Important message for SSA members

We have always wanted to be more like the BGA. Do you
believe that, comprising 1% of the pilot population,
we would receive any notice inside AOPA? Maybe one
page near the back of the magazine -- occasionally.


At 13:06 06 September 2006, Mike Schumann wrote:
I think having a Soaring sub-group under the AOPA umbrella
sounds like a
great potential solution. This could leverage AOPA's
existing
organizational infrastructure (financial, publishing,
lobbying, insurance,
etc.), dramatically reducing the amount of resources
that are being spent on
these types of activities by the SSA.

Mike Schumann

'Bob C' wrote in message
...
Why such outrage at the reposter, and apparent member
apathy about such a seemingly serious issue as the
possible (probable?) demise of our national organization?
Simple.

Berating the reporter is a common boardroom tactic
used by those in a precarious, embarrassing position
when confronted with evidence of their incompetence.
The person trying to bring their actions to light
is accused of being a traitor and trying to undermine
the organization, usually in such an obnoxious way
that the others in attendance would rather change
the
subject than deal with the situation. As we've seen
in this case, the tactic usually works.

Trying to sweep a problem under the rug in the name
of organizational privacy is a rediculous attempt
to
keep things under wraps while those involved can either
make their escape, destroy the evidence or find someone
else to blame.

There is NO excuse for failure to pay taxes. Are
we
really to believe that this was just an honest mistake?
The taxes were just 'overlooked' for four years?
Is this really the best leadership we can find?

Maybe we should investigate scrapping the whole SSA
concept, and either starting over, or joining forces
with one of the other (infinitely more effective)
aviation
organizations, such as AOPA, or even USHGA.

Let the flaming begin...

Bob C


At 19:31 05 September 2006, wrote:
I'm surprised at two things in this thread. First
the outrage leveled
at the reposter of the message. Is this really unexpected?
Water
isn't the only thing to follow the path of least resistance
- the
internet eases the flow of information considerably
and anyone that
posts a message here pointing the rest of us to the
SSA site should
assume that said information will appear on RAS in
short order. Second
the lack of outrage leveled at the SSA is remarkably
stunning. I guess
lifelong members of the SSA have just gotten used to
this level of
incompetence? Frankly at this point I am starting
to believe that the
best thing that could happen to the SSA is for it to
dissolve. I
highly doubt any of the executive members will be honest
enough to
state that the biggest threat to the long term viability
of the SSA
isn't the declining number of people soaring but the
financial
mismanagement of the organization.

-bob

Maybe one page in the AOPA magazine every month would be a great way to get
more pilots interested in soaring. That might do more for the sport than a
full color glossy magazine aimed at the converted.

Mike Schumann

"Nyal Williams" wrote in message
...
We have always wanted to be more like the BGA. Do you
believe that, comprising 1% of the pilot population,
we would receive any notice inside AOPA? Maybe one
page near the back of the magazine -- occasionally.


At 13:06 06 September 2006, Mike Schumann wrote:
I think having a Soaring sub-group under the AOPA umbrella
sounds like a
great potential solution. This could leverage AOPA's
existing
organizational infrastructure (financial, publishing,
lobbying, insurance,
etc.), dramatically reducing the amount of resources
that are being spent on
these types of activities by the SSA.

Mike Schumann

'Bob C' wrote in message
...
Why such outrage at the reposter, and apparent member
apathy about such a seemingly serious issue as the
possible (probable?) demise of our national organization?
Simple.

Berating the reporter is a common boardroom tactic
used by those in a precarious, embarrassing position
when confronted with evidence of their incompetence.
The person trying to bring their actions to light
is accused of being a traitor and trying to undermine
the organization, usually in such an obnoxious way
that the others in attendance would rather change
the
subject than deal with the situation. As we've seen
in this case, the tactic usually works.

Trying to sweep a problem under the rug in the name
of organizational privacy is a rediculous attempt
to
keep things under wraps while those involved can either
make their escape, destroy the evidence or find someone
else to blame.

There is NO excuse for failure to pay taxes. Are
we
really to believe that this was just an honest mistake?
The taxes were just 'overlooked' for four years?
Is this really the best leadership we can find?

Maybe we should investigate scrapping the whole SSA
concept, and either starting over, or joining forces
with one of the other (infinitely more effective)
aviation
organizations, such as AOPA, or even USHGA.

Let the flaming begin...

Bob C


At 19:31 05 September 2006, wrote:
I'm surprised at two things in this thread. First
the outrage leveled
at the reposter of the message. Is this really unexpected?
Water
isn't the only thing to follow the path of least resistance
- the
internet eases the flow of information considerably
and anyone that
posts a message here pointing the rest of us to the
SSA site should
assume that said information will appear on RAS in
short order. Second
the lack of outrage leveled at the SSA is remarkably
stunning. I guess
lifelong members of the SSA have just gotten used to
this level of
incompetence? Frankly at this point I am starting
to believe that the
best thing that could happen to the SSA is for it to
dissolve. I
highly doubt any of the executive members will be honest
enough to
state that the biggest threat to the long term viability
of the SSA
isn't the declining number of people soaring but the
financial
mismanagement of the organization.

-bob

Mike Schumann wrote:
Maybe one page in the AOPA magazine every month would be a great way to get
more pilots interested in soaring. That might do more for the sport than a
full color glossy magazine aimed at the converted.

Mike Schumann

"Nyal Williams" wrote in message
...
We have always wanted to be more like the BGA. Do you
believe that, comprising 1% of the pilot population,
we would receive any notice inside AOPA? Maybe one
page near the back of the magazine -- occasionally.

AOPA has been pretty good about running soaring related articles from
time to time. Also, doubtless other magazines and newsletters would
spring up to take the place of SOARING.

As an example of the way things might turn out in the AOPA magazine,
look at Aerokurier. Although primarily a power magazine, it has soaring
features, too.

AOPA is a great organization that has done much good for general aviation
for many years. I wish them well, but don't want us to become part of them.

We shouldn't get ourselves under their umbrella. In a tough battle with the
FAA, I'd be worried about soaring issues becoming something to bargain away
in a compromise, in order to preserve rights for the powered aircraft (their
major constituency).

In a hypothetical business jet/glider midair, whose side do you think they'd
be on when it comes to proposing solutions?

They wouldn't fight for us as hard as we will fight for us. If we can only
get competent leadership in the SSA (sadly lacking for many years), we
actually might be able to fight for ourselves.

Regards,
Bullwinkle

On 9/6/06 11:07 AM, in article yfDLg.18776$RD.4368@fed1read08, "Greg Arnold"
wrote:

Mike Schumann wrote:
Maybe one page in the AOPA magazine every month would be a great way to get
more pilots interested in soaring. That might do more for the sport than a
full color glossy magazine aimed at the converted.

Mike Schumann

"Nyal Williams" wrote in message
...
We have always wanted to be more like the BGA. Do you
believe that, comprising 1% of the pilot population,
we would receive any notice inside AOPA? Maybe one
page near the back of the magazine -- occasionally.

AOPA has been pretty good about running soaring related articles from
time to time. Also, doubtless other magazines and newsletters would
spring up to take the place of SOARING.

As an example of the way things might turn out in the AOPA magazine,
look at Aerokurier. Although primarily a power magazine, it has soaring
features, too.

Nyal Williams wrote:
We have always wanted to be more like the BGA. Do you
believe that, comprising 1% of the pilot population,
we would receive any notice inside AOPA? Maybe one
page near the back of the magazine -- occasionally.

Would we receive any notice inside AOPA? No! Not even inside EAA nor
even NAFI. Case in point, I used to be a NAFI (National Association of
Flight Instructors) member. In one of their monthly (mailed) newsletters
(2002), they warned us that the PTS (practical Test Standard)was
changing and to make sure that we trained our students to the new
standards. When I researched the matter I discovered that ONLY the
*airplane* PTS was changing - not glider, not helicopter, ... you get
the picture. I wrote a nice letter to the organization president and
editor explaining the situation and requested a public clarification. I
got nowhere - not even a clarification in their online newsletter which
would have cost them nothing to distribute. After several polite email
exchanges, I realized that unless you were an airplane instructor you
were nothing and that there was no point in me being a member. I
resigned in protest.

Expect similar treatment if we become part of AOPA.

Tony V. CFIG
http://home.comcast.net/~verhulst/SOARING

I think it is pretty clear that if the SSA survives this latest bout of
mismanagment that our dues will mainly go to debt payment, and not to
services for members.

Several of us at our club have considered the pros and cons of the AOPA
idea. It definitely is worth discussing.

The AOPA has some real lobbying power. If the SSA ever had any, it
won't now. The amount of $ SSA had, has, or will have to spend on
lobbying efforts probably won't even open the door for us with anyone
in Washington. AOPA's clout is another matter.

I don't know that the AOPA would be interested, but 16,000 pilots would
be a healthy addition to their membership, if that is what the SSA
membership is. Of course, some SSA are already AOPA members.

A couple of pages monthly in the AOPA magizine would probably do
soaring a world of good. Most of the potential pilots for our sport
are already power pilots.

AIG, the insurer who underwrites the policies that come from
Costello's, already has a relationship with the AOPA. Probably
Costello's has a relationship with the AOPA too. Hopefully, we
maintain our insurance in its present form.

Let's face the reality of the situation. We may soon have no national
soaring umbrella organization. We will need to deal with that in some
fashion. Better to think about the alternatives now.

Stan Scott - VA

Tony Verhulst wrote:
Nyal Williams wrote:
We have always wanted to be more like the BGA. Do you
believe that, comprising 1% of the pilot population,
we would receive any notice inside AOPA? Maybe one
page near the back of the magazine -- occasionally.

Would we receive any notice inside AOPA? No! Not even inside EAA nor
even NAFI. Case in point, I used to be a NAFI (National Association of
Flight Instructors) member. In one of their monthly (mailed) newsletters
(2002), they warned us that the PTS (practical Test Standard)was
changing and to make sure that we trained our students to the new
standards. When I researched the matter I discovered that ONLY the
*airplane* PTS was changing - not glider, not helicopter, ... you get
the picture. I wrote a nice letter to the organization president and
editor explaining the situation and requested a public clarification. I
got nowhere - not even a clarification in their online newsletter which
would have cost them nothing to distribute. After several polite email
exchanges, I realized that unless you were an airplane instructor you
were nothing and that there was no point in me being a member. I
resigned in protest.

Expect similar treatment if we become part of AOPA.

Tony V. CFIG
http://home.comcast.net/~verhulst/SOARING

I really think the situation we are facing is that the SSA will be
around for a long time, hopefully with alert managers and dedicated
soaring folks.

It will be a shame if the Society has been the victim of a crook over
these past few years.

Mike

Stan - VA wrote:
I think it is pretty clear that if the SSA survives this latest bout of
mismanagment that our dues will mainly go to debt payment, and not to
services for members.

Several of us at our club have considered the pros and cons of the AOPA
idea. It definitely is worth discussing.

The AOPA has some real lobbying power. If the SSA ever had any, it
won't now. The amount of $ SSA had, has, or will have to spend on
lobbying efforts probably won't even open the door for us with anyone
in Washington. AOPA's clout is another matter.

I don't know that the AOPA would be interested, but 16,000 pilots would
be a healthy addition to their membership, if that is what the SSA
membership is. Of course, some SSA are already AOPA members.

A couple of pages monthly in the AOPA magizine would probably do
soaring a world of good. Most of the potential pilots for our sport
are already power pilots.

AIG, the insurer who underwrites the policies that come from
Costello's, already has a relationship with the AOPA. Probably
Costello's has a relationship with the AOPA too. Hopefully, we
maintain our insurance in its present form.

Let's face the reality of the situation. We may soon have no national
soaring umbrella organization. We will need to deal with that in some
fashion. Better to think about the alternatives now.

Stan Scott - VA

Tony Verhulst wrote:
Nyal Williams wrote:
We have always wanted to be more like the BGA. Do you
believe that, comprising 1% of the pilot population,
we would receive any notice inside AOPA? Maybe one
page near the back of the magazine -- occasionally.

Would we receive any notice inside AOPA? No! Not even inside EAA nor
even NAFI. Case in point, I used to be a NAFI (National Association of
Flight Instructors) member. In one of their monthly (mailed) newsletters
(2002), they warned us that the PTS (practical Test Standard)was
changing and to make sure that we trained our students to the new
standards. When I researched the matter I discovered that ONLY the
*airplane* PTS was changing - not glider, not helicopter, ... you get
the picture. I wrote a nice letter to the organization president and
editor explaining the situation and requested a public clarification. I
got nowhere - not even a clarification in their online newsletter which
would have cost them nothing to distribute. After several polite email
exchanges, I realized that unless you were an airplane instructor you
were nothing and that there was no point in me being a member. I
resigned in protest.

Expect similar treatment if we become part of AOPA.

Tony V. CFIG
http://home.comcast.net/~verhulst/SOARING

It doesn't sound like the problem is a crook, just gross incompetence.

Mike Schumann

"Mike" wrote in message
ups.com...
I really think the situation we are facing is that the SSA will be
around for a long time, hopefully with alert managers and dedicated
soaring folks.

It will be a shame if the Society has been the victim of a crook over
these past few years.

Mike

Stan - VA wrote:
I think it is pretty clear that if the SSA survives this latest bout of
mismanagment that our dues will mainly go to debt payment, and not to
services for members.

Several of us at our club have considered the pros and cons of the AOPA
idea. It definitely is worth discussing.

The AOPA has some real lobbying power. If the SSA ever had any, it
won't now. The amount of $ SSA had, has, or will have to spend on
lobbying efforts probably won't even open the door for us with anyone
in Washington. AOPA's clout is another matter.

I don't know that the AOPA would be interested, but 16,000 pilots would
be a healthy addition to their membership, if that is what the SSA
membership is. Of course, some SSA are already AOPA members.

A couple of pages monthly in the AOPA magizine would probably do
soaring a world of good. Most of the potential pilots for our sport
are already power pilots.

AIG, the insurer who underwrites the policies that come from
Costello's, already has a relationship with the AOPA. Probably
Costello's has a relationship with the AOPA too. Hopefully, we
maintain our insurance in its present form.

Let's face the reality of the situation. We may soon have no national
soaring umbrella organization. We will need to deal with that in some
fashion. Better to think about the alternatives now.

Stan Scott - VA

Tony Verhulst wrote:
Nyal Williams wrote:
We have always wanted to be more like the BGA. Do you
believe that, comprising 1% of the pilot population,
we would receive any notice inside AOPA? Maybe one
page near the back of the magazine -- occasionally.

Would we receive any notice inside AOPA? No! Not even inside EAA nor
even NAFI. Case in point, I used to be a NAFI (National Association of
Flight Instructors) member. In one of their monthly (mailed)
newsletters
(2002), they warned us that the PTS (practical Test Standard)was
changing and to make sure that we trained our students to the new
standards. When I researched the matter I discovered that ONLY the
*airplane* PTS was changing - not glider, not helicopter, ... you get
the picture. I wrote a nice letter to the organization president and
editor explaining the situation and requested a public clarification. I
got nowhere - not even a clarification in their online newsletter which
would have cost them nothing to distribute. After several polite email
exchanges, I realized that unless you were an airplane instructor you
were nothing and that there was no point in me being a member. I
resigned in protest.

Expect similar treatment if we become part of AOPA.

Tony V. CFIG
http://home.comcast.net/~verhulst/SOARING

It is not only incompetence, it is indifference, and I have the emails
from the staff, volunteers and directors to back up that statement.

As to Tony's remarks about the National Association of Flight
Instructors, their magazine has been running a series of glider
training articles since expanding the format of their magazine. Other
specialties get similar exposu helos, acro, tailwheel and sport.

The wounds to SSA are likely terminal. The sooner US pilots start
thinking about what could or should replace it, the better. A good
start would be a different governing structure.

We shouldn't accuse anyone of dishonesty without firm evidence.

However, I can find no logical reason why a CFO would neglect to pay
$300,000 in taxes and the like. It's his job to make sure these
payments are made and to alert the company if there's a problem. I'm
afraid my first suspicion on hearing this news was that funds had been
diverted and the silence was to cover up their misappropriation.

I find it really hard to believe that this was just incompetence. If
the CFO was such a bozo, someone must have noticed by now!

Mike