Bill Belcourt: The Uncomfortable Truth No One is Talking about in the Current Safety Paradox

If you're saying you want less fatalities, I would say the number one thing is training. The result of some accidents is that people are racing that probably shouldn't be racing and I am more than happy to welcome people to come race. But at the same time they have to know themselves and what they can do and not to stay out of trouble. That is the beauty of this sport. That is the freedom of this sport. The buck stops with us. Flight is that. To me, it's total freedom. And that means that we own the choices. Everybody who gives something to make what we do possible deserts our gratitude.

Whether it's the manufacturers to meet organizers, the governing bodies, pilots themselves. They are special. They are your people and never forget that. Hello and welcome back to Paragraph Atlas. I'm your host Aninder Singh, and today we are talking about the topic Safety is a Shared Responsibility. Joining me on this talk is a very experienced pilot from the field who has not only seen evolution of the sport, but along with that, he has been in the thick of the things from racing to being a part of the tribe. Bill Belkert.

From racing to be a from race, Just give me a SEC.

From racing to being a part of the tribe. Bill Belkat has seen it all. Phil, welcome to the show. There's such a huge honour. Thanks, glad to be back. Bill, I want to start with the topic by saying that safety isn't the enemy of performance. In fact, it is the foundation of it and a lot has been said and done in the past weeks across various forums. First thoughts? You know from your perspective what is going on. Well, I say what is going on is what is always going on and that is this is a dangerous sport and it's made more dangerous by racing. And there have been accidents,

you know, ever since I started in the late 80s and went through the banning of the open class on and a lot of evolution and glider design. And I can't remember a time where we didn't have accidents. We always had them. And racing just increases the likelihood of an accident because people are pushing it more than they would normally, which is the nature of a race. Thank you for putting it so bluntly, Bill, because this was one of my dilemmas as well. When my generation of pilots or let's say somebody who has, who has seen the sport only for the past 5-10 years or so, this was

the first big shift or the moment that we are trying to see. But the question, uh, that I want to start with is that a lot of us are starting to compare this with the changes in Formula One. And I don't know where that comparison is becoming so convenient, but is this something of Arthur Cena accident, uh, comparison kind of a thing? Are we seeing some moment on the same lines in power lining as well or is this something different as you mentioned that it is nothing new and it's now just that, you know, people are talking about it at this moment, so that's why we are paying more

attention to it. It feels more like the latter, like people are just talking about it more at the moment. I know the Formula One analogy has been used a lot. You know, there's been times I've used it myself. But I think other analogies to other sports might be better, like downhill mountain biking or mountain bike racing and World Cup ski racing. We don't have the budget of Formula One teams to throw hundreds of millions of dollars at new and better technology and nor do we have control of the racecourse like Formula One does to slow cars down by, you know, adding turns or, you know, whatever other method they use,

limiting horsepower on tire types, etcetera, etcetera. So I'm not sure that we could afford Formula One style solutions and paragliding because there's really not enough money in it. Paragliding is not driving the tech of aircraft in general like Formula One drives to tech in everyday automobiles. So a lot of technology developed on Formula One is now commonplace in every car, and there is a a symbiosis there that doesn't exist for us. So I, I, I don't want to dwell too much upon the F1 because we can kind of end up comparing apples to oranges kind of a situation. So, but I still, I'm very curious for quite a long time that then F1 started seeing

substantial changes. There were three main entities that were involved. It was the drivers, of course, the manufacturers which were wanting to chase the constructors championships and then the legislators, which was the FAI. So when I look at it from a driver's perspective, it's more or less like anybody who wants to be in the driver's seat wants to go out and chase the glory or the podium every single time they go out and race. So they're least bothered about what innovation goes on behind a car or what are the rules limiting. They have a very specific set of tasks and their brain is programmed to go out and execute it to perfection.

Manufacturers on the other hand, do have some capitalistic gains where they want to make sure that their product or whatever they are putting out is being seen by the masses as the most successful 1. So they will push the limits as as far as they can according to the rules. Now this is where FAI kind of comes in that they have to take into perspective every single thing, the commercialization of the sport, keeping it, making, making sure that it it it stays sustainable, does not make losses and of course the entertainment part for the ones who are watching it. For that reason, in these three entities does the buck stops

with anyone or collective responsibility is still valid, because regardless everyone is the part of the same ecosystem. I'm a big fan of collective responsibility rather than to put it on anyone else. You know, were the pilots in charge? The decisions are ours and they should be ours. The culture should reinforce that because I don't think you get a better outcome in regards to safety when you put that responsibility on someone else other than yourself. That should always be best practice is you look to the pilots first to be responsible for their safety. OK, I, I really thought I was not going to bring this point so early in the conversation, but I

think this is a decent time to talk about it. And I'm, I'm talking about the sad incident that Stan Rods. Stan Rodsjewski. I hope I'm saying your name correctly. Stan. I'm sorry if I'm not mentioned a couple of episodes ago where he said that there was a task which was flown over a dead pilot's body two years ago in Castelo. Talking about culture, organisers knew that there was a pilot who was lying lifelessly there for more than 12 or 24, I don't know how many, like because there were issues with his retrieval, with the retrieval of the body. The pilots who were racing knew that somebody has perished and is still lying around, but every

single person went out and flow the task regardless of somebody else. Because there was a comment under that video where said that the next day after there was mourning and they stopped the competition. So keeping in mind collective responsibility, is everybody just happy being stupid? Because tell me any other sport Bill, be it F1, be it soccer, be it any conventional sport, if there is something as sad as a fatality on the field of play, there is no freaking way every single elite organiser or the supporters will be insensitive to it and say that let the show go on. So culturally, even though we are a tiny handful niche community, are we going in the

direction of shame which is eventually leading us to have discussions like these and raise questions that why is this all happening? Because this to me is shocking and I I still cannot make peace with it to be honest.

All right, what do you know about mountain climbing? It's a sport. How many? Yeah. And this is no justification for task setting in that particular incident. But if you climb Mountain Everest, you know, now thousands of people have climbed Mountain Everest. There are dead bodies on Mount Everest that you're literally walking by or stepping over as you're climbing. And there's a fair, you know, there's a, they even have nicknames for them, you know, which I totally think is bat style. But for whatever reason, they haven't retrieved those bodies. And they are fixed, if you will, on the mountain and landmarks, you know, for people climbing Everest. And so if I read in the media

or, you know, or anyone else about who's climbed the 14 highest peaks fastest or the seven summits, which is the highest peak on every continent in the shortest amount of time, I would say no one's calling out anybody's style for walking by these bodies. It's for whatever reason in climbing, it's become the norm and the mountains of the world, if you're an alchemist or a climber are littered with bodies and people still climb those mountains. And so, so does, I would say it doesn't feel on it. It doesn't feel outrageous on, you know, that task that they set the task maybe, maybe knowingly, maybe unknowingly, I

don't know the details. Maybe it was the safest task to set over a fallen comrade. And you can interpret that as bat style. You can interpret that as dead or alive. That person is still one of us. And this was no disrespect intended to fly within the vicinity. Some would feel like it's taboo. Some would feel like by flying over that person, that person is still with us in flight. And so that that is going to be, you know, you could even feel that that is mourning in itself to fly over the down pilot and, you know, remember that person as you're in the area. And I would say that everybody

mourns differently and and that for some people could be part of the mourning process. I remember a lot of my friends while I'm in the air. And so I'm sure the organizers intended no disrespect. Without dwelling over this point too much, Long story short, at survival of the fittest, things happen. Suck it up and move on. Is that the only way forward? Well, but that's not what I said at all. And I don't think it's survival the fittest, and I don't think it's suck it up and move on. I was just at the American Alpine Club dinner, which is the organization, you know that that if you're an aspiring alpinist,

you're part of this club. They do a lot for climbers. They do a lot for Alpinist and every year we lose people to climbing every year. And at these dinners we celebrate them, we remember them and and we've long ago accepted the fact that doing extreme sports in the mountains has a cost. You know, I used to say that, you know, these sports deliver incredible highs, but with that come incredible lows. You know, it's the laws of physics and we don't look at it like survival of the fittest. We don't look at it like you have to just move on. We never move on from those lost individuals that will always be

part of us because we were brothers and sisters together in the pursuit of the thing that make made us happiest, that gave us peace, that made life worth living. And so these people will always be, you know, my comrades and always be in my thoughts if we lose them to these sports. And I like to, you know, we don't do these sports for money. We don't do these sports for glory. We've found these sports because, you know, they gave us peace. They gave us sanity, they gave us purpose. And so it's never survival of the fittest. It's never a callous disregard for life. You know, in its own way, it's a

celebration of what it means to be alive. And, you know, these sports have given us so much. But at the same time, because they can give us so much, they can take so much away. And so this is, this is not a callous pursuit. This is not survival, the fittest. It's anything but that. Jeez, I love your answer, Bill. Thank you for yeah, answering it so well. I think I'm going to leave this here because, I mean, I can say that we can agree to disagree, but I think what you put out is very valid. The only reason why I am still shocked from this is that in one

way we want to professionalize ourself like conventional sports and have those kind of legislations and norms in place to make sure that we are able to reach those levels of operation or operational proficiency. But on the other hand, there are like, there's no way we can mimic them because of various constraints with respect to money or what like whatever, you know, the scalability and everything. And then these parts, I think this is like, for example, you know, death is a very common occurrence in BASE jumping community and people still have to normalize it because that is the only way forward. You cannot stop according to their perspective. But I think this is where I will

leave the opinion to people and I to the audiences who are watching this or listening to this on whichever platform. You're welcome to drop into your thoughts in the comments below and maybe we can reiterate them in coming podcasts with the other guests and try and explore this further. But for now, as far as the culture part comes for me postally, I find it hard, but I think the way you explained it is, is very beautiful. And I'll, I'll leave this here and let people decide by themselves and they can, you know, start to start their own thought process in the comments section. But moving on, Bill, coming back

to the point of like who does the onus lies with the reason why I mentioned 3 entities, pilots, driving racers, drivers, manufacturers and the legislators. Bottom line is that finally pilots did have to give feedback to manufacturers and manufacturers had to work in tandem with the FAI legislators, FIA. Sorry I'm confusing the flying and the motor racing thing, but when it comes to making paperwork more robust, the capacity, the unwavering, what do you say unbiased stance can only come from the top of the level executives who don't have vested interests or commercial interest in pushing one side of the narrative. So does this not make the buck

stop with the top management which is eventually the legislators? Well, I would take a step back and go, what are we flying? You know, and that is if you're the FAI, which is all of airsport from, you know, motorized aircraft, through hot air balloons, through accuracy competitions, with skydiving canopies, we're flying paragliders, you know, and I often used an Alpine climbing analogy in paragliding and in Alpine climbing, the alpinist is trying to do the most with the least, you know, small teams, single push, minimal gear and moving as fast and as light as possible to achieve incredible objectives. And I feel like in air sport, the paraglider is exactly the

mirror of the alpinist and we have the lightest and the most compact and the simplest of aircraft and we do incredible things with them, mind blowing things. And we're literally doing the most with the least in terms of air sport in my opinion. And so in with that comes risk. You know, we have the, we have the smallest operating envelope and we tend to try to operate in the most extreme mountain environments with the aircraft with the smallest operating envelope, you know, the most with the least and amazing feasts have been achieved every year. It's mind blowing to me on what pilots do with paragliders in

terms of pushing the boundaries of what is possible. It's incredible. So on. But safety on is the thing that is the most difficult to manage because you are trying to be as safe as possible with the least capable. The least stable of all the aircraft that you could be flying except maybe a skydiving canopy, which you're not going to be flying across country. So I think at times were unrealistic as to what can be achieved safety wise, even though I do think incremental gains can be made. If we really wanted to be safe, safer in a tangible way like many pilots have done, they switched to sailplanes and sailplanes, you know, it's more

robust, capable aircraft with more performance and a better safety record certainly than we have. Because now you have something that is simply more capable with a larger operating envelope and, and you can mitigate a lot of risk that can haunt you or push you out of flying paragliders and still enjoy being in the air. You just move to a, you know, you move to a better aircraft essentially. And many pilots have and they've extended their flying careers or at least pursuits by switching to sailplanes from either hang gliders or paragliders because they were no longer down for managing the risk. And so, so that's one way to do it if you want to mitigate risk.

But if we're within the sport itself and you want to add regulation, the first place to start is testing requirements. And so if the data supports a increase in back protection or if the data supports more robust lines, you know, for G testing or if the data supports, I don't know something else relative to aspect ratio, which which has all those things has resulted in the systems and the requirements that we have right now. Whether it's the glider rating system, whether it's the amount of back protection and harnesses, whether it's the helmet requirements, whether it's the reserve sink rake requirements for various that's resulted in multiple sizes.

We have an infrastructure in place for the purpose of safety and and choice in paragliding just like we have in climbing. And so maybe the listener doesn't know that. I've worked in the climbing industry for 35 years, a lot of it and design. I was the head of R&D at Black Diamond. I was also integral to design at Blue Ice, which is where I work now, and I have dealt my entire career with climbing regulations and the evolution of climbing regulations and how the regulations were developed. And the result of all those regs over all those years is the climbing gear that we have now and the requirements that they

need to meet. And so the paragliding world is not a whole lot different than that. Maybe a little bit behind it in terms of its evolution just because the sport is newer, but manufacturers design to the requirements set by, you know, whatever governing body that there is overseeing safety in the sport and, and it moves forward every year and it in part moves forward through debates like this. And if we need more stringent requirements, we can always ask for those and the governing bodies will respond and the manufacturers will also respond. And so if we are at that juncture right now, I would like to see the data that will result in change because you can't

shotgun approach these. And you know, is it the harness that's the result of all these accidents? Is it glider stability that is the result of all these accidents? Is it, you know, head injuries to the inadequate head protection that is the result of these accidents? What is the root cause, you know, And if it's a smattering of incidents with no particular root cause, I would say looking to the manufacturers is probably the wrong place, You know, because you don't have a specific thing that needs to be addressed, like the impact force, you know, for helmets is inadequate or harness is inadequate. You'd have to know via the data

what you need to change. And so I'm not sure if that is exactly what you're looking for or is it regulation more of competitions and requirements for competitions, whether they be places of competition, whether they be the pilot field allowed into the competition, whether it's the task setting of the competition. What is it exactly that we feel is broken that needs to be fixed? I'm honestly a bit confused with is this a never ending debate that no matter what we do, there will be shortcomings and no matter how far we try to go, challenges because of, as I said, the other things, you know, scalability, money and

everything else involved will remain. Because if it is looking at the history where we started the show by saying that this is not something new. This is something that has happened time and again and moments like these help make a transformative change, but nothing that is a paradigm change in a way that, you know, it moves a big thing. If that might be the case, then I think BASE jumpers are doing it the best way because they don't have any regulation, so they are just going out and knowing what it is and, you know, doing it accordingly. At least, the less you expect, the less you can get surprised

at. Well, let me ask you a question. What's the result that you're looking for? Less fatalities. That's it. Yeah, I think less could be achievable and that is less in competition, less in general, all of the above. What? What are you looking for?

I would say all of the above because combination is a very small part of the field anyways. You know anybody who picks up the wing is joining it for the for the pleasure of flight. And even though aviation might not be benefiting from the developments at the top level or the triple C level, but the basis, the very underlying levels of parallel lining do benefit massively from the data collected at the top level. So if we can make the sport a safer place for everyone involved and not just the elite ones and educate people in a more transparent manner, I I think we are hitting the point

right there as as we should. Yeah. And and if you're saying you want less fatalities, I would say the number one thing is training. I would, I would, you know, because the same problem exists in climbing. But there are no certifications for climbing. It's not like I need to have a license to go buy climbing gear or I'm going to get signed off to be able to, you know, go climbing different places on. Anybody who wants to go climbing can go climbing and buy the climbing gear. And, and if you're out there as a climber and you see new inexperienced climbers on doing things that are dangerous on you try to help them out if you can

on, but you're hoping nothing bad happens. And so you know right away that a lot of accidents can't be prevented if they have proper training. And then you're hoping that and you're knowing, you know, you're hoping that they don't get hurt, but you're also knowing that just wishing for good luck for them. It's not the best solution. Your training is available if they want to go get it, but since they're not required to have it, they're just learning as they go. And so if we want to further reduce accidents in our sport, training is where you start. You try to train people best you can, but also know that with a very basic level of training,

you can go fly by yourself anywhere. And so you try to create a culture in which, and I think we've done a pretty good job, in which we have training requirements. Climbing does not. Climbing has a pretty good mentor culture. We have a really good mentor culture and in climbing we have no expectation of 0 fatalities. And from what I hear from you, you don't have an expectation of 0 fatalities because I think it's completely unrealistic if someone does. These are extreme sports in nature. They're, they're intrinsically dangerous and there will be fatalities as a result of that. There's even fatalities on commercial airlines despite a very heavy amount of regulation,

far more regulation than we could ever, you know, fly with on with the capabilities of what we're flying. And so zero risk, no fatalities is not a possibility. But certainly we can brainstorm on if there are ways on to reduce the amount of fatalities that we have, the amount of injuries that we have without ruining the freedom of the sport itself, which is always something I'm concerned with. You know, if I'm, you know, if it's being suggested that we need to all fly with aircraft transponders and be under control of air traffic control on and have our every movement tracked on be penalized for being too close to the terrain

on, you know, other, I would say on too heavy-handed regulation on who flies when and where. Or as it was suggested, you need to have a video of your, you know, of yourself stalling your CCC wing or any other wing for that matter, to enter a competition. All those things I think are not going to be accepted by a community that values its freedom. Climbers were always non conformist and anti establishment in nature. I feel the same element exists and paragliding. Especially speed riding where people want to go into the mountains and enjoy them in any way that they can without being told what to do and where to do it.

So I agree with you, less deaths would be always better, but at what cost and is it possible? Fair enough. I think Long story short, if we have to come to a conclusion, there has to be a sweet spot where the carnage goes down, yet the freedom and the fun factor does not as much to compensate it. To illustrate, this will help me understand this situation of 2011. You've been racing at the top levels much before that and you happen to have worked closely with some of the biggest names in the world. How was the manufacturer's POV at that time when the human cry was going on as well?

And what was the way forward which eventually lead to these kind of regulations? Just for the perspective of our listeners who are, who were probably not in the spot back then or or like our more recent pilots like me. So do you want to use an F1 analogy? That was probably a good time to use it. So in 2011, the two fastest gliders, production gliders that you could buy was the R11 and from Ozone and the Boomerang 8 from Gin. And at the time I was flying Gin, so I was flying the Boomerang 8 and it was mind bogglingly fast with the trimmers out. And so the glider like all gliders before had speed bar and

it had trimmers on the risers. And so the combination of the two, you know, you let the trimmers all the way out and push full speed, you could get the glider to go on, I don't know, over 75 Ki could get the glider in and close to 80 if you had the nerve for it, it was mine bogglingly fast on the roar of the wind with tremors out and speed bar was deafening. If your radio was on full blast right next to your ear, you couldn't even hear it. You know, that's that's how fast the gliders would go. And I would say, you know, like F1 in the 70s where there was no limit on horsepower.

And so it was just the driver's judgement as to how much horsepower was prudent. And so that was the philosophy of the day is, look, we'll give you guys some incredible speed capability in these gliders, these racing gliders use it prudently, you know. And so certainly any automobile that you can drive right now, if you put your foot to the floor and went around too sharp in the corner, you're going to go off the road. And so you have more horsepower in a production sports car then then obviously you can use anytime, anywhere. And it's your choice as a driver as to how to use it. And so the same philosophy

existed with the gliders. And so in normal recreational flying, I would say you are more prudent on when and where you would use such speed. It was like, you know, just driving your car on the road. But when you're on the racetrack or in our case racing, you were going to try to use all the speed that was available if you thought you could hold it together. And there were people flying paragliders, and I'll use Josh Cohen as an example, that had an uncanny ability to keep a glider open at any speed. You know, it was a talent. And some, some pilots were really good at getting all of the speed out of, you know,

whatever glider that they were flying and not blowing it up. And so then the rest of us, you know, just had to be more careful. And most of us were. And, and then the tragedy of 2011, sometimes I'm surprised at what the tipping point is on. And in that case, it was 2 deaths. And I believe because I wasn't there, it was on the same day. And so that that hit the tipping point and they canceled the meet and banned the open class as a result. But at the same time, there's been plenty of other meats and I think 4 this year with one death on. And, and it's like, OK, if

there's one death that doesn't hit the tipping point, but if there's two deaths, you know, then, you know, we do, which which I feel like is, is an emotional reaction, not necessarily a data-driven reaction. Because I've been at meats, you know, even Red Rocks this year where we had one serious injury and we had three other close calls, you know, that had some luck involved that didn't result in serious injury. The serious injury could have just as well been fail because, you know, it was a very serious injury and it was good fortune that the pilot survived. And then we could have theoretically had at least one

or two more fatalities if it wasn't for luck. And so if we had bad luck, you know, at this meet, because this is how close to the line we were in terms of potential for injury or death, we could add 3 deaths. And I would say the same things have occurred at other meets I've been at this year where you had a death, but you could have had more if it wasn't for just simply good fortune because you had other incidents that resulted in injury and those injuries could have just as well been fatal. And so I feel like we're not in a very different spot than we've been before.

We've just been lucky and at times unlucky. So, so, but we've been more lucky and then only when we have a fatality, which you could say was unlucky or you could say we had it common, then we react. But the incidents that could result in fatalities or or not if we're lucky have always been there. They've never gone away on. But for some reason now it was enough of a catalyst to 'cause this debate to come back out in the open. But. You know, and I apologize for going on on this, but to get back to your original question, you know, what was it like in 2011 and what did we do?

We took away the open class and we also limited top speed. And so they did that in F1. You know, they found ways to limit top speed. They took away horsepower. They made some changes with the tires, they made some changes with the courses. They slowed the drivers down. And so they slowed us down after 2011 and you would never before 2011 fly the gliders full speed trimmers out in all conditions on or most of the time. In fact you were in mortal fear of that speed bar on in trimmer combo on when you were racing because while there was a lot of speed there, there was also risk

with that speed and you'd hardly ever use it all. But now you use it all. You know, you're pulley to pulley a lot with the modern glider because the speed is a good 20K slower than it was back then and the speed you have is more usable in more situations now because it is slower. And so if you're flying AC glider comp, you know that thing is pegged most of the time you're flying ACCC comp, that thing is almost pegged most of the time. But everybody else with you on AD glider is pegged trying to keep up to the to the floor to the limit. You have the pulleys, you know, Yeah, sorry, US slang, but

you're flying full speed. And so if you're, if you're a pilot who is flying in the company of ACCC gaggle in a typical paragliding meet, which is going to have all levels of gliders in it, the pilots on the slower gliders are flying full speed all the time just to try to stay in the game. The pilots on the CCC gliders have more options. They can fly slower, they can fly faster. You know, they're faster in general. And so they have choice where everybody on a slightly slower glider is going to fly full fast just to keep up. So in general, it slowed us down. OK. A question comes to my mind

though. This is comparable to 2011 analogy that you mentioned that you know, there were gliders, there were pilots who were able to handle those. Those gliders probably they had worked for it. You know, nothing comes for free. So they have gone in, put in the effort and they are winning the field by a huge margin where everybody, as you said, is mortified. But for them it's more or less just another day in the park where they have navigated that risk versus reward spectrum and have figured out a way to stay up top. In today's racing scenario, there are tasks which are set considering the top 2030% of the

field of the pilot with their achievability. And then one of the pain points that came up was that the survivability of the task is not for the whole field but only for the selected few. But when it comes to celebrating human excellence where we are putting people on a pedestal because they are working harder than the others and they have put in the work, is this some sort of a disservice to the ones who are going ahead and putting up the work And we are saying that no? Or is this just another way of

testing intelligence and rather than just raw power in a way? Do you understand my context? Maybe you could tell me if I've got it wrong by my answer. When the open class was banned, I quit flying competitions for a while. You know, I called it my one man protest. You know, everybody else moved on. And I was like, all right, if you're going to take away the open class, which I felt was critical to glider development, to technology development on all the factory pilots that you competed against had prototypes of what the future could potentially hold that they were trying to validate one way or the other. And while, you know, you felt

like you weren't ever going to be competitive against those factory pilots on the next greatest thing, I was as a designer, I was happy to see new ideas being tried because they would in the long run benefit the sport. And many of those ideas are now in, you know, being sea gliders and also in kite surfing planks. And they were all developed on via the open class. And and so now on we've, you know, I felt like, you know, the analogy I was using was now we're go Kart racing. And so before we were only using top speed in the straightaway. And now you just fly.

Now you're just going around the track with your pedal to the floor all the time because you're, you know, the speed has been limited. And so now everybody's flying, you know, at the same top speed and we're just all racing around the track, you know, with our foot to the floor. And I felt like we were punishing guys like Josh or, you know, Kriegel or any of the luminaries, you know, back in the day that were really good at keeping their gliders open. We were taking away something that they were good at because all of us weren't good at it. And so now we were taking, you

know, their talent and their advantage off the field and making it a better race for us mortals and a worse race for them. But you know, after, you know, a decade plus, you know, because I only just got an Enzo 3 last year after a decade plus of sort of watching this from the sidelines in pursuing more cross country flights on a Zeno AD glider, the cream rose to the top anyway, you know, and so the top pilots, even though we took away things that they were good at and leveled the playing field to the mortals advantage, they found a way to win anyway because they were talented.

And so I, I went to the Super final in Columbia last year and that was the, I know, the first PwC style race with all the top European pilots that I've been to in over a decade. And I was amazed how the top pilots still found an advantage even though I was on exactly the same kit that they were on now. Submarine Enzo on most of the field was on, you know, submarines and Enzos or X ones and Genie race fives and, you know, boom, twelves and all the gliders and the harnesses went, you know, similarly. And this was the closest thing to a level playing field in a top World Cup race that I've

ever been to. You know, back in the day it was very different with open class. And so here I am with the same kit as everybody, and the gaggles never broke up. You know, it was one giant Armada flying around the course. But the winners, like Maxime, still found a way to get to the front of that thing. And it was it was amazing to watch. And so I was very pleased to see that the the best pilots in the world still found a way to win. So even if it might look in short notice that we are taking away advantage of some people who truly deserve it, if it is

for the greater good, it is more or less justified in a way. Just yeah, I agree. It took me a while to get there, but taking away the open class didn't ruin everything, you know? And so I felt it was going to ruin everything and it only slowed it down. And so that Enzo's, what, 6 years old going on 7 now, 8, you know, we would have never seen a glider hang around that long back in the day of open class. Change came way more rapidly because there was less limitations. There was more experimentation on and that is the one result of CCC is it slowed everything down.

And so we we have that, but I'm not saying that that is necessarily a bad thing, but that is one of the side effects is more requirements, more standards will slow down on evolution. It's a, it's a limitation, you know, like you put a limitation on a system you're, you know, it's guardrails and so, but you could say that there's benefit to going slower, you know, and so, but that is a result. That's like a catch 22, especially for the ones who want to go out and chase fun. I mean, of course, we will make people, we will drive away the ones who are chasing adrenaline

at the highest level. Like, you know, there were people who were able to keep their bladder open. I'm sorry, I keep forgetting the name of the pilot that you mentioned who was so skilled. But yeah, like, for the sake of inclusivity and for like, making sure more people are able to experience this, it seems like it's OK to sacrifice a few. But again, I think this is another one of those never ending debates, which is more or less subjective. So maybe audience members can help us in this one as well and give out their, you know, point of view in the comments section because I think a lot of this is already being discussed in the

pilot's union, which has recently found up. Speaking of which, will there have been some, you know, ray of hopes coming up in the past few days where a lot of solutions are discussed at various levels of hierarchy. Pilot's union was something that was never heard of. In fact, I think today at the time of recording this episode, FAI put out a public post that they're going to have a pilot relationship officer, which Violetta has been chosen for. So there are, we are seeing some changes coming into place already. But looking from from your experience, where do you see as as an origin necessity or like which are the ones that should be prioritised if we want to get

back to having fun as we are supposed to rather than scapegoating of some sorts of finger pointing and that we are at the risk of doing at or anyone is in debates like these, I would say. Well, I would say I've got no magic bullet for this or, or profound, you know, easy solution because I feel like there's no easy solution. And one of the things, you know, that comes to mind is on how we treat competition itself. And so, and this is just fully anecdotal on my part, I feel that more paralorder pilots fly in competition just as part of what they do in a given year.

Then mountain bikers participate in mountain bike races as part of what they do in a given year or skiers participating in ski racing as part of what they do in a particular year of skiing. So I think a higher percentage of Parabutter pilots go to races than other extreme sports. And because it's, it's more than just a race, you know, it's sort of a community gathering. You go to these races to fly with your friends. It's it's just more popular to do in paragliding than other sports. And as a result is you have on a big cross section of pilot skill in a, in a any given race, you

know, even on even the PwC, which has the highest level of qualification to get in. We always knew that if you really wanted to get into PwC, just go to the less popular ones in the faraway places that have the most chance of not filling up. And you know, you can have a better shot at getting in. You know, they're still going to look at you to see if you're up to it, but it's not going to be as difficult to get into the, you know, to the race in Utah last year as it is to get into the race in Spain, You know, this year when the, you know, the top European pilots are

going to attend the Spain one en masse. And so, you know, your ladders have to be really good to get in, but your ladders to get in Utah don't have to be that good. And so you can get in to the PwC even if you're not a a top racer. As Goran said, and I totally agree with them, everybody has to do their first PwC sometime. It's not like you're going to come into APWC having done others. If you're in a rising pilot, at some point they're going to have to let you in as part of your evolution as a pilot. So you're going to be new,

everybody's new at some point. And so, so you can get, you know, pilots of average skill in a top race. And then those races are going to be designed, you know, to test the top of the field. And then you're going to hope, pray that the pilot's not at the top can keep themselves out of trouble because they're pilots and they could make safe decisions for themselves. So it, and this is a problem we have and I wouldn't say that it is the result of all accidents because obviously it's not, but it's the result of some accidents is that people are racing that probably shouldn't be racing. And I am more than happy to

welcome people to come race. But at the same time they have to know themselves and what they can do enough to stay out of trouble. And you know, that's a tough thing to regulate. So, so, so the bottom line is we need to, it's either through communication or it's through culture and evolution in culture that it's maybe having more fly insurance and gatherings that are options for people instead of going to races and having them treat those like fly insurance and gatherings instead of races. The CC, well, the, the sea glider meets could provide more options for pilots. And that is, it's not that we need to go to CCC from CCC meets to Sea Glider meets, but the

mere existence of the sea Glider meets and I would say less

hardcore racing and more fun gives an outlet for for people to choose that over going to ACCC meet. And so you get sort of better alignment with the pilots in the venue than we currently have. And, you know, that could that could make a difference. But I saw some things this year, you know, that just weren't a result of racing at a, you know, at a too high of a level, you know, and that is sea gliders on just taking frontals just after launch, you know, in typical, you know, midday thermic conditions that resulted in serious injury. You know, and the US wasn't the only place that it happens. Or I just AD glider on having a

deflation and the pilot just never throws to reserve plenty of room to throw on, but for reasons unknown, you know, just spiral into the ground and and you're going. All right. Well, there's 2 examples where a different format wouldn't have helped, or more glider certification requirements wouldn't have helped, or banning the CCC gliders and making everybody fly sea gliders wouldn't have helped. And so, you know, you're instead of just overreacting and going, all right, we're going to burn this thing down and start over. You're sort of looking for some correlation in the data that points to a specific problem that you can actually address. Then just an emotional reaction

that this whole thing is broken and we need to fire everybody and start over or regulate the shit out of it at every level to try to fix this. And, and I'm going all right.

Is that really going to make it better or? Are we just in denial, you know, as to what it is that we're doing and or does the answer just lie in the middle? Sweet spot as we said it, but I think you put a lot of very valid points out there beautifully, Bill. And I'll leave the audiences to process it for a bit. But before we close for the day, Bill, I want to bring this point out because in PwC Turkey edition, there was just one woman pilot and she was naturally probably the first in the women rankings and she was flying a yatta advance yatta, A

high B if I'm not mistaken. Please don't quote me on this, I haven't researched this very well but. No, I was a stranger. Indeed so. And kudos to the women pilot. She wants to, you know, become a racer. She wants to put herself for the best of the best. It takes a lot of courage to do that, but a high B pilot is allowed in the same gaggle as the top of the line triple C's. Is this the pilot's responsibility for being too ambitious? Or is this the organiser saying that we will accept everyone because we want to promote and welcome everyone? Because to me, this can't be. Yeah, this kind of a stalemate

is a bit weird, man. Like I'm not able to make peace with this. That who should be questioned on this regard because it does feel out of place for me at least. Well, I was in Turkey and you know, my first PwC. So this was and of course you asked me a question. You get a long story. I apologize for that. But my first PwC was 1992 in the Owens Valley. And and I, I, I jokingly say it was my first PwC because I wasn't allowed to fly in it, but they did let me win dummy. And so it's the Owens Valley, you know, I think it's the fall

and I'm wind dummying for the PwC because I'm not good enough to fly in it, but I'm good enough to launch just before they launch and be in the air 1. The bunch of them launch and I can't fly the task obviously on. So, you know, I just fly around a bit around the launch area and go out and land every day. But I'm flying in the same era. I'm just not flying the task. And so and I was, you know, very proud to be able to make a contribution to the PwC, you know, with respect to, you know, just going out there and win dummy and forum so they could

have a good race. And so it was part of the learning curve and it was great to be there. And so in Turkey for the one woman in the meet on, you know, the bee glider conditions are very reasonable to go flying. And so if this was a normal recreational flying day without a competition, she would have been out there flying. You know, conditions weren't extreme. And when you're, when you're in the PwC, you know, if you're on a bee glider, you're not even in the race really. You just sort of win dummy in the course because you're not going to be in anybody's way because you're usually lower or

behind. And so you're participating, you know, this is, but you're not, you know, you're not racing racing, but you're participating and you're on seeing what it's all about. You know, you're seeing, you're getting experience. You know, and this is Goran's analogy, you know that it's, it's always, you know, for the best pilots in the world, you know, they still had their first PwC at some point. And so I didn't feel like it was dangerous for her. It was dangerous for us that she was there on, you know, there were other sea gliders in the meat and I didn't feel like they were any in position to us or

they were a danger to themselves.

They would have gone flying on the same kind of the day. And so I don't think there was a need to be exclusive with respect to, you know, to it being a PwC. And these people shouldn't be there. I felt it was great that they were there. And it's not to me, that's not where the danger is, you know, because because they kept themselves out of trouble. And this is, you know, comes back to the very beginning of the conversation, even before you started recording about it's the pilot in charge that's the most important. Because you could participate in APWC and not get in anyone's way

and not be a hazard to yourself and go have a good time flying because it is a good flying day. And just because it's also a race doesn't mean that you can't go flying and keep yourself out of trouble because you're a pilot, you're a certified pilot and you should be able to go flying on a good day and keep yourself out of trouble. And so, so to me, that's that's the the bottom line. And if we're talking about going racing on marginal days and taking additional risk because, you know, you wouldn't normally be flying on a day like this and now you're feel like you're being forced to because

everybody else is, it's a bit of a different conversation. We could have that another time because it's a valid one. But in the case of Turkey, it was good flying. And so I was glad she was there. She did great. Amazing. Bill, I think, you know, I love the way you answer these questions because before this conversation, these were burning questions that to me, nobody was able to clarify and I was just living with the anxiety that comes with unanswered questions. But I think the way you put through facts is it's just fascinating, man. This is magical to see somebody bring out their perspective like this. But closing thoughts, Bill, time

and again, we have said this and tried to address it from multiple point of views, but the bottom line is the buck stops with us. Is that what you're saying eventually? Yeah, it does. And that is the beauty of this sport. That is the freedom of this sport. The buck stops with us, you know, and I'll use as the last example on Gavin, he runs the Red Rocks wide open and then shortly after they do the X Red Rocks, which is the hike and fly race and so on. You know, one race the wide open, you have a task committee and a safety committee and a

fairly big infrastructure in terms of rescue services and volunteer support. Glider fluffers on launch on a lot of on support for the pilots and a lot of work for the organizers to try to provide as a safe of a competition as possible where the organization is making more decisions for the pilots. And so we had one serious accident and a few really close calls that could have gone either way. And, and so we, we finish up that meet and then a week later Gavin does the ex red rocks. And now there's no task. There's a task committee, but there's no safety committee. There's no regulation of what's

launchable conditions or not or, or anything other than giving weather briefings and let pilots make their own choices as to whether they're hiking or whether they're flying. And they get through that meet with one incident which a pilot threw his reserve but was fine and kept packed up and kept hiking. And so no injuries and, and, and I couldn't help but go, all right, well, there was one meet where we were making a lot of decisions for the pilot field and we had a mixed bag of results. And there was another meet where the pilots made entirely their own decisions and they had less incidents. And it and, and I had made some kind of comment via text to

Gavin. And all she said was, yeah, completely different group. It's all he said. And I took that as it's like, look how powerful that is when the pilots own it and have the choice of hiking or flying or a little bit of both. Look how well they can do when they know it's on there or you look at those big flights done on those inspiring flights I talked about earlier all over the world, whether it's flying off the summit of K2 or Nanga Parbat. And I know that wasn't the summit, but it's still a fantastic flight by David or on or Antoine's, you know, Volbev across the US or, you know,

breaking Triangle records or, you know, big flights in Pakistan. All of those were done without anybody telling the pilots what they should do and when they should do it. On the pilots themselves, you know, they created the inspiration and, you know, they had the inspiration and then they pulled off the flights. And so to me, it it comes down to the pilot. And that is also the beauty of the sport on, you know, mountaineering, freedom of the hills. You know, this is when I got into climbing and it was, there was one line in it and it said take a step in any direction and experience the freedom of the Mountaineer and flight is that

to me, you know, it's total freedom. And that means that we own the choices.

It's fascinating, man, fascinating to hear that Bill, because deep inside we all know us better than anyone else and that reality is not going to change ever. So let's all try to bring in the professional discipline that our actions deserve, and that's all going to be collectively. Yeah, really nice. You forge yourself through these sports, you know? You know, to do that, the fire's got to burn pretty hot. And the fire is the risk that's involved to create the heat, to allow the metal to move. And you basically remake yourself via these sports because you have to manage yourself. You have to know yourself and what you can do.

And that that evolves over time but keeps you humble. It keeps you completely honest with yourself as to what you can pull off. And even with all of that, the risk remains, but that risk is the fire that has changed you. And, and I would say that any of us that have participated in this activity, whether we're still alive or not, have been forever changed from it and forever benefited from it. And so, you know, this is, you know, part of the cost of, you know, the pursuit of an extreme sport in nature. But, you know, because you're not with us any longer doesn't mean that it hadn't had a profound and beneficial

influence on your life and created bonds with your friends that have could never been created any other way. You know, when you're with people in the sky on a big day on their, there's a connection there that cannot be formed any other way. And you'll see this when you're together, you know, with your comrades in flight, whether you're walking through the town of Shamani, you know, you could, you know, that look of a fellow alpinist or a fellow pilot that has been transformed, you know, by the sport. And there's a connection to them, even if you don't know them personally. You see each other on the

street. You recognize each other. You, you have a bond that cannot be formed any other way. And you know, these people are your brothers and sisters forever, you know, even if you've never spoken a word to them. And this is, you know, this is one of those gems that the sport gives us, but it doesn't give us those without a cost. And, you know, the only thing I can, you know, ask people to consider is the totality of the gift of this activity. And you're going to lose something if you try to pick at it or change it too much to fix what you don't like, because you might do that at the expense,

you know, of what makes it special. And so you know. So in closing, I I would say that everybody who gives something to make what we do possible deserves our gratitude. Whether it's the manufacturers, whether it's the volunteers, whether it's to meet organizers, whether it's the governing bodies that usually are, you know, pilots themselves, whether it's the tribe, everybody that you're flying with, they are special. You know, they are your people, and never forget that.

Wise words, Will, wise words. I think this is what I told you last time as well, because speaking with you is so fascinating, magical and enriching all at once that the only bad part of all this episode is that it has to come at an end at a certain point. And for for our audiences who are watching us and listening to us right now. There was a episode that I recorded with Bill a couple of months ago when I was when we were at PwC in Macedonia. I was not racing by the way, but that has still remained unreleased because of some of the priorities that came up in

the show. Uh, but that magic will come your way and umm, please let us know how you like this discussion, because to me this has been one of the most eye opening ones ever since I started the show and having somebody of bill's stature is always an absolute honor. So umm, all I can say is until next time bill. Thank you so much for this. It's been an. Honor. All right, man. Thanks for having me.