I once witnessed a glider far above me while exiting the same cloud. I was leaving the cloud at cloud-base. The glider in question was much, much higher (2000 ft +) and was on the same heading towards the next "turn." I was quite shocked. How did that guy get that high? What did I miss? I was impressed to be honest, but also knew what I "might" have been witnessing. I kept a very close eye on this glider for as long as I could (another hour). I did not see that behavior again and just could not be certain. I never saw that glider enter (or exit) the cloud. I only saw it well above me exiting (I assume) the same cloud. I really didn't give it much thought at the time. I let it go. I spoke to the pilot and mentioned being surprised at his altitude. The pilot changed the conversation... The cloud was large, mature, fully developed. The thermal was very, very strong... Could it have been cloud flying? Maybe. Actually, if I had to put cash on the table, probably. But I cannot not be certain. Perhaps that pilot come up the front or side of the cloud. Perhaps there was a less developed portion of the cloud somewhere. Intentional cloud flying (cheating) is a very, very difficult thing to actually "prove."

I guess I have not experienced the feeling of losing a competition to someone I thought was cloud flying. I empathize with those who have (speak up and be heard if anyone has). That said, I strongly agree with the very intelligent removal of this long obsolete rule from our already portly US rule book. If preventing cloud flying is an important problem worthy of a specific rule, why have we so obviously not been enforcing it? That, to me, is the real litmus test.

Has anyone ever been caught cloud flying? Where, When and How? Please expound and detail the (many) incidents where contest pilots have been accused and proven to have been cheating by cloud flying? In the US? The World?

Others here have "noted" (hearsay really) that they have suspected (as recently as last year) other US contest pilots of cloud flying (under the OLD rule by the way). This may or may not be true. If the suspicion of cloud flying last year is true (iced wings), this proves that the OLD rule is NOT a meaningful deterrent for the competitor that is willing to cheat by cloud flying. Were these pilots disciplined? Why not? Clearly, the old rule was not effective in this case.

The only meaninful deterrent capable of preventing cloud flying is aggressive ENFORCEMENT and the likelihood of getting caught. Pilots are, apparently, still cloud flying in US contests (and it is influencing the results). If you simply reinstate the OLD rule (inconveniencing all honest pilots), you will, apparently, still have the cheating. The OLD rule clearly does nothing to prevent it even when "clear evidence" exists that it occured. If we really want to eliminate cloud flying from contests, we need to introduce a reliable, iron clad means of being able to prove that it occurred. The presence of the modern instruments and devices outlawed in the OLD rule, apparently, does little or nothing to stop cloud flying by pilots determined to cheat by cloud flying. This is a fact.

If you (the ones who want the ineffective, unenforced OLD rule reinstated) are TRULY serious about preventing illegal cloud flying, you are going need onboard cameras. Pilots would need to provide a flight trace along with "access" to a clear, reliable video file for each contest flight (primary and backup camera ;-)). This is simple to do really. Actually, its quite fun! But, most importantly and in addition to the cameras, the competing pilots would need to be vigilant in calling out others who they feel are cloud flying. Then the CD can easily check the incident in question and verify. Only this kind of PROOF will be truly effective in preventing cloud flying by pilots sophisticated enough to do so under the old rule. Only this level of proof would make it too risky for the sophisticated cloud flying US contest pilot to continue cheating in US contests.

The old rule, in the modern age, became a complete waste of time and paper. If cloud flying was occurring last year, then by definition the old rule was not preventing it. We need the will to ENFORCE and a mechanism that provides clear proof that cloud flying has occurred. Anything else is not going to deter, prevent or prove it happened. No broad analysis software technology exists or will exist in the foreseeable future that can PROVE cloud flying occurred.

If we are serious about this, we need video. If not, then its a ghost that can never be caught or proven to exist.