![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Change the rules any way you like, we'll find some new way to put
ourselves in a world of hurt... ;-) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Change the rules any way you like, we'll find some new way to put
ourselves in a world of hurt... ;-) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
John
I know you and respect your opinion, but you are wrong on this one. This was a "relight" accident and the finish cylinder (or lack of one) would have made no difference in this case. Sorry, but this arguement just does not hold water this time! "BB" wrote in message oups.com... I know it's a dead horse, but I can't help but point out that this is exactly the sort of accident that would be a lot less frequent with a 500 foot one mile circle finish. 70-80 kts right over the center of the airport at 51 feet is about the worst place you can be -- too much to land straight, too little to do a pattern. 70 knots, 501 feet, one mile out gives you a lot of time to think about what you're going to do next. 70 knots, 300 feet, one mile out means you're not going to make the flying finish at 500 feet, so you must roll. That decision is over, now use the whole mile to figure out how to land. Yes, pilots should think ahead to the pattern while also managing the stress of a tight glide. Yes, they should decide to do a rolling finish rather than focus entirely on the finishline and then wake up to the fact they have to land the darn thing. But everyone knows this advice, it's repeated over and over at the safety meetings, and we still get a crash like this once every few years -- usually with much worse results. A lower workload reduces the chances any of us will screw up. John Cochrane BB |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Uh, Brian. The accident John was referring to was the Practice Day
accident, which was a too low, too slow for a pattern return to the airport. One that should have become a rolling finish. Pretty bad when we refer to not just "an accident" at a contest, but "the first" accident at a contest, isn't it? Steve Leonard Brian Glick wrote: John I know you and respect your opinion, but you are wrong on this one. This was a "relight" accident and the finish cylinder (or lack of one) would have made no difference in this case. Sorry, but this arguement just does not hold water this time! |
|
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 |