![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
g l i d e r s t u d wrote:
A rolling finish was a severe penalty. Straight in or just safely entering on base was out of the question. Buffeting, stalling then spinning a partially loaded aft CG glider got me a GPS fix in the safer circle finish. You could say that I didn't climb high enough, but I climbed as high as I could and left the last thermal at best L/D. So, you consider a low altitude spin, from which you may not recover (it has been known to happen, you know) less of a penalty than five minutes added to your time on task? I have dumped the nose and crossed the field boundary with full flaps and about 70 knots and taken a rolling finish in the days of the low altitude finishes because I didn't want to make a low energy pattern. Added time be damned. "Straight in or a base entry was out of the question"? So, I take it you landed in a field after this spin, rather than making it home? But you got those speed points, man! Yep, GliderStud, indeed! Please identify yourself, as I am not so sure I would like to share a thermal with you. Steve Leonard Zulu Sierra (Sometimes a Zuni 2, other times a 604) PS: Also, would you all be so kind as to change the "subject" when you change the subject? (see above) Thanks! PPS: Guess what tomorrow is? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
This pilot is one that I have and would anyday share a thermal with. He is
an excellent racing pilot and would never put someone else in danger. He has won more than one contest. To imply that he is some crazy unsafe wacko is unfortunate. I would not reveal myself if I were him but would say that I can see getting into the same situation. That IS the point here.......with the so-called "safe" finish there are times when it is in fact unsafe! To date I have not felt any safer with a single change that has been made in the name of safety. I honestly think that from a pure safety aspect the old start gate and 50' AGL finish line was safer than the mega-gaggle cylinder starts we have now and the finishes into a circle from varying angles. I don't argue the point that contest organization is simpler with the cylinder however. Casey Lenox KC Phoenix |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Kilo Charlie wrote:
This pilot is one that I have and would anyday share a thermal with. He is an excellent racing pilot and would never put someone else in danger. He has won more than one contest. To imply that he is some crazy unsafe wacko is unfortunate. I would not reveal myself if I were him but would say that I can see getting into the same situation. That IS the point here.......with the so-called "safe" finish there are times when it is in fact unsafe! To date I have not felt any safer with a single change that has been made in the name of safety. I honestly think that from a pure safety aspect the old start gate and 50' AGL finish line was safer than the mega-gaggle cylinder starts we have now and the finishes into a circle from varying angles. I don't argue the point that contest organization is simpler with the cylinder however. Casey Lenox KC Phoenix Casey and Everyone else, I agree completely that you simply cannot regulate judgement and safety. Any rule that is created will have some edge that someone will end up testing. The pilot being talked about had the option of a rolling finish, but his competitive drive and the rule made him do something he would not normally do. I think I know who this pilot is, and yes, I have also raced with him and had a great time doing so. If it sounded like I was implying he is a wacko, my apoligies to him. That was not my intent. I was simply trying (apparently unsuccessfully) to ask if he now thinks that he excercised good judgement. Isn't that what this is all about? We have to excercise good judgement, in spite of the rules. He used his judgement and maybe let the rule influence his judgement in a not so good direction. End result: In this case, an interesting story the person who experienced it can tell. I, too, hate seeing rules made "in the name of safety". It is one person's opinion, and the opinon of as many other people that choose to see it that way as the expressor. I miss the fast, low finishes. I miss pilotage (heading out into 8 to 10 mile visibility, northbound out of Monahans towards Seagraves, with no GPS or compass, with the first road to be found about 25 miles out, according to the sectional). I miss standing my 604 on its tip from over 10K AGL to try and photograph only half of a half mile long runway. I am not at all fond of running around at ever increasing speed near the top corner of a start cylinder or at cloudbase because the top of the cylinder is above cloudbase. All these things get the heart going and we must use our judgement as to what we are willing to do. Would we maybe be less unhappy with a rule if it wasn't put to us as being a "safety improvement" but just "this is the way it is going to be."? Please, Casey, Don't Adjust my Meds! I really am a good guy! Steve Leonard ZS Wichita, KS |
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 |