I like some of what Wilber has offered, but this particular Uvalde accident is something that I would NOT have brought up as an argument for or against any particular task type.

All accidents are hard to take. Especially for those of us closely involved.. But they are all accidents! That head on accident was a terrible, shocking one. The pilot involved was well liked and well known. In the end, we learned the lessons that we could together. But that accident was not the fault of the contest organizers or the CD. We all have to be very careful not to blame organizers or CDs for "accidents." These folks are all highly focused on safety, period. As is the SSA. That is unquestionable. Undeniable. Safety is a prime function of the SSA. I completely respect and support that safety focus.

I was the manager of a contest in Ionia, MI where we had a "very difficult" fatal accident. The accident occurred in plain view of 20-30 people (including my wife and my close friend), at the airport. It was an awful experience for everyone involved. Gut wrenching. Later, several attacked us here on RAS by claiming that conditions were perhaps too windy to call a task. That was very hard to take. I don't want any other organizers ever to have to endure that kind of attack or accusation, even if the charge is somewhat indirect.

Fatal soaring accidents would still occur even if we allowed only a single glider into the sky at a time!

Fortunately, the rewards of soaring and soaring competition outweigh the risks (by a huge margin). Most of us choose to accept the risks. Sure the sport of soaring can always be safer. It is improving all the time in varios ways. But, we should be very careful to not even "hint" blame at the contest organizers. This is unfair and is enormously destructive. Our SSA folks are extremely safety conscious. Period. End of story. But we are all imperfect as pilots, and real risk always exists in a sport with such high energy and potentially, closing speed.

In the five years that I have been competing in contests; I have watched numerous US (and Canadian) task committee's (led by CD's of course) carefully (and often painstakingly) set their tasks with this exact lesson in mind. I have even watched them orally state, "we need more separation here..." Entry/exit angle safety considerations in the task setting process seem to be a standard procedure. Unfortunately, glider pilots still aggressively fly along the lines of lift. This is true in all conditions and all task types. So the task type doesn't really matter. Even OLC flying has this risk! Even a 90 degree offset (AT, MAT, or TAT) often still results in a head-on situation. I remember a somewhat scary head-on entry/exit line (not down low on a ridge but up at high altitude, screaming) at Nephi this past summer. There is only so much that we can do about this.

Those, all too common, head-on situations are the main reason I fought the stealth mode effort aggressively. I, for one, do not want to lose one micron of potential safety that Flarm provides. Flarm leech me all you wish. I don't care. I would rather have a higher chance of detecting possible head-ons.

In support of Wilber, I do believe that the unassigned portion of a MAT is very difficult to manage from a safety perspective. I agree MAT's are higher risk tasks. Gliders in this portion of the MAT are all over the place. It is difficult to predic. A pilot could be doing something that doesnt make weather sense just to burn off altitude and completely surprise you. A glider can be coming into the same turnpoint from several directions, even the opposite direction! This happens often in fact. All that randomness can be pure chaos as pilots generally zip around the finish airport adding turnpoints while running out the remaining clock. Finally gliders end up finishing FROM ALL DIRECTIONS. Stupid. Just stupid! Everyone see's a different way to use up the remaining time in a MAT. This MAT "unpredictability" is very much like the US start gaggle, 2 min below max height, up, down, spinning all around madness while preparing to start out the top. What a safety nightmare our starting system is. Even TAT's can be a little unpredictable with pilots coming in and out of the last clouds in a turn area.

I have mentioned this to senior SSA folks recently and they simply brushed me off. I have no idea what you are talking about. I have never seen this, etc. Quite shocking. So, there is some real work left to do here on safety in regards to US rules, even though I beleive everyone is doing their best.

I wanted to make those brief comments, for whatever it is worth.

Sincerely,

Sean