[Bob Kuczewski]

John Kangas up in Idaho would be a good addition to the USHGRS list of pilots.

You may also find some other leads for USHGRS ratings here:

http://johnheiney.com/articles/hawks_in ... rviews.htm

[Bob Kuczewski]

After a discussion with Joe Faust, I've asked the US Hawks Board to approve a forum to collect the individual pilot topics that Joe has been posting to the history section. These can link to each pilot's USHGRS page (as Joe has recently been doing). They can also provide an easier way for pilots to make information available to the USHGRS team.

Update: The U.S. Hawks Board passed the motion on January 24th, 2019.

[Bob Kuczewski]

On hanggliding.org, "Wonder Boy" wrote:

RE: HOW MANY HG INSTRUCTORS IN THE USA???
By Wonder Boy
-  Sun Feb 10, 2019 6:17 pm

With the last revision USHPA did, I dont know how anyone can become in instructor. 

Listen to the deep concern from Jack Axaopoulos alias "sg":

RE: HOW MANY HG INSTRUCTORS IN THE USA???
By sg
-  Sun Feb 10, 2019 6:39 pm

Damn... hard to imagine the logic of putting up MORE entry barriers like this in a sport that is struggling this much already.

Liar.

Jack Axaopoulos is a master at putting up entry barriers in hang gliding. Just look at the people and ideas he's silenced:

1) Jack Axaopoulos silenced Scott Wise when Scott was building the HGAA as its Chairman. The HGAA was intended to be an alternative to USHPA, but Jack killed it.

2) Jack Axaopoulos bans all mention of either the US Hawks or the Torrey Hawks. Both organizations have a long history of working to promote hang gliding.

3) Jack Axaopoulos banned the only USHPA Regional Director working to get fair representation for hang gliding at Torrey Pines.

4) Jack Axaopoulos banned Joe Faust. Joe Faust has been promoting hang gliding long before Jack even knew how to spell it.

5) Jack Axaopoulos bans all mention of USHGRS. USHGRS is an approach to solve the rating stranglehold of USHPA, but Jack won't even allow that acronym to be posted on hanggliding.org.

Yet Jack writes:

Damn... hard to imagine the logic of putting up MORE entry barriers like this in a sport that is struggling this much already.

Liar.

[Bob Kuczewski]

USHGRS continues to add new pilots!!!

Thanks Joe!!

[Bob Kuczewski]

From Oz:

Is USHPA membership still a requirement at the majority of hang glider flying sites in the USA? In my state, the answer is "no".

Here is a quote from the USHPA website:

the majority of flying sites in the US require that pilots hold some specific USHPA rating to be allowed to fly.

https://www.ushpa.org/page/hang-gliding ... -questions

Although the Florida flight parks are not USHPA insured, I do believe that they require USHPA membership.

I would be willing to pay them an equal fee as USHPA and fly with my USHGRS rating.

http://ushgrs.org/

Swift!!!!   

[SamKellner]

YES !

[Bob Kuczewski]

Wow. I just read the entire section of USHPA's web site that Cloud Hopper had quoted:

Do pilots need to be licensed to fly hang gliders?

Not really, but a program analogous to FAA licensing exists and is administered by the USHPA (U.S. Hang Gliding & Paragliding Association). This program consists of a specific set of flying skills corresponding to a series of pilot proficiency ratings (Beginner through Master) each of which carries a set of recommended operating limitations. Beginner rated pilots, for instance, should only fly from hills under 100 ft in height in mild winds and under the guidance of an instructor.

While these ratings don’t carry the force of law in quite the same way as FAA pilot’s licenses do, the majority of flying sites in the US require that pilots hold some specific USHPA rating to be allowed to fly.

That is filled with half-truths and some outright lies. Take this part for example:

While these ratings don’t carry the force of law in quite the same way as FAA pilot’s licenses do ...

      "... the force of law in quite the same way ..." ?
      "... the force of law in quite the same way ..." ?
      "... the force of law in quite the same way ..." ?

How about "... the force of law in no way at all!!" ?

[JoeF]

Some notes to sg
1. USHGRS is not an "opt-in" system. However, a pilot may feed information to USHGRS for enhancing a USHGRS file on the HG Pilot; instructors, observers, etc. may feed USHGRS information about a HG pilot who has used US airspace for hang gliding. Feeding information does not guarantee changes or rating. Ratings are not for sale. No fees are collected for ratings.
2. USHGRS is not an "opt-out" system.
3. USHGRS does not do mass emailings to those pilots rated by the agency USHGRS.
4. Ratings are the result of USHGRS rating efforts. The ratings are for life. USHGRS is solely responsible for a stated rating. USHGRS ratings are not an archive of some other agency's dealings.
5. Information may arrive to USHGRS for placement in a ratings file for potential review by USHGRS for potential advancing a rating. Any persons including pilots are ever invited to send information to USHGRS
6. Having a rating from some other rating system does not guarantee USHGRS will rate the pilot at or below or above the rating of some other rating agency.
7. USHGRS ratings are based on a file of information obtained from a multitude of sources; any source does not rule; USHGRS makes a fresh determination over a HG pilot's file to reach a USHGRS rating for the HG pilot.
8. Ratings are not for sale. No fees are collected for ratings.
9. A pilot rated by USHGRS need not have been rated by any other person or entity or agency. Some USHGRS rated RHG pilots have no rating from any other person or agency. A rating by USHGRS thus might be the first and maybe only rating applied over a RHG pilot.
10. An RHG pilot may have his or her own self-rating or/and be rated by other agencies. USHGRS is just one independent rating agency. The public is also free to rate HG pilots via notes in newspapers, magazines, books, etc.; such public rating of pilots is an ever blossoming activity. Property owners may also rate pilots according to the property-owners' criteria.

sg,
Apparently you have had some mistaken conceptions about USHGRS. As always, I presented clarifications and present opportunity for any further clarifications, as needed. Rash holding to mistaken conceptions may be reversed by study, discussion, and fine-tuned clarifying back-and-forth talking. Closing the door to open dialogue does not help to reach clarity. Rash erroneous conclusions are fodder for confusion. You are invited to open the rashly closed topic in your forum and rather continue a fair discussion of the USHGRS rating system. Letting some posters' misconceptions move you to stop the sharing process is sad; consider honoring discourse itself. Else, this present forum may be the place where you may place notes, questions, challenges, etc. Welcome.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Many hands to lighten the load ...

Joe Faust has been carrying the full load for USHGRS since he had that brilliant idea. But with a little recent help from his friends, that should be changing soon. We're working on a collaborative system where more people can help lighten the load.

The details are still being worked out, but it will likely be using a collaborative on-line tool (like GitLab or GitHub) where a rating team can do the work that Joe had been doing alone. I've been working on a prototype at GitLab, and here's what it looks like:

This is from the current USHGRS web site http://ushgrs.org:

USHGRS_ORG.png (174.72 KiB) Viewed 3671 times

This is the version being worked on at GitLab https://ushgrs.gitlab.io:

USHGRS_at_GitLab.png (194.91 KiB) Viewed 3671 times

As you can see, they're nearly identical. The difference is that the GitLab version can more easily be updated by a team of people. That's the whole purpose of Git - to make it easier for people to work together on a common project.

Ultimately, I am hoping that the GitLab version will be the place of collaboration, but USHGRS.org itself will be where the result of the collaboration becomes "official". The Git repository will likely contain several parallel branches. In the simplest case, there will be a "contributions" branch where new ratings are initially entered. That branch might have all kinds of mistakes (misspellings, misformatting, broken links, etc.). After review and fixing, those ratings can move to the published branch which gets published on USHGRS.org itself.

[JoeF]

Hopes are high on such a neat announcement!
Walk, run, fly ...!