CFIs

I guess if I look at this issue from the perspective of supply and
demand, the problem is not a shortage of CFIGs, it's a shortage of
students. If there were a long line of students outside the flight
lounge every day waiting for training, CFIGs would come. The cost of
training might go up (due to the initial shortage of CFIGs) and that
would shorten the line of students a bit, until a new equilibrium was
struck. But in that new balance, CFIGs would be compensated enough to
sustain them, and much needed cash and pilots would flow into the
sport.

That's why I am personally excited about the Grand Prix racing format
raising the profile of the sport. The fact is that the vast majority
of people on this planet don't know that soaring exists, or at least
don't know enough about it to give it a second thought. And of the
pool of people that do become aware of soaring, some (probably very
small but constant) percentage decide to give it a go. If 10X more
people are made aware of our existence, then the number of people
willing to try it will go up by 10X (or something close) as well and
the whole economics of the game changes. I believe the key to turning
the sport around is positive, high profile exposure. And not just for
the sport itself, but exposure for the personalities involved. People
follow car racing for the drivers, not the cars. Can we agree there
is no shortage of eccentric personality in our sport?

As the stakes go up, the media is more likely to pay attention too.
If someone walks away with $150,000 in first prize money for winning
the GP, guess what? There are going to be more interviews of the
winner, and more coverage of the event by the media. And of course
sponsors start to get interested in the media coverage and
participation. We still have the chicken/egg problem that keeps this
sort of thing from ramping up quickly: Exposure takes money before it
can create money. But what if Fossett's estate were to sponsor a
prize? Or Hilton (I know he does this now with the Hilton Cup, but
it's a very private affair, isn't it) There are plenty of high
profile people involved in the sport that could stir things up if they
wished.

It would also be wonderful if the SSA could turn outward and be the
true ambassador of soaring it aspires to be. How many 14 year old
boys or girls know they are already old enough to fly a real plane by
themselves? (Oh, but what if the wind dies? Will I crash?) Educate
them! I love soaring enough that I would happily pay double my SSA
dues if I know the money was going toward informing and engaging
potential new pilots. I will always take time to sit a curious kid in
the cockpit and try to inspire them, and I know almost every other
pilot will too, but it's a woefully inefficient way to get the word
out. Reactive rather than proactive. Thanks to politics, PR, and
advertising, getting your message across is now a precise science,
with measurable results. Surely we can communicate the joy of soaring
more effectively and efficiently than we do today. And just as
surely, more people will join us.

Matt Herron Jr.

Our club has minted two new CFIGs last year, with more people in the
pipeline. I don't see us turning away new member prospects because we don't
have enough CFIGs.

Mike Schumann

"Papa3" wrote in message
...
On Dec 29, 4:30 pm, Dan G wrote:
Slightly O/T but I'm curious: in the UK all instructors are volunteers
and instruct for free. The courses required to become an instructor
are cheap so there's little cost (if any if the club pays, which they
often do) involved in becoming one.

Is it different in the states? How does it work over there?

Dan

Hi Dan,

By and large, glider instructors over here (in the States) earn their
CFI-G on their own. By that, I mean there are very few organized
"instructor training" courses. Some of the larger clubs have the
resources and talent to provide formal training, but at most
locations, it's up to the individual. The existing instructors will
help with the requisite dual and sign offs for written and practical
tests, but the costs (tows, testing, books, etc.) are typically born
by the aspiring instructor. Note I said "typically"; I'm sure there
are a few good exceptions.

One other big difference is that some fairly significant percentage of
the soaring done in the States is done from a commercial operation.
In these settings, there's very little incentive for the new CFI-G to
emerge. They have to pay for tows and rent the glider to build up
hours, and they would have to pay the existing CFI-G for the
instruction toward the rating. Despite the glamorous lifestyle and
high pay, it's not something that most young guns would go after. If
they're interested in an airline job, they'll get their ASEL followed
by their Instrument and Instructor ratings and build up hours that
way.

Thinking in terms of the club/commercial operation where I fly, I can
think of only one new CFI-G being minted in the last 10 years, and
this is at a moderately large operation. Obviously, it's not a
sustainable model...

Erik Mann




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com