In article ,
says...
Eric wrote,

I've never been in a contest where I've had these advantages, because
I didn't do those things.

I guess I got to spell it out. Eric, I'm talking about YOU and JN.

I would be glad to send you (or anyone) my flight files for any
contest. They will show I did not "motor around" until I got a thermal
where the towed gliders didn't go.

I tell you about launch inequities and you say, Oh that, we will be getting a
waiver and fixing all that next year. We are right now, in the process of
amending the rules, so that WAIVERS won't be required next year.

Here is what I said in my email to you. Please note the first eight
words, as I do realize we are filling out a survey that will influence
the rules for 2004:

------
If the 2004 SSA rules don't address this, and we get a waiver for the
2004 Region 8 contest, I'll insist that the contest inform the MG
pilots that they are to follow the towplane path, release at the
correct height (I suggest 2200' AGL, but would accept 2000' AGL
without complaint), and expect their flight files to be checked for
adherence to these rules, with a penalty for non-compliance (I suggest
something like the graduated penalties for missing a turnpoint).
-------------

Let me add one
more advantage you are requesting, Give motorgliders a 25 point (approved
airport landing) bonus for NOT LANDING. But it's s SAFETY issue, isn't it? It
would be much safer to crank up the old put-put and not congest the airport
with all those pure sailplane slobs, down there, fighting for a spot on the
runway. I consider that part of the sport. If you want to play, you must accept
all the hazards along with the rewards this sport offers.

One more time: the Airport Bonus was implemented to increase safety by
encouraging gliders to land at airports instead of landing out. An
unintended consequence of the current implementation is it, in some
circumstances, has the opposite effect of discouraging the safest
practice. The change I propose requires the motorglider to go to the
airport before starting. Tactically speaking, it's better to plan to
land, so I can thermal about 300'-500' lower than I can if I plan an
in-air restart. I gain only convenience (and sometimes safety), by air
starting, not a contest advantage.

I fail to see how encouraging a less safe practice, after the task is
over, helps anyone, including those that have landed or are about to
land at the airport. Why would anyone want one more glider on the
runway? One solution is to eliminate the airport bonus entirely (as
Eisenbeiss suggests), but I am in favor of the airport bonus, and if I
must land to collect it, and can do so without decreasing the safety
of the other pilots using the airport, I will.

--
!Replace DECIMAL.POINT in my e-mail address with just a . to reply
directly

Eric Greenwell
Richland, WA (USA)