Two things and then I'll try to stay out of this:

Racing is more dangerous than not racing.Â* Look at RATES not NUMBERS.Â*
Compare NASCAR racing to the daily commute.Â* Of course there are more
accidents in daily driving but the RATE is way higher in racing.Â* So
which is more dangerous?Â* Reading all the comments indicates to me that
a lot of proponents for more rules either just don't get it or they
simply want to have the last say in rule making.

Just because someone has a different opinion does not make him an
armchair pilot.Â* I've been flying gliders for over 30 years with over
550 hours just in the last two years.


On 2/7/2018 10:07 AM, Justin Craig wrote:
At 16:36 07 February 2018, Dan Marotta wrote:
I think the statement, "it is quite sensible" means that it is more
likely, given the format of the race compared to traditional sailplane
contests, to have more frequent incidents.ÂÂ* In that interpretation I
would not call it an "absurd" statement.

But my question is why do people feel there is / will be more accidents in
an SGP?

As mentioned already, take the mountains out of the equation.

The SGP is limited to 20 gliders. In a normal comp a class could have 50 or
so gliders. So the start / gaggeling is not the an issue.

I do not know hat, if any accidents there have been at SGP races outside of
the mountains?

When the format of the race is discussed, is that because its a floatilla
start? Lets be specific if having a reasoned debate.

The discussion started as "hard deck" and has moved on the SGP. These
threads started as a reult oftheSGP in Chile.

It would be interesting to know what proportion of those in these two
threads have flown an SGP.

From what I can tell, pilots that have love them. If they dont, they don't
have to go back.

The SGP is proving to be a real success in many ways and I think it would
be sad if a few "arm chair" pilots run them down in a public forum, without
having even competed in one.


--
Dan, 5J