WWGC.

Huge resources are committed to WGC. I think the organizers and the sanctioning body owe the competitors a fair competition at a minimum.

225 pts means you aren't serious about the infraction, and you look forward to more of the same.

T8

Huge resources are committed to WGC. I think the organizers and the
sanctioning body owe the competitors a fair competition at a minimum.

225 pts means you aren't serious about the infraction, and you look forward
to more of the same.

Congratulations to Sarah Arnold !and every other competitor who abided by the
rules, explicit and implicit)!!!

Opining as someone 100% ignorant of the rules as they apply to this sort of
cheating, were I king, the entire team woulda been disqualified, end of
discussion. Kinda-sorta related, can anyone advise me where I can go to have
my moral compass inexpensively removed?

Bob W.

It cost one pilot a win, that’s a pretty fair sanction.

At 22:21 17 January 2020, Charlie Quebec wrote:
It cost one pilot a win, that=E2=80=99s a pretty fair sanction.

So having looked at the rules, I can't see anything which forbids this in
this competition. No 'hacking' was involved. There are lots of freely
available sites that show the live data.

The UK competition rules were changed last year to specifically forbid
this, but the rules of this comp don't appear to have done so. I wonder
what the US rules say?

The problem was accessing the live tracking without a delay, via pst access allowed. This gave an unfair advantage apparently.

On Friday, January 17, 2020 at 6:00:05 PM UTC-5, Al McNamara wrote:
At 22:21 17 January 2020, Charlie Quebec wrote:
It cost one pilot a win, that=E2=80=99s a pretty fair sanction.

So having looked at the rules, I can't see anything which forbids this in
this competition. No 'hacking' was involved. There are lots of freely
available sites that show the live data.

The UK competition rules were changed last year to specifically forbid
this, but the rules of this comp don't appear to have done so. I wonder
what the US rules say?

I'm guessing that it was from Local Procedures V9.1 para 4.1.1.c: Carriage of GNSS data transmitters for public displays
The organizers will require competing sailplanes to carry GNSS data transmitters to enable the public display of GNSS flight records during competition flights. Such display will not begin before the start line is opened and the actual positions of the sailplanes shall be displayed with a time delay of at least 15 minutes. This delay may be reduced to zero prior the finish..

At 23:11 17 January 2020, Dan Daly wrote:
On Friday, January 17, 2020 at 6:00:05 PM UTC-5, Al McNamara wrote:
At 22:21 17 January 2020, Charlie Quebec wrote:
It cost one pilot a win, that=3DE2=3D80=3D99s a pretty fair sanction.

So having looked at the rules, I can't see anything which forbids this
in
this competition. No 'hacking' was involved. There are lots of freely
available sites that show the live data.
=20
The UK competition rules were changed last year to specifically forbid
this, but the rules of this comp don't appear to have done so. I
wonder
what the US rules say?

I'm guessing that it was from Local Procedures V9.1 para 4.1.1.c:
Carriage
=
of GNSS data transmitters for public displays
The organizers will require competing sailplanes to carry GNSS data
transmi=
tters to enable the public display of GNSS flight records during
competitio=
n flights. Such display will not begin before the start line is opened
and
=
the actual positions of the sailplanes shall be displayed with a time
delay=
of at least 15 minutes. This delay may be reduced to zero prior the
finish=
But nothing which forbids teams from accessing live data via any of the
many sites that show it, and nothing which restricts what teams can discuss
with pilots on the allocated frequencies. I'm not suggesting that we
should be allowing this in competitions going forward (but ultimately do
wonder how it can be effectively policed) rather questioning whether any
rules in this comp were actually broken.