new Soaring article

This has gone on too long on here. You mistake my comments as desires for
the past, which I do not hold, and even more as disparaging newer pilots
because they haven't flown without technological advances. I don't do
that either. As a matter of fact, I never discuss these matters with most
pilots. In particular, I have not said that there is a causal
relationship between [the]ability to perceive beauty and the equipment
that [one] uses. I was referring only to those qualities as they pertain
to a particular skill set, which has been abandoned. Even less do I
denigrate younger pilots for not having certain experiences.

As for the baby, neither of us can now crawl with the same facility as a
baby. We don't want to, of course; our lives are much better because we
have abandoned that for walking. Nontheless, we have lost a particular
facility that had its own usefulness and enjoyment. (We can't have it
all.) Nor can we suddenly shut down our electronics and fly with the same
facility as those who have constantly practiced that way (i.e. hang-glider
pilots) until we gain that facility.

I only responded to your original post because you said NOTHING was given
up. I'd be happy to continue this conversation in a friendly manner
offline either by direct email or on FaceBook if you like, but not here
any longer.

I'll wait for any further contact you might like to make.

Best wishes.




At 21:07 16 May 2011, noel.wade wrote:

On May 15, 5:28=A0pm, Nyal Williams wrote:

When a baby learns to walk it gives up its crawling skill-set for an
overall advantage, but there is no question that it has lost SOMETHING
fo=
r
a net gain.

Nyal -

Its not so much that I'm offended as it is that I find your premise
illogical and ridiculous. I believe you are speaking to nostalgia and
your view of history through rose-colored glasses; not any real loss.

To use your analogy: A Baby that learns to walk does not forget how
to crawl. We can crawl even as fully-grown adults. We haven't
"lost"
a skill; we have simply found a better way to do things. Maybe
standing on two legs alters our perception of the world and the way we
interact with it; but we CAN go back and interact with it in a
different manner if we want. We _choose_ not to; we don't lose the
innate ability.

Similarly, I can turn off my GPS and/or jump in a Schweizer and
experience soaring "like the old-timers" anytime I want to. Just
because I have a DG-300 and use a PDA does not mean that other soaring
skills are lost, or that I cannot appreciate the simple beauties of
physics, nature, weather, aerodynamics, and the 3-dimensional freedom
of flight. There is no causal relationship between my ability to
perceive beauty and the equipment that I use.

In summary: You may long for simpler times; or for a period in which
different skills were _emphasized_. There's nothing wrong with that.
But confuse your desires with the skills of other pilots; and don't
impugn their sense of artistry or beauty.

--Noel
P.S. To be clear: this is not just a personal defense; its also a
reaction to the attitude that many in the Soaring community have about
newer generations of pilots. Attitudes like what Nyal is displaying
*do* come across as negatives and a discouragement to newer pilots.
With a shrinking pilot population the last thing people should be
doing is telling new folks what they _can't_ do or how they'll never
be like the people that have come before them.

On 5/14/2011 6:34 AM, Papa3 wrote:
On May 12, 8:32 pm, John
wrote:

They did, give them credit. The IGC created the world class, in
response to this sentiment. It was exactly your "sunfish" class. And
pilots around the world resoundly rejected it. They voted with their
wallets, and 18 meter gliders, mostly with motors, are the only things
selling right now. Not even standard or 15m are selling.

It is a great theory. It was tried. And it failed.

John Cochrane


John,

All that this failed experiment proved is that there isn't necessarily
a market for a purpose-built one-design that turns out to be more
expensive than much higher perforance ships readily available on the
market. Again working the analogy, many of the successful sailing
classes (Sunfish comes to mind) were built and became popular first -
then someone decided to race them. Same with cars.

If we set out with a mission statement where one of the primary
objectives was to "contain costs", the class specifications would
follow.

I was there as a Director of the SSA when the specifications were being
discussed, and "containing costs" was a major specification. Turned out,
pilots would rather have an old glider with more performance than a new
glider for the same money. It's very hard to compete against the used
market on price, and this was not appreciated at the time.

If soaring was growing instead of shrinking, used gliders would cost
more, and the PW5 would have sold a more, maybe a lot more, gliders.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)

Thanks John,
As expected, your soaring articles are entertaining and to quote A8,
thought provoking. I’m always a bit amused how many of us tend to
discount equipment advances as losing our soaring souls and pinning
for the romanticism of the long lost glory days, i.e. Good then Bad
now!

I originally came to this sport of sailplane soaring in late 1999
after 23 years playing in the Hang Gliding world, arguably the purest
form of human soaring. All my hang gliding XC & contest flying was
conducted without the assistance of GPS, I used a map to navigate just
like everyone else. I can honestly state that at the end of the day I
never got lost, but just as true, I didn’t always know exactly where I
was either, retrievals were often rough on everyone. These were
exciting Glory / barnstorming days to be sure but you won’t find a
single hang glider pilot today who goes XC or races in contests
wishing for the good ol days of non GPS and low tech equipment. I'd
personally today, say the same is generally true for our sport of
sailplane soaring.

I still study the maps and carry one with me (big picture visual back
up) but IMO I’m a far more well informed pilot as are my friends and
family and indeed a safer pilot due to the various electronic “gizmos”
I carry in the cockpit such as: Transponder, Spot, 302 (gps), Pcas,
PDA(s) w/ color moving maps, cell phone (shut off of course) & my
Flarm brick (as soon as it arrives in...2012, ouch!).

Not to invite rebutal, but do I recall and it’s still a faint
grumbling today how the thought of mandating a sailplane to install a
Transponder is wholly unfair, too expensive and impractical due to
battery power problems. The SSA won that ancient battle on our behalf
(thank you SSA) but can we really say that today with a straight
face…? I’m very happy, I know my family is and the 737 passengers
would feel the same way if aware, that when I see (thanks to Pcas) an
approaching- descending or climbing 300kt+ heavy make a slight
deviation in flight path because it’s seeing my 1201 squawk well in
advance. Or, If I land out or have an incident my crew or the
authorities can instantly find out using my spot tracker page
"exactly" where I am located... simply priceless!

I’m firmly in the camp that would say it was indeed glorious then but
it’s even better now, bring on the Gizmos!
Rick
21

I agree with this wholeheartedly.

At 22:46 17 May 2011, Rick Culbertson wrote:
Thanks John,
As expected, your soaring articles are entertaining and to quote A8,
thought provoking. I=92m always a bit amused how many of us tend to
discount equipment advances as losing our soaring souls and pinning
for the romanticism of the long lost glory days, i.e. Good then Bad
now!

I originally came to this sport of sailplane soaring in late 1999
after 23 years playing in the Hang Gliding world, arguably the purest
form of human soaring. All my hang gliding XC & contest flying was
conducted without the assistance of GPS, I used a map to navigate just
like everyone else. I can honestly state that at the end of the day I
never got lost, but just as true, I didn=92t always know exactly where I
was either, retrievals were often rough on everyone. These were
exciting Glory / barnstorming days to be sure but you won=92t find a
single hang glider pilot today who goes XC or races in contests
wishing for the good ol days of non GPS and low tech equipment. I'd
personally today, say the same is generally true for our sport of
sailplane soaring.

I still study the maps and carry one with me (big picture visual back
up) but IMO I=92m a far more well informed pilot as are my friends and
family and indeed a safer pilot due to the various electronic
=93gizmos=94
I carry in the cockpit such as: Transponder, Spot, 302 (gps), Pcas,
PDA(s) w/ color moving maps, cell phone (shut off of course) & my
Flarm brick (as soon as it arrives in...2012, ouch!).

Not to invite rebutal, but do I recall and it=92s still a faint
grumbling today how the thought of mandating a sailplane to install a
Transponder is wholly unfair, too expensive and impractical due to
battery power problems. The SSA won that ancient battle on our behalf
(thank you SSA) but can we really say that today with a straight
face=85? I=92m very happy, I know my family is and the 737 passengers
would feel the same way if aware, that when I see (thanks to Pcas) an
approaching- descending or climbing 300kt+ heavy make a slight
deviation in flight path because it=92s seeing my 1201 squawk well in
advance. Or, If I land out or have an incident my crew or the
authorities can instantly find out using my spot tracker page
"exactly" where I am located... simply priceless!

I=92m firmly in the camp that would say it was indeed glorious then but
it=92s even better now, bring on the Gizmos!
Rick
21

On May 11, 6:36*pm, John Cochrane
wrote:
I wrote an article for Soaring, that will appear in the July issue.
Title: "Gizmo Future." A somewhat unusual view of the "what's in the
future for Soaring" kind of article. It's on my webpage if you just
can't wait for July,

http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john...ers/gizmo.html

John Cochrane

It was a well written and thought provoking article by John. Thanks.
Let’s not lose sight of the fact that we have limited technology from
the very beginning of this sport. I could beat all the competition if
they would only let me fly with an operating engine. In trout
fishing,
it would be much more productive to use a spot light at night, a gill
net, or even dynamite. But someone was wise enough to say that
wouldn't be sporting. It was not an irrational fear but a legitimate
concern for the sport they loved. This is a sport too and we should
not feel bad about placing some limit on what resources are allowed.
Now bass fisherman use fish finders and big motors so that becomes
another sport entirely. So there are arbitrary guidelines that we
must
think about and establish.
It seems logical to me to disallow information compiled by others and
transmitted to the glider. If this were true weather information
compiled by professionals or computer equipped crew would be out of
bounds. Instead the pilot would have to continue to demonstrate their
ability to read the weather in the air.
Another limit could restrain the transmission and subsequent
reception
of energy to artificially enhance the pilot’s vision. This would rule
out on-board radar and thermal detection. Exceptions could be made
for
items that enhance safety like radio transceivers (of course) and
flarm.
With thermal detectors we'll see the use of autopilots and software
to
center thermals automatically and to calculate the best energy line.
Yes, it is in the works. Two people talked to me last year to see if
I
thought it would be possible for use in drones. Perhaps this should
be
placed out of bounds for our sport for it would vastly decrease the
amount of pilot skill necessary to complete a task.
These are just examples of how limits could be thoughtfully imposed.
Other lines could be drawn. My point is that the idea of no limits is
not consistent with the history or spirit of the sport and leads to
more homogenous pilot performance and a less interesting flying
experience.
XC