At 14:29 14 January 2017, Jim White wrote:
At 12:32 14 January 2017, Jock Proudfoot wrote:
At 11:10 14 January 2017, RuudH wrote:
Op donderdag 12 januari 2017 15:13:23 UTC+1 schreef krasw:
There was a mid-air collision in 18m class today. Both damaged
gliders
returned to airfield.
This the work of an ethics committee.

1) It is hard to argue that someone who gives up their race to assis
another pilot in mortal trouble isn't doing the right thing

2) It is also hard to argue that the organisation that decides to cance
the race because said pilot gave up his race for noble reason and was s
disadvantaged isn't doing the right thing

yet note that the rules say that pilots involved in a mid air must suffe
a technical land out at that point. I was not present in this rule makin
but presume that the reasoning is that this rule discourages pilots fro
continuing in potentially lethally compromised gliders. It also has a
deterrent effect on rash pilot behaviour as the penalty is very high,
eve
if not to life and limb.

The rule was, I believe, introduced after a mid-air (in cloud) in a UK
Nationals in the late 1960's. One of the pilots flew on for about another
50 km with a couple of feet of wing missing.


so

3) It is therefore possible to argue that the organisers who cancel th
task, remove the points downside to the pilots from unsafe flying and
tha
is wrong.

Better to find a way to reward the good shepherd for his proper an
humane decision?

Always controversial, not always correct
Jim