A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Soaring not compatible with modern society?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old May 5th 18, 05:09 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default Soaring not compatible with modern society?

Money being the barrier to enter the sport of soaring is complete bull****. Money is an easy scapegoat. We have hull insurance to cover the cost of replacing a broken glider. A tow costs less than a lift ticket and depending upon where you go sometimes a daily lift ticket is twice as expensive. On average, many people ski 10-15 times a yea'r. This is probably the number of times the average glider pilot will fly in a year. What about golf? Money st bicycles cost $3-8k. Look at the number of people racing stock cars at the local track. Most will drop $10-20k each year. No, sponsors don't pick up the tab at the local level. Look at the number of RVs on hecroad on any given day. A motor home costs more than a modern sailplane. Clubs are a cost effective watt I fly but they can be inconvenient. People with discressionary time have a lot of disposable cash. Most choose to spend it on activities other than flying a sailplane.

Soaring is not expensive. Soaring is inconvenient and has a very thin slice of conditions when it can be enjoyed. Landout s are an adventure and most great soaring stories revolve around some iteration of a landout. Off airport landings, even when safe, are inconvenient. As a society we abhor inconvenience and go to great length it avoid it. Little motors help avoid the inconvenience of landouts and finding towpilots or the inconvenience of paying our tow fees.

As the soaring population ages we also become more risk adverse. Electronic gadgets seem to make us feel better about taking risks. The aging population also wants more certainty so we rely upon gadgets to help reinforce our decisions of risk management.

In general I agree with Gregg's opinions and find them refreshing even if they only serve to spark debate and make us think a bit.
Ads
  #12  
Old May 5th 18, 05:20 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Jonathan St. Cloud
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,027
Default Soaring not compatible with modern society?

I was in San Diego that day, about 5 miles from the crash site. I will never forgot the loud boom of the 727 hitting the ground and blowing up! It could be heard throughout the city! It was a much simpler time but the FAA did order substantial changes after that event. One change was airlines could no longer cancel IFR and fly a visual approach. If a glider and airliner meet today, one could expect much tighter regulations on gliders.

Back in the 1990's and 2000's when gliders pilots out of Minden would brag about busting Class A space. I tried to get Larry Sanders to address this issue, even had a personal meeting with him at Baron Hilton's ranch, but Larry refused with the comment it is a big sky. Thank goodness for wide adoption of transponders!

On Saturday, May 5, 2018 at 8:55:15 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
On Monday, 25 Sep, 1978, a B-727 crashed in San Diego following a
collision with a Cessna 172.* To my knowledge 172s are still flying.

On 5/4/2018 8:27 PM, Matt Herron Jr. wrote:

snips
No one is listening to our "safety blather", but the first mid-air
between a glider and a commercial jet will definitely curtail our sport..


--
Dan, 5J

  #13  
Old May 5th 18, 05:26 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
BobW
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 414
Default Soaring not compatible with modern society?

On Monday, 25 Sep, 1978, a B-727 crashed in San Diego following a collision
with a Cessna 172. To my knowledge 172s are still flying.

No one is listening to our "safety blather", but the first mid-air
between a glider and a commercial jet will definitely curtail our sport.



And just for the possible edification of some (younger? non-U.S.?) RAS
readers, the San Diego mid-air led to the imposition of 'Terminal Control
Areas' around 'busy U.S. airports.' It was also - and likely is still -
routinely misreported as 'Cessna crashes into airliner' when in fact the very
opposite was true, despite both planes being in contact with San Diego A/P
radio and identified to/in both cockpits as being in potential
flight-path-crossing conflict. IMHO, a classic example of complacency combined
with the limitations of both 'see and avoid' and technology-assisted collision
avoidance.

Much as everyone today seems to wish for it, 'risk-free perfection' in the
skies is an oxymoronic concept. And, no, the preceding assertion should *not*
be assumed my 'comprehensive, philosophic, elevator opinion' regarding
concept(s) involving technology-assists in the collision-avoidance field...

Bob W.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

  #14  
Old May 5th 18, 05:39 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
BobW
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 414
Default Soaring not compatible with modern society?

On 5/4/2018 11:35 PM, John Foster wrote:
snip...
The problem with modern society is a lack of, or aversion to personal
responsibility... So much of life these days is so protected in a
shell, in an effort to shield against having to take responsibility for
anything.


'Personal responsibility' - what a concept! Greater use of it 'across the
board' sure would make for a better society IMO. Maybe even in soaring, too!

Bob W.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

  #15  
Old May 5th 18, 09:42 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dave Walsh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 77
Default Soaring not compatible with modern society?

I did not mean to be negative about "little engines"; I wholly
approve of the idea of little engines; just a pity that so many of
the current ones are unreliable. Jets and electric motors may
change this? Anything to avoid Farmer Joskin's fields is good in
my book.

The idea that we have "insurance" and that this makes it all-
right to suffer landing-out damage is laughable. One of the
reasons that insurance premiums are so high is to cover the
cost of all that prangery; then after a prang there's the
insurance excess to pay, typically thousands.

Pilots manage enough prangs at airfields without adding
unknown fields into the mix.

To the earlier poster who claimed soaring was not expensive!
Well it's always good to meet a fellow pilot from another
universe.....
Dave Walsh

  #16  
Old May 5th 18, 10:27 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default Soaring not compatible with modern society?

I'm the not expensive guy and in relative terms flying gliders is not expensive. Do you know any horse people? Lots of horses around and many private owners spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on equestrian activity and there are orders of magnitude more horse people than glider pilots. Youth hockey is more expensive than learning to fly gliders. Know any sailboat people. Ask them how much cash the hole in the water takes to fill up. Lots of boats costing the same as a mid performance glider are on the water. Cost is a perceived barrier to entry.

As for allowing the insurance company to carry the financial risk. That's what it's for. I'm not advocating reckless flying. I am saying the insurance covers you financially on your investment so if you orang the thing you are not out the whole thing.

The drag if dinging a ship is the inconvenience of it and not necessarily the loss of cash. Most pilots who damage a glider set over the money pretty fast but not having convenient access to their toy is the painful part. We can make more money but time is gone once spent. We are never getting the summer back we lost when we damage a glider. We do recover the cash to have another go.
  #17  
Old May 5th 18, 11:49 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Marotta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,275
Default Soaring not compatible with modern society?

Airliners are "Cleared visual approach, contact the tower" all the time,
though they don't "Cancel IFR".

On 5/5/2018 10:20 AM, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
I was in San Diego that day, about 5 miles from the crash site. I will never forgot the loud boom of the 727 hitting the ground and blowing up! It could be heard throughout the city! It was a much simpler time but the FAA did order substantial changes after that event. One change was airlines could no longer cancel IFR and fly a visual approach. If a glider and airliner meet today, one could expect much tighter regulations on gliders.

Back in the 1990's and 2000's when gliders pilots out of Minden would brag about busting Class A space. I tried to get Larry Sanders to address this issue, even had a personal meeting with him at Baron Hilton's ranch, but Larry refused with the comment it is a big sky. Thank goodness for wide adoption of transponders!

On Saturday, May 5, 2018 at 8:55:15 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
On Monday, 25 Sep, 1978, a B-727 crashed in San Diego following a
collision with a Cessna 172.* To my knowledge 172s are still flying.

On 5/4/2018 8:27 PM, Matt Herron Jr. wrote:

snips
No one is listening to our "safety blather", but the first mid-air
between a glider and a commercial jet will definitely curtail our sport.

--
Dan, 5J


--
Dan, 5J
  #18  
Old May 5th 18, 11:53 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Marotta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,275
Default Soaring not compatible with modern society?

IIRC, there was another light plane in the pattern and the airline crew
saw it and called "Tally ho".* I don't recall all of the communications,
but I'd bet that the tower then said, "Maintain visual separation" and
everyone got complacent.

On 5/5/2018 10:26 AM, BobW wrote:
On Monday, 25 Sep, 1978, a B-727 crashed in San Diego following a
collision
*with a Cessna 172.* To my knowledge 172s are still flying.

No one is listening to our "safety blather", but the first mid-air
between a glider and a commercial jet will definitely curtail our
sport.



And just for the possible edification of some (younger? non-U.S.?) RAS
readers, the San Diego mid-air led to the imposition of 'Terminal
Control Areas' around 'busy U.S. airports.' It was also - and likely
is still - routinely misreported as 'Cessna crashes into airliner'
when in fact the very opposite was true, despite both planes being in
contact with San Diego A/P radio and identified to/in both cockpits as
being in potential flight-path-crossing conflict. IMHO, a classic
example of complacency combined with the limitations of both 'see and
avoid' and technology-assisted collision avoidance.

Much as everyone today seems to wish for it, 'risk-free perfection' in
the skies is an oxymoronic concept. And, no, the preceding assertion
should *not* be assumed my 'comprehensive, philosophic, elevator
opinion' regarding concept(s) involving technology-assists in the
collision-avoidance field...

Bob W.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com


--
Dan, 5J
  #19  
Old May 6th 18, 12:21 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Martin Gregorie[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 127
Default Soaring not compatible with modern society?

On Sat, 05 May 2018 16:53:25 -0600, Dan Marotta wrote:

IIRC, there was another light plane in the pattern and the airline crew
saw it and called "Tally ho".* I don't recall all of the communications,
but I'd bet that the tower then said, "Maintain visual separation" and
everyone got complacent.

Yes, I've just read the Wikipedia report on this crash and the third
aircraft is mentioned in that.

BTW, describes the 727 as hitting the Cessna, rather than the other way
round and also that the Cessna altered course by 20 degrees (070 to 090)
without getting an instruction or reporting it. Apparently the NTSB
report suggested that the collision may not have happened without that.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org
  #20  
Old May 6th 18, 03:08 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
son_of_flubber
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,359
Default Soaring not compatible with modern society?

I obtained an interesting perspective on hull insurance the other day when I had a chat with a pilot who'd landed in the trees. He had recently cancelled his hull insurance right after he stopped racing. He figured that his risk outside of competition was much lower and that the insurance premium was 'too dam high'.

So he landed in the trees just short of an airport runway. (He pointed out the tree, it also survived.) The day was very gusty and rotary and it took 45 tense minutes for the fire department to extricate him from the glider swaying precariously in a broken tree.

He could afford to buy a new glider (or repair the old one) but he decided he 'did not want to spend the money' and he did not want to drill holes in the sky with club ships. So the wreck of his glider has been sitting in a trailer in his hangar for ~15 years.

I learned that the lack of insurance contributed to his decision to quit soaring, a rather high intangible cost.

So I conclude that besides the hull replacement, my insurance premium also insures my continued participation in the sport after the rather bad experience of wrecking a glider.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Blue Ridge Soaring Society: R4S 2015 Jp Stewart Soaring 2 July 8th 15 09:15 PM
Sequatchie Soaring Society K Smith Soaring 3 July 17th 09 09:06 PM
Spokane Soaring Society [email protected] Soaring 2 July 18th 06 05:25 PM
Where oh Where is Llano Estacado Soaring Society ? [email protected] Soaring 8 May 24th 06 07:58 PM
Soaring Society of America National Convention, Feb 10-12 Ontario,CA Jim Skydell Home Built 1 January 31st 05 04:33 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.