![]() |
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 |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tuesday, August 13, 2013 9:01:26 AM UTC-7, Sean F (F2) wrote:
Several times this season (18 meter nationals for example) I experienced the following US Rules starting procedure... This is a highly dangerous process that I think should deleted from the sport. This is far more dangerous than finish height, normal thermalling or cruising in a large pack. In short, absurd. It was alot of fun, but from a rules perspective, head down flying in this manner is not safe. It is highly charged and invites disaster. Nibble on that for awhile and let me know if you have experienced this procedure. Please be honest! Hi Sean, I've had all the start experiences you mention. I share most of your issues with them (just not in CAPS - ;-) ). I'm not sure what the alternative proposal is, but the ones I can think of have also issues. Unlimited height start clusters everybody at the top of lift or at cloudbase if there are clouds (maybe even above cloudbase - been there, done that and I did not enjoy it). If there is no top there is no start out the top and a giant gaggle tends to form at the point where the first leg course line exists the cylinder - all at top of lift. Done that too. At least with start out the top you spread the pack out a bit. FYI all my soaring software is European (i.e. not US-based or particularly focused on US rules) and all have a tone for getting below MSH and at 120 seconds. They work great. Not sure what you are using these days, but I expect you'll have it in a future release - it really helps an immense amount in terms of all the fiddling. I'd love to hear your suggestion? Some possibilities: 1) Unlimited height start? If so how to handle gaggling at top of lift or cloud base and what if any enforcement for the FARs regarding clearance from clouds? 2) Eliminate two minutes below MSH? 3) If yes on #2 - Eliminate the speed limit in the start cylinder? Should there be enforcement for exceeding Vne or leave it to the pilot? 4) Other ideas? I'd love to hear some specific ideas. Without a better alternative all we are left with is the griping part. 9B |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Junior World Championships - FAI Rules Absurdity | Kevin Christner | Soaring | 37 | August 15th 13 09:46 AM |
SSA Rules Poll and Rules Committee Election | Ken Sorenson | Soaring | 2 | October 6th 06 03:27 PM |
US Rules Committee Election and Rules Poll | Ken Sorenson | Soaring | 1 | September 27th 05 10:52 PM |
FLASH! U.S.A. Rules Committee to Address Rules Complexity? | SoarPoint | Soaring | 1 | February 3rd 04 02:36 AM |
New SRA Site - New 2003 Rules Minutes and 2004 Rules Summary | Ken Kochanski | Soaring | 0 | December 17th 03 03:38 AM |