think we've been lucky so far that powered sailplanes and touring
motorgliders are still in the glider category.


:P

Hmmm...thinking about John's idea, yeah I'd love to watch
a half dozen of these gliders jamming around a short triangle course
at Avenal. And a toilet paper cutting contest too...

But that's ok, Eric. If you don't want them, we'll take them.
After all, they have to spend their money SOMEWHERE, right?

I like John's idea, but I don't think he had Quicksilvers in mind. They
would not be able to soar around the course. To me, this not analogous
to having snow boarders show up at the ski hill: it's more like ATVs
showing up at the ski hill.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

In article ,
Eric Greenwell wrote:

Isn't this the problem? None of these criteria apply to experimentally
licensed aircraft. Surely, the Quicksilver is not _certified_ as glider?

Scrivner Quicksilver MX, tail number N69QT, experimental glider.
Chuck Scrivner is a glider pilot, initially trained in aerotowed gliders.
He now has a self-launch endorsement and exercises this privilege
whenever he launches his Quicksilver glider.

It meets the span to weight criteria, so he certified it as a glider.

Why does the pilot think it's a glider? Has he never seen even a 2-33?

He has. He has also looked at his airworthiness certificate.
And he has thermalled and ridge soared this Quicksilver glider.

The glider category has a number of regulatory perks we treasure, and I
don't want these to disappear by filling the category with such
enormously different aircraft. I'm not sure that they will disappear,
especially if the numbers of ultralights remains low. It might even be
an asset, if it leads those pilots to discover soaring and the aircraft
that do it (I call them gliders and sailplanes, almost interchangeably),
but it's an experiment that likely can't be undone if it goes badly.

Again, I didn't say this SHOULD happen, just that it IS happening,
and it is worth looking into. I'd like to see the ASA consciously
decide to help accelerate, decelerate, or ignore this certification
of Quicksilver aircraft as gliders vs. airplanes.

I for one see these as hang gliders that have simply added an
engine to self-launch, much like your glider. I personally would
like to see them welcomed to soaring. But without organizational
encouragement from ASA and perhaps SSA, Quicksilver gliders will
come into soaring in ones and twos, not in any significant numbers.

In some European countries (maybe all), a self-launcher is NOT treated
like a glider, but instead requires a license much like a power plane. I
hope that never happens here,

I hope it doesn't either. But I'm not willing to actively exclude a
whole group of eager pilots to avoid this "maybe."

******I have changed a few words from Eric's post to make a point****

but I get very uneasy when I see such
non-glider aircraft like the ASH-26E being considered
"gliders".

******Changes end*******

I wonder how the "pure glider" folks felt when the early "self-launch"
gliders started appearing. I wonder if they had some of the same
comments. In fact, isn't this kind of discrimination something we still
face today, just a little more under the surface? Tell me, Eric,
how does it feel when someone snickers at your "non-glider" ?

If problems occur because of "motorgliders" of any sort
(ultralight or powered sailplanes), it's easy to imagine that an FAA
solution might be separating them from the glider category and treating
them more like airplanes. That would be loss for everyone and sport. I
think we've been lucky so far that powered sailplanes and touring
motorgliders are still in the glider category.

I wonder if the pure glider pilots wondered the same thing about
the first motorgliders too?

I like John's idea, but I don't think he had Quicksilvers in mind. They
would not be able to soar around the course. To me, this not analogous
to having snow boarders show up at the ski hill: it's more like ATVs
showing up at the ski hill.

If Quicksilver gliders are ATVs on the ski hill, then you
are looking a little naked there on your ASH snowmobile. :O brrrrrrrr

Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

I dunno where this is going to end up, but there is an opportunity
here, that I am sure. Whether it is an opportunity the gliding community
wants to take, hmmmmmm...., that's something clubs and airports
across the country are going to have to decide a little at a time.

To quote one local club President:
"There will be no problem about the insured UL's landing at
the field. The rule is as long as they are coming to participate
in club activities they are welcome (that goes for any non-club aircraft)."
--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd

John Shelton wrote:
snippage

A Sprint Race (invented by ME) involves a few aircraft starting in a
cylinder at the same time (yes, i know the Euros are doing something
similar
now but I proposed it long before them), flying a short task (to
quarter
mile AST turnpoints) designed to last no more than an hour and a
half, and
finishing at a FINISH LINE in front of the gate/audience/crews. The
time
limit is important for several reasons; not the least of which is the
boredom that exists back at the strip while you are out in your ship
scratching around in two knots. Fellows: She isn't coming back out to
help
you ever again after you put her through that. But if she doesn't
have to
commit the family vacation and the entire lifestyle, gets to visit
with
other people who are excited about a race they are watching, then she
just
might. And with 30:1 ships, you just might need a crew again.....

The ships and trailers will be painted in a variety of bright colors
and
covered with vinyl advertisements not unlike the vehicles of the most
popular sport in America. If one wants to push it, then the
production
methods proposed by me for a televised race bought by Fox to be shown
ten
times could be employed. Lipstick cameras, camera ships, computer
images
(held to a minimum) and all that stuff could be used to create a
venue that
is watchable, exciting and inviting...especially when a young pilot
crawls
out of the winning ship to stand on the podium to collect his/her
check and
put his Red Bull cap on for the cameras to see.

Gee, John. It sounds like you're volunteering to CD the 1-26
Championships.
We already have "Soaring in full color". (Buy the T-shirt at the 1-26
site). It's not 30:1, but hey, put 'em in the Owens Valley in the
summertime (so you have those spectacular Sierra views and booming
lift), and nobody at home will know the difference.
Not a laminar flow wing, so put all the sponsor stickers you can afford
on 'em. A vinyl edge here and there won't hurt a thing but the gross
weight.
You can even mention that getting into competition with these things is
cheaper than some hang gliders. (The ATOS VX is about 15 grand US, a
good 1-26 is probably less than 10. That difference even pays for the
instruction, for most people.

Tim Ward