Potential $300 increase in contest fees?

vehicle.

Now if there was a $50 'Au Vache' charge which was passed on without
deduction to the unfortunate who has to retrieve you, it would seem only
fair.


Isn't it already customary to buy the retrieve crew dinner?


Heck, if I had $50 for every time I have retrieved someone else, I could
have almost paid for all of the times I have been retrieved.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

Here's an idea, have the contest at an airport that doesn't require downwind landings to the last 1000' as the norm. I'm sure some agency would have a good time asking the pilot of a destroyed glider why they elected to land downwind to the last 1000' of runway. How's the saying go.......altitude above you and runway behind you?

On Thursday, December 20, 2012 7:39:08 PM UTC-8, LOV2AV8 wrote:
Here's an idea, have the contest at an airport that doesn't require downwind landings to the last 1000' as the norm. I'm sure some agency would have a good time asking the pilot of a destroyed glider why they elected to land downwind to the last 1000' of runway. How's the saying go.......altitude above you and runway behind you?

Finally someone stated one of the real problems with this particular location for a contest. It was not lack of crew. The additional issue at this site that was even more troubling was not using all the runway for takeoff to the south. Many gliders even the two seaters that opted to push back to the end of the grid for takeoff were 50' or less off the ground as they passed the departure end of the runway. If there was a problem shortly after takeoff the option was barb wire fence, freeway , wires, truck stop!!!!

Other than that it is a great place to fly.

Richard
www.craggyaero.com

As if a contest isn't already expensive enough! This rule will cause
contest participation to go down. I for one, will not be attending
any contests that apply this $300 fee.

$500 in gas getting to the contest
$500 for a place to stay (hotel, or RV rental)
$600 in contest fees
$200 for nightly dinners

That's $1,800 total for 6 days of soaring!

Add another $300 for a grand total of $2,100 for 6 days of flying.

For $2,100 I can take my wife and two kids on a 7 day all inclusive
Caribbean cruise!!!!

.......or I can fly crew less on my own for 6 day at my home airport
for $270 ( 6 tows at $45 each).


In my humble opinion, this will greatly lower contest participation if
implemented.

I think this has to do with a great deal of frustration by the contest management from some pilots (solo and even with crews) going into "beer thirty" mode when their glider comes to a stop on the runway. Instead of the pilot quickly getting out and clearing their glider from the runway, moving it immediately to their tiedown and THEN beginning the BS session, they start right away with any pilot near them on what a day they had. NO consideration of the guys landing behind them, just selfishness on their part. I see this at every contest I fly and it has happened to me multiple times at Parowan where the situation is heightened by the airport configuration. Safety can obviously become a factor. I can fully understand and support contest managements fee/fine for such rude behavior.

On Sunday, December 23, 2012 2:19:01 PM UTC-5, Scott Alexander wrote:
As if a contest isn't already expensive enough! This rule will cause contest participation to go down. I for one, will not be attending any contests that apply this $300 fee. $500 in gas getting to the contest $500 for a place to stay (hotel, or RV rental) $600 in contest fees $200 for nightly dinners That's $1,800 total for 6 days of soaring! Add another $300 for a grand total of $2,100 for 6 days of flying. For $2,100 I can take my wife and two kids on a 7 day all inclusive Caribbean cruise!!!! ......or I can fly crew less on my own for 6 day at my home airport for $270 ( 6 tows at $45 each). In my humble opinion, this will greatly lower contest participation if implemented.

To repeat- THIS IS NOT A RULE! AND it will not become one.
That said, if an organizer asks to be able to put such a policy in place, the RC will likely permit it.
My prdiction is that the market will say "Hell no" and the idea will die a quiet death.
UH
RC Chair