mindset

Penalty if loosing (too much) height in collapse

Organiser

By DusanO on Fri, 24 Oct 2025 - 12:51

Discipline

Paragliding XC

What do we want ?

I'm thinking... how to "force" pilots to fly more carefully and not just blindly pushing full bar in turbulent conditions or in general fly in turbulent conditions (rather to avoid it, or be more careful), which would in general increase safety in flying?
More careful flying and not juts the fastest flying (les safe), would be rewarded. E.g. fast/dangerous flying would be risky and penalized if got in to a trouble. (like car/bike racing. Getting off the road ("exit sand zone"), doesn't immediately mean you will crash or end up, but it will slow you down. Or fully stop, if severe).
This would put pilots more into the safe mode flying, rather than dangerous flying.
This would be possible only if the trackers and GPS instruments are good enough? As I believe, we have possibilities to have (much) more than 4 points/s in tracklog resolution in mostly all newer instruments. Therefore, this should be possible.

How do we achieve that ?

To achieve that, we could implement a safety feature - sudden loss of altitude -> penalization.
Also, the scoring software must be able to recognize that sudden height loss without "much" horizontal speed .. (just an example: e.g. .. V =-5m/s & H<10km/h).
That would mean that you had a major collapse and you are recovering the glider. On top of that. If the time of descent would be grater than "e.g. .. 10s", you have 0 points. Not only to force pilots to fly safer (and prevent collapse/penalization), this would force pilots to throw the reserve earlier.

Issue category :

mindset

Racing format

Competition format

Read more about Penalty if loosing (too much) height in collapse
3 comments
Log in or register to post comments

Comments

By Markos Siotos on Fri, 24 Oct 2025 - 23:02

I see the good intentions behind this idea, but I believe is trying to micromanage a situation that from its nature is the most chaotic in our sport, and some times not a pilot's fault at all....

By thibaultrohmer on Sat, 25 Oct 2025 - 01:29

At lot of collapse do not happen when going straight on speedbar, but when thermaling or prospecting. That would penalized those people even more, when they didn't even took a particular risk, but got a surprise collapse (and they are always a surprise, unwanted!). This would be unfair.

Pilots fly in their confidence zone. They don't want a collapse! When there is a collapse, it's unexpected and sudden.
We use speedbar and 99.9% of time everything's fine because we use it in our confidence zone.
If it's turbulent, we release speedbar and adapt. Because if we get a collapse, we'll loose altitude and take time to recover direction. In the meantime, other pilots will pass in front. So having a collapse is already a penalty in itself. Giving points penalty on top of that is not helpful.

Your idea of "careful flying" starts on the principle that pilots are "blindly pushing full bar". I think that they are not idiots, but are overall in there confidence zone... because usually no collapse. See: risk homeostasis theory.
So we won't fly slower because they might get a collapse in 0.01% probability.

Pushing your idea further would be to remove speedbars, but that would be way less fun. Also they could be helpful for security in case of wind increase so we need them.

You don't throw rescue because you risk 0 point, but because your life is in danger and you're not in control anymore.
You don't give 0 points because rescue took time to open. Pilots already have way less points than others anyway when task is not finished.

We should encourage people to fly well like the best pilots : without collapse and making use of speedbar appropriately. That will give you more points.
Not the fact of being afraid of losing points.
We should also train pilots how to react in case of collapse (SIV). And maybe that should be mandatory on some comps.

Organiser

By bembem on Tue, 4 Nov 2025 - 23:18

This limit is already implemented. We call it ground.

Discipline

Hike and Fly

What do we want ?

Protecting pilots from themselves, protecting organizers from (reckless) pilots, and protecting the futur of the discipline and the nowadays amazing freedom that comes with it.
Reduce stress and confusion (=increased safety) even before the start of events, where too often, confusion and stress are injected through negligence or poorly made framework.

How do we achieve that ?

By being more professional in the conception and application of the rules and the way each party assume their responsibility, from a legal as well as a sportsmanship point of view.

Few improvement examples:

- Unified communication tools.
The nowadays ease of instantaneous communication should not allow unclear transmission of information nor multiple last minute changes, which are factors of confusion, stress, and so safety issues.
Communication framework must be standardized in a way that it is readable, easy to understand and to get back to after few hours off the phone (proper groups, proper read only sections…).

- Unified timeline.
Organization must provide a clear event timetable, preferably unified through all events to get competitors used to it and speed up processes.
Timetable must be respected by organization, by pure professional standpoint, and by competitors being subject to penalty.
Timetable drifting imply confusion, lack of attention, late finish… All being added stress factors in an already high stress comp situation.

- Overall penalty system.
Yellow/red card. 1 yellow card = warning, 2 yellow = red, red = disqualification.
Pilot stroke by 1 yellow keeps it through the next event. Pilot stroke by 1 red gets disqualified from the actual event + the next.
Reckless/life threatening behavior penalty must start to be taken seriously (when airspaces infraction already are).

- Scoring system.
Should be indexed within the different types of events and their respective duration.

- Airspaces.
Mandatory for the organization to provide airspace file, including local specificities, no LZs, propper TPs…

- Task.
Writing of the tasks should be standardized, especially regarding mandatory landings/signboards/selfies, to avoid confusion.

- Gear check.
Propper gearcheck should be enforced to maintain fairness and safety among every competitors.

- Doping check.
Transparency should be provided regarding doping check.

...

Issue category :

Comments

CIVL Delegate

By Julien Garcia on Thu, 23 Oct 2025 - 22:51

Very needed. The sport raised from the outside world but now it's time for institution to catch back and define rulebook,guidelines and procedure. If the formats are left too open nothing of this will ever be possible

CIVL Delegate

By Julien Garcia on Wed, 29 Oct 2025 - 02:05

With a World Championship coming in hot for 2026. I'm amazed to see how passive the community is acting...

Discipline

Hike and Fly

What do we want ?

Protecting pilots from themselves by allowing them to compete on a more even playing field.
Raising competitive spirit without pushing pilots over their own limits.

How do we achieve that ?

By playing against pilots of your world, a world where, having the edge is not taking more risk because it is the only leverage left against way more skilled pilots.

Example:
Every pilot gets a ranking level, and every event a field level wich is the average of all participating pilots ranks.
The two categories are defined by rank either above (cat 1) or below (cat 2) field average level.

Event level can also be indexed by weather conditions, task can be adapted to each categories.

Pilot rank can be indexed by participation recurrence, accident/incident, DNF, penalty, number of people of higher rank beaten or the number of lower ranked pilot who beat you, level/quantity of competition achieved without incident…

Issue category :

Comments

CIVL Delegate

By Julien Garcia on Thu, 23 Oct 2025 - 19:44

From what I know, I believe level homogeineity is indeed a first class safety parametrer. Thank for bringing this up.

Pilot's technical skills

Organiser

By Thibault Voglet on Wed, 22 Oct 2025 - 21:44

Discipline

Paragliding XC

What went wrong ?

There is a huge problem with pilots' technical skills. Official bodies can be blamed for many things. But that won't improve pilots' technical skills.

Just watch the takeoffs during “high-level” competitions. It's disastrous for far too many pilots. The excuse that ballast makes mobility difficult exists. But that doesn't justify pilots not being able to fly their wings properly.

Unfortunately, a pilot who cannot control their wing on the ground will have the same poor reactions in flight. This is dangerous, both for them and for other pilots in a group.

A surprising comparison:
Running is a popular sport, with more and more people running (on roads or trails). The average jogger will train to complete their city's half marathon. They will pay for a coach and invest time and energy in their running.

In contrast, paragliders compete without training. They do so without thinking about their current level, their progress, or how to train to reach the level required for competition. Unlike running, paragliding puts our lives at risk. This happens at all levels, even in a final round of an FAI 1 championship... And yet, are they “the best in the world”?

What would you propose ?

The solution? Training! And changing pilots' mindsets. A competitive pilot must train and become an athlete, not just a flying enthusiast.

An athlete is someone who thinks about their practice, who takes the time to train, to repeat the basics, to progress... And this applies at all levels.

In parallel with this reflection, why are there far fewer accidents, or even no fatal accidents, in H&F races or acro competitions? Because they train to reach their level.

There has never been a death in the Xalps, even though the commitment is at its peak. Why? Luck? Maybe. But that's not all. These guys work hard to be “ready” for their race. In XC, the guys don't work hard.

Issue category

mindset

Skills

Technical

Read more about Pilot's technical skills
6 comments
Log in or register to post comments

Comments

By Mateusz Gajczewski on Wed, 22 Oct 2025 - 23:02

I tend to agree, but apart from the observation, is there any data to support the point?
I’m by no means a role model in this matter and I'd like to train more often.. anyway.

I’d suggest preparing a survey (even though I hate surveys) to collect data such as:
- When was the last time you did a ground handling session with your competition wing?
- How often do you do such sessions?
- When did you last stall your comp glider?
- How often do you train stalls on your comp glider?
- How many practice stalls do you do per year?
- What is the reason you don’t do this more often? (lack of time, laziness, other priorities, finances, logistics, concern about equipment, fear, IMO that's enough, other etc.)
- And as a reference - in which glider class do you compete?

The idea would be to understand the current situation - the issue we’re trying to address - and to get a sense of the trend.
Ideally, such data could be collected annually to see how things evolve over time.

CIVL Delegate

By Julien Garcia on Thu, 23 Oct 2025 - 00:14

Maxime Bellemin has also an idea to reinforce basic skills to access the competition scene (IPPI6 - additional technical layers). I agree pilots could improve their skills a lot (coach cap), however take a look at the fatality list, some of our friends were superstars and accomplished athletes. Thanks for the input

CIVL Delegate

By Herman Chiu on Fri, 24 Oct 2025 - 16:20

Not every country has the same level of experience in paragliding as European countries, which have a long history and expertise in paragliding pedagogy. Is it possible for the FAI can lead and to define and develop a more solid and concrete structure for paragliding pedagogy that other countries can follow? When I look at the IPPI guidelines, IPPI 5 requires "at least 100 flights or 50 flying hours, on 5 different sites;SIV course strongly recommended" With this, an IPPI 5 holder can enroll in any competitions. What are we expecting?

CIVL Delegate

By Julien Garcia on Fri, 24 Oct 2025 - 16:21

Exactly

By Markos Siotos on Sat, 25 Oct 2025 - 00:49

Well.

If it was so simple it would not have been paragliding...

You are wrong. Sorry to say that, but it is not a matter of hours, and this is part of the problem.

You will have people with thousands of hours that they never learned, they keep repeating the same mistakes and they just go on.

You will have prodigies with few hundred hours that can annihilate the previous guys, both on the air and in the takeoff...

You cannot "rank proficiency" in this sport with number of hours, or number of comps flown, or number of different takeoffs flown.

It is a start, if you do not have something else to base your ranking on, but is not a panacea...

Division of Nations/Regions among NACs and Pilots

CIVL Delegate

By Moon Policarpio on Wed, 22 Oct 2025 - 06:07

Discipline

All

What went wrong ?

The establishment of the Airsport Federation of Asia (AFA), approved by the FAI, appears to be a double-edged development. While its primary intention is to strengthen the representation and development of air sports within the Asian region, it may inadvertently create division among nations and pilots. There is a growing perception that this move encourages regional segregation rather than global integration.

Asian nations may now operate under a different dynamic, focusing primarily on their own regional goals and initiatives, while European, American, and other regions continue with their own established frameworks. This can result in fragmented growth, inconsistent standards, and reduced cross-regional collaboration.

Furthermore, within the paragliding community, Paragliding Accuracy has often been viewed with skepticism or even criticism. However, both the FAI and CIVL believe that the growth of the sport lies in Asia. They have encouraged nations to organize Category 2 (CAT2) events and to promote participation in accuracy competitions as an entry point for aspiring athletes—a more accessible path to competitive paragliding compared to cross-country (XC) flying.

Interestingly, while accuracy flying grows in popularity in Asia, the International Free Flyers Pilots Union seems to be dominated by XC pilots, reflecting differing priorities and cultural attitudes within the global paragliding community. This imbalance highlights the need for mutual respect and cultural understanding among disciplines and regions, rather than the creation of silos.

What would you propose ?

1. Promote Unity under FAI Governance:
Encourage FAI and its commissions (e.g., CIVL) to reinforce global integration among regions. The creation of regional federations should complement—not compete with—the overall mission of FAI to maintain international unity in airsports.

2. Establish Cross-Regional Exchange Programs:
Introduce initiatives that foster collaboration between Asian, European, and American pilots, such as joint training camps, mixed-continental competitions, and pilot exchange programs to build a shared culture and technical understanding.

3. Equal Recognition across Disciplines:
Advocate for balanced promotion between Accuracy, Cross-Country, Aerobatics, and other paragliding disciplines. Each discipline contributes uniquely to the sport’s development and should be equally supported in global discussions, funding, and visibility.

4. Cultural Awareness and Mindset Education:
Organize workshops and online forums under FAI or NACs to discuss the cultural mindset of pilots across regions. This helps reduce bias or misconceptions (e.g., Accuracy vs XC vs Acro) and cultivates respect for diversity in skills, culture, and growth paths.

5. Unified Athlete Development Pathway:
Develop a consistent pilot development framework that integrates both Accuracy and XC progression within FAI’s athlete pathway model. This will help avoid fragmentation and promote a holistic view of paragliding disciplines.

Issue category

Read more about Division of Nations/Regions among NACs and Pilots
Log in or register to post comments

Communication of safety incidents

By Mateusz Gajczewski on Fri, 17 Oct 2025 - 23:33

Discipline

Paragliding XC

What went wrong ?

Safety issues or accidents happen in paragliding competitions, from minor to serious. Currently, there is no formal public communication about these, even serious, accidents. Pilots, teams, and the wider community remain uninformed, which affects safety awareness and trust in the organization.

What would you propose ?

1. Any serious accident should be publicly and officially communicated by the organizer within 1–2 days.
2. Communications should include:
- Announcement of an investigation into the incident, providing context. A detailed report should follow and be publicly available. Based on it, recommendations will be proposed to prevent such situations in the future.
- Monitoring the pilot’s condition, if applicable, until hospital discharge.
3. In severe cases, the organizer and overseeing organization must notify the community via official channels.
4. Consider having a separate institution handle investigations and pilot condition monitoring to ensure impartiality.
5. Respect pilots’ safety and comfort by anonymizing personal data if they wish.
6. Define clearly:
- Which incidents require individual investigation and public communication.
- Which incidents should be recorded in a safety database, described only by involved pilots, and summarized later in a CAT1 event safety report or annual safety report.
- Provide a convenient, pilot-friendly way to report safety incidents during competitions.

Issue category

Read more about Communication of safety incidents
7 comments
Log in or register to post comments

Comments

CIVL Delegate

By Julien Garcia on Fri, 17 Oct 2025 - 23:45

Completly agree. Last PG world was again a perfect démonstration with an institution refusing to communicate.

Organiser

By Louis Tapper on Sat, 18 Oct 2025 - 01:15

I think this ties into the proposal here around Just Culture
Charter and intentional design of the accident reporting database https://gagglereport.org/node/26

Organiser

CIVL Delegate

By Flyluchofly on Sat, 18 Oct 2025 - 16:46

I believe the discussion should not solely revolve around the accident report itself. While such reports can and should be detailed—covering aspects such as the pilot’s profile and the organizational conditions—it is equally important to focus on how to use this information effectively to prevent similar incidents in the future.
Accident reports should be submitted within a defined timeframe following the conclusion of the event. It is not appropriate to place additional pressure on the Organizer, Meet Director, or Safety Director during an ongoing competition, as their primary responsibility must remain the safety of all participants. Submission of reports by both organizers and pilots should be mandatory, and failure to comply should result in sanctions, such as disqualification from organizing or participating in subsequent events.
A clear communication protocol must be established. Journalists are often the first to share information following an incident, but without a structured process enabling organizers to communicate accurate details to the public, the impact on our sport and our community can be severe. A consistent and transparent communication strategy is therefore essential to safeguard the reputation and integrity of paragliding as a sport.

By Mateusz Gajczewski on Sun, 19 Oct 2025 - 08:58

Thank you for your comments, Julien and Luis. I’d like to clarify a few points:

- I’m assuming communication about a serious accident within 1–2 days, not the submission of a report - the latter, of course, should happen within the established post-event timeframe.

- The public communication strategy should be developed based on the principles of Just Culture; however, it is a smaller change in itself and could probably be implemented separately.

- Creating a user-friendly system for collecting safety incident reports may be considered “out of scope” and and implemented through a dedicated group.

CIVL Delegate

By Julien Garcia on Sun, 19 Oct 2025 - 13:42

Great Mateusz. I see one piece of the system you refer to collect accident report as very wild, raw and community based. I'm willing to work on a "Gaggle Report" to provide almost immédiate feedback of what happened during a Task. Collision, switch of turn, incident, late stop... Pilots could come to this plateform and fullfill a blalzing fast report. We would still need better detailed report towards the institution (from pilot or organiser) but at least we would have something and could compare report from the field and institutional ones 😅

Building a Just Culture for Free Flight

Organiser

By Louis Tapper on Fri, 17 Oct 2025 - 23:06

Discipline

All

What do we want ?

Background
Right now, our sport is a long way from a Just Culture. Too often, when something goes wrong, the focus turns to blame rather than understanding. That makes people go quiet. Reports aren’t made. Lessons are lost. And the same problems repeat.
If we want to make meaningful change, this has to shift. We can’t improve safety unless pilots and organisers feel safe to speak openly about what actually happens in the air and on the ground.

What a Just Culture Means
A Just Culture doesn’t mean “no accountability.” It means fair accountability. It recognises that mistakes are part of being human — and that learning, not punishment, is what keeps us safer in the long run.
In a Just Culture:
Honest mistakes and near-misses can be reported without fear of punishment.
Reckless or repeated negligence is still addressed appropriately.
Systemic issues, not just individual errors are examined.
Dissent is protected. Pilots who raise safety concerns or call for a task to be stopped are supported, not sidelined.
This balance protects both pilots and volunteers. The sport relies on unpaid energy and goodwill but volunteers shouldn’t carry liability alone, and pilots shouldn’t be scapegoated for systemic blind spots.

Why It Matters
Research across aviation, healthcare, and other high-risk sectors shows that people report more when they feel safe, protected, and heard.
What encourages reporting:
✅ Safety from blame
✅ Anonymity or identity protection
✅ A quick, easy process
✅ Evidence that change actually happens
What suppresses reporting:
❌ Fear of punishment
❌ Unclear protections
❌ Complicated or clumsy reporting systems
❌ The feeling that “nothing changes”
If we design our reporting and culture around these realities, we can finally move from silence and blame to openness and learning.

How do we achieve that ?

What We’re Proposing
Adopt Just Culture charter across all pilot and organiser processes, recognising the difference between error, drift, and recklessness. The following charter is a first step towards articulating this approach.
https://free-flight-just-culture-ba8qik5.gamma.site
Develop a protected reporting pathway that is quick, easy, and psychologically safe.
Build feedback loops so pilots see that their reports lead to visible changes.
Include cultural training for safety officers and organisers, so reporting is encouraged and understood consistently.
Protect dissent and open dialogue, especially when safety decisions are questioned mid-task or during competitions.

The Bottom Line
A Just Culture isn’t a luxury. It’s the foundation for any credible safety system. Without it, we will keep fighting the same battles and losing the chance to learn from our mistakes. Let’s create a system that values honesty over silence, learning over blame, and shared responsibility over scapegoating.
Because safety isn’t built by fear, it’s built by trust.

Issue category :

Read more about Building a Just Culture for Free Flight
6 comments
Log in or register to post comments

Comments

CIVL Delegate

By Julien Garcia on Fri, 17 Oct 2025 - 23:40

Thanks Louis, I got it better. Definitly in favour of such a charter and to see it applyed in our way design the next reporting system.

Organiser

By thomas senac on Sun, 19 Oct 2025 - 14:52

Interesting proposal- in the implementation steps, could be worth adding the possibility to improve rules from lessons learned (more practicle than the step #4 about governance)

By christiaandurrant on Wed, 22 Oct 2025 - 12:01

Great proposal and as Louis says this is normal in every risk based activity - the fact that it has not got to FAI/CIVL in 30 years is surprising.

CIVL Delegate

By Julien Garcia on Thu, 23 Oct 2025 - 23:52

Hi Louis, Build a working group for this charter please. We need it. Be it on CIVL or on the union.

Organiser

By Louis Tapper on Fri, 24 Oct 2025 - 05:43

Is this its own working group on its own or incorporated as part of the reporting working group? I see both civil and pilots' union are pretty unanimous on collecting data on accidents. Consensus hasn't been reached on how that occurs and what level of visibility we have.

By Frazzled on Tue, 28 Oct 2025 - 16:05

At a national level in the UK, even for non-comp flying, there "seems" to be significant under-reporting of accidents (injury) and incidents (non-injury). Anecdotally, in any one club, one gets to hear of more accidents & incidents than appear in the annual report for that club or the BHPA's own annual reports. This may in part be a reflection that the reporting mechanism itself is cumbersome.

I really like the approach & format that was adopted - initially as a beta program - about 5-10 years ago by the BMC (British Mountaineering Council) who had exactly the same *cultural* issues. Here's a link to how you both report and research incidents and accidents; it is quick, accessible and lightweight - and as a consequence is to my knowledge very widely adopted.

https://www.thebmc.co.uk/en/incident-reporting

Discipline

Paragliding XC

What do we want ?

Implementation of In-Flight Safety Pilots (Air Marshals) during CAT 1 and CAT 2 Paragliding Competitions

How do we achieve that ?

To enhance the overall safety standards of FAI 1 and FAI 2 paragliding competitions, we propose the formal inclusion of in-flight safety pilots—referred to as Air Marshals—who will actively fly during tasks.

The primary role of the Air Marshals will be to observe, assess, and report on in-flight conditions throughout the task area, ensuring that safety standards are upheld in real time.

Roles and Responsibilities:
Fly with competitors during the task to monitor real-time weather and airspace conditions.
Communicate directly with the Meet Director and Safety Director in case of rapidly changing or hazardous conditions.
Provide an independent safety assessment before and during the task.
Act as an additional layer of security in decision-making regarding task cancellation, stopping, or adapting routes.
Ensure pilots’ adherence to safety protocols and report any major infractions.

Benefits:
Increased situational awareness for the organization team during flight.
Proactive identification of risk factors that may not be visible from the ground or HQ.
Enhances the credibility and professionalism of the event’s safety management.
Contributes to a safety-first culture within competitive paragliding.

Implementation:
Minimum of one Air Marshal per task, ideally more depending on the number of pilots and size of the task area.
Must be equipped with real-time communication tools (radio, tracking, etc.).
May be integrated into the organization team or act as independent observers.

Selection Criteria:
Air Marshals should be:
Experienced competition pilots with a solid safety record.
Familiar with the specific site and weather patterns.
Ideally holding qualifications or prior experience related to safety monitoring or task setting.

Issue category :

Safety

Conflict of interest

mindset

Read more about Implementation of In-Flight Safety Pilots (Air Marshals) on FAI Paragliding Competitions
5 comments
Log in or register to post comments

Comments

CIVL Delegate

By Julien Garcia on Fri, 17 Oct 2025 - 13:17

I believe it raises many organizational questions but no doubt it would benefit the sport to have independent feedbacks from the air.

By Mateusz Gajczewski on Fri, 17 Oct 2025 - 22:33

It would be very beneficial to improve communication between what’s happening in the air and the responsible Safety Director, as well as clarify the communication protocols.

We’re currently missing clear protocols on how to react to certain situations, for example:
- If 3+ pilots call Level 3 – Marshall, any Safety Committee members or the Meet Director must respond within ~2 minutes.
- Wind over 30 km/h (generally, with adjustments communicated in advance for specific tasks or locations) should trigger a task stop – maybe windspeed data could be retrieved from the trackers?

Appointing a Marshal could improve safety oversight, but it also raises several considerations:
- Potentially higher operational costs.
- The Safety Director, and any Marshals if required, should ideally remain independent from the Organizer.
- The Marshal may not be present where a hazardous situation occurs.

By the way, Chrigiel mentioned a similar idea during the last Couldbase Mayhem podcast.

Organiser

By DusanO on Sun, 19 Oct 2025 - 22:56

Air Marshal, would/could improve safety. And I'm also in favour for that.
But it raises a question. How to get that person, for a competition? In reality, it would be hard to get one. (At least for CAT2).
It will also raise the competition costs.
Therfore, i would make this mandatory only for CAT1 events. And only a proposal (not mandatory) for CAT2 events.
Also, an Air Marshal, could have second role. To help in multimedia - filming in the air, etc...

By christiaandurrant on Wed, 22 Oct 2025 - 12:03

What is wrong with having members of the task committee / safety committee plus all 120 pilots on safety freq reporting conditions directly to committee?

By Joachim Oberhauser on Wed, 29 Oct 2025 - 18:34

On Worlds in Feltre we got 2 Airmarshals (2 expert pilots from Feltreclub) during the tasks. What I remember the feedback was good.

Subscribe to mindset

mindset

Penalty if loosing (too much) height in collapse

Organiser

Comments

Organiser

Unified rulebook.

Comments

CIVL Delegate

CIVL Delegate

Level category.

Comments

CIVL Delegate

Pilot's technical skills

Organiser

Comments

CIVL Delegate

CIVL Delegate

CIVL Delegate

Division of Nations/Regions among NACs and Pilots

CIVL Delegate

Communication of safety incidents

Comments

CIVL Delegate

Organiser

Organiser

CIVL Delegate

CIVL Delegate

Building a Just Culture for Free Flight

Organiser

Comments

CIVL Delegate

Organiser

CIVL Delegate

Organiser

Implementation of In-Flight Safety Pilots (Air Marshals) on FAI Paragliding Competitions

Comments

CIVL Delegate

Organiser

WhatsApp QR Code