We simply weren't made for this world, for this three-dimensional world. Every time we move into areas we weren't originally created for, it means our bodies react to it. And that is no different at all when it comes to diving compared to flying.
Podz-Glidz, the Lu-Glidz podcast.
Stories from the cosmos of paragliding.
Today with Robby Loeltgen and Lucian Haas at the microphone.
Robby Loeltgen from Kerpen has been working as a professional diving instructor for 20 years. Or rather, he's an instructor trainer. This means he trains instructors for PADI, the largest international diving organization. PADI's diving training is highly structured and follows the same standardized curriculum all over the world. Robby, who did the exact same thing himself five years ago, says the paragliding scene could also benefit from such an approach. In this podcast, the 55-year-old explains why diving and flying share many parallels and why both fascinate him equally. He talks about, among other things, the special challenges of moving in three-dimensional space, underwater and in the air, dealing with fear and risks, modern versus outdated training formats, and how he manages to get into the air again and again at his diving spots.
If you dive into Podz-Glidz now and want to hear more stories from the world of paragliding in the future and read the most interesting news from the paragliding scene, then please become a supporter of Podz-Glidz and the associated Gleitschirm-Blog Looglights. All of this is voluntary, but without generous supporters, I wouldn't be able to maintain these professionally and passionately produced formats. As a supporter, you can determine the amount of your contribution yourself. For those who are undecided, I recommend using the non-binding calculator. The guideline is 1 Euro per podcast episode and 2 Euro per reading month on Looglights. Payments are very easy via PayPal or bank transfer. You can find the relevant details on the Looglights website, specifically on the Support page.
Robby, what was your longest dive so far?
Oh, I have to think. The longest dive must have lasted well over two hours. But you have to say, that was actually very little. Dives that last a very, very long time are usually dives that served training or examination purposes and, in that sense, don't represent anything special in terms of content. Technical dives can also sometimes last around two hours when going to greater depths, if different gases are used. Then you can have the dive time. You have enough breathing gas with you. You can extend the dive time relatively far. And what was your longest flight so far?
Also around that much time. Three hours are about the longest flights I can currently manage, of course only if conditions allow. And yes, then also with small distances, of course.
You say
straight line. Can diving and flying actually be compared in terms of performance in any way? I think, just by itself...
the term "performance" is already a bit problematic in relation to these two sports. Because I believe they shouldn't necessarily be seen as performance-oriented, but rather it's more of a story of experience. And that's exactly how many pilots, but also of course many divers, understand what they do. And in that sense, I always find the term "performance" a bit difficult. Many divers, of course, define depth as a performance goal, or yes, also dive length as a performance goal. But yeah, these are actually more like performance metrics that are imposed on the sport from the outside, but which don't really have anything to do with performance.
But isn't it also, I mean, for many paragliders, there's quickly something in the XContest, like a kilometer count or a score. And so
on. But
otherwise, aren't you also a bit infected by that as a paraglider, or as a paraglider, and you say, oh, I want to do the hundred or whatever?
Absolutely, of course. I mean, these goals—which don't necessarily have to do with performance—I'm firmly convinced that there are certain routes that are easier to fly. Whereas other routes in paragliding might be much shorter but far more problematic to navigate. You know this from the superlatives of the X-Alps, where pilots sometimes manage certain traverses that might not even be that long, but are incredibly difficult to fly. And in that sense, they might not be suitable for everyone. And in that sense, I also find it a bit difficult to say; the 100-kilometer flight, that's where the wheat is separated from the chaff. And those are the pilots who have reached a completely different league in terms of performance.
Is there a specific flight, regardless of how far it was, where you'd say that was the one where you best showed how well you can fly?
Yes, also difficult. I mean, there were always these little situations where you were very happy with yourself afterwards because something had worked out. Where you might have been able to stay in the air longer than expected from the start, because maybe only a short glide was planned. And then it turned out completely differently. But... yeah, ultimately there were also sometimes flights that took a bit longer, where you might have thought, "Yeah, we can't get to the other side of the valley, we can't get into the next valley." But then it actually worked out. And yeah, that already... leads to a great sense of satisfaction, of course. And what was it for you, for example? Yeah, in Switzerland, for example, last year I had a nice flight with my best flying buddy.
Where we flew over Klosters. And yeah, that was truly outstanding because we were able to stay up in the air for hours in the end. And yeah, we could fly up and down the valley over and over again. With great thermals. Yeah, some were more difficult, some were easier again. It was, yeah, an outstanding flight.
Now, you've been diving for over 20 years, but you've been paragliding for about five years. How did it even happen that you started flying as well as diving?
Yeah, diving isn't just a hobby I do in my spare time; I've been diving professionally for many years. But to be honest, flying has always been sort of in the back of my mind. Funnily enough, for many, many years longer than diving. But I kept putting it off. I made several attempts. Through a tandem flight that I could quickly squeeze in somewhere. But it never got to the point where I actually managed to work up the nerve to do a paraglider training, because I always thought I had to invest more time into it. And yeah, five years ago I finally took the time, after having many key experiences with paragliders and paragliding pilots where I thought I finally had to get started.
And yeah, I let it slide for over ten years, if you want to put it that way. And at some point, I was in a situation where I had to say, if I don't really start now, I'll never do it. And after the tandem flight—after the third or fourth tandem flight I'd done by then—I said, okay, tonight I'm signing up for a paragliding course. And that's exactly how it happened. You just said
Key experiences with paragliders. What is a key experience that one can have with a paraglider? A
I have to tell you about a great experience. It was a few years ago. I climbed the Drei Zinnen with a friend, and we were sitting on the summit plateau of the Große Zinne, of course very satisfied to have reached the peak after a long, extensive climbing tour. And we were sitting on the summit—you have to imagine the summit, well, like two large kitchen tables, maybe, with a lot of surface area and very exposed. And suddenly, a paraglider approached us. There was a Gleitschirm-Blog and it pulled over us, so about 50 meters, 30 meters away, it circled around us and we definitely talked with it for about five minutes. And it was simply fantastic to see how a bird flew around us. And yes, that was one of those key experiences where I thought there's no other way but that you have to take that step at some point.
What was the conversation about, when you say you talked to the pilot?
Yeah, that was funny. We actually talked about the weather too. I also asked him how it's possible for it to hold for so long. And he said, yeah, it's not that easy to explain, but it's thermals. At the time, I was familiar with the term thermals, of course, but I couldn't grasp at all what that meant. How much thermals do you need for me to have a chance of staying at an altitude? All of that was completely unclear to me. And yeah, we were congratulating each other. Him on the flight. Us on reaching the summit. And it was just a great moment.
If you do both now, diving and paragliding, and if you ever compare the two a bit, what is the greatest fascination for you in each respective area?
Yeah, the fascination is actually moving in three-dimensional space. That's also why I always called my profiles 3D-Robby, because it's actually very, very comparable. It's moving in three-dimensional space, both underwater, of course, and in the air. And unlike many other sports, I have the opportunity, just like when flying, to personally influence my depth or my altitude. And that's what makes the whole thing so exciting—that I can actually be creative in three-dimensionality. I don't have to be like a skydiver, just jumping out of the plane where there's only the way down. Instead, I also have the opportunity to experiment with the elements.
And the same thing happens underwater, of course. Even underwater, I have the opportunity to experiment with the elements. I can let myself drift with the current. I can position myself against the current, as long as it allows for it and isn't too strong. I have the ability to choose my depths. I can manage my time at certain depths, and thus adjust to the entire course of the dive. And that's actually the fascination of these two sports, which I consider to be very, very comparable in some ways.
Is there anything in aviation, which you started later, where you benefited from your diving knowledge? Where you'd say, wow, I can basically transfer something here, even though it's a completely different medium—once water, once air.
Yes, definitely. There are a few things that are very similar, and there are a few things that are completely different. And if you ask me now what I was able to experience or learn through diving that was useful for flying, then it's very clearly this physical awareness. Both are very, very dependent on your own physical perception.
I mean, I don't have to explain it to you, but while flying, I naturally have to be able to feel where the air masses are coming from and how they're moving. What are the air masses doing to my glider? In which direction is my glider tending to go? How high is my sink rate? Can I feel the thermals? All these things are very similar to diving. In diving, we call that trimming. That means I have to get a feel for how my body lies in the water. And how the current affects my body, or how depth, sinking, and rising affect my body. And that's exactly the crucial part, because I always have to do something with that information. In diving, it's like this: I have to be able to stop an excessive sink by filling my trim jacket with more air so that I get back to a neutral status.
It's similar when flying. Maybe I want to enter a thermal. Then I have to feel where the thermal is strongest? How can I even manage to stay inside the thermal? I have to try to center myself. All these things are already very, very similar. And it's useful, of course, and the mental strength you gain over the years from diving has actually helped me a lot.
It means we know that with every paraglider launch, the pulse increases. It can easily be over 100. Even with experienced pilots, studies have been done indicating that the pulse simply doesn't stay at 60 or 50 when the launch is imminent. And it's no different with diving. When diving before entering a body of water, even if it's a body of water I know well, the pulse will always rise slightly in every diver because we simply weren't created for this world. For this three-dimensional world. As humans, we are reduced to two-dimensionality. And whenever we move into areas for which we weren't originally created, or perhaps haven't been for millions of years, it means our body reacts to that.
And that is no different in diving than it is in flying. And I believe that getting used to these situations and pushing your mental performance doesn't take hold that quickly. I think you can translate that one-to-one from diving to flying. And that has certainly been very useful for me. Which
Are there any specific techniques that you learn as a diver that you might not learn as much as a pilot? Because often, at least in my experience, there's a lot of talk about flight technique, weather, and other things, but very little about the mental strengths of a pilot, even in training or something like that. What do you learn as a diver where you could say, hey, this calming technique, or centering technique, or whatever it is—in terms of mental centering—that you could then apply as a pilot?
apply? Unfortunately, no. So officially, that's not part of the curriculum. But the techniques that every one of us knows, or that many of us know, can of course be applied during diving just as much as during flying. Because sharpening your senses while diving makes just as much sense as it does while flying. And it's actually the case that the conditions at the launch site have to affect you first. It's no different with the dive entry. Also, diving or the beginning of a dive, similar to the beginning of a flight, must never degenerate into haste and stress. So that you have the opportunity to expand your perception of your surroundings and not stand in front of a dark wall and somehow jump or fly into a dark hole.
Instead, I have to... I have to try to focus on becoming calm, on breathing calmly, on keeping my pulse in a reasonable range. And for many people, that takes a lot, a lot of time. And that's actually a tip that can be transferred absolutely from diving to flying. Actually taking that time for yourself. It will never be the case that you miss out on anything. Because whatever you might want to achieve—the right bubble at the start of a paraglider flight or the whale shark that passes by just at the end, which I'd really love to see—it might just come later.
And many people quickly fall into a stress situation if they let outside chaos get to them. And that's exactly where you have to actively counter it. If you feel that you're susceptible to that. You
You just said that we as humans are built for 2D, not for this three-dimensional space. Now, with flying, we enter three-dimensional space into the air. With diving, it's three-dimensional space into the water, as you say. From your perspective, which is the bigger step? Or what is perhaps the greater hurdle that one has to overcome as a human?
I think it's definitely the case with flying. Because, unlike diving—or there's a very, very huge difference compared to diving—with flying, it's like this: once I've taken off, and let's imagine a takeoff area that isn't immensely large like at Monte Baldo on Lake Garda, where I could repeatedly land in a circle. But rather the classic takeoff situation. Then you actually have to imagine that once you've taken off, there's basically no going back. No going back naturally means I can, for example, fly directly to the landing field and keep the flight relatively short. But unlike diving, it's of course the case that I have to complete the flight. With diving, it's perhaps a bit easier on your mental strength because I can, of course, end the dive relatively quickly.
So I can dive down 20 centimeters and then realize the current is too strong for me. Or the underwater visibility, which I might have underestimated beforehand. It's not suitable for my skills because, at maybe five to ten meters deep, I can only see my hand in front of my face, and only then does a wide field of vision open up. In that case, I can still end the dive after 20 centimeters of depth. And that's exactly the huge difference compared to flying, where that's simply not possible.
But there's also the opposite, where if you've been diving for a long time and at a greater depth, you can't just surface quickly. So with paragliding, you put your ears in and then you go down fast. But with diving, it's, no, from the depth, you always have to do decompression because the body has to adapt to the different pressure levels again. Because of that, if you've been really deep once, basically, the return trip is also possible.
Yeah, you could think that. If you think of the old Cousteau films, maybe that's the prevailing view. But in reality, it's not like that. Because in the sport diving field, a dive is actually defined in a way where you can basically surface at any time. From any depth you reach, as long as you stay within the limits of diving. I can, of course, exceed those without any problems. And then exactly what you just described applies: that I have to observe decompression stages, that I have to structure the way up completely differently in terms of time. In the sport diving field—and that's what we're actually talking about when we speak of classical equipment—
I can actually surface from any depth. That means I do have to observe a surfacing time—meaning I can't just shoot out of the water like an arrow—but I only have to cover a certain height difference within a specific timeframe while ascending. But that's relatively fast. And so, if you take into account that I'm allowed to cover 18 meters per minute, yes, vertically, then from a depth of 10 meters, I'm already back at the surface in half a minute. Everything beyond that is a safety standard that you add on. There's also a safety stop in diving that has to be observed. It would be required for every dive, meaning I stay there for a certain number of minutes again,
at a depth of 5 meters. Or water depth, to give the rest of the nitrogen in the body another chance to leave the body. But those are simply additional safety features that you could or must include. But the fact is, you can ultimately reach the water's surface from a depth of 20 meters within about a minute. And that's just not the case when flying. I have to, even if it's only a short flight, and we're still talking about 3, 5, 7 minutes that I experience. And completely alone, without a diving partner, without a flight partner, to be able to reach the earth safely again. And that's also a bit of the classic difference in diving. One of the basic rules of diving, at least for the entry level, is that you never dive alone, but always in a buddy team.
And you can support each other underwater. In the event of a technical problem or if someone feels unwell, I have the option to get help. And that's exactly the kind of support I'm missing, even if just a little, in the air, where I definitely have to be responsible for myself alone from the very first minute of flying.
Let's talk a bit about the training. You've been a dive instructor for almost 20 years now and you work for PADI. That's the largest international organization, so a commercial organization for dive training with dive bases all over the world and so on. By now, you're even the instructor for the instructors, so a dive instructor-instructor or something like that. And you're also involved in co-developing all the training content and developing the standards for it and so on. If you were to translate that to paragliding, it would be something like sitting in on the DHV teaching team and also deciding what should actually be taught and so on. To what extent can such a PADI training be compared to training in a flight school?
From your experience.
Yes, it is very comparable. The content is similar. There's a bit of technical stuff, some weather content, and some physiological content. So there are very, very many parallel areas that you have to deal with in both flying and diving. In that sense, the training to become a pilot is certainly comparable. Training for an Open Water Diver means that the person can later go underwater alone, responsible for a diver or a diving partner. In that respect, you could say these areas are already very comparable. Is there
...things where you'd say, that works with PADI or other diving courses, but staying with PADI, you have the experience that it still works somehow differently?
Yes, of course I have the mindset that things work a bit differently there. But that's also traceable from the history. The DHV is, of course, an association that has no competition. That means anyone who wants to take to the air in Germany as a paraglider has to obtain a DHV license to be able to do any kind of flying at all. And that's how it is with the DHV. Diving is a bit different. There are several associations, there's no license with a federal eagle on the front, but rather there are diving licenses or diving certifications from different organizations.
And in that sense, there is naturally competitive behavior between the organizations, which obviously has the advantage of them having to evolve much faster than a federation-oriented organization. And that is, of course, also a reason why you can do such an organization at all. And in that sense, there are naturally differences. Especially in the area where I did my Ahrschein back then, I sometimes had to chuckle a bit. It's still a bit, well, sometimes you had the feeling that there was still a light layer of dust on the forms, so to speak. Because so much still works in the same way as things actually did a few years ago—20, 30 years ago.
And you have to chuckle a bit sometimes. That doesn't mean the quality is worse. For God's sake, I don't mean to imply that at all. But the learning techniques and tactics have changed over the last 20 years. And I'm observing now that even in the DAV, you can gradually do exams with digital options. And yes, that's naturally the direction we're heading. The diving industry, or at least the PADI sector of diving, took that path very early on and very successfully. And that means they're already moving a bit more in tune with the times.
is. You just mentioned the layer of dust on the forms. What would need to be done? Or in which areas would you say it's most urgently necessary to dust off paraglider training?
Yes, I believe that's no longer up to date. The idea that you absolutely have to take a nationwide organized exam to train an A-license pilot—I'm of the opinion that actually every flight instructor should perhaps be able to certify the completion of the training with some additional training.
Because the numbers in the paragliding sector have risen significantly in recent years, you have to ask yourself: is it still up to date that we have to send all A-license aspirants to a flight examiner? That is an organizational effort that is hardly cost-effective and is sometimes really problematic to carry out organizationally. Wouldn't it be more sensible to certify flight instructors to the extent that they are themselves able to conduct the exam in the end? That way, it can be integrated into the training process much more easily.
But wouldn't you actually have to standardize the training content much more for that? So that you really know, if someone did the A-course at Flight School A, you know exactly what they learned. If you look at the flight schools today, some have been doing it for 30 years, and some might still be working with... who knows. Maybe there are few left that still use some kind of slides that they put on a slide projector. The next one tells a bit about his experience. The other has a super well-prepared PowerPoint or something. But what is actually being conveyed as content—of course, there's a curriculum that the DRV checks in the questions and so on. But the real standard, where you can actually say I can expect this basic knowledge from everyone equally, isn't really absolutely guaranteed in the current system.
What does Paddy do differently in this situation, for example? Yes,
I think it's guaranteed because, of course, I'm admitting a student for the exam and then introducing them to an examiner who ultimately completes their program. And then the student shows what they've already learned beforehand. It's comparable in the theory exam. So ultimately, those standards you described do exist. The only question is who monitors these standards and who is responsible for ensuring they are met. And you're completely right, there are many diving associations where the exact same procedure is followed. The student might be dragging the compressed air cylinders from left to right constantly during their course and loading the truck much faster than others, and then they pass the exam.
He might eventually get his Open Water Diver certificate for that. That would be disastrous if that were the case, but I think that still happens. But in the PADI system, because of the continuing education that instructors have to take, there is a way to constantly influence them as well,
so that there is oversight to ensure that the instructors have to undergo regular training. That the standards are being met. In the diving world, at least in the PADI system, there is also quality management. That's where PADI essentially differs from numerous other diving organizations that forgo this expensive quality assurance tool. You can imagine that it's very demanding to have a quality assurance department that periodically checks, investigates all accidents, and constantly looks at what kind of vacations and what kind of modes are being taught in different dive schools. Are the standards being met? Quality management questionnaires are sent out to the students,
which they can also fill out online, so it asks what you learned in your diving course. Specific things are then asked quite concretely, so the student has no chance at all,
...to check off something. And in the sense of acting as a potential "good guy" to a dive instructor, he doesn't succeed at all because he doesn't know exactly what the background of that question is. In this way, we can check if all our dive instructors also adhere to these standards, which are so important to us all because they can achieve a relatively high standard through the worldwide consistency of the training, which is supposed to be absolutely the same all over the world. You know, you can rely on it today: the Open Water Diver who was trained in the PADI system in Germany can go diving in Thailand, and the person who takes them on their dive boat in Thailand knows exactly what that person learned in their training.
That's unfortunately not the case with paragliding; the training regulations in each country are significantly different, to the point of being non-existent.
If you look at paragliding training now, okay, you can get your A-license, which is basically all the flight skills you theoretically need, though the question is always whether you can actually do everything practically as well as you should by the end. Then there's the B-license, and that's pretty much it. But if you look at a PADI system, for example, there are at least four basic levels alone—I think Bubble-Maker, Scuba-Diver, Open-Water-Diver, Dive-Master—but under those, there are still several sub-packages, I'd call them. All sorts of things. Everything you can possibly do. What do I have here? For example, something like Digital Underwater Imaging, Diver Propulsion, Vehicle Diver, Drift Diver, Dry-Suit Diver, Enriched Air Diver—all these extra certificates that you can probably do there.
Would something like that make sense for paragliding, where it's divided much more into individual sections—like saying, for example, you've shown you can really soar well for coastal flying, and then there's a license for, you can really fly thermals well, or you can really handle ground handling well and stuff like that, and that you build something like that up much more systematically?
Absolutely, absolutely. You're speaking my mind; that was exactly my thought when I eventually figured out the DHV training system, realized how it actually works, and saw that, if we're being honest, we basically only need an A-license and that's it. Many other countries organize it differently and pack many more components into that A-license training. I don't want to judge that at all, because I simply lack the experience for it. But from a marketing perspective, I have to say quite clearly that there is significant potential that could be tapped into in the field of flight training, where there is certainly still a lot that could be done.
And the things you've already mentioned, those are exactly the things people should be demanding. You'd actually have to make the training more modular, so that a ground handling module is mandatory during your training—not necessarily at the flight school where you might have done your theory training, but these modules need to be much more flexible to handle, so that a flight school in the Lüneburger Heide would be perfectly capable of issuing a ground handling certificate, which would then need to be combinable with the steep start site certificate or whatever.
so that you eventually meet all the requirements to then ultimately do a final check flight at the flight school where you originally signed up. In my view, as far as I can observe, and as I can say from my humble experience, the cooperation between flight schools is certainly more geared towards competition than cooperation. And that often makes things so complicated that, of course, flight school A can very easily let flight school B take the easy way out, which shouldn't be the case at all. Many things that flight schools located in the mountains consider difficult to fit in time-wise could be handled without any problems by flight schools in the flatlands.
If we take the example of ground handling, where we certainly agree that it's basically the basic school that should actually be taught much more intensively to every student, but of course often can't be intensified due to time constraints. I understand that too, because it all always has to be squeezed into vacation days or vacation weeks. But I see it as the fact that very often, if it's not potentially lost, and with that, of course, the opportunity to optimally prepare students for their flying life is taken away. And there would be quite a few things conceivable there. You just mentioned that in the PADI system, there are very many—we call these special courses. They aren't mandatory, you don't have to offer them, and you don't have to complete them, except for a few where it's about special gases, more specific gases that I want to use underwater.
That's already a prerequisite. But on the whole, you mentioned digital imaging. Yes, but that's also a topic in aviation. How many people today have a GoPro or a comparable action cam with them when they're out and want to take videos or photos? Not least myself. Nevertheless, every responsible pilot knows how easily these additional technical features—like camera settings, microphone settings, whatever—can distract you from flying or from concentrating on the flight. And that's obviously problematic. Right down to the mounting options for the camera somewhere in the pilot's area or on the aircraft, which can sometimes be very problematic as well.
That would certainly be worth some training. Absolutely. It would certainly be possible to do these things not just in online tutorials,
that would certainly be worth training for. Absolutely. It would certainly be possible there to not only do these things in online tutorials, but also to have these things taught in practical workshops and to pinpoint exactly where the problem areas are with a camera on a helmet or a camera in your hand, however it may be. There is
...still quite possible. If you look at these many special courses, they are offered by the PADI system. But that also means every course has to pay for itself, of course. It's a nice source of income for the diving schools accordingly, because they can always say, look, then you can do this course, that course. Are the paragliding schools perhaps too uncreative when it comes to such sources of income?
Well, you have to say, I don't think they're lacking creativity. I just think it takes an immense amount of time to squeeze the training components of these special courses into a standardized framework and then make them available to flight instructors. That is truly a very, very lot of effort. But here, there's a difference between the DHV and a professional organization like PADI, which provides this for the dive schools. Usually, it's not a dive instructor who figured out the best way to teach underwater current diving, but rather the diving sports organization that created it.
And every instructor can get trained in this specialty course at the instructor level—meaning at the teacher level—and then they are allowed to teach this specialty course. And that would, of course, certainly be something that actually belongs more in the scope of work of a national association and not a diving school, because then these things are no longer comparable to one another. They are supposed to be relatively easy for the instructor to teach. But then the instructor also has to know: how do I teach it? What is important? What equipment do I need to teach it?
What content should I teach? How much time do I need to budget to teach it? And yes, all these things are fixed in advance, and the diving instructor can then use them as a guide to teach things like underwater photography or filming to other people.
Now, these training structures in paragliding are usually shaped nationally. Like the DAV, you get it for the German license, and you can get a license for Austria and Germany in Austria. They cooperate a bit. In Switzerland, you get the Swiss license, which is structured a bit differently, and so on. Wouldn't it actually be much more sensible to think more in the direction of needing an international, internationally valid system, an international somehow adapted system, similar to a PADI, but where you say, in relation to paragliders, where the DAV would then have to give up a bit of its power or something, where you say you harmonize it, at least maybe first across Europe or something. Maybe such a training system would be something for an EHPU, as a European paragliding organization.
Absolutely. You're speaking my mind. That's exactly what I think too—that it would be important to develop as many standards and concepts as possible that have global, or ideally worldwide, validity. Of course, that's difficult; we're all aware of that. And it can really only happen through the path of professional schools, like the ones we have here. We have these individual businesses or companies that initially have nothing to do with the DAV, but who, of course, have to submit to the DAV's training standards. There's nothing against these numerous training companies choosing a training standard that a professional organization imposes on them, which the DAV would then ultimately only evaluate as part of the examination tools.
That's how it works in the diving sector too. Except in diving, it's just that as long as the numbers are what they are—the accident rates, for example—the legislator simply doesn't have to intervene additionally to make a license accessible that has nationwide validity. The legislator just says, it's not that important when people go underwater. We don't see a need for regulation here. We do see a need for regulation in aviation sports, I can certainly understand that.
because your aircraft might enter completely different areas. You might not just be endangering yourself, but through certain aircraft, potentially a multitude of people. This means the legislator saw the necessity and it's also understandable that he's aiming for a nationwide uniform license. You could absolutely leave it exactly like that. It's just that, because the training ultimately might need to be structured or organized differently, so that the free market has the opportunity to bring this training to the end customer, to the flight student, in order to ultimately give them the opportunity to take the exam with the DHV in the final instance, and that's that.
There is one organization, at least internationally speaking, similar to PADI, also for paragliding, called APPI, the Association of Paragliding Pilots and Instructors. It's less well-known in Germany, but in Eastern Europe, Asia, and South America, there are numerous flight schools that operate according to this system. And where there are also levels, and special courses, like for example, you have to do a basic ground handling level and a thermal flying level to reach a certain pilot level accordingly, would that be something where you'd say, that's actually the way to go?
Yes, exactly. I've looked into it and it's very, very similar. I'd almost argue that they looked at the diving sector because so many things seem very, very similar. And yes, ultimately it's exactly what we were just talking about. You just have to try to create such a global one—a worldwide organization, of course—and get it to the point where it can achieve acceptance in all nations. And harmonizing that isn't so easy. It's significantly easier in the diving sector in that regard, because we don't have the legal frameworks or the specifications that the individual countries present to us.
There are elements of that in the diving world too. In some countries, the PADI system also has its difficulties.
But what you're pointing out is actually exactly the path that represents the future in my eyes. It's just that there's little initiative felt from the European associations to make such an organization work for themselves. To accept the advantages of such a system without putting themselves at a disadvantage somewhere. That's not necessary at all, because I actually believe that even if you see the DHV as an institution, it has a massive amount to do and probably wouldn't lose any areas; instead, they could set their priorities completely differently.
And maybe they could also shift their focus more toward other areas where they are simply unbeatable.
If you look back at your five years of practical flight experience, where did you notice the biggest deficiencies in yourself—where you'd have liked to have learned more during your training instead of later, basically through learning by doing or maybe even through bad experiences or other things?
Personally, I can't say anything negative about my own training; it followed the standards perfectly. Based on what I know about the training system myself, I'm actually very satisfied with my education.
Still, I believe that one thing was severely overlooked in my own training, which probably would have gotten me further ahead much faster if I had recognized its value back then. And that is the area of ground handling. I find—and ironically, a report appeared recently in the DHV newspaper that actually covers exactly what I've been thinking about for years—that so many things can be taught through involvement with ground handling, that I think this area should take up a much larger space in the training. I absolutely understand why flight schools are rarely able to do that. Because ground handling is always just squeezed in whenever flights aren't feasible at the moment, because there is a minimum number of flights to reach in the shortest possible time, so that every flight student is actually satisfied and can then finish their vacation or their part-time leave with their training completion.
I understand all of that very well, it's just a real shame that the area of ground handling isn't mandatorily anchored in a training concept in such a way that no one can avoid spending many hours on the airfield. The DHV could intervene here to specify certain times—for example, you could have them provide proof of time related to ground handling and so on. So, various constructs are conceivable, but I believe it is really, really important, and if I hadn't recognized this value myself, I probably would never have gotten as far as I have now in the time I'm flying.
that it's important to understand how vital the activity of ground handling is, and then to bring your own flying skills up to a decent level relatively quickly.
Let's leave this topic of training alone for now. You're traveling all over the world today as a diving instructor-trainer. That's the case currently. Right now maybe not, because of Corona and all that, everything is restricted, but during the times when you're traveling or can travel again soon, but also looking back, do you actually always have your glider with you now? Yes,
Absolutely, that's exactly how it is. It's really funny that I've gotten into the habit of always having my little glider with me during all my exam weekends, which I actually take place all over the world more or less. I got a... light glider a few years ago with a light harness, a small rescue parachute, and a light helmet, so I always have a flight craft, a complete piece of equipment, with me that weighs exactly five kilos. So it can be taken as carry-on luggage on every plane, and with the helmet, variometer, rescue parachute, and harness, I'm at exactly five kilos. And in terms of size, it's always there in the carry-on.
And I actually use it here and there to fly whenever I'm in the Alps anyway. But even beyond that, I always try to have a flight craft with me and take every opportunity to do it.
to use. Is it actually possible to reasonably combine diving and flying while traveling? Because I mean, many diving spots are, obviously, always on the coast, you need the sea. Can you always be reasonable there? Can you go flying reasonably? Do you always find something?
It's not always that easy. Sometimes you have to be very creative. If I imagine myself doing an exam in Mallorca and spending a weekend with divers there, then of course I have the option to get to any coastal spot on Mallorca to reach the different wind directions, and I can easily go soaring for a few hours if the weather situation allows for it. But sometimes you really have to be creative. Two years ago, I was doing instructor training in Malaysia, on Borneo, and I had my flight gear with me. And funnily enough, I had one day off during those two weeks of training.
And fortunately, it was the only day with acceptable flying conditions, so I was actually able to use that single day to fly over the Borneo jungle. And there was hardly any information about a launch site. And it wasn't that easy to find one either. I only had GPS data for this launch site. And I actually worked my way through the jungle on a trail with strange noises from so many animals that were completely unknown to me, until I reached a launch site that was actually a proper launch site. It looked like many launch sites in the Alps. Like, really, you could almost say like a perfectly mown meadow. And then I was actually able to have a dream flight over the Borneo jungle.
Of course, I was completely alone, and that obviously comes with a different level of risk than when I'm standing in a line in Annecy. But in terms of the experience, the value of the experience, it was of course something very, very special. And yes, you certainly have to be creative. You also have to work through your catalog of preparation regarding what information is necessary. And then, regarding the weather, of course, there are those apps we all know. They might not exist in other parts of the world like that, or they might not access the data the same way. Or you just don't have the data pool available that you might be used to from Central Europe.
Yeah, but it works.
It works. You just briefly mentioned, yes, we know about the risks. Because I was out there alone. If you were to compare both, diving and flying, and especially if you go diving alone, would you say one is riskier than the other, and if so, which one?
No, I wouldn't actually say that one is significantly riskier than the other. No, I think they're absolutely comparable. And if you look at the accident numbers and, yeah, the consequences of accidents, then it's actually comparable as well.
But of course, you have to take into account that when you look at the accident numbers and, yeah, the consequences of accidents, if you're doing paragliding in Central Europe in the classic sense, you'll rarely be alone at the launch site if I'm using official launch sites. Or if I use classic flight areas, there will always be other people there too. It's the same with diving. I always have other people around me. If I dive from a dive boat, I'll rarely be alone on a dive boat, but I'll be participating. I'll be part of a dive group. If I go diving somewhere into a lake in Germany with a dive buddy, I always have a dive buddy with me. That will be the rule. And it's exactly the same with flying.
The difference in the air is, of course, different. And interestingly, very few accidents happen in the air; it's the takeoff and landing that are the problem. And there are usually people there. That means I'm not actually alone at all. But if I take this Malaysia example, then I'm not alone. Then I am, of course, alone. I don't know if anyone would have even come by there in the next 14 days. And if I had landed in a tree somewhere in the jungle, I'd probably still be hanging there today.
That means more exposed flying areas, more exposed locations, those are again more comparable to a hike and fly I might do somewhere in the Alps, maybe near a flying area. But then, just half a valley away, where there's significantly less public traffic. And then it's more comparable again. But let's be honest, even these lonely hike and fly trails aren't used by the masses of paragliders. If you
...already, not just five years ago, but much earlier, if you had started flying much sooner—since you already thought about it back then and so on—would you have perhaps become a flight instructor instead of a diving instructor?
Probably. If it had happened that way back then, it probably would have been like that. Today, I see it completely differently because I have to admit that in the diving field, the professional side eventually completely outweighed the hobby side. And that's something I naturally miss a bit today. I do significantly fewer dives just for pure private pleasure, where I have the chance to film or see whale sharks or mantas; that's far less possible time-wise than it used to be.
Still, that was the right path for me, from my personal perspective, to do it that way. But if flying had come before diving, it probably would have developed similarly, because you're always looking forward and seeing what else is possible, what else you can do, what satisfies you, or where your own needs would most likely be met with satisfaction. And that's why I do believe that if it had been the other way around, I would probably have proceeded differently in the aviation field today as well. Now, I've reached the point where I say, yeah, no way. Now, that absolutely cannot happen again, because I've really created this as a bit of a retreat to say, I don't want to achieve a parallel world between a diving profession and a flying profession, but here, the enjoyment and the experience should definitely remain in the
stay in the foreground. If you compare both again, diving and paragliding, would you say that even from 20 years of diving, and of course with your profession behind it, a lot of things are similar? In a very regulated area. But would you say that maybe paragliding even keeps you hungry longer than diving, because in paragliding there are perhaps even more differences, meaning more changes than in diving itself? No. Because the weather is always different, and with diving you say, okay, if I go diving in the Caribbean, I actually have almost the same water temperature every day and the currents I encounter there are also always the same.
Yeah, you could believe that, but I have to say clearly, no. I think it's really true that both provide stimuli at the same level that last for many years. And you're right, of course, if I always dived in the same spot, I'd probably know every fish by name and greet them every morning eventually. But fortunately, that's not how it is; the world has so many coastal regions that can be dived, right down to top spots in the middle of the oceans. So there are still, really still, enough possibilities, and I've been diving for many years now. I still have enough on my list, on my to-do list, that I'd like to visit.
And where it just never sufficed or never fit into my schedule for me to make it happen. And even though I've certainly had top-tier experiences in diving, whether I'm diving with hundreds of hammerhead sharks at Cocos Island or with mantas in the Maldives, it doesn't matter. There are still things I'd like to experience, even in diving. And it's the same with flying. If I always do the same glide every morning, yes, the weather changes, that's true. And eventually, I can assess whether the weather is flyable, yes or no. And then I glide down and that's it. But flying also—and I saw this with my Malaysia example—it simply has unimaginable possibilities.
Not just in the air itself, but also what I can do with the paraglider. Because I can use it to make a lot of things experienceable around the actual paragliding flight. Whether through hiking, through climbing, or in other cultures, I also experience some things on the ground around the paragliding flight, of course, that...
Yes, absolutely, they are absolutely brilliant, and where this is naturally the goal to be achieved.
...to reach. Where do you want flying to take you in the future? Do you have any plans?
Yes, I actually have plans, but unfortunately, they'll probably have to be canceled now due to the current situation, so they won't be possible anymore. I had planned to climb Elbrus with a climbing buddy this year. So...
Elbrus is the highest mountain in Europe, so the highest mountain in the Caucasus in Russia.
Yeah, exactly. So the highest mountain in Europe isn't Mont Blanc, it's Elbrus. And as a flight destination, that's certainly a nice goal because the chances of being able to take off from the summit of Elbrus are relatively high, provided you actually reach the summit. There are two peaks, though. Which one would you take? I think it's relatively irrelevant. There are indeed two peaks, but I think it doesn't really matter because they're almost the same size, the same height, and offer the same takeoff options. In that sense, it's pretty much the same. They're also only a few hundred meters apart as the crow flies.
In that sense, that wouldn't be the issue; the great thing is that the peaks would be relatively easy to launch from, which would of course also offer the option of actually being able to fly. With a high probability, and you wouldn't have to carry the glider back down.
Okay, so that might be canceled for this year because of Corona. But I'll keep my fingers crossed that something might still happen with Elbrus in 2021 after all, and you can fly under it then. Yeah, thanks a lot. Robby, thank you for all the background information on diving training and the comparison with all that flying stuff. It's really interesting to see those kinds of parallels. We're coming from two different worlds, and the idea that moving in 3D space in the air and underwater has so many parallels and similarities was really fascinating to me.
Yes, thanks a lot, Lucian, and thanks to you too for the conversation. And yeah, I'm a big fan of your blog. In that sense, I'm of course very honored that you invited me to this conversation, to this podcast. And yeah, thanks a lot.
That was Robby Loeltgen in conversation with Lucian Haas. In the show notes for this podcast episode on Looglites, I've put together some additional links on the topic of diving and flying. If you'd like to hear more interesting stories from the world of paragliding, you can already find more than 30 episodes under the Podcast label on my blog Looglites or on Soundcloud. Podz-Glidz can also be found in all the major podcast catalogs like iTunes, Spotify, Google Podcast, etc. The easiest way is to subscribe to Podz-Glidz directly in your podcast player. And once you've enjoyed two, three, or four episodes, maybe you'll feel like giving something back. How to do that is explained on my blog Looglites, specifically on the Support page.
I want to say thanks for listening and for the support. Stay healthy, see you soon, ciao.