The highly successful UK Junior XC program vs. USA's nonexistantJunior XC program. Why?

At 19:15 14 September 2015, 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
wrote:
=20
I've been noodling on a few ideas for about a year now and have come
to=
the conclusion that we really need to understand better where the
bottlene=
ck is: intake (seems not from the data), getting to solo, getting to
first
=
XC or getting to advanced XC/racing-ready? We also need to understand the
s=
tate of the junior population and what the constraints are. The solution
re=
ally needs to fit the problem - even then it would take energy,
commitment
=
and resources.=20
=20
=20
In addition to the bottlenecks to progress there needs to be an
assessmen=
t of where we lose juniors in the process because it's pretty obvious
that
=
not all of them are making it into full-fledged XC and racing pilots as
adu=
lts. 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, but
re=
tention that need a hard, analytical look. Right now we have a good
number
=
of opinions and anecdotes that can lead us where to look, but how much of
w=
hat effects prevail when and where probably needs to be assessed at more
th=
an a cursory level. I've heard heartfelt proposed solutions over the
years
=
that I suspect a first-order look at the actual data would show to be
fruit=
less.
=20
Andy

There is a long way to go before we can begin to emulate the European
glidi=
ng scene and as Alexander Schwagermakers pointed out you need to start
some=
where. I believe the start point is long before the provision of contest
ai=
rcraft for juniors to fly.

Club's must be willing to promote cross country and just as important is
th=
e organization of club resources to attain the objective. The clever ones
w=
ould plan their fleets to provide aircraft for a variety of flying
opportun=
ities and promote standards that once attained would allow pilots to
advanc=
e to higher performance aircraft. The aircraft at the top of the scale
woul=
d be maintained expressly for cross country. The example citing the
inconve=
nience to a member who would have to forfeit his flight to a cross
country
=
pilot would not occur, e.g. an LS4 is not a local soaring aircraft, for a
o=
ne hour float around the airfield a 1-26, Ka8 or similar glider is
perfectl=
y adequate. Some clubs in Europe refine this process by allocating
aircraft=
on a daily basis for cross country soaring. Not only is an aircraft
alloca=
ted, also a weather briefing is conducted and a task set. Pilots who are
no=
t 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
alloc=
ated an aircraft have the incentive to attempt the task knowing help has
al=
ready been organized should they need a retrieve. Just like gaggle
flying,
=
groups can get better results even when conditions are not optimal.

The Europeans who have contributed to this discussion have intimated the
cl=
ub culture in Europe encourages cross country regardless of age. Sean is
co=
nvinced this is not the case this side of the pond, I concur. Not every
pil=
ot is going to become a contest pilot, the same for juniors but many more
w=
ould if cross country flying was made available and promoted in a
meaningfu=
l way. Low costs and the availability of aircraft go a long way to
enabling=
more pilots to gain the time and skills cross country flying requires.
Con=
vince the clubs that it is in their best interests to organize their
activi=
ties to promote higher standards that lead to cross country flying and we
m=
ight have a starting point for a revival.


Interesting thread, and really a continuation of the “How do we
inspire� topic that Sean began here
http://ras.gliderpilot.net/?op=s2&id=282714&vt= and Andy Gough has it.
I would guess not many joggers jog competitively- if they were told that to
enjoy their recreation they had to race I suspect the majority response
might be rude. Not many glider pilots race competitively – what is it
5%, maybe only 2%. Soaring, even cross-country soaring is, for most, not a
race. I think those promoting soaring as a primarily competitive endeavour
do it no favours.

That's one thing. The other is the club thing. I've heard it said what
clubs need is more people like them. Many have a choice of one and,
depending on the club, Joe Public might think “Jeez no way I'm joining
that�. And some are clubmen, some just aren't. Long-time club
membership declines should encourage us to conclude there simply are not
enough “people like them� out there and to broaden the appeal stuff
needs fixing (I know its not the same everywhere). If the clubs are the
problem, the only alternative is that newcomers don't have to join them to
go soaring. Another discussion.

Showing newbies soaring and how its done as a “why we do it� and, at
the right point cross-country soaring too, without having them believe its
all about racing, could bring better results. The club culture thing is
harder. It should be the case that folk join clubs because they want to
not because they have to. Cross-country soaring should be an easy and
achievable aspiration but not all will want to do it. Of those that do
get the XC bug we cannot expect much more than the existing tiny minority
to have the commitment, time and money to take it as far as racing.
Therefore, to end up with more racing pilots means starting with a whole
lot more cross-country “joggers�, most of whom will quite reasonably
only ever want to enjoy the jogging.

On Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 7:45:07 AM UTC-6, Roger Hurley wrote:
At 19:15 14 September 2015, 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
wrote:
=20
I've been noodling on a few ideas for about a year now and have come
to=
the conclusion that we really need to understand better where the
bottlene=
ck is: intake (seems not from the data), getting to solo, getting to
first
=
XC or getting to advanced XC/racing-ready? We also need to understand the
s=
tate of the junior population and what the constraints are. The solution
re=
ally needs to fit the problem - even then it would take energy,
commitment
=
and resources.=20
=20
=20
In addition to the bottlenecks to progress there needs to be an
assessmen=
t of where we lose juniors in the process because it's pretty obvious
that
=
not all of them are making it into full-fledged XC and racing pilots as
adu=
lts. 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, but
re=
tention that need a hard, analytical look. Right now we have a good
number
=
of opinions and anecdotes that can lead us where to look, but how much of
w=
hat effects prevail when and where probably needs to be assessed at more
th=
an a cursory level. I've heard heartfelt proposed solutions over the
years
=
that I suspect a first-order look at the actual data would show to be
fruit=
less.
=20
Andy

There is a long way to go before we can begin to emulate the European
glidi=
ng scene and as Alexander Schwagermakers pointed out you need to start
some=
where. I believe the start point is long before the provision of contest
ai=
rcraft for juniors to fly.

Club's must be willing to promote cross country and just as important is
th=
e organization of club resources to attain the objective. The clever ones
w=
ould plan their fleets to provide aircraft for a variety of flying
opportun=
ities and promote standards that once attained would allow pilots to
advanc=
e to higher performance aircraft. The aircraft at the top of the scale
woul=
d be maintained expressly for cross country. The example citing the
inconve=
nience to a member who would have to forfeit his flight to a cross
country
=
pilot would not occur, e.g. an LS4 is not a local soaring aircraft, for a
o=
ne hour float around the airfield a 1-26, Ka8 or similar glider is
perfectl=
y adequate. Some clubs in Europe refine this process by allocating
aircraft=
on a daily basis for cross country soaring. Not only is an aircraft
alloca=
ted, also a weather briefing is conducted and a task set. Pilots who are
no=
t 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
alloc=
ated an aircraft have the incentive to attempt the task knowing help has
al=
ready been organized should they need a retrieve. Just like gaggle
flying,
=
groups can get better results even when conditions are not optimal.

The Europeans who have contributed to this discussion have intimated the
cl=
ub culture in Europe encourages cross country regardless of age. Sean is
co=
nvinced this is not the case this side of the pond, I concur. Not every
pil=
ot is going to become a contest pilot, the same for juniors but many more
w=
ould if cross country flying was made available and promoted in a
meaningfu=
l way. Low costs and the availability of aircraft go a long way to
enabling=
more pilots to gain the time and skills cross country flying requires.
Con=
vince the clubs that it is in their best interests to organize their
activi=
ties to promote higher standards that lead to cross country flying and we
m=
ight have a starting point for a revival.


Interesting thread, and really a continuation of the "How do we
inspire" topic that Sean began here
http://ras.gliderpilot.net/?op=s2&id=282714&vt= and Andy Gough has it.
I would guess not many joggers jog competitively- if they were told that to
enjoy their recreation they had to race I suspect the majority response
might be rude. Not many glider pilots race competitively - what is it
5%, maybe only 2%. Soaring, even cross-country soaring is, for most, not a
race. I think those promoting soaring as a primarily competitive endeavour
do it no favours.

That's one thing. The other is the club thing. I've heard it said what
clubs need is more people like them. Many have a choice of one and,
depending on the club, Joe Public might think "Jeez no way I'm joining
that". And some are clubmen, some just aren't. Long-time club
membership declines should encourage us to conclude there simply are not
enough "people like them" out there and to broaden the appeal stuff
needs fixing (I know its not the same everywhere). If the clubs are the
problem, the only alternative is that newcomers don't have to join them to
go soaring. Another discussion.

Showing newbies soaring and how its done as a "why we do it" and, at
the right point cross-country soaring too, without having them believe its
all about racing, could bring better results. The club culture thing is
harder. It should be the case that folk join clubs because they want to
not because they have to. Cross-country soaring should be an easy and
achievable aspiration but not all will want to do it. Of those that do
get the XC bug we cannot expect much more than the existing tiny minority
to have the commitment, time and money to take it as far as racing.
Therefore, to end up with more racing pilots means starting with a whole
lot more cross-country "joggers", most of whom will quite reasonably
only ever want to enjoy the jogging.




The number of clubs and chapters and SSA members in them has be quite steady for several years. Churn is always happening. A few listed chapters are fiddling with the rules by not requiring all members to be SSA members. We are working to differentiate those. It's a work in progress, or not.

Frank Whiteley