[Bob Kuczewski]

Fellow Board Members,

I am opening this topic for the discussion of US Hawks Hang Gliding Ratings.

As background, the FAA issues pilot licenses that are good for life. However, in order to fly, a pilot must have both a license and meet certain medical and currency requirements. Meeting the currency requirements usually means having flown a particular type of aircraft within a certain amount of time. If a pilot hasn't flown that type of aircraft in that amount of time, then some sort of flight review / refreshing is needed before they can fly on their own.

USHPA does not have any flight currency requirements for their ratings. Instead, they use "continuity of membership". If your USHPA membership lapses for some amount of time (meaning you haven't paid them to renew), then your ratings may be in jeopardy. Similarly, if you haven't flown even once in decades - but have paid your annual fee - then they consider you qualified to fly at the level of your last rating.

I'd like this topic to discuss how the US Hawks would like to handle the issue of ratings both in the long term and the short term. In the long term, I think we would like to be able to issue our own ratings and accept "transfers" of ratings from other organizations such as USHPA. In the short term, I don't think we have the infrastructure to issue our own ratings, so I'd like us to focus on how we could accept ratings transfers from other organizations. This is particularly important now because some of our members may wish to resign from those other organizations, and it might be much easier to effect such a transfer before they allow their other memberships to expire than after.

My general feeling is that I'd like a convenient way to transfer ratings, and I'd also like our ratings to be more in line with the FAA model. But it's all open for discussion, and I welcome all thoughts in this topic.

Thanks.

[JoeF]

One rating: hang glider pilot: HGP. Accept any other org's rating into that one HGP.
Following one's HGP: Let the pilot have a dedicated topic place where he or she records his or her experiences.
Such a rating opens to ground skimmer specialists, tow-launch masters, masters of everything under the sun, etc. ... hundreds of variations of style, sites, participation, activities, wings, launch methods. Let the HGP post his or her mentor's comments. Examine how former rating systems play to the agenda's of manufacturers, of enthusiasts of a particular style of participation, beer sellers, FAI, ... The vast option space of hang gliding might be better served if exterior sifting screens are not ever funneling participants into a vanilla space of activity. Let the HGP rating be for life unconnected to "membership" dues; that is, let the actual story of a pilot be his or her credentials. Others may comment and discuss each pilot's story.
Avoid letting scaled ratings produce overconfidence. Keep in place .... "Am I ready for this flight today and right now?" Avoid letting a scaled ratings permit a flight session; keep the judgment call in the arena of the pilot.

Challenges:
What about competitions by beer companies? What about the energy of manufacturers that want their craft to be flown by a winner? What about bragging rights and other puffery plays? See, my listing of ratings is long and deep! See how I played some exterior game of adding ratings to my portfolio. Many scenarios. Many games to play. Many types of competitions to format. "I want others to recognize that I have a certain skill!" How might events "qualify" entrants; the event may have to limit the number of participants. Maybe the population of current participants have become so accustomed to ratings-driven participation, that other sorts or approaches to participation are even difficult to think about. A partial coverage of niche activity: http://www.energykitesystems.net/HGAusa/nicheHGA.html

Perhaps have two HGPs who formerly do not know a person study the aspiring person's story and observes the aspirant as a real live person doing some kind of hang gliding; then declare what was observed and state non-objection to the person adopting the HGP rating. Thus, some tradition verification of a real live person is made from the community; the aspirant member starts his or her story blog in USHawks. And the new HGP advances his or her own niche hang gliding activity with reports and observations, etc. Honor the variety of recreational hang gliding actions that are possible. Let others be inspired by the adventures that may not be the vanilla sort. Perhaps a written/oral exam over physics, aerodynamics, safety, airspace rules, risk management, property respect, etc. could be given from USHawks. Leave flight to the person and his or her mentors/instructors; report stories in one's HGP blog.

Having "HGP" rating means what? That one takes 100% responsibility for one's actions in a dance of gravity, physics, wind, materials, designs, people, and property.

Rely on a scaled rating and miss one fundamental care could result in injury or death, no matter how many years of participation or dues paying occurs. One fundamental care! Be ready now for what one intends doing. Let the USHawks reach out to a vast variety of hang gliding activity. Avoid selling a rating structure that cannot assure that one is ready right now for a particular action. Honor vigilance appropriate for an action.

Encourage an HGP to consult with others about sites and conditions. A habit of communicating might support the reality that each flight has its immediate peculiarities and one's immediate readiness level to face the action being taken.

Would such an HGP system work to have a richer hang gliding world than what is occurring? Will there be more or less accidents? Will HGPs race into conditions that will loudly bite them? Need such an open system bring chaos or order-through-wisdom?

Scenario: An HGP approaches the Torrey Pines cliffs. Let no "4" tradition stop him or her from launching. If the HGP decides to launch, then let it be; forget the -1,-2, -3, or -4 thing. Could we trust that the HGP had prepared for what could be faced in flights at the site for the present conditions? Hopefully, the involved HGP would have the habit of clearing matters actually, not by an exterior scaled rating system; both patterns have severe challenges; I am wanting a person to take 100% responsibility for his or her launch, flight, and return. Concessionaire: "Sign here. Pay. Are you ready?" HGP: "Here is my signature. Here is my fee. Yes, I am ready."

May the USHawks encourage wise 100% responsibility while supporting a wide variety of hang gliding participation.

[Bob Kuczewski]

One rating: hang glider pilot: HGP. Accept any other org's rating into that one HGP.

This is an interesting idea.

My first thought when reading it was that it wouldn't work because we'll need to be "compatible" with USHPA ratings to be able to fly at USHPA sites or to get equivalent insurance (when needed) for our own sites.

But we could issue a single "HGP" rating and use the "special skills" as a way to create compatible ratings. So we might issue someone an "HGP" with an "H3" special skill.

Good thoughts Joe!!

[Bob Kuczewski]

I like Joe's idea of creating a rating called hang gliding pilot, but to be consistent with the existing culture of the sport, I think we're also going to need a rating system that dovetails with the current de-facto standards set by USHPA.

  I therefore move that the US Hawks establish the following hang gliding rating system:  

• Hang Glider Pilot (HGP) - A Self-Declarative Rating
• Hawk 0 - Equivalent to USHPA's Hang 0
• Hawk 1 - Equivalent to USHPA's Hang 1
• Hawk 2 - Equivalent to USHPA's Hang 2
• Hawk 3 - Equivalent to USHPA's Hang 3
• Hawk 4 - Equivalent to USHPA's Hang 4
• Hawk 5 - Equivalent to USHPA's Hang 5

Pilots who can demonstrate that they hold any of those USHPA ratings will be granted the equivalent US Hawks Rating. Furthermore, US Hawks ratings will follow the precedent set by the FAA - namely that they are good for life. The US Hawks may impose flight currency and other requirements to fly (as the FAA does), but the rating itself will be good for life unless removed for cause. Finally, the US Hawks will establish a special "Ratings" forum containing a "Rated Member's Only" section (similar to the current Blog Forum) where the US Hawks records issued ratings and where each pilot is also allowed to start one topic to document their qualifications as an HGP.

  End of Motion  

Would anyone like to second this motion?

[SamKellner]

  I second that motion  

[Bob Kuczewski]

Thanks Sam!!!



OK, the motion has been seconded. So let's vote.

  I vote Yes.  

[SamKellner]

  YES  

[JoeF]

  Yes vote on the rating system.  

[Bill Cummings]

  YES on the rating system.  

[wingspan33]

I vote YEA as well.