Diamond goal flight rejected due to typo

On Jun 14, 2:54*am, "Larry Goddard" wrote:

Nope, you are wrong. N numbers are unique at any given time. The fact
that they can be changed at some time in the future has nothing to do
with it. *

Actually I maintain it has everything to do with it. Sure, the
registration and the glider have a unique relationship at the time the
flight is made. There is however no assurance that the registration
number and the glider will have that same association at the time the
badge or record is processed, or at any time in the future when the
badge or record documentation is reviewed. The association between the
glider and the N number is therefore not unique.


Andy

I guess the main point is that if you are going to be making badge or
record attempts it is important to read the sporting code before you
go fly. Also, make sure that you have an OO who has read the sporting
code.

On Jun 14, 11:48*am, Andy wrote:
*There is however no assurance that the registration
number and the glider will have that same association at the time the
badge or record is processed, or at any time in the future when the
badge or record documentation is reviewed. The association between the
glider and the N number is therefore not unique.

The barometric pressure is likely different at the time the claim is
processed.

You seem to agree that at the time the flight is made, there is a
unique association between registration and glider. If the glider is
destroyed before the claim can be processed, is it invalidated?
What's your point?

This is silly...

-Tom

To all, FWIW:

1. The claim in question was not rejected because of a "typo". The
claim in question was rejected because a current FAI procedural
requirement WRT flight declaration was not met.

2. The *last* declaration accomplished immediately before the start
of flight, be it paper or electronic, is the valid declaration. Said
another way, a paper declaration supersedes an electronic declaration
only when it is accomplished after the electronic declaration has been
input into the FR.

3. Attempting to retroactively create a paper trail to overcome a
claim error is unethical at best
and outright lying at worst. Any advice to the contrary is
improper.
(A subsequently submitted paper declaration wouldn't be accepted
anyway because SSA procedure is it must be sent in along with the
claim.)

4. The proper procedure to contest a rejected badge or record claim
is the appeal process.
Filing an appeal makes the SSA badge and record committee aware of
questionable rules language thus requiring interpretation,
clarification, and/or procedural changes. An appeal may also become
the impetus that causes the committee to take formal action with the
FAI to clarify/amend/omit a rule.

Anyone familiar with my personal learning curve in these regards can
testify as to my sympathizing with anyone whose badge or record
claim(s) is rejected due to a technicality; however, the bottom line
is
"If you want to play the game, you gotta play by the rules--And them's
the rules!"

If one is to commit themselves to being actively involved in badge or
record flying, one is far better advised to become intimately familiar
with the rules and to accept the inevitable procedural setbacks as
learning experiences--though frustrating as it can be.

Regardless, my congratulations to Scott on a great soaring
performance!

In all sincerity,

Ray Cornay