First night flight and no flashlight

That's boondocks Wendover at night. Thankfully we did just one "stop-and-go landing" and then peaced out.

The sun was setting, and the mountains were ablaze like a lunar eclipse, but it wasn’t as peaceful as hoped. I was nearly wetting myself waiting to take off for my first night cross-country flight. By the time I did pre-flight on the Tecnam P-92, the lights were out, the sky was black, and so were the runway lights, in fact. For a new pilot, this was a bit disconcerting. I was shaking in my Danskos. “Did you bring a flashlight?” asked my flight instructor Drew Cater. “Oh you didn’t, well you have a cell phone right?” Hmm, I did but, super, I hadn’t been on one night flight and didn’t realize that, yes, of course, being able to read your flight plan attached to your kneeboard would be ideal. Otherwise, navigating without any tools in blackness while flying over the Salt Lake Flats is like skiing naked—you won’t last that long. Luckily, the landing light was an alternative to a flashlight, but a bit excessive as it illuminated everything including the Great Salt Lake 1,000 feet below. But we were good to go.

Drew keyed the mike, and like magic, the taxiway and runway lights appeared (this allows runways to function only for pilots using the airport and saves on extra electricity and city glare). With the white lights outlining the runway, taking off wasn’t so rough—full throttle and the little Tecnam popped off the ground. We were off. Destination: Wendover, NV, the gambling city in the middle of no where (it might has well have been Santa’s workshop in Finland.) While planning my flight using Visual Flight Rules, I had to pick out some landmarks as reference points. I had a tower beacon and I-80, otherwise it was blackness. There was a slight sliver of moon, and the airplane’s lights reflected off the water oh so briefly until we climbed to 8,500 feet MSL (above sea level, but actually only 4,000 feet above the ground).

About an hour in, Wendover appeared. Where was the airport? No problem, Drew told me to key the mike and voila it lit up and so I set a straight approach and prepared to land for a full-stop. Easier said than done. The runway lights were bright, but not being able to see the cement until 100 feet from the ground is a little freaky. Drew told me to do exactly what I had been doing during daytime landings. Well, I landed three wheels on the ground, so that was promising. “Ready to do 9 more?” Drew asked. “We merged two lessons in one, and have to get those night landings in.” It was 9:15 p.m. already, arg.

So after Drew put me under the “hood,” so I could only fly by instrument, we started to arrive back at Ogden. As I’m listening to the weather on ATIS, I hear: “Mad Dog, grrrrr, grrrrrr, grrrrrr.” Huh? “Oh the Air Force fighter pilots must be on our frequency, and flying at Ogden. You can always tell them since they sound like Darth Vadar and have their own codes.” I announce our intentions, and the Hill Air Force tower gets on: “Tecnam, our fighters can’t key the runway lights, mind putting them on?” Ha, you need us to make the magic happen? You’re welcome. We watched them take off on the runway, their jets ablazing.

And with eyes aburning and a gnarly tailwind turned to frustrating headwind on landing, I zipiddy-do-da-ed through eight landings. At 10:45 p.m., Drew cut the power and I spent my last tired minutes in the plane hoping I wouldn’t die during the “simulated engine failure.” After the last landing, and safe on firm ground, I wasn’t shakin’ in my Danskos anymore, I was ready for more (just after lots of sleep and buying a flashlight).

Becoming a pilot

Vanessa Pierce and her training plane, a Tecnam P-92 Eaglet Lightsport

I’ve gone and done it again, taken a scary risk that makes my mind freak out but my heart, well, it hearts the plan. I’m becoming a pilot, and it’s just one of the many adventures I’ve been on. Life is really too short to be bored at a desk job, or bored in a dead-end relationship, or just plain bored, so I created somewhat of a mental bucket list. Athlete, CHECK. Published, CHECK. World traveler, CHECK. Learning how to ride a motorcycle, CHECK—plus many more. I figured it was time to shake up life, and with Wall Street confirmation that my career (freelance writing) was suffering along with the flat-as-a-pancake magazines, I knew life had brought me to one of those forks in the road. Being that I always wanted to become a pilot—ever since the time I chiseled paint off docks when I was 15 so I could get free seaplane lessons—I decided to sign up for the whole shebang: pilot through commercial and flight instructor ratings. That means, kids, I’m on an intense 8-month program at Cornerstone Aviation Flight Schools/Salt Lake Community College to get highly trained so I can pursue a career in the commercial airlines. Come on, free travel for life. You can’t beat that. It’s an adventure, and it started on Sept. 11, when I had my first flight. Yep, that is the day.  And the best part, I can still be a writer. After all, imagine all of the time I’ll be sitting in an airport.

Denied

Here’s an update on a story I wrote for The Ski Journal last season. I’m glad Justice Fenlon cried discrimination, and hopefully the IOC will take note.

Vancouver, BC (July 10, 2009) — The culmination of the women’s ski jumping controversy covered in Issue 2.4 delivered a dissapointing result for the athletes as the BC Supreme Court rejected a bid today to allow women’s ski jumping in the 2010 Olympics.

“Judge Lauri Ann Fenlon ruled against an elite, international group of 15 women ski jumpers who had sued VANOC over their exclusion from Olympic ski jumping at the 2010 Games. They had asked for a declaration that the Games must either include women’s ski jumping or have no ski jumping competitions at all.

However, in a moral victory for the women plaintiffs, Judge Fenlon found that their exclusion from the Winter Olympics is discriminatory. She noted that many of them have trained with and competed against men who will be Olympians next year.

‘The plaintiffs will be denied this opportunity for no reason other than their sex,’ Judge Fenlon wrote.

But she concluded that VANOC was not in breach of the Charter because the decision to keep their event from the Olympics was made by the International Olympic Committee, and only the IOC has the power to include the women at the Games. The IOC, she pointed out, is not bound by Canada’s Charter.”

So, while it was a moral victory, ultimately, the IOC has its way for 2010. We can only hope things will change for Russia 2014.

Source: Globe and Mail

Sad day for women’s ski jumping

It’s a sad day for women’s ski jumping. Justice Lauri Ann Fenlon of the B.C. Supreme Court came out with her decision (three months after the hearing), and said based on law, that Canada cannot make the IOC allow women to jump in 2010. To her credit, she did say it was pure discrimination. But it’s IOC’s discrimination and not VANOCs (which the plaintiffs sued).

“VANOC did not make the decision to exclude women’s ski jumping from the 2010 Games,” Fenlon wrote. “VANOC did not support that decision. VANOC does not have the power to remedy it.”She continued: “The plaintiffs will be denied this opportunity for no reason other than their sex.”

It’s scary to think IOC can get away with anything. They are an international superbody that doesn’t seem to be governed by any law, including the host country.

As a long time fan of the Olympic spirit—that has (in the past) represented equality and opportunity—the politicos of the IOC have diminished the value of competition and spirit. However, I’m proud of the women that have taken a stand and showed that discrimination in this day in age is unacceptable. My heart goes out to all of them.

Tough decision for Justice Fenlon in women’s ski jumping lawsuit

I spent the last five days hearing the arguments from the plaintiffs and defence in Sagen et al vs. VANOC, in what was an amazing display of the British Columbia Supreme Court system. As manager for plaintiff, Lindsey Van, against VANOC, I wanted to see this action in person. The Plaintiffs claim it’s against Canada’s Constitutional Charter of Rights and Freedoms to discriminate against women ski jumpers by not allowing them to jump in the Olympics, but, at the same time using government monies to build facilities for the men’s events.

The Plaintiffs’ argued, through their lawyer Ross Clark of Davis LLP, that because VANOC is a “government entity” it must apply the Charter. They are asking Justice Lauri Ann Fenlon to make a declaration that VANOC must comply to the Canadian Constitution. If they don’t allow women, then they can’t allow men to jump. On its face, the declaration is simple enough. But VANOC contends that it is not a government entity and it must comply with the International Olympic Committee’s wishes, and the IOC has decided to deny a women’s ski jumping event in 2010.

If that is their case, then generally speaking, an international body can do what it wants when entering a foreign country and its laws are superior to the host country’s. That’s scary! The National Post, a conservative Canadian newspaper, agrees. During the defence’s argument, Justice Fenlon asked: “Does this mean if the IOC decided it wouldn’t allow black athletes to compete, then Canada should allow that?”

Clark presented the Plaintiffs’ case of continued prejudice against women’s jumping, that even with the sport’s international depth of field (more so than skiercross, a completely new sport that the IOC let in for 2010), the IOC refuses to let the women jump. This isn’t a case of entitlement, but discrimination the Plaintiffs’ argue, not just because of the backwards decision of the IOC, but because VANOC could/can do something about it. The organization should tell the IOC that Canada’s laws are not elastic, and the IOC must comply to the host country’s Charter.

If Justice Fenlon can link that lawfully VANOC is in fact a government entity, then there should not be a reason for her to dismiss the Plaintiffs’ claim lightly. The lawyers dealt with many complexities within the law, but Clark made a clear case that VANOC is to blame for not upholding the nation’s Charter. VANOC’s argument was on repeat: We must do what the IOC rules, no exception. But if that’s the case, it sets a scary precedent to the world that just because an international body wants to impose something, it can.

Justice Fenlon reserved her judgment until she can “go over the complexities,” though I feel she is a just person and will do the right thing. Her decison will likely take two to three months, but she understands the urgency for the athletes and VANOC. If she makes a declaration in favor of the Plaintiffs, then VANOC must tell the IOC to either allow women to jump or they will not be able to stage the men’s event. Everyone knows this will be quite a pickle for the IOC. Men’s ski jumping is the most prestigious event of the Games, so if they said no to that, there would be an international firestorm. I think the IOC will be gracious at that point, and say: “OK, women allowed.” In that case, it will be the first gender equal Winter Olympics, and that surely will make the world proud.

So you think you have what it takes to make the U.S. Bobsled Team?

Last year, I took a ride of my life. My bobsled experience may have culminated in a chipped tooth, poopy pants (though not my own), and bruises where the sun don’t shine, but it was worth all the weirdness. This story appeared in the Nov./Dec. issue of Women’s Adventure Magazine.

Bobsledding is the longest minute of your life. It’s like being trapped in a tin can and withstanding a 9.0 earthquake.

After pushing the 400-pound “bob” maybe 5 seconds, you jump in and pray the driver gets you down the track smoothly. But smoothly isn’t comfy. The bob has no padding – it’s just a hull made of fiberglass – and the protruding brakes in the backseat destroy your inner thighs. The g-force attacks you after the first curve, with a pressure on your back so destructive that if you’re not ready, you’re broken. At 75 miles per hour, your head – though you try to keep it straight – bobs around like a bobblehead. Your teeth rattle and shake and even chip.

When the minute is done, you’re not sure whether you should cry or die. Concussed and out of breath, you don’t ever want to get back in the bobsled again.

But you do. And you love it.

READ THE ENTIRE STORY

American Lindsey Van makes history at first World Championships

LIBEREC, Czech Republic—The mood among the women ski jumpers was mixed between excitement and pressure. Here they had to prove that women’s ski jumping belonged among the most revered competitions in skiing—the World Championships. Not only that, but that they belong to one of the most traditional winter sports of the ages—nordic ski jumping. The days leading up to the main event were strained with poor weather conditions, and the added element of a notorious hill known to be low-flying and laden with tailwind, both contributing to difficult “flying” conditions. If the women could prove they belonged here, then they could belong anywhere, particularly in the Winter Olympic Games, they claimed.

But then the officials, as predicted by the athletes, played it safer than exciting and lowered the start bar on the day of the competition, and thus, lowered the amount of speed for the women. In this technical sport, less about power than form, women only need more speed to compete alongside the men. “They don’t want us to jump farther than the men,” says U.S. Ski Teamer Jessica Jerome in frustration.

And in the beginning round that Friday morning, it looked as though they would lose the fight as many of the women began jumping short in the fog, tailwind, and snowy conditions. Until American Lindsey Van, with pure guts, let loose the longest jump of the day—a 97.5 meter leap out of nowhere. With fogged lenses, she could only see her ski tops. Going 88 kmh, she was committed. “I couldn’t see past my ski tips, so when I felt the pressure of the inrun, I knew I had to jump and go on feel,” she says. Currently ranked No. 2 in the world, she proved that when adversity strikes, a true athlete could find the Zen of mental capability and go on instinct. Within a few seconds, she found the strength and willed herself to jump and jump far.

When she landed, the crowd was both stunned and amazed. Van leapt in the air waving her arms. She knew this was a podium jump, but two of her top competitors were still left to go. No. 1 ranked Norway’s Anette Sagen, and Van’s best friend but rivaled enemy, jumped solid but short of Van’s benchmark. Then Germany’s Ulrike Graessler did the same. The American had the win—an American. In a sport most known in Europe, for an American to win it was a historic feat for the first women’s World Championship bid.

“I’m so happy for you,” Sagen tells Van after the jump. She is the most famous female athlete in Norway, but she knew Van, an 18-year veteran of the sport and pioneer in many respects, deserved the win. The women deserved to have an advocate of the sport like Van to win. She is a plaintiff in the lawsuit against the Vancouver Olympic Organizing Committee—so is Sagen and Graessler for that matter—to take legal action to prove that women’s ski jumping be included in the 2010 Games. Proving themselves on the hill has only gone so far, even now it’s hard to say what VANOC or the International Olympic Committee will say.