![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jamie,
Great response, and very helpful. Especially knowing that it is a 1/2 km radius circle. In the case I mentioned, a 1/2 km circle around our metal tank is still far enough away that it doesn't infringe on our pattern (I think). I'll need to check it again though. I really like this remote finish idea and will ask around a bit more. As others have pointed out, it seems to be at Contest Director discretion here in the US how this kind of stuff is handled. Cheers! Mark In article , John Doe wrote: Hi Mark A control point in simply an additional turnpoint (as opposed to a remote finish) placed next to the airport so as to bring gliders round to finish from a direction where an appropriate finish gate can be provided. As per UK rules this is the usual 1/2 km radius circle and 20k (I think) thistle. If you aren't sure about the thistle part (I don't know if it has an equivalent in US rules) there is a diagram on page 11 of: http://www.gliding.co.uk/forms/competitionrules2005.pdf For an example of Control Point use look at this task from last years junior nationals: http://www.lasham.org.uk/comps/natio...p?comp=b&ddate =Saturday%2021st%20August Lasham has a very open finish line coming in from the west but no suitable place to locate a finish line from the north, so each day where the task came in from the north an aditional turn point (in this case TP4) was added to force competitors to approach from the west. A glider has not finished until it has crossed an on airfield finish line or entered the finish circle (page 12 of the above pdf). You mentioned the self selection of turnpoints in the US Sports class (I assume that is similar to our Club Class). In this case might it not be an idea to have the provision for a mandatory turn point at the end of the task and say 'you may select the order of your turnpoints but your final turnpoint must be this one'. This would seem to eliminate the whole problem of converging gliders at low level without necessitating the use of such a large finish cylinder (which I have to admit I am sceptical of the value of). There are obvious issues regarding the use of thistles and penalty sectorsif the direction you are approaching the airport is not fixed (in UK competitions, the order of turns is usually fixed), but I think these could be alleviated by the use of a simple 1k cylinder. The idea of the thistle I believe is to allow a pilot to round a turnpoint further out if the conditions at the turnpoint are unfavorable, but as the control point is very near the finish a pilot would be trying to get to that exact location so the thistle could be discarded at this point, leaving a 1 or 2 km radius cylinder as the only point. Cheers Jamie p.s. I have to admit that on that day during the Juniors I forgot about the conrol point and went straight for the finish, recording a gps landout a few k from the airfield, d'oh! At 18:30 11 March 2005, Mark James Boyd wrote: Jamie, That is exactly what I was thinking. A control point. Yes, sort of like what we locally call an IP (initial point) when entering on the 45 for our normal pattern to land. We are fortunate to have a huge metal tank maybe 50 meters diameter that could be used as this remote 'control point' and is in line with the 45 entry (sort of). It is probably 3-4 km away. At 500ft AGL in a 2-33 with a headwind this would be a little close, but in the L-13 or anything sexier it looks ok. Thanks for your post! Control point. I like that. Is it scored as an OZ or a cylinder? Scoring as an OZ would take a little bit of thought, and as a cylinder, I'd expect it'd need to be pretty narrow to not cover the airport. In article , John Doe wrote: Mark, I think what you are getting at is what we in the UK call a control point, a final turnpoint that must be rounded in the normal way, but is only maybe 5-10 km from the airfield, each glider is a few hundred feet (or more depending on the pilots saftey margins) up at this point and after turning the control point, competitors turn to the airfield and dive to a known linear finish gate. There is generally no minimun finish height so often the gate is crossed under 50 ft but as all competitors are coming in from a fixed direction towards a small and clear area of land it eliminates the vast majority of head to head at low altitude issues and I've never seen congestion at a control point myself (altough as my own competition experience is rather limited I won't say it never happens). As for non comp gliders, everywhere I've been competing the daily briefing for non-comp pilots always stressed the comps procedures as well as use of the radio to ensure separation in launch, landing and finishing. As long as the finish gate is suitably chosen to be away from the main landing area and obstacles with space to land after as well as an easy entry into circuit for those with the speed to do so it can be both a safe and an exciting way to finish without the artificial complications of raised finish lines. John, Whilst some of those accidents are attributable to finish gates, I'd certainly question your thinking the last three. Taking the Discus crash for example, in a Discus (in which I have a reasonable if not spectacular amount of time), 500' is adequate, if not totally comfortable, for a decent enough circuit, that crash, as well as the others, from the reports seem to be the whole 'slightly low in the circuit leads to a poor turn leading to a spin in' issue. Where the blame in that lies is the topic for another thread but that, like the other last three, does not seem to be attributable directly to finish gate issues as surely a pilot just making it over a 500' 1 mile finish gate would be in exactly the same situation as someone who has just got a few hundred feet of height from a competition pullup? The others seem to be 'insufficient speed, insufficient time to recover from the spin', afaiks the same situation as trying to scrabble over a start gate at 450' and screwing up. It's been said before but unfortunately you can't legislate good judgement. Cheers Jamie Denton -- ------------+ Mark J. Boyd -- ------------+ Mark J. Boyd |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
2005 Region 7 Contest | Paul Remde | Soaring | 0 | August 13th 04 03:48 AM |
Survival and Demise Kit; Contest Points | Jim Culp | Soaring | 1 | June 21st 04 04:35 AM |
USA Double Seater Contest | Thomas Knauff | Soaring | 1 | April 13th 04 05:24 PM |
30th Annual CCSC Soaring Contest | Mario Crosina | Soaring | 0 | March 17th 04 06:31 AM |
2003 Air Sailing Contest pre-report synopsis | Jim Price | Soaring | 0 | July 10th 03 10:19 PM |