On Sunday, January 27, 2013 11:46:38 PM UTC-6, RW wrote:
On Thursday, January 17, 2013 10:17:35 AM UTC-5, John Cochrane wrote:

I do fear the impact of flarm, if any for those smart enough to game it to an advantage or now the use of radio chatter at regionals. I can only hope that the idea to drop the worst day, whether some of us are believed by others not to fully understand it, will never rear its ugly head.



Sorry Ray, I think the world has it wrong and we have the best. You and others helped create what to me is downright magic. Carry that with you and let the World chips fall where they may.



R







Yeah, I'm really surprised that this winter's flame war has been over



the idea of using IGC rules, like next spring, at nationals. I thought



for sure that flarm radar (require stealth mode?), the team-flying and



pilot to pilot communication experiment, and the structure of future



national competition (more handicaps? merge classes?) would be the



huge issues we'd be discussing over the winter. Surely, these are the



issues that have bedeviled the rules committee the most -- we really



don't have clean simple answers here. And, in practice, they still



look to me like the issues with the likely most profound impact on US



contest soaring this and in the next few years.







A minor point. As I think about it, it makes no sense whatsoever for



the US to have two sets of rules as fundamentally different as IGC and



US going on at the same time. If one contest uses a line, no altitude



limit, kilometers, and no penalty buffer zones, while the next contest



uses a cylinder, altitude limit, miles, and buffer zones, there will



be no end of confusion. Scorers and CDs can barely keep up with one



set of rules. It also makes no sense to create a completely new set of



hybrid rules halfway between US and IGC, losing the many years of



experience behind every single paragraph in the US rules and opening



us up to who knows how many bugs.







So, the question really is, should the US go wholehog to IGC annex A



for its rules, in all classes. The RC is starting to be attracted to



the idea, because then we could all quit and go home, and if you don't



like a rule, call Switzerland.







Look for it to be polled in the fall.







John Cochrane



No, we need you John, too many contest pilots died of too low finishes ,

and nobody died of your stupid rules(don't push me to contact widow),

Make sure my last turn is above 500agl, make sure I never turn below 45 kts.

If I do, make sure I get penalized and look only at the gauges while landing.

Make me worry that all pilots want to fly like me and will follow me with all the time with theirs Flarms. Make sure that I safely crash land between collided gliders on the runway. Defend your rules. Let CD have a chance to set task, so opposite gaggles can fly with high speed head on.

This is your legacy.We need You.

Ryszard Krolikowski

Ryszard, your rambling 'irony' is completely lost on me. You seem to be bitter, clinging to your strictly assigned tasks and super-low finishes.
Sorry to say but times have passed you by. You won't find a majority of contest pilots going back to those rules. Dumping on those in the sport who want to make soaring contests safer is not helping your cause.