| View previous topic :: View next topic |
|
FPeel
3 thumbs up
Joined: 28 Aug 2009
Posts: 1116
Location: San Jose, CA
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:07 pm Post subject: |
 #301 |
| Wingspan34 wrote: |
| BubbleBoy wrote: |
Sounds just like me when I learned to HG -- I just wanted to go fast EXPRESSLY for the adrenalin rush. Should I have been excluded from the USHGA just because I wanted to skim the ground at high speed?
JB |
Yup!
(never ask a question you don't already know the answer to   ) |
Hey! Hands off the low hanging fruit. That's my orchard!
_________________
"If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space." - Anonymous |
|
|
|
AIRTHUG
3 thumbs up
Joined: 09 Aug 2007
Posts: 6159
Location: Point of the Mountain, Draper, UT
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:13 pm Post subject: |
#302 |
| Wingspan34 wrote: |
If it's such a great idea, then why didn't this issue get some BIG ARTICLE in the Nat Mag 2 - 3 months ago? All the positives could have been explained and we could all say "Gee, that makes lots of sense!" |
In this magic land of agreement, is there a different USHPA than the one everyone loves to b**** about here? Because what I see is an organization that tries and tries and tries, and does some good, and an angry mob mentality on the internet.
Second, communicating with the members is a great idea, and in principle I completely agree... but if it's difficult to debate and come to a consensus among the few people that make it to pg 15 of this thread, what's the likelyhood of doing so within the entire organization?
A stregth of the representative system is that we elect people with similar beliefs to our own, and then when things like this DO arise, there is a room full of people who should each represent the majority likemindedness of their region.
I'm not defending not communicating with members, but I'm also not as outraged as you all.... I think it's a little idealistic to think it possible to consult with every member and gain any sort of consensus on ANY topic.
Within this thread we have arguements about foot launching, landing, origins of hang gliding, ski flying, base jumping....
I ask all of you- WHAT consensus. I am NOT outraged that a group of people elected to lead us, are leading us. If you don't like the person leading your region, elect someone new. Or start a recall, that seems to be what all the cool kids are doing these days 
PS Bob, I didn't mean you specifically... but I can honestly say (and I'm happy to be saying it), glad to see you chiming in here.
_________________
Ryan Voight
BLOG: www.AIRTHUG.com
VIDEOS: http://vimeo.com/AIRTHUG |
|
|
|
Wingspan34
2 thumbs up
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 5652
Location: Central NY
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:17 pm Post subject: |
#303 |
Sorry Frank. 
But on a more serious note, BB's comment brings up a valid point.
Is it good judgment and does it involve a mature attitude to buzz the ground super closely (I'm not talking "Speed Gliding close" of 20 feet or more) and at super high speed?
I think I'm 100% correct to point out that NO USHPA rating excludes the requirement of the pilot to demonstrate both of these qualities. And, . . . if a pilot repeatedly demonstrates a lack of maturity, and poor judgment, they can have their rating revoked.
Is USHPA going to drop this requirement from the rating system it creates for Speed Wings? If so, . . . 
_________________
WW 141 Fusion SP
Master rated, First flight - May 1975
FL, PL, PA, AWCL, CL, FSL, RLF, TURB, X-C
Last edited by Wingspan34 on Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:19 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
flyin_canuck
2 thumbs up
Joined: 11 Jun 2009
Posts: 404
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:19 pm Post subject: |
#304 |
| Ryan...very well put |
|
|
|
Jason
3 thumbs up
Joined: 02 Jan 2007
Posts: 7530
Location: Stapleton, Colorado
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:23 pm Post subject: |
#305 |
| flyin_canuck wrote: |
| Quote: |
| I could see a good argument for saying you are not covered by USHPA liability insurance when you speed glide or do aerobatics though |
I can't imagine that argument being any good
Come on Eric, you Boehm boys like to think you are smart, I challenge you to come up with a logical definition of a paraglider that by definition excludes speed wings... |
I don't know what the f*** you have against me or my brother...but i challenge you to look at the posts I have made on this thead and then defend your accusations and personal attacks against me
_________________
TSA, DHS, NDAA and SOPA Seig Heil! |
|
|
|
BubbleBoy
1 thumbs up
Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Posts: 3002
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:29 pm Post subject: |
#306 |
Jason, Doug is just sore because you and Eric got the answer to DDWFTTW correct while he didn't and he knows his "it can't be done" jig will be up next week.
He'll be ok after a few days of grieving.
JB |
|
|
|
Wingspan34
2 thumbs up
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 5652
Location: Central NY
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:31 pm Post subject: |
#307 |
| flyhigh013 wrote: |
| Wingspan34 wrote: |
If it's such a great idea, then why didn't this issue get some BIG ARTICLE in the Nat Mag 2 - 3 months ago? All the positives could have been explained and we could all say "Gee, that makes lots of sense!" |
In this magic land of agreement, is there a different USHPA than the one everyone loves to b**** about here? Because what I see is an organization that tries and tries and tries, and does some good, and an angry mob mentality on the internet. |
The USHPA isn't trying to communicate with it's owners/members. There's no disputing that. And I only see 2 RDs showing up here with any regularity (BobK and recently, Urs).
The "angry mob" wouldn't have any reason to BE angry if they were treated with the respect they are due and actually communicated with in a two way manner. The mob is angry and frustrated exactly BECAUSE the USHPA acts like they aren't even there.
Oh wait, . . . except when it comes time to collect our yearly fee.
_________________
WW 141 Fusion SP
Master rated, First flight - May 1975
FL, PL, PA, AWCL, CL, FSL, RLF, TURB, X-C |
|
|
|
Wingspan34
2 thumbs up
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 5652
Location: Central NY
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:39 pm Post subject: |
#308 |
| flyhigh013 wrote: |
| Wingspan34 wrote: |
If it's such a great idea, then why didn't this issue get some BIG ARTICLE in the Nat Mag 2 - 3 months ago? All the positives could have been explained and we could all say "Gee, that makes lots of sense!" |
Second, communicating with the members is a great idea, and in principle I completely agree... but if it's difficult to debate and come to a consensus among the few people that make it to pg 15 of this thread, what's the likelyhood of doing so within the entire organization? |
How long has Speed Wings been discussed here? That is the meat of the current discussion. Has it been a day and a half?
And I must say that it seems to me that you are promoting NO DISCUSSION since discussion is not easy. Well, the whole point of discussion is to hear and be heard. And you will note that, in the post you quote above, I also mention how NOBODY at USHPA is listening to our discussions! (with the noted exception of BobK) They aren't even giving us the topics to BE discussed.
_________________
WW 141 Fusion SP
Master rated, First flight - May 1975
FL, PL, PA, AWCL, CL, FSL, RLF, TURB, X-C |
|
|
|
flyin_canuck
2 thumbs up
Joined: 11 Jun 2009
Posts: 404
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:52 pm Post subject: |
#309 |
| Quote: |
| I don't know what the f*** you have against me or my brother |
The 7000 post between the two of you on this forum alone to start
I'm sure like almost everyone (me excluded of course) on here that in person you are great guys, I just found most of the opinions against including speed wings to be very illogical
Its not that I'm for speed wings...the #1 thing to do if you want to debate something is find logical arguments for the other side first
can you back up Eric's comment
| Quote: |
| I could see a good argument for saying you are not covered by USHPA liability insurance when you speed glide or do aerobatics though |
Sorry Jason for getting too carried away with a fun debate...I just see a bunch of guys lambasting the USHPA but not being able to provide a logical argument or solution.
There seems to be a bunch of people on here that just get pissed every time the USHPA does something without consulting them first
I'm all for completely raking the USHPA over the coals but without a logical solution this just seems to be a completely unproductive witch hunt |
|
|
|
Wingspan34
2 thumbs up
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 5652
Location: Central NY
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:04 pm Post subject: |
#310 |
| flyhigh013 wrote: |
| Wingspan34 wrote: |
If it's such a great idea, then why didn't this issue get some BIG ARTICLE in the Nat Mag 2 - 3 months ago? All the positives could have been explained and we could all say "Gee, that makes lots of sense!" |
A strength of the representative system is that we elect people with similar beliefs to our own, and then when things like this DO arise, there is a room full of people who should each represent the majority likemindedness of their region. |
No. The strength of a representative system is that your representative has a good idea (via ongoing communications) what his/her constituents want.
And, how the hell is my RD (coincidentally, your father) supposed to know what I and the other pilots in Region 12 are thinking so as to create this "majority like-mindedness" of which you speak?
We've got the majority of hang gliding and PG sites in Region 12 out here in western NY, but Paul hasn't been out this way for a couple years, and when he has it's been for a day or two for a flying event/party. He doesn't email me, or any other pilots I know of, in any regular kind of way. He didn't inform us about whether Speed Wings should be brought into the association. Like-mindedness?
Hell, I was close friends with my RD for over 25 years and most of what I knew about what was going on with the USHGA (then USHPA) involved asking questions or overhearing phone conversations (while sitting in his house).
Mostly, I have no idea what's in his mind. And I, for sure, know he isn't asking (or making it easy for me to tell him) what's on my mind.
_________________
WW 141 Fusion SP
Master rated, First flight - May 1975
FL, PL, PA, AWCL, CL, FSL, RLF, TURB, X-C |
|
|
|
sg
3 thumbs up
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
Posts: 11030
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:09 pm Post subject: |
#311 |
| flyin_canuck wrote: |
| Quote: |
Thats a logical AND, not an OR. You need both and SOARING is the gotcha here.
If they are not primarily used for SOARING, they are not a fit in our org. |
So if you speed glide or do aerobatics you're out of USHPA
|
Looks like you didnt read the word "primarily"
_________________
H4, AT, FL, TFL, AWCL, CL, FSL, RLF, TUR, X-C
Aeros Stealth III 142
| Thomas Jefferson wrote: |
| All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. |
|
|
|
|
Wingspan34
2 thumbs up
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 5652
Location: Central NY
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:13 pm Post subject: |
#312 |
| flyhigh013 wrote: |
| Wingspan34 wrote: |
If it's such a great idea, then why didn't this issue get some BIG ARTICLE in the Nat Mag 2 - 3 months ago? All the positives could have been explained and we could all say "Gee, that makes lots of sense!" |
I'm not defending not communicating with members, but I'm also not as outraged as you all.... I think it's a little idealistic to think it possible to consult with every member and gain any sort of consensus on ANY topic. |
Sounds like a kind of "Don't ask, Don't tell" kind of policy. That's sure to generate complete like-mindedness. 
I've already proposed a solution to member communications with the USHPA and our various RDs. It would take the form of a web site a little like this with Regional Forms as well as USHPA Committee specific Forms where USHPA members could either directly participate or at least PM the involved rep with their ideas and opinions. It would, effectively, be an on going USHPA Directors (and members) Meeting. Imagine how much more could be accomplished if discussions didn't have to end in two hours, so committee members could grab some dinner.
_________________
WW 141 Fusion SP
Master rated, First flight - May 1975
FL, PL, PA, AWCL, CL, FSL, RLF, TURB, X-C |
|
|
|
AIRTHUG
3 thumbs up
Joined: 09 Aug 2007
Posts: 6159
Location: Point of the Mountain, Draper, UT
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:17 pm Post subject: |
#313 |
| Wingspan34 wrote: |
| When did we the membership even here about this possibility? Golly, not until after it became a reality! |
just for the record the USHPA meeting agenda *DID* include the presentation of why speed wings should be recognized. I'm sure that agenda was published numerous places. Did you even read it Mr. Blame-Everyone-but-Myself?
_________________
Ryan Voight
BLOG: www.AIRTHUG.com
VIDEOS: http://vimeo.com/AIRTHUG |
|
|
|
Wingspan34
2 thumbs up
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 5652
Location: Central NY
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:23 pm Post subject: |
#314 |
| flyhigh013 wrote: |
| Wingspan34 wrote: |
If it's such a great idea, then why didn't this issue get some BIG ARTICLE in the Nat Mag 2 - 3 months ago? All the positives could have been explained and we could all say "Gee, that makes lots of sense!" |
Within this thread we have arguements about foot launching, landing, origins of hang gliding, ski flying, base jumping.... |
Imagine if they (the relevant discussions) were all being heard by our USHPA reps?
[ http://tinyurl.com/yj793dn ]
_________________
WW 141 Fusion SP
Master rated, First flight - May 1975
FL, PL, PA, AWCL, CL, FSL, RLF, TURB, X-C |
|
|
|
noman3
1 thumbs up
Joined: 09 Jan 2009
Posts: 4621
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:27 pm Post subject: |
#315 |
hey ryan did they keep the So's for two more years for some transition time?.Im hoping thats what i heard.
_________________
I have a dead hot water heater in my front yard. |
|
|
|
Wingspan34
2 thumbs up
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 5652
Location: Central NY
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:31 pm Post subject: |
#316 |
| flyhigh013 wrote: |
| Wingspan34 wrote: |
If it's such a great idea, then why didn't this issue get some BIG ARTICLE in the Nat Mag 2 - 3 months ago? All the positives could have been explained and we could all say "Gee, that makes lots of sense!" |
I ask all of you- WHAT consensus. I am NOT outraged that a group of people elected to lead us, are leading us. If you don't like the person leading your region, elect someone new. Or start a recall, that seems to be what all the cool kids are doing these days |
You can't have a consensus if you don't have active and intelligent discussions. That's not happening.
Elect someone new? Might be a good idea. My RD's been in his position for about 20 years. 
A recall? Could be doable, but I'd need to know how my RD voted in order to figure out if he's like-minded or not. But gee, the BoD and EC voted against making this easy or more possible. 
_________________
WW 141 Fusion SP
Master rated, First flight - May 1975
FL, PL, PA, AWCL, CL, FSL, RLF, TURB, X-C |
|
|
|
AIRTHUG
3 thumbs up
Joined: 09 Aug 2007
Posts: 6159
Location: Point of the Mountain, Draper, UT
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:34 pm Post subject: |
#317 |
| noman3 wrote: |
| hey ryan did they keep the So's for two more years for some transition time?.Im hoping thats what i heard. |
existing SO's have two more years, but there won't be any new SO's
_________________
Ryan Voight
BLOG: www.AIRTHUG.com
VIDEOS: http://vimeo.com/AIRTHUG |
|
|
|
noman3
1 thumbs up
Joined: 09 Jan 2009
Posts: 4621
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:38 pm Post subject: |
#318 |
| flyhigh013 wrote: |
| noman3 wrote: |
| hey ryan did they keep the So's for two more years for some transition time?.Im hoping thats what i heard. |
existing SO's have two more years, but there won't be any new SO's |
i feel like we were heard,if your around any of those guys,tell them the mcclure boys thank them very much.Now we can work through our problem and get or maintain a instructor in our area without having to scramble.Please tell them thankyou!. 
_________________
I have a dead hot water heater in my front yard. |
|
|
|
Wingspan34
2 thumbs up
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 5652
Location: Central NY
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:38 pm Post subject: |
#319 |
| flyhigh013 wrote: |
| Wingspan34 wrote: |
If it's such a great idea, then why didn't this issue get some BIG ARTICLE in the Nat Mag 2 - 3 months ago? All the positives could have been explained and we could all say "Gee, that makes lots of sense!" |
PS Bob, . . . I can honestly say (and I'm happy to be saying it), glad to see you chiming in here. |
Then you'd be in absolute Nirvana if we all had a USHPA RD web Forum with active two way member/rep participation. Come on Ryan, you can admit it. You'd be like all  
_________________
WW 141 Fusion SP
Master rated, First flight - May 1975
FL, PL, PA, AWCL, CL, FSL, RLF, TURB, X-C |
|
|
|
bobk
3 thumbs up
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
Posts: 1842
Location: San Diego
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:39 pm Post subject: |
#320 |
| flyhigh013 wrote: |
| Because what I see is an organization that tries and tries and tries, and does some good, and an angry mob mentality on the internet. |
I'm sorry Ryan, but I have to disagree with you here. David Beardslee was banned from Torrey for life back in 2007 and USHPA didn't do anything to help. None of his RDs did anything and no other Directors or members of the EC did anything. Brad Hall did work with Dave Jebb to formulate a "gag order" on Beardslee to let him fly again (gee thanks), but that was all, and Beardslee was right not to sign it. I was similarly banned for a year in April of 2008 and again, no one on the Board lifted a finger. Rich Hass made an offer to look into it, but he wasn't able to follow through. So both of us were left without any support from the organization that we were paying to keep us flying.
So you just can't call that an organization that "tries and tries and tries".
Support for the Torrey Hawks was another big issue (that we finally won). I had been asking for USHPA's support for a long time. In March of last year I finally got the Chapter Support Committee to agree that USHPA should support the Torrey Hawks. But Mark Forbes and a few others on the Board gutted the Chapter Support Committee's recommendation and left us without any support from USHPA on the Council at all. They held their ground on that issue until I finally got a vote last weekend to support adding another Chapter on the Soaring Council (thanks to all the Directors who supported that!!).
And let's not forget the secret ballot (Accountability Amendment) issue. I tried to bring it up at the Organization and Bylaws Committee meeting last week and Dave Wills refused to allow me to bring it to the floor. How could he do that? I also requested it at the full Board meeting and Lisa Tate also refused to let me bring it to the floor. How can they both just refuse to allow a motion? At the full Board meeting, I believe it was even being seconded but Lisa just refused to allow it to be discussed - period. I wonder how that will be recorded in the minutes? 
My point is that you are wrong to say that USHPA "tries and tries and tries". These examples (and many more - like barring Directors from EC meetings and writing nasty letters to Davis and myself) demonstrate that USHPA has NOT been trying very hard at all. None of these issues require much effort or much expense, and yet USHPA has stonewalled them. Why?
Having said all that, I think there's some light at the end of the tunnel, and this past meeting may have been a turning point for USHPA. While Lisa wouldn't allow the Accountability Amendment to be brought to the floor, I believe that was her last desperate attempt to keep it from passing. I believe that a majority of the Directors on the Board (including your Dad, Paul) are beginning to favor the Accountability Amendment, and I'll bet it will pass in the fall if there's someone there to push it through (another reason I hope I'm not recalled).
So while I don't think USHPA has tried and tried and tried in the past, I am hopeful that we may be about to see some changes. I'd like to see a more open EC and a more open Board. If we can get that, then there really will be less reason to complain, and we can finally start welcoming back some of the people who've left USHPA in the past. That's my goal, and I hope you'll join me in that goal Ryan.
By the way, it was good to see you at the Board meeting. I'm sorry I didn't have more time to chat, but it was a very busy meeting for me, and I spent 100% of my waking time concentrating on the many motions and reports that we had to deal with. I didn't win every issue, but I was very happy to get significant support from some of the other Directors - including your Dad on some issues. It was very much appreciated.
Sincerely,
Bob Kuczewski
_________________
Bob Kuczewski: H4/P4 - Torrey Hawks, CSS, SHGA, E-Team, Soboba Soaring, Founding Member of the HGAA
Learn to fly hang gliders • Join the Torrey Hawks • Fly the Big O Loop!!
"Hang Gliding must be represented by an organization that cannot survive without it" - gs |
|
|
|
|
Unanswered
Highest rated...
Topics
