Flyfunston

spork wrote:...And yet no one has attempted to express what the "gentleman's" agreement is. Would you say the gentlemen are the ones willing to discuss possible solutions, or the ones that wish to police airspace they have no claim to through intimidation?

OK I'll try...
I thought the agreement was that...with all the room down at westlake, it really made no sense for PGs to come down to the small north Funston ridge where the HGs have always been....from the beginning of time....why would anyone want to stop anyone else from flying? = Gentleman's Rule (NEVER STOP ANOTHER PILOT FROM FLYING FOR YOUR OWN DESIRES).....I think you would agree....

I think gentlemen are willing to do figure out peace....but there are also gentlemen who will also fight till the death for something they believe in (Flyboys ......no they do not intimidate !!! That is just wrong.
I know you know we both know there are some very opinionated HG pilots (and Pg pilots)....and well I think that is what makes a lot of us pilots....we are just different...we look up when we should be looking where we are going.....
Anyway it's getting late and I'm starting to ramble....
Diev

diev wrote:I thought the agreement was that...with all the room down at westlake, it really made no sense for PGs to come down to the small north Funston ridge where the HGs have always been....from the beginning of time....

In my opinion "it makes no sense for PG's to want to fly there" is not an agreement - it's wishful thinking.

...why would anyone want to stop anyone else from flying?

I'm actually not sure whether you're asking why there are pilots that want to keep PG's from flying in that airspace, or you asking why there are PG pilots that would want to keep HG's from flying by being in that airspace.

What I think is ironic is that the pilots that want so badly to keep PG's out of that airspace are exactly the ones standing in the way of a genuine agreement that would benefit the flying community as a whole (both PG and HG) and would not have PG's flying in that airspace. Now that would be a real agreement.

spork wrote:...I'm actually not sure whether you're asking why there are pilots that want to keep PG's from flying in that airspace, or you asking why there are PG pilots that would want to keep HG's from flying by being in that airspace.

I thought you would catch that neither one seem very Gentlemanly...

spork wrote:What I think is ironic is that the pilots that want so badly to keep PG's out of that airspace are exactly the ones standing in the way of a genuine agreement that would benefit the flying community as a whole (both PG and HG) and would not have PG's flying in that airspace. Now that would be a real agreement.

I hear ya....Lets see what comes about when our great father Prez goes and smokes the peace pipe down at the dumps in council....

Diev

diev wrote:I thought you would catch that neither one seem very Gentlemanly...

I'm a little slow.

Lets see what comes about when our great father Prez goes and smokes the peace pipe down at the dumps in council....

Is that the plan? Do you know if they plan to include me in the discussion? As you may know, I have not joined BAPA since this issue arose as I haven't wanted to put them in any awkward situations.

If I may offer a word of advice - I'd wait until after the elections. I don't think it's wise to send Tom to do this job.

Rick C.

Having a summit is a good idea because the more we get to know one another the more trust and camaraderie can develop. I also think we should have more than just one person represent any particular group and would encourage many people to come and share their thoughts.

Speaking of which; I share the concerns of other HG pilots that a slow flying PG or a PG parked on the Funston cliff could keep HG’s from being able to soar. On the other hand, none of the PG pilots whom I know would intentionally keep another pilot from flying. I doubt that any PG pilots would fly the Fort on a particular day if they knew it was keeping HG pilots grounded. By extension, I think that these pilots would be happy to leave Funston to the HG’s if it meant they could then fly too. This is the gentlemanly respect that is so much appreciated and I offer a huge “Thank You!” to everyone who gives us room to fly!

I like the native American adage about “walking a mile in another man’s moccasins" and think it can be applied here. I’d like to offer free tandem HG flights to any PG pilot who wants to see for themselves what kind of conditions hang gliders need to soar the Fort and what our different flight parameters really look like.

Contact me offline and I’ll do my best to get you into the air. Please pass the word!

Cheers!
Steve R.
Email: steve at skypuppy dot us

Steve Rodrigues wrote:Speaking of which; I share the concerns of other HG pilots that a slow flying PG or a PG parked on the Funston cliff could keep HG’s from being able to soar.

I do think it bears repeating that the arrangement I proposed some time back did *not* make provision for PG pilots to fly the Funston ridge. On the contrary - it provided for an arrangement that would have PG pilots enter into a genuine agreement to *not* fly that portion of the ridge.

I’d like to offer free tandem HG flights to any PG pilot who wants to see for themselves what kind of conditions hang gliders need to soar the Fort and what our different flight parameters really look like.

I'm in! I've been dying to know what this "hang gliding" is all about. Is it safe?

I'm in! I've been dying to know what this "hang gliding" is all about. Is it safe?

Safe? That all depends on who you fly with. I'm not making any promises!

As a former BAPA officer I would like to clarify one thing here:
BAPA's official position from the beginning (i.e. since the first time FF requested it) has been that PG pilots should respect the requests of FF regarding the area around Funston launch and ridge as requested by FF and for the reasons FF have articulated. To my knowledge this has never changed, BAPA membership has never had any serious disagreements about it, and in the site guides we post for the Dump (both online and at the Dump) this restriction is clearly stated, along with the FAA airspace restrictions. Of course the Dump is not regulated so BAPA has no official control over what flying activities happen there, they just try to be good community members. I explained all of this (or very close to all of it) to Steve Rodrigues in a phone discussion we had over a related matter several years ago. It was a freindly conversation.
Also, to my knowledge, the only pilots who have ever made a point of going up to Funston for it's own sake have been non-BAPA members and likely non-USHPA members as well.
The way I understand it, the vast majority of PG pilots who fly the area have no desire to go to Funston anyway, for the same reasons a hang glider would not want to fly low south of Westlake on a day when 30+ paragliders are crowding the dump. It just doesn't look like fun and there's plenty of air elsewhere.
Anyway, the point of this is to say that in reference to your talk of having discussions with BAPA regarding this issue I don't think there is anything to take up with BAPA. They're already doing their part with their membership and they have a lot less control and influence over local PG pilots than you probably assume. If you need to get hold of the officers however, their contact info is available on www.sfbapa.org. Just look them up.

Sorry, forgot:
Kurt Niznik, USHPA P4, #80869

Hi Kurt,
Thanks for shedding more light on our cooperative efforts to respect each other as pilots and share the air in a friendly fashion. Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help you or BAPA.
Hope you have a happy holiday season!
Warm regards,
Steve

Steve Rodrigues wrote:Hi Kurt,
Thanks for shedding more light on our cooperative efforts to respect each other as pilots and share the air in a friendly fashion.

Not to put too fine a point on it Steve, but telling a segment of the flying community not to fly in "your" airspace - "or else" - is neither cooperative nor respectful. It is in fact illegal.

Hi Rick, I can't speak for anyone else, but I've always framed this as a request and offered my thanks. I've always reminded folks that only the FAA can regulate airspace, which makes my appreciation even more so. We are on the same page.

At least I think we are.

Steve Rodrigues wrote:Hi Rick, I can't speak for anyone else, but I've always framed this as a request and offered my thanks. I've always reminded folks that only the FAA can regulate airspace, which makes my appreciation even more so. We are on the same page.

Steve,

I think you and I are pretty much on the same page. And frankly - if the club and pilots treated it as a request, I might very well oblige. But I've been threatened with rating revocation, being arrested on-sight, and have been waked and attacked in the air. I had one pilot fly beneath me with about 2 feet of clearance after playing cat and mouse with me on the lower ridge for several minutes.

Frankly, Funston is too fragile a site to be pulling shit like that. But I will admit, those folks have managed to pull that off (along with an astonishing array of other safety violations) for a very long time. For that I think you have to simply be glad that no one is trying to make an issue of it.

Yes, I for one am glad. It's sad, but it seems in any group, especially one of two or three hundred, there will always be some bad apples that spoil the barrel. I wish everyone would use more logic and communication, rather than resorting to aggression. Sigh....

Steve Rodrigues wrote:Yes, I for one am glad.

There's reason to be glad - but frankly I think it's ridiculous for an organization to press its luck for so long with an asset that's so precious. I haven't followed FF politics to speak of, but I can tell you the club used to be run like the wild west (if cowboys acted like school girls). It saw a VERY marked improvement when folks like Dan Pifko and Henry Bittner were officers. As you know, I'm more or less an outsider these days (enough so that I wouldn't think of trying to vote), but from everything I hear, things are becoming like the bad old days once again.

As you pointed out, the President has a big influence on the club. The last two years have been bad for the Fellow Feathers on many levels. I may be wrong, but I believe that change is coming. Tonight.