Seniors Contest

Kilo Charlie wrote:
Every single one of these is a stall spin accident. They are
examples of
poor judgement and are not different than any other stall spin
accident....e.g. from base to final....

That's right, but you're missing the point. Of course all these
accidents represent failures of judgement, decision-making, "improper
manipulation of the controls" or whatever you want to call it.

The fact is, though, that the standard finish gate procedure seems to
require a lot of that judgement, especially at the end of a long hot
flight and a long marginal final glide. This is proved by the fact that
a disquieting number of pilots are finding this task occasionally
beyond them and crashing.

So what do we do? We can say "well, they were bozos who didn't show
good judgment" and forget about it, which I take to be your proposal.
Ok, but then we resign ourselves to the fact that we will be picking
gliders out of the trees about once every two years, and mourning the
loss of one or two pilots per decade. That doesn't seem to bother you.
It bothers me, and it would bother me even if I were foolish enough to
think I was immune to screwing up once in a thousand or so finishes.

The fact is that a cylinder finish, followed by normal pattern entry,
is a maneuver that requires far less "judgement" by pilots. It's not
screw-up proof -- it is possible to fail in judgment here too, for
example by trying to thermal at low altitude with waterballast in an
effort to save a 5 minute rolling finish penalty, and spining out of
the thermal. But I think most of us find that a much less likely
failure of judgment.

Yes, it's less "fun" and has less "spectator appeal." For both, let me
suggest instead a tow after the contest flight and go do some
aerobatics. Put on a really good show. It will be even more fun and it
will really please the spectators.

And on spectator appeal, consider the effect that seeing even one crash
has on spectators and spouses. Just one crash converts the spectator
from "wow that looks like fun, I think I'll try it" to "man, that must
be dangerous".

John Cochrane
BB

BB wrote:
Kilo Charlie wrote:

The fact is that a cylinder finish, followed by normal pattern entry,
is a maneuver that requires far less "judgement" by pilots.

When you talk about a cylinder finish, are you talking about
a cylinder around the airport, and then having pilots come into the
pattern at random directions, or a cylinder or remote point
away from the airport, that brings gliders into the pattern
in an "onramp" style?

John Cochrane

I'm trying to think about this from the Sports Class perspective too.
If I understand it, in Sports Class one chooses their own TPs,
so the pilots can come in from any direction, and a cylinder around the
airport wouldn't seem to solve much in terms of head-on
surprises.

So a remote point or remote cylinder seems like a better answer.
Has this been done in US contests? I am ignorant of what the term
"cylinder finish" means. Is it a remote cylinder or one around the
airport?

I liked the non-US post about remote finish points and how they are
used, just wondered if this had been tried on the US also...

--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd

Mark James Boyd wrote:
I'm trying to think about this from the Sports Class perspective too.
If I understand it, in Sports Class one chooses their own TPs,
so the pilots can come in from any direction, and a cylinder around the
airport wouldn't seem to solve much in terms of head-on
surprises.

The finish cylinder is basically a circle with (minimally) a 2 mile
*diameter*. A typical one will have a floor of 500 feet and no top.
Once the edge of the cylinder is crossed, one pulls up from the final
glide speed, which may well in excess of 100 knots, to a more reasonable
55 or 60 knots for pattern and landing. Following the pull up you are
usually at a minimum of 600 to 700 feet, and there is plenty of time to
sort out traffic, and sequence for landing. People finishing from the
same direction are no more of a problem than they are with a finish
gate. People finishing from the opposite direction are also not a big
deal, as both you and the head-on glider have normally slowed to 60
knots or less by the time you are within a mile of each other. Most
people by that point have started a series of gradual clearing turns, so
they can assess the traffic situation.

By contrast, with a finish gate, you have gliders converging on the same
point in space (thanks to GPS) at final glide speed of 100+ knots (if
you're under 100 feet, you better be going at least that fast), pulling
up to 200 feet or so (unless they have too little energy), then having
to sort themselves within a few moments and land. Now throw an MAT
(modified assigned task) into the mix, and things get interesting, as
you get some gliders running straight into the gate, and others
approaching the gate from one side or the other (and every once in a
while some bozo goes through the gate in the wrong direction), then
having to make a last minute high speed turn to go through the gate in
the proper direction. Now yes, things are easier with a required final
turnpoint (control point), several miles away from the finish gate, to
get everyone finishing in the same direction, but not all (or even most,
in my experience) contest directors bother to use them.

Marc

Thanks Marc. this is helpful.

In article ,
Marc Ramsey wrote:
Mark James Boyd wrote:
I'm trying to think about this from the Sports Class perspective too.
If I understand it, in Sports Class one chooses their own TPs,
so the pilots can come in from any direction, and a cylinder around the
airport wouldn't seem to solve much in terms of head-on
surprises.

The finish cylinder is basically a circle with (minimally) a 2 mile
*diameter*. A typical one will have a floor of 500 feet and no top.
Once the edge of the cylinder is crossed, one pulls up from the final
glide speed, which may well in excess of 100 knots, to a more reasonable
55 or 60 knots for pattern and landing. Following the pull up you are
usually at a minimum of 600 to 700 feet, and there is plenty of time to
sort out traffic, and sequence for landing. People finishing from the
same direction are no more of a problem than they are with a finish
gate. People finishing from the opposite direction are also not a big
deal, as both you and the head-on glider have normally slowed to 60
knots or less by the time you are within a mile of each other. Most
people by that point have started a series of gradual clearing turns, so
they can assess the traffic situation.

By contrast, with a finish gate, you have gliders converging on the same
point in space (thanks to GPS) at final glide speed of 100+ knots (if
you're under 100 feet, you better be going at least that fast), pulling
up to 200 feet or so (unless they have too little energy), then having
to sort themselves within a few moments and land. Now throw an MAT
(modified assigned task) into the mix, and things get interesting, as
you get some gliders running straight into the gate, and others
approaching the gate from one side or the other (and every once in a
while some bozo goes through the gate in the wrong direction), then
having to make a last minute high speed turn to go through the gate in
the proper direction. Now yes, things are easier with a required final
turnpoint (control point), several miles away from the finish gate, to
get everyone finishing in the same direction, but not all (or even most,
in my experience) contest directors bother to use them.

Marc


--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd

Ok, but then we resign ourselves to the fact that we will be picking
gliders out of the trees about once every two years, and mourning the
loss of one or two pilots per decade. That doesn't seem to bother you.

OK I see you're resorting to personal insults now John. That's what happens
sometimes when a persons arguement fails on it's own merits.

Truth be known I'm a conservative racing pilot that takes few chances.
You've flown with me in Uvalde and as I remember you took more chances than
I did. You are absolutely wrong re the finish gate and have no data to
prove me otherwise. I have not ever felt the finish gate to be a threat.
It sometimes begins to sound like you all want protection from yourselves
i.e. you MUST fly dangerously if not prevented from doing so by the rules.

I'm all for educating and training pilots to be aware of the threats they
might encounter at ALL levels not just the finish gate. I am NOT for a
subgroup of people wishing to basically install rubber baby buggy bumpers
into all of the racing rules. It's a dead horse beating.

Casey

"Kilo Charlie" wrote in message
news:nyqYd.42760$FM3.22504@fed1read02...
Ok, but then we resign ourselves to the fact that we will be picking
gliders out of the trees about once every two years, and mourning the
loss of one or two pilots per decade. That doesn't seem to bother you.

OK I see you're resorting to personal insults now John. That's what
happens
sometimes when a persons arguement fails on it's own merits.

Truth be known I'm a conservative racing pilot that takes few chances.
You've flown with me in Uvalde and as I remember you took more chances
than
I did. You are absolutely wrong re the finish gate and have no data to
prove me otherwise. I have not ever felt the finish gate to be a threat.
It sometimes begins to sound like you all want protection from yourselves
i.e. you MUST fly dangerously if not prevented from doing so by the rules.

I'm all for educating and training pilots to be aware of the threats they
might encounter at ALL levels not just the finish gate. I am NOT for a
subgroup of people wishing to basically install rubber baby buggy bumpers
into all of the racing rules. It's a dead horse beating.

Casey



I agree with Casey. Contests are getting bor-ring.

I feel like a rant.

Go read Sterling Starr's reminiscing about the 1966 US Nationals at Reno,
Nevada in the latest Soaring Magazine. I was there too. Those guys knew
what soaring competition was all about.

These days, you guys don't want to risk a land out or fly long tasks and you
don't want low finishes.

You sound like a bunch of wusses.

Why not stop calling what you do a contest and call it what it has become -
just a rally. If the soaring rules committee ran the Indy 500, the drivers
would be wearing pink bunny suits and driving pedal cars.

Get real. If you want to race, then RACE. Sure, there'll be some risks.
If the kitchen's too hot for you, get out.

This ELT rule is the last straw. Maybe if I could borrow a PLB to put in my
parachute it would be OK but build it into the glider? No way. ELT's have
been used in GenAv for decades and 99% of all activation's have been hard
landings with no damage.

How much hassle is it going to be when a pothole activates the damn thing in
the trailer? I can see it now, a glider trailer humming down the interstate
with a swarm of CAP planes overhead trying to triangulate on the thing.

Sheesh! What's become of us?

End rant.

Bill Daniels

Bill Daniels wrote:

This ELT rule is the last straw. Maybe if I could borrow a PLB to put in my
parachute it would be OK but build it into the glider? No way. ELT's have
been used in GenAv for decades and 99% of all activation's have been hard
landings with no damage.

It doesn't appear that it's near this bad for gliders. I don't know why
it's different, but maybe it's the ELT being mounted close to the gear,
and the shorter gear of the gliders keeps the forward forces from a hard
landing low enough to avoid setting it off.


How much hassle is it going to be when a pothole activates the damn thing in
the trailer? I can see it now, a glider trailer humming down the interstate
with a swarm of CAP planes overhead trying to triangulate on the thing.

Not a problem in metal trailers, of course. Personally, I've trailered
an ELT equipped glider as far as Alaska and San Diego (over the years,
about 40,000 miles) and it's never activated. I think the trailers ride
smoothly enough, so even behind a motorhome with a harsh suspension it's
not a problem.

Even so, I think requiring an ELT should be up to the contest organizers.


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA