Re: CPC: Re: tandems/ legality

[Steve Forslund]

WRONG NO LAWS WERE BROKEN !! A tandem pilot instructor who has a bit of
a history making questionable decisions ( more than a couple at
Oceanside Opens) did a bad attempt at launching in strong cross wind and
got hurt (passenger may have had slight injury?) Pilots from our club
raised their concern before hand. Why do you say we have a culture that
does not address these type of issues? That is not what I have observed
as I see pilots who seem comfortable to call out other pilots. Not sure
it was a horrible idea but a heavier passenger and a more skilled tandem
pilot would have been a better match for conditions


SF



On 5/1/2017 5:37 PM, l.dan...@comcast.net wrote:
>
> I will clarify that I was aware of the tandem exception rule and its
> stipulations. I still saw what was going on that saturday, thought it
> was a horrible idea, considered what appropriate action could take
> place and did nothing. I have also broke laws before. The point is we
> still do not have a culture that has adapted to preventing these
> potential diseasters (for the record there were some people who tried
> to discourage him). Dirk was largely just making it clear that a
> federal law was broken and that does affect us. He was addressing the
> concept that the specific circumstances surrounding this particular
> incident and its larger context could be detrimental to the
> "advancement of paragliding and hang gliding in this region" and a
> discussion could result in "the education of its members in safety and
> general knowledge of the sport, the development and maintenance of
> local flying sites". I read those words somewhere recently but can't
> remember where. Dirk was stating that this is a topic of interest to
> the club and should be discussed: If there is an action that we can
> take which would be of utilitarian value to the club, then we should
> listen to those ideas if they are brought up. Yes pitchforks are bad
> and noone wants to hurt anyone be they pilots, rogue pilots or unaware
> "instructees". Someone who knows what they are getting into is much
> more vulnerable than an unassuming potential pilot so I am less
> worried about offending the former's sensibilities. Let's bring ideas
> to the meeting tommorow and discuss in productive manner that is
> helpful to our community as well as the people who wander through our
> path!
>
> Luke
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Dirk Larson
> Sent: Monday, May 01, 2017 2:11 PM
> To: sseib...@gmail.com
> Cc: CPC List
> Subject: Re: CPC: tandems/ legality
>
> Thank you Steve,
>
> Forgive my tardiness to officially address this but Luke and I were
> not the education of its members in safety and general knowledge of
> the sport, the development and maintenance of local flying sites fully
> aware of what violations were being broken until yesterday.
>
> Officially Cascade Paragliding Club condemns any violation of FAR part
> 103 and we ask that anyone violating FAR part 103 cease immediately.
>
> We have a meeting tomorrow night and I invite anyone who wishes to
> have their voice heard please show up or write myself or Luke
> Danielson an email regarding this. There has been talk about our club
> taking further action and if that is to happen there needs to be some
> kind of consensus. This is not a monarchy this is a democratic club of
> paragliding pilots who come together to keep our beloved sport
> healthy, and protect each others lives and the lives of anyone who
> becomes involved in our sport. Understanding that, Luke and I will not
> take any actions unless we as a club unanimously agree to do so.
>
> As a further reminder, the two flying sites that Reed Gleason owns
> both require an USHPA or foreign equivalency membership to fly there.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Dirk Larson
> CPC President
>
>
> Sent from my smartphone
>
>> On May 1, 2017, at 10:32 AM, Steve Seibel <sseib...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I keep hearing bits and pieces of things, usually posted under some
>> other non-connected heading like "Cape Lookout Sunday". I do not know
>> whether anyone is or is not flying tandem passengers without holding
>> an appropriate tandem rating. If they are, they are violating FAR
>> part 103. As opposed to a solo hang glider/ paraglider pilot who can
>> fly wherever they want (so long as airspace limitations are respected)
>> without violating any FAR, regardless of what rating they hold or
>> regardless of whether they are even a USHPA member. Just something to
>> keep in mind.
>>
>> Stefe
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "Cascade Paragliding Club" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>> send an email to cpcl+uns...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

[Steve Forslund]

 On my way to work in a bit, no beer. So are you saying USHPA has the only exemption issued for tandems ? Want to clarify that?

SF

On 5/1/2017 6:23 PM, Discover Paragliding! wrote:

Put down the beer Steve. Yes, laws were broken. Without exemption 4721, you are NOT allowed to fly tandem. It is a federal law.

Brad

See you up there!

Brad and Maren
Your 'Couple' of Instructors
2015 USHPA Instructors of the Year!
www.DiscoverParagliding.com
Phone: 503-440-0733 (c)

[Steve Forslund]

  John informed me he was under the ASC rating Well after looking, bored waiting for a night shift, I do not see John's name on the ASC site. It is not easy to search so I may be mistaken.

John can you clarify your status?

For those not aware very few are renewing tandem/ instructor rating with USHPA. With places like Torrey Pines and Sun Valley going with Aero Sports Connection for tandem exemptions

http://www.aerosports.org/

SF

On 5/1/2017 6:34 PM, Discover Paragliding! wrote:

No, not the only. The ASC also has one, but John is not in possession of that one either. No exemption that any of us have been able to trace down.

Do you have info on which body he might have an exemption with? Please disclose so we can put all this to rest.

Brad

See you up there!

Brad and Maren
Your 'Couple' of Instructors
2015 USHPA Instructors of the Year!
www.DiscoverParagliding.com
Phone: 503-440-0733 (c)

On 5/1/2017 6:32 PM, Steve Forslund wrote:

 On my way to work in a bit, no beer. So are you saying USHPA has the only exemption issued for tandems ? Want to clarify that?ohn informed me he was flying under

[Discover Paragliding!]

ASC - Impressive. Looking directly on their home page, they say:

Staying connected with your

aviation accident attorney

is just as important as keeping up with your Aerosports news.

Here is what the attorney advertises on their home page:

"Our law firm has achieved record jury verdicts in private aviation accident lawsuits, including the two highest jury verdicts ever in helicopter crash trials: a $350 million verdict for a pilot killed in a Life Flight helicopter crash, and a separate $70 million verdict for a passenger killed in that same helicopter crash."

Is this the direction we want the paragliding industry to go in the US?

I have been aware of the ASC for years. It's worth noting that I have never considered ASC membership, nor do I plan to do so.

Brad

See you up there!

Brad and Maren
Your 'Couple' of Instructors
2015 USHPA Instructors of the Year!
www.DiscoverParagliding.com
Phone: 503-440-0733 (c)

[Steve Forslund]

 Well for now anyway. It may not be what you or we or they want but that is where it is going. I don't think you and Maren need USHPA to be competent safe processional instructors and USHPA has not exactly held pilots and instructors to high standards even if they do have a nice website

SF

[l.dan...@comcast.net]

My statement about our culture may have been overstated :) ! I do think
improvements can be made however: Isn't that what we should be striving for
as human beings or at least collectively as a club??? Steve I love man and
your do a great job of making points that many of us don't think of and you
often defend things that others aren't willing to defend: That's awesome!!
In this case I feel like you are picking apart bits of a conversation that
is about something a little bigger. Yeah my culture statement could have
been state better, but I do believe a law was broken (you mentioned it in
plural) and the pilot of concern had plenty of time to clarify his status
with any recognized organization. He obviously follows our group and the
legality of what he is doing has been brought up by other people without
this pilot offering an explanation (this is according to the people who
spoke with him and whose word I respect). Why hasn't he brought up the fact
that he has a rating if this is obviously a big issue (yes I know you can
find reasons but they probably won't be very good ones)! Also to clarify
about your insinuation that a couple pilots raising concerns means that
there is not a culture issue is also probably a poor correlation. I know of
lots of cultures that had people raise concerns while a large majority let
something happen (US history as well as history book of any other country
will have plenty of examples) ... It doesn't mean we are bad people but we
could figure out a way to improve our culture so fewer unsuspecting pilots
are not put in harms way.

Now off to why I a getting frustrated with this conversation. Steve, you
remember a long discussion thread about 3 years ago that we were a part of
(some others reading this were probably a part of it also). It started with
condemnations followed criticism followed by criticisms of criticisms.
Basically comments were just getting picked apart with very little progress
using the potential positive aspects of the conversation to work toward
something could be useful. One decent solution finally came up at the end
and I (President at the time) asked the person who very adamately brought up
the complaint about the pilot (and whom offered a decent solution at the
end) to do a little leg work and nothing happened after that. What ended up
happening was that I met with this pilot and had a nice but honest talk at a
restaurant (actual that idea came from Steve who said "why don't you just
talk to him"). During that whole discusion I sent out offers to call me so
we could talk more thoroughly about the situation and maybe brainstorm some
positive ideas but I guess my cell service was gone and so the criticisms of
criticisms continued happily through the internet machine (kind of like what
I am probably doing). With all this jiberish you probably are wondering
what my point is. I have the concept but am have a hard time verbalizing
it. I think that I am trying to say that if we are concerned about
improvement and don't like what is being put out there than lets come up
with a better solution instead picking everything apart (we aren't corporate
raiders ;) ). Anyone can find problems with anything but solutions are much
difficult to come by. We have a lot of smart creative people in our club (I
am probably not one of them), so lets move forward and do something
productive and useful with this! Lets show up at the meeting with some
ideas, or at least an open mind, to discuss anything that may help make the
subject of this thread safer and less of a threat to our hobby and those who
may briefly happen upon it!

Peace out,

Luke

ps. The preceding opinions are my own and do not represent the CPC, Dirk,
Mark, SuperD, Elvis, the Mario Brothers or any other entity living or dead!

[Discover Paragliding!]

While I agree that Maren and I certainly don't need USHPA to continue teaching as safely as possible, I would contend that we need USHPA to have any reason to teach at all. Without USHPA, our flying sites would be few and far between by now, or at least in the near future I think.

Brad

See you up there!

Brad and Maren
Your 'Couple' of Instructors
2015 USHPA Instructors of the Year!
www.DiscoverParagliding.com
Phone: 503-440-0733 (c)

[l.dan...@comcast.net]

They just don’t hold Steve to high standards but it has nothing to do with paragliding

 

From: Steve Forslund

Sent: Monday, May 01, 2017 7:34 PM

To: cp...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: CPC: Re: tandems/ legality

 

Well for now anyway. It may not be what you or we or they want but that is where it is going. I don't think you and Maren need USHPA to be competent safe processional instructors and USHPA has not exactly held pilots and instructors to high standards even if they do have a nice website

[Steve Forslund]

USHPA choose to do nothing in the past with problem pilots and they
have a bigger stick to swing then we do. Not sure what we can do short
of being a fun and welcoming group. Peer pressure is a tricky thing and
is usually more one on one when it is works. Don't see club actions,
sanctions etc.. doing much positive for the club. As a friend of Reed
and a responsible pilot I mentioned my concerns regarding Reed's
liability to my friend John who stated "You're right I don't want to
put Reed at risk."

So my spin is if pilots want a culture of safety and responsibility it
is fairly easy. Speak out, state your concern and don't get bent out of
shape if someone does not take it well. Also don't get bent out of shape
if someone questions you. But use some charity and realize we all don't
have the same goals, skills or risk management. I thing there may be
more pilots out there quietly steering others to better behavior then
you realize. I tend to launch quickly and get away sometimes not due to
conditions but because I don't like what I am seeing or don't want to
get caught up in pulling a wing out of a tree. You can get a bit jaded
watching the same story unfold year after year.

And yes I am working the night shift without much to do, should sneak in
a nap and go flying tomorrow

SF

[Steve Forslund]

  I watch seasoned USHPA tandem pilots at Tiger routinely slide their passengers in for a landing (seems like more of a crash). I see the biggest school their launching new pilots from the south launch in tricky conditions, SE thermic, with the lz way around a corner while solo pilots are debating if it is worth flying. So this is what is keeping our sport viable.  OK OK there are plenty of great teachers and tandem pilots out there but the fact there is such a gulf does not lead me to believe the necessity of an organization that has not seemed to be able to handle enforcement or standards.

SF