On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 4:16:22 PM UTC-8, wrote:
You're not testing the right hypothesis. Leeching isn't a good way of beating the top guy for the day. Done by a good pilot, however, it CAN be a way to place very high overall in contests and occasionally to win one. Veteran pilots from the 70s and 80s are aware of one and possibly two cases where competent pilots leeched outrageously and managed to finish atop the leader board at national contests. No, I'm not going to name names.

It's generally the exception, not the rule - particularly these days when we never call ATs (chumming the water for Sean Fidler)


But those are exceptions. More typically, winners don't leech. They often, however, fly in the company of others, leading out when it's their turn or when they think they have a better idea (hint: leeches NEVER lead out). P3 has it right: "Will it drastically alter outcomes at the top? Not likely. Will it further compress the middle? Probably."

The essential point here is that regardless of larger tactical decisions, if you want to keep up with somebody you are best off following really, really close - the further back you are the more likely you are going to miss the bubble and get dropped. The other essential point is all the guys in the middle of the pack are the ones who oppose Flarm in large proportions - who are we to tell them their preferences are irrelevant? Why do they like unfiltered Flarm? Perhaps because they think they might over time learn something from seeing what other guys do - even if they do get dropped most of the time. I have asked a lot of pilots new to racing why they don't fly more (or any) contests and one of the more prominent answers is they can't see a path to getting even reasonably competitive. To them, stealth is the kids in the tree fort pulling up the rope ladder.


So quit arguing about whether FLARM facilitates leeching (it does) or whether leeching offers an advantage. History has shown that leeching is a way for clever pilots who don't have the confidence of their own decisions to place higher than they otherwise might be able to. I agree that's a skill in itself but it's not one we want to measure, in my opinion.

Not going to quit - sorry. I love you man, but I disagree and I'm the only one with facts instead of beliefs so you should quit (also, I have the flying spaghetti monster on my side).

Is leeching a "huge" problem anymore? No, but probably only because we're not filling up 65-glider fields at national contests. If you didn't fly during those days, during the the "plague of leeches" in the '70s and 80s, you really can't speak to this.

I did - I started in 1979 IIRC.


How long will it take after the first FLARM-to-FLARM collision for lawyers to persuade a shattered widow that her husband died because his FLARM was defective? And it won't matter whether Stealth was involved or not.


I'm not a lawyer but I suspect in torts there is a difference between not installing some expensive piece of equipment that could potentially help avoid collisions and deliberately deciding to disable part of its functionality. I think it could make a big difference in legal proceedings - particularly with a relatively weak rationale on the motive to do it. This certainly factored into my decision to vote agains this.

9B