US SSA/SRA Contest Rules Poll

" wrote in message
ups.com:

On Nov 1, 11:19 am, chris wrote:
On the poll I was confused by the explanation of question 8[?]
regarding using the last exit position of the start cylinder as the
scored start point rather than the point closest to the first
turnpoint.

I understand the concept of the proposed rule change. The explanation
seemed poorly written and confusing to me.

The description said something about exiting out the back, then flying
through the gaggles in the start cylinder. I don't understand this
because if you did this then by definition you pass through the start
cylinder again and then have a restart on the 2nd exit right?
[start=last exit of start cylinder]

Why did we not have a choice to change the scored exit point to
anywhere on the front 1800 of the start cylinder? That seems like the
best of both concepts with the fewest problems.

Chris

If the principle of giving a pilot his best score is applied, and
speed achieved after
exiting the back and then flying across the cylinder (on a street of
through a "boomer")
at a speed that exceeds the rest of the on course speed for the
flight, a pilot can improve both
his speed and his score.
This is a significant safety concern and likely to happen. Where elso
do you have lift so well
marked as the prestart?
Limiting to the "front " 180 solves this but has computation issues
due to potentially significant
variations in the heading of the first leg.
Wanna take a swing at trying to write some language to deal with these
considerations?
This is a good example of something that seems very simple actually
not being so simple.
Thanks for you thoughts.
UH





Hank,



I think it is simple.



Here is my language: "Your start is scored for distance and time when
and where you exit the start cylinder the last time"



It sounds like your example would still have the pilot who exited at the
back of the cylinder coming back through the cylinder again to use the
pre-start gaggles, hence getting scored when (s)he exits the cylinder at
the front with the rest of the gaggle. I think that if you get a valid
start and distance calculated from the last exit of the start cylinder,
wherever that may be, that seems to answer the questions of safety
because there would be _no_ advantage to taking a boomer toward the back
and bumping through the frontward start gaggles because then you would
be back inside the cylinder and be scored when and where you
subsequently exited the cylinder. Additionally, you would need to be
sure that you were below the start cylinder height for 2 minutes to get
a valid start.



I would submit three examples where my approach would improve safety.



1) Because I will get credit for distance flown, not the minimum
course line distance from the front of the cylinder, there is no
advantage for me to be at or near course line (which is currently the
_most_ advantageous place, and where most of us tend to congregate). I
can now be 5 miles left or right of course line, away from the rest of
the gaggles and know that I am in just as good a position as anyone else
because I get scored for distance and time when I leave the cylinder on
the side.

2) I see a 4 kt. boomer forming toward the back of the cylinder
that I estimate can take me a 1000' above the top of the cylinder. I
climb out of the top of the cylinder, 6 miles back, getting a start from
that location when I exit the top. I take it up appropriately based on
strength and head on course. The only thing I need to be aware of at
this point is that I do not slip back down into the cylinder (which is
where all the pre-start gaggles are milling around) so that my original
start time is busted. And I will certainly be flying a bit slower in
order to make sure that I do not penetrate the start cylinder again.

3) I see a good thermal toward the back of the cylinder. The
contest has seen numerous leechers. I decide to slip out the back of the
cylinder and go around the side and onto course. I have an incentive to
travel toward the back of the cylinder now because I get credit for the
distance from the last exit. This action puts me at least 5 miles to
the left or right of course line hence spreading out the pack.



This approach should be easy to score, easy to understand, and have the
original desired effect of spreading the field out before the start.





Larry Goddard

01 "zero one"

I think it is simple.

Here is my language: "Your start is scored for distance and time when
and where you exit the start cylinder the last time"

As Larry points out, the issue of separating pre-start and post-start
traffic is fairly easy to solve. As one minor addition, if you do slip
back in to the cylinder, you can then start again if you stay under
for two minutes, or take your original start, but scored in the old-
fashioned way. The scoring program already knows to look for multiple
starts and take the best one. The scoring program already finds the
"start fix" so the change is not hard to program.

Previous discussions of this option at SRA meetings focused on a
different issue, highlighted in the pro/con of the poll. In no wind
the "start anywhere" option is great, it's like a start line because
all parts of the start circle are equally good. But in significant
wind, the optimal start point is at the upwind edge of the cylinder,
rather than at the wind-triangle upwind point under current rules. If
in addition, it's a crosswind or downwind, the optimal point is 90
degrees away from the courseline. Now, as currently, it's not a huge
big deal to start 30 degrees away from this optimal point, but it is a
bit worse than currently because you start and then make a sharp
course change. Still, the US RC wisely decided not to use a start
line, because in a significant crosswind it funnels all gliders to one
point in space, the upwind edge of the start line. There is some
concern that the "start anywhere" option would have this same effect.

The most important question, I think, for the poll, is how do pilots
feel about this? Are the obvious advantages of "start anywhere" on
days without much wind offset by the potential disadvantage of this
scenario? In your experience, how often is there enough cross or
downwind on the first leg that this would be a problem? The RC is
pretty good at thinking through traffic issues, but this really is a
pilot preference issue, and hearing opinions on the poll will be very
useful.

John Cochrane

The scoring program already knows to look for multiple
starts and take the best one. The scoring program already finds the
"start fix" so the change is not hard to program.

I am not so sure about that.
I had the opportunity to help scoring the Canadian Nat's.
A contestant requested to be scored on the second last start.
This gave him a small advantage due to him being 5 minutes early.
Udo

On Nov 2, 10:40 am, BB wrote:
I think it is simple.

Here is my language: "Your start is scored for distance and time when
and where you exit the start cylinder the last time"

As Larry points out, the issue of separating pre-start and post-start
traffic is fairly easy to solve. As one minor addition, if you do slip
back in to the cylinder, you can then start again if you stay under
for two minutes, or take your original start, but scored in the old-
fashioned way. The scoring program already knows to look for multiple
starts and take the best one. The scoring program already finds the
"start fix" so the change is not hard to program.

Previous discussions of this option at SRA meetings focused on a
different issue, highlighted in the pro/con of the poll. In no wind
the "start anywhere" option is great, it's like a start line because
all parts of the start circle are equally good. But in significant
wind, the optimal start point is at the upwind edge of the cylinder,
rather than at the wind-triangle upwind point under current rules. If
in addition, it's a crosswind or downwind, the optimal point is 90
degrees away from the courseline. Now, as currently, it's not a huge
big deal to start 30 degrees away from this optimal point, but it is a
bit worse than currently because you start and then make a sharp
course change. Still, the US RC wisely decided not to use a start
line, because in a significant crosswind it funnels all gliders to one
point in space, the upwind edge of the start line. There is some
concern that the "start anywhere" option would have this same effect.

The most important question, I think, for the poll, is how do pilots
feel about this? Are the obvious advantages of "start anywhere" on
days without much wind offset by the potential disadvantage of this
scenario? In your experience, how often is there enough cross or
downwind on the first leg that this would be a problem? The RC is
pretty good at thinking through traffic issues, but this really is a
pilot preference issue, and hearing opinions on the poll will be very
useful.

John Cochrane

I see the effect as somewhat different.
Now, a pilot chooses between the optimum start point based on wind
and thermal distribution relative to
shortest distance to first turn. In fact what most do is try to find
the "fast gaggle(KS, DJ etc) and get with them.

With exit point start, the tradeoff no longer exists. The pilot simply
goes to the best cloud in the windward quadrant- just like everybody
else. They then collect around the same guys, and the result is pretty
much the same.
I describe this from experience in the WGC where we saw the same
thing.
The gaggle collects at the best cloud, and tries to go 30 seconds
after the Brits!

The start method that pretty much stops all of this and drives pilots
to make "soaring starts" is the multi-point start where the fleet is
randomly divided into 3-4 groups each with their own start cylinder.
With this one, there are no big gaggles and you have to go based on
your assessment of the soaring conditions. We put this into place, but
it died due to lack of interest. It worked very well in Oz in 2001.

The biggest benefit to exit point scoring is that it makes your flight
match the result generated
by See You.
Interesting debate.
UH