.

.

All topics the user community has voted to take off the front page are moved here.
Click on the "BURY this topic" link at the top of each topic to vote to bury a topic and take it off the front page.

Moderator: mods

By Phoenix
#245745
srskypuppy wrote:It’s not about being righteous, perfect or absolute. I’d guess that everyone here has broken some rule at one point or another and I think some rules can be broken without having tangible negative effect on anyone.**
For instance, I drive over the speed limit on FWY-280 and I don’t care if anyone else speeds as long as they are in control. I know I’m breaking the law so if I get a speeding ticket I don’t complain, I just pay my fine and deal with it. And if through my conscious violation of the law I lose my license, I won’t blame the cop or the judge.

**(One might argue that by speeding I use more gas, contribute to global warming and hasten the end of civilization, but I’d like to not get to that level of minutiae)

In contrast, I am very careful to obey the speed limit or drive even slower when passing a school or playground because I don’t want to run over a child, and I get really pissed off when I see some knucklehead blasting through a crosswalk just because they don’t see any kids around. I think these A-holes should have their drivers license pulled and wish there were more cops around when we need them!

I think we can draw some parallels to hang gliding, where some rules can be ignored but others can’t.

For instance, I’m sure we all agree that teaching students safely and getting them into hang gliding is a good thing. But not everyone has their private training facility and these instructors need to use another venue, which is oftentimes public. This is where there are some rules, IMHO, that for the good of the sport, can be overlooked, equally for everyone, because they support training and flying and yet don’t put anyone or the site in jeopardy.
Some sites, and for the sake of their preservation should remain nameless (Hint to everyone), have been used for training for decades without issue because everyone keeps a relatively low profile and follows the rules that keep people safe.

On the other hand, there are some rules that can’t be overlooked, for anyone, because they absolutely do jeopardize the flying site.

For example, rules that prohibit launching a student from a site that they are not qualified to fly from, or teaching someone without having them sign a waiver first, these are the kind of violations can get a site shut down. So when someone comes in and violates rules like these, they need to be reigned in to protect the flying site.

So while all this makes sense to me, it DOES make it hard to not look hypocritical when we condemn a person for breaking one rule while we don’t enforce a different rule.

My belief is that while we don’t absolutely have to enforce every rule, what rules we do enforce need to be applied equally to everyone.
The buck stops with this one, folks! Spot On, Steve!
User avatar
By srskypuppy
#245747
The buck stops with this one, folks! Spot On, Steve![/quote]

Thanks! I wonder though, with all my brilliant observations and astute suggestions, how come I only have one "thumbs up"?

I'm such a failure.
By Phoenix
#245748
srskypuppy wrote:The buck stops with this one, folks! Spot On, Steve!
Thanks! I wonder though, with all my brilliant observations and astute suggestions, how come I only have one "thumbs up"?

I'm such a failure.[/quote]

Sporked! Were all shootin for three thumbs down here. :rofl:
User avatar
By BubbleBoy
#245764
selbaer wrote:wow, it's thousands now...just walking away shaking my head...you're a really smart cookie
It's always been thousands selbaer -- it went on for years and Malcolm reported regularly how many ~ tandems he was doing per year.

JB
User avatar
By SeeMarkFly
#245767
The punishment does NOT fit the crime.
srskypuppy wrote:I’m willing to forgive Mike and with certain conditions, give him a second chance.
You are just setting him up for permanent revocation, not forgiveness.
Dave Wills wrote:I am permitting you to apply for re-instatement of the revoked certifications and rating, with the following conditions:

1. You will need to petition a committee comprised of local pilots for re-instatement. The members of the committee are at my sole discretion and can change at any time. A preliminary list of members is;

Urs Kellenberger, USHPA Region 2 Director
Steve Rodrigues, USHPA Director-At-Large
Paul Gazis, former USHPA Region 2 Director, WOR President Elect
Karl Allmendinger, WOR Vice President, WOR Safety Director Elect
Dave Wills, USHPA Region 2 Director

The petition must be made to me and I will convene the committee. Scheduling of committee meetings is at my sole discretion.

2. You will be allowed to submit evidence that your behavior has changed and that you will obey FAA FARs, USHPA SOPs, and site regulations at all sites. The committee will determine whether you will be permitted to submit written evidence, oral evidence or both to the committee. Even if you are permitted to present oral information to the committee, committee discussion of the petition will be made in closed session.

3. Additional conditions for re-instatement of your certifications and rating are as follows:

a. Each certification or rating will be considered separately. If the petition for any certification or rating is denied, you must wait a minimum of 6 months before making a new petition.

b. You may petition for re-instatement of your Basic Instructor certification no sooner than 6 months from the date of this letter.

c. You may petition for approval to receive a Tandem 2 rating no sooner than 6 months from the date of this letter.

d. You may petition for re-instatement of your Advanced Instructor certification no sooner than 6 months from the date of re-instatement of your Basic Instructor certification.

e. You may petition for re-instatement of your Tandem Instructor certification no sooner than 6 months from the date of re-instatement of your Tandem 2 rating.

f. If the petition for re-instatement of your Basic or Advanced Instructor certification is approved by the committee, you will need to be re-certified by an Instructor Administrator. The Instructor Administrator must receive a copy of this letter prior to certification.

g. If the petition for appointment of a Tandem 2 rating or re-instatement of your Tandem Instructor certification is approved by the committee, you will need to be re-appointed or re-certified by a Tandem Administrator. The Tandem Administrator must receive a copy of this letter prior to certification. The Tandem Administrator must be someone other than Bill Cuddy.

h. The committee is the sole jury as to whether to permit re-instatement of the revoked certifications or rating. The committee’s decision is final and cannot be appealed.

4. You must acknowledge that you have received the warning that further violations will lead to the permanent revocation of your certifications and ratings without possibility of re-instatement.
further violations will lead to the permanent revocation
You are NOT teaching him how to be a good "salesman".
You are teaching him how to get along WITHOUT the USHpA.
To be specific.
THIS punishment does not fit THIS crime.

I'm going to give Mike a few free lessons in Wind Sliding.
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.ph ... 431#173431
(i choose to HELP Mike)
User avatar
By AIRTHUG
#245770
BubbleBoy wrote:
AIRTHUG wrote:So then you agree with the revocation this thread is based on?
No, we do NOT agree. You have stated that you hold a position (you support it). I hold no position as to the specific revocation as I have nowhere near enough knowledge of the situation to take a position.

What I DO know is that Mike didn't flaunt the rules for years, taking *thousands* of people tandem against the law. Thus if I were to support Malcolm getting off scott free, it would be hypocritcal of me to ask for the rating of someone who did the same thing several thousand times fewer.
Ok, so then you're posting to a topic in which you have no opinion. I wonder why we're not getting anywhere :crazy:

I'll leave it at this: You are comparing difference cases, with different details, and 15+ years of separation. Times have changed, and we're under closer observation than we were then (this you can not argue with). Once case was done on the person's private property (in other words, he didn't risk losing a site).

I'm afraid these cases are apples and oranges, albeit you have made them sound comparable.

And, just because I know it will get you steaming, I'll leave you with this: While I wasn't involved in the decision regarding Malcolm, I know of NO negative consequences incurred regarding USHPA or the FAA by them choosing to not yank his ratings. In fact, I know many pilots that have come from Wallaby ranch since then. However, today, I can think of *many* negative consequences that can come from doing illegal tandems, at a sensitive site no less.

So I guess I still feel the same... and you can call it hypocrisy if that's how you see it.... but I think each case deserves it's own review... and I think things have changed over 15+ years, and we can't be as loose as we once were...

all my .02. I see nothing in this that you can argue with (it is all statement of my personal opinion).... so can we move on?
By Billyjoe
#245771
dayhead wrote:I just got the latest issue of the USHPA magazine. It mentions that two instructor pilots have had their ratings revoked.

This arouses my curiosity. Anyone here know why this happened?
Holy s--- Steve, aren't you glad you asked?
User avatar
By BubbleBoy
#245774
AIRTHUG wrote:Ok, so then you're posting to a topic in which you have no opinion. I wonder why we're not getting anywhere :crazy:
You notoriously suck at logic and reason. It's clear I have an opinion on the topic and it differs from your -- punishment should not depend on your position in the sport. PERIOD!!!
Once case was done on the person's private property (in other words, he didn't risk losing a site).
Yeah, not risking a site -- merely our ENTIRE TANDEM PROGRAM!! Stop trying to minize it and pretend it wasn't a big deal.

Our #1 tow site in all the country was openly violating the FAA regulation. Any FAA inspector could merely drive up and ask for a tandem and then shut all of us down.
So I guess I still feel the same...
See Bart? Nothing "false" about the accusation.

JB
User avatar
By SeeMarkFly
#245775
Ryan wrote:................................
BubbleBoy wrote:................................

The punishment does NOT fit the crime.
srskypuppy wrote:I’m willing to forgive Mike and with certain conditions, give him a second chance.
You are just setting him up for permanent revocation, not forgiveness.
Dave Wills wrote:I am permitting you to apply for re-instatement of the revoked certifications and rating, with the following conditions:

1. You will need to petition a committee comprised of local pilots for re-instatement. The members of the committee are at my sole discretion and can change at any time. A preliminary list of members is;

Urs Kellenberger, USHPA Region 2 Director
Steve Rodrigues, USHPA Director-At-Large
Paul Gazis, former USHPA Region 2 Director, WOR President Elect
Karl Allmendinger, WOR Vice President, WOR Safety Director Elect
Dave Wills, USHPA Region 2 Director

The petition must be made to me and I will convene the committee. Scheduling of committee meetings is at my sole discretion.

2. You will be allowed to submit evidence that your behavior has changed and that you will obey FAA FARs, USHPA SOPs, and site regulations at all sites. The committee will determine whether you will be permitted to submit written evidence, oral evidence or both to the committee. Even if you are permitted to present oral information to the committee, committee discussion of the petition will be made in closed session.

3. Additional conditions for re-instatement of your certifications and rating are as follows:

a. Each certification or rating will be considered separately. If the petition for any certification or rating is denied, you must wait a minimum of 6 months before making a new petition.

b. You may petition for re-instatement of your Basic Instructor certification no sooner than 6 months from the date of this letter.

c. You may petition for approval to receive a Tandem 2 rating no sooner than 6 months from the date of this letter.

d. You may petition for re-instatement of your Advanced Instructor certification no sooner than 6 months from the date of re-instatement of your Basic Instructor certification.

e. You may petition for re-instatement of your Tandem Instructor certification no sooner than 6 months from the date of re-instatement of your Tandem 2 rating.

f. If the petition for re-instatement of your Basic or Advanced Instructor certification is approved by the committee, you will need to be re-certified by an Instructor Administrator. The Instructor Administrator must receive a copy of this letter prior to certification.

g. If the petition for appointment of a Tandem 2 rating or re-instatement of your Tandem Instructor certification is approved by the committee, you will need to be re-appointed or re-certified by a Tandem Administrator. The Tandem Administrator must receive a copy of this letter prior to certification. The Tandem Administrator must be someone other than Bill Cuddy.

h. The committee is the sole jury as to whether to permit re-instatement of the revoked certifications or rating. The committee’s decision is final and cannot be appealed.

4. You must acknowledge that you have received the warning that further violations will lead to the permanent revocation of your certifications and ratings without possibility of re-instatement.
further violations will lead to the permanent revocation
You are NOT teaching him how to be a good "salesman".
You are teaching him how to get along WITHOUT the USHpA.
To be specific.
THIS punishment does not fit THIS crime.

I'm going to give Mike a few free lessons in Wind Sliding.
http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.ph ... 431#173431
(i choose to HELP Mike)
User avatar
By CHassan
#245776
AIRTHUG wrote: Times have changed, and we're under closer observation than we were then (this you can not argue with).
Closer observation by who?
User avatar
By Rebardan
#245782
Times have changed, and we're under closer observation than we were then (this you can not argue with).


sez who?
you?
Last edited by Rebardan on Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By NMERider
#245783
AIRTHUG wrote:....It is illegal to fly after sunset... but I know people do it anyway (knowing it's illegal)...
Wrong! Read the FARs
User avatar
By Rebardan
#245784
NMERider wrote:
AIRTHUG wrote:....It is illegal to fly after sunset... but I know people do it anyway (knowing it's illegal)...
Wrong! Read the FARs
and take the H3 test again
User avatar
By fakeDecoy
#245786
Can I have Mike's ratings if he doesn't get them back? Where are they being held? Is someone at USHPA using them for their own means? Isn't that identity theft? I don't think we should just stand by while they steal all our identities. I can't believe they're committing felonies now. They probably only gave Mike the ratings to begin with cuz they knew they could take them away and start using them in secret meetings.
User avatar
By CHassan
#245787
Come now, Ryan has already instructed us on FAR 10 with this posting. Have YOU read FAA FAR part 103???
User avatar
By AIRTHUG
#245789
CHassan wrote:
AIRTHUG wrote: Times have changed, and we're under closer observation than we were then (this you can not argue with).
Closer observation by who?
FAA
Rebardan wrote:sez who?
you?
Since I'm quoted saying it... I guess yea, 'sez' me :crazy:
But you can also ask anyone at the board level. Ask the tandem chair...

Or just look around you- laws are getting tighter and tighter enforced on a daily basis. I don't like it... but knowing it's the case we need to act accordingly...
NMERider wrote:
AIRTHUG wrote:....It is illegal to fly after sunset... but I know people do it anyway (knowing it's illegal)...
Wrong! Read the FARs
It's illegal to fly after sunset. There are stipulations to where it CAN be done legally, with proper precautions. But that is different than saying it's LEGAL... It is ILLEGAL... with exceptions:
Part 103.11
A. No person may operate an ultralight vehicle except between the hours of sunrise and sunset.
B. Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section, ultralight vehicles may be operated during the twilight periods 30 minutes before official sunrise and 30 minutes after official sunset or, in Alaska, during the period of civil twilight as defined in the Air Almanac, if:
1. the vehicle is equipped with an operating anti-collision light visible for at least 3 statute miles; and
2. all operations are conducted in uncontrolled airspace.
FYI- the uncontrolled airspace clause often gets overlooked. Most of our flying is in class E airspace, which I do not believe counts as 'uncontrolled'. The only airspace I can think of that meets that definition would be G airspace... which is surface-1200 ft agl, unless otherwise noted where it is 700 ft agl (or something like that).
User avatar
By AIRTHUG
#245790
BubbleBoy wrote:It's clear I have an opinion on the topic and it differs from your -- punishment should not depend on your position in the sport. PERIOD!!!
I guess it's not THAT clear... because I agree punishment should not depend on position in the sport.... but I do think no two cases are the same, and each needs to be looked at individually (and THEN all of them looked at as a whole).

My point is these are two different cases, no matter how much you would like them to be comparable, there were major differences... namely 15+ years between them...
User avatar
By SlopeSkimmer
#245796
[quote="fakeDecoy"]Can I have Mike's ratings if he doesn't get them back? Where are they being held? Is someone at USHPA using them for their own means? Isn't that identity theft? I don't think we should just stand by while they steal all our identities. I can't believe they're committing felonies now. They probably only gave Mike the ratings to begin with cuz they knew they could take them away and start using them in secret meetings.[/quote]

Wow, this topic has gone crazy. We even have USHPA thugs trying pick a fight with other members here. Please keep this on topic folks. I don't have all day spend reading about peoples petty flame wars.

Dave, you misread the revocation letter that someone leaked out to the membership. Dave Wills has made it so HE will not give me my old ratings back. HE and his friends, (who can change at any time), may only allow me the right to earn back new ratings. This processes could take years due to the fact that we have only one administrator in region 2 who does not do his administrative duties. Dave Wills has also said in writing that Bill Cuddy can not do it. Is Billy not qualified? Dave, the bottom line is, if DW allows me, I may get [b]new[/b] ratings. I didn't want the [b]old[/b] ratings anyway, they were way too slippery and hard to hold on to.
User avatar
By SeeMarkFly
#245798
AIRTHUG wrote:laws are getting tighter and tighter enforced on a daily basis. I don't like it... but knowing it's the case we need to act accordingly...
Yes, the proper reaction is revolt.
Revolt sometimes takes a lot of time.
Oooohh yea, you've got a hang gliding business to run, you can't AFFORD to revolt.
User avatar
By flysurfski
#245800
BubbleBoy wrote:
Once case was done on the person's private property (in other words, he didn't risk losing a site.
Yeah, not risking a site -- merely our ENTIRE TANDEM PROGRAM!! Stop trying to minize it and pretend it wasn't a big deal.

Our #1 tow site in all the country was openly violating the FAA regulation. Any FAA inspector could merely drive up and ask for a tandem and then shut all of us down.
:ditto:

I have to agree with JB on this one. Ryan I'm surprised you even went the "private property" route knowing what you know about the tandem exemption.....


I would personally teach someone to HG if I wanted to even though my instructor rating expired years ago. But since I no longer have a tandem rating, I would not even consider taking someone tandem and risk every tandem instructor's livelihood..... :mrgreen:

(BTW If I really wanted to do a banditto tandem I would drive into Mexico where the worst case scenerio would be having to pay off some crocked official....)
Last edited by flysurfski on Wed Jul 20, 2011 3:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
Large Pilot (Heavy)

I'm a Pilot who's first Glider was a 225 Wills Win[…]

One lucky dude....

Steering with your feet never works out. Campers,[…]

Is the road rebuilt yet? It was pretty messed up f[…]

1-axis gimbal footage?

Hi,guys.you can try this new gimbal which born for[…]