Dehydration

There is a tendency for us to put dehydration into an all or nothing
category. We say things like, "Yeah, he was dehydrated and crashed,
remember to drink more water, next time". Dehydration comes in degrees
from slightly dehydrated, all the way up to loss of consciousness. By
the 10th day of a Nationals, we are all tired, many of us are
frustrated, discouraged and I wouldn't be surprised if we weren't all a
little dehydrated. A pilot that is slightly dehydrated is functioning
pretty well, he just isn't at the top of his form, isn't making real
good decisions, doesn't pick up on things right away. A mildly
dehydrated pilot is a pilot headed for trouble, he may be losing his
situational awareness, doesn't foresee problems, can't make split
second decisions. Many land-outs can be attributed to poor decisions as
to where to find that saving thermal, dehydrated?

So, what is the best way to recover 50 tired, frustrated, possibly
dehydrated pilots? Do we ask them to make the split second decisions
necessary to do the hi-speed, low altitude finish, OR do we allow them
to finish the race at 500 feet and a mile out? I would suggest the
later is clearly the safest way to conduct our races.
Managers and CD's; There IS a safer way.
JJ Sinclair

A man on a *serious* safety crusade should make *serious* arguments!
But here's an answer to the laughable argument raised by this thread:

Thanks for suggesting still more unintended hazards of the dreaded
finish cylinder!!! (You're up Chris.)

When it comes to safe landings by pilots in a compromised mental state,
who, unfortunately, are likely to shut down even more mental systems
immediately after finishing, which maneuver has a better chance of
completion on autopilot: a routine, adrenaline enhanced, 90 second
follow the leader hop from low pass to landing? Or a ten minute game
of blind man's bluff after a cylinder pullup to 1500 ft?

Should we cancel just day 10 or does safety demand even shorter
contests to address the dehydration issue?

Should we decide which day to close the gate and open the cylinder
based on daily pilot weigh ins?

After a cylinder finish for points, low passes for show are safe,
right? It's only those low passes for points that cause trouble.

Jonathan Gere

wrote:

snip

So, what is the best way to recover 50 tired, frustrated, possibly
dehydrated pilots? Do we ask them to make the split second decisions
necessary to do the hi-speed, low altitude finish, OR do we allow
them
to finish the race at 500 feet and a mile out? I would suggest the
later is clearly the safest way to conduct our races.
Managers and CD's; There IS a safer way.
JJ Sinclair

Smile.

OC

There's water in beer, right?

wrote:
A man on a *serious* safety crusade should make *serious* arguments!
But here's an answer to the laughable argument raised by this thread:

I have given you 3 accidents where dehydration was a factor. I doubt
these pilots think dehidration is laughable.


Thanks for suggesting still more unintended hazards of the dreaded
finish cylinder!!! (You're up Chris.)

I think you mean the dreaded finish line, don't you? I'm advocating the
dreaded finish cylinder.


When it comes to safe landings by pilots in a compromised mental
state,
who, unfortunately, are likely to shut down even more mental systems
immediately after finishing, which maneuver has a better chance of
completion on autopilot: a routine, adrenaline enhanced, 90 second
follow the leader hop from low pass to landing?

I have given you a doctors opinion (NT) that the pull-up may be enough
to shut down the dehydrated mind. So, I think we can avoid the
shut-down mind situation by using the finish cylinder where a pull-up
isn't required.

Or a ten minute game
of blind man's bluff after a cylinder pullup to 1500 ft?

Pull-up is not necessary at the finish cylinder, so why do it?


Should we cancel just day 10 or does safety demand even shorter
contests to address the dehydration issue?

No, we should address the dehydration issue by using a finish cylinder
that puts pilots under less stress at the end of every contest day.


Should we decide which day to close the gate and open the cylinder
based on daily pilot weigh ins?

Weren't you the one that wanted me to make *serious* arguments?

After a cylinder finish for points, low passes for show are safe,
right?

No, If a pilot made a low pass when the finish cylinder was in use, I
would consider that unsafe flying and probably give him an unsafe
flying penalty (if I was CD'ing the contest)

JJ Sinclair

On 3/27/05 7:34 PM, in article
,
" wrote:

Pull-up is not necessary at the finish cylinder, so why do it?

OK, I've lurked long enough. I'll probably be sorry, but....
Why not? Aren't we trying to puncture the edge of the cylinder very near its
bottom at maximum speed? Now, an instant later, we find ourselves 499' AGL
at redline less than a mile from the airport. Seems to me we sort of have to
pull up even a teensie bit to get slowed down and sorted out and into the
pattern.

Some math in prior posts points out that the length of the arc of the
cylinder we are trying to reach (on an AST at least) is even shorter than
the 1km long finish line. For me at least, all the cylinder does in this
case is move the bottom of the high speed pass up 450'. Maybe that's better
or safer, I'm not sure; it's certainly not obvious to me.

Additionally, the rules state that the 4 mile radio call for a finish is 4
miles from the finish point, the cylinder center. So with a 2mi radius
finish cylinder, radio calls come about a minute before the finish. With a
finish line, the 4 mile radio call gives 2 minutes of warning. I'd kinda
like as much warning as possible about who's nearby.

--
Bob
bobgreenblattATmsnDOTcom --fix this before responding

Bob Greenblatt wrote:
Aren't we trying to puncture the edge of the cylinder very near its
bottom at maximum speed?

Got to thinking about your question, Bob and actually we shouldn't try
to hit the edge of the cylinder at red-line. Why? Because our
sailplanes are very inafficient at red-line, in fact they start coming
down like a stone at anything over 90 knots. We should climb the last
thermal to 500 over home + a smidgen and then fly the indicated M/C to
the edge of the cylinder. You should get there between 60 and 90 knots,
depending on conditions on the glide. If you get there at red-line,
that means you climbed too high in the last thermal and it cost you
(time).

The finish line, on the other hand, requires a finish at red-line, so
that we can exchange our excess speed for pattern altitude. I'm even
tempted to say the cylinder is the most efficient way to fly the final
glide, but if I did, OC would just fly off in another snit, and I would
be forced to look up all those big words, again...............
:) JJ

Optimum is the same for either finish. Most of us just don't have the
guts to cut it that close with a line finish.

With a high cylinder finish, you can cut it close. You're risking points
if you end up a bit lower than you hoped. But your margin for momma and
the kids is built in to the optimum answer. Its then more a contest of
skill than nerve, at least for the final glide.

Since most pilots will try to fly efficiently, the range of speeds at
the cylinder is reduced, and lowered compared to the gate. Makes for a
nice orderly follow the leader to land, with a tad more time after the
race is over to sort it out.

That can degenerate when everyone finishes way too high and hot or just
squeaking in a rolling finish, but it does the same thing with a gate.

With a line everyone shoots for the sweet end of the line. There always
is one. With a cylinder, finishers will naturally be much more spread
out. Maneuvering will be less predictable, but also more uniformly
gentle. Given the blind spots in all our gliders, and the tendency to
fixate on the targets you see and know about, we really count on the big
sky theory more than we like to admit. A little more natural spacing
makes the sky bigger.

But the cylinder is an instrument approach since it is completely
invisible, which has to pull some of your attention into the cockpit.
Cutting the edge of the gate is, too, since its really defined by GPS
coordinates, not a ground feature. Not very comforting for either finish
in traffic.

If you think either one is really safe, you're nuts. Both can be
executed successfully, but the margins flying that close to so many
other gliders and the ground are just not that big. I think the cylinder
is a bit less risky, but a lot less fun.

A perfect final glide to the edge of the cylinder at 75 kts is so
anti-climactic after an epic adventure out on course. Nothing compares
to the good old assigned task and no minimum height gate.

But I can change... If I have to... I guess.

-Dave Leonard
ZL




wrote:
Bob Greenblatt wrote:
Aren't we trying to puncture the edge of the cylinder very near its

bottom at maximum speed?


Got to thinking about your question, Bob and actually we shouldn't try
to hit the edge of the cylinder at red-line. Why? Because our
sailplanes are very inafficient at red-line, in fact they start coming
down like a stone at anything over 90 knots. We should climb the last
thermal to 500 over home + a smidgen and then fly the indicated M/C to
the edge of the cylinder. You should get there between 60 and 90 knots,
depending on conditions on the glide. If you get there at red-line,
that means you climbed too high in the last thermal and it cost you
(time).

The finish line, on the other hand, requires a finish at red-line, so
that we can exchange our excess speed for pattern altitude. I'm even
tempted to say the cylinder is the most efficient way to fly the final
glide, but if I did, OC would just fly off in another snit, and I would
be forced to look up all those big words, again...............
:) JJ

Jonathan,

Furstrating, huh?

JJ clearly prefers inductive reasoning. Must be from Missouri. We're
spouting syllogisms and JJ, whether he recognizes it or not, is basing
his reasoning on a series of hasty generalizations. In fact, JJ has
supported his argument with just about every logical fallacy common to
induction. This is very wise on JJ's part, as his ends (safety) justify
the means (inaccuracy) and absolve him of any errors since his heart is
in the right place. (I know, that sounds flip, and it is: I mean it
both as a compliment and complaint.) So, why shouldn't he take
advantage of those methods so commonly employed by politicians and
marketers to circumvent discernment?

As I've said before, some people can walk upright on a fallen tree
bridging a chasm. Others must get down on all fours and shinny across,
nearly paralyzed by fear of falling. And guess who's more likely to
fall...

At 15:00 28 March 2005, Bob Greenblatt wrote:
Additionally, the rules state that the 4 mile radio
call for a finish is 4
miles from the finish point, the cylinder center.

Oops, I read that one wrong - I've been calling in
too early.

9B

Don't let them drink anything but water and sports drinks during the
contest!

A rule of thumb I've heard is that for each beer one consumes, one must
consume an equal amount of water just to break even - that is, be just
as dehydrated as when that beer was started.

Now this should get some folks in a tizzy!

-Tom