Racing airspace "violation" question

On Sep 9, 6:47*am, John Cochrane
wrote:
On Sep 8, 9:25*pm, Andy wrote:





On Sep 8, 5:45*pm, John Cochrane
wrote:

On Sep 8, 12:36*pm, Mike the Strike wrote:

On Sep 8, 10:07*am, John Cochrane
wrote:

On Sep 8, 10:50*am, LOV2AV8 wrote:

As long as we're discussing a rules change and not a score change for
the day. *Many other contestants aborted at the first turn point
rather than the second turn point because of the Class C airspace
conflict with getting home.

Randy

What day of what contest was this? What was the issue with going
around class C? How was it impossible to continue the course,
impossible to go around class C, but easy to go over? I'm not being
hostile, I'd just like to go look at the task and results. Stated in
the abstract it all seems so unlikely, so it would be good to know the
practical circumstance.

John Cochrane

This was the first day of the Southwest Soaring Championships flown
from Tucson Soaring Club. *The CD set a long and challenging task that
proved too long, mostly because of a late start. *Only one contestant
completed the task, three landed out and the rest (including me)
abandoned.

We routinely fly over Tucson Class C as it's often the quickest and
safest way home from tiger country.

Mike

I'm still trying to get a sense of whether "this was a real problem"
or whether this is some hypothetical question.

The SSA contest report says this was an area task from El Tiro to
Amado, southwest of Tucson, with a 25 mile circle around Amado. The
direct courseline to Amado doesn't intersect the Tucson class C,
though it does come close; the Tucson class C is east of courseline.
Looking at the chart, I would have flown the line of high ground even
further west of courseline, ending up at Keystone peak or thereabouts..
My options would have been the line of airports, Ruby Star, Flying
Diamond, Ryan, Taylor, all again a bit west of courseline and heading
right back to El Tiro and the second turnpoint. I just don't see how
anyone could have gotten stuck behind the Tucson class C. And it looks
like the CD did *a good job of setting a course that really didn't
cause a problem.

So, tell the story. Where were you guys that you really felt this was
the only safe option? How did you get there? Or is this all
hypothetical?

There is a lot of complaining around here about rules being too
complicated. Carving out an exception for class C overflights in
abandoned tasks is certainly going to be complicated. So it matters
whether this is a real problem, or just the beginning of winter what-
ifs.

John Cochrane

John,

I think you've mistaken the Southwest Soaring Championships (a non-
sanctioned local contest) with the Region 9 that was also held at El
Tiro. The task in question was:

* ID * Name * * * * * * * * Distance (Miles) * Radius
* *106 * 106 Waterman * * * * * 0.00 * * * * * * *5.0
* * 62 * 062 MtWshngt * * * * *77.13
* * 12 * 012 Benson * * * * * 126.93
* * 13 * 013 Biospher * * * * 176.85
* * *1 * 001 EL TIRO * * * * *209.27 * * * * * * *1.0

I have a few recollections of making long final glides to El Tiro from
the east. Given the distances involved a long, flat glide would
occasionally get you close to the top of the Class C and in that
instance going around could run you out of glide distance.
Disclaimer: My recollection is decades old and based on the old ARSA
configuration at Tucson IIRC.

9B

Well, if it's non-sanctioned, go ahead and make your own rules, or
exceptions!

John Cochrane- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ok, just to makes things clear:

The task was a speed task, first turnpoint way south of Tucson (Mt
Washington, I think, near Nogales), second turnpont Benson (east of
Tucson, directly across the Class C from El Tiro), then Biosphere
(north of Tucson), then El Tiro. By the time I got near Benson, the
day was dying and I decided to abort the task rather than head up into
a possible landout. At that point, I found a climb that allowed me to
get well above the Class C and gave me final glide back to El Tiro. I
contacted approach, overflew the "closed airspace", and landed back at
El Tiro.

I understand (and agree with completely) the rule about no overflying
closed airspace WHEN ON TASK. And I have no problem with losing my
score and getting penalized for this flight, because I misinterpreted
the rule that is clear as currently written and decided to take what I
considered a safe and legal route home. My question was about whether
the rule should be amended IN THE FUTURE to allow legal overflight (or
even, with clearance, flight through) controlled airspace during part
of a contest flight that is no longer "on task" i.e. an aborted return
from a task as there is no competitive benefit for doing so (unless
one considers avoiding a long retrieve a competitive advantage ;^).

Up side? Safety, convenience, full use of the airspace we are allowed
to use, etc. Downside? Scoring complication, rule complication, more
chances for airspace violation.

My opinion is that it's ultimately the pilot's, not the SSA's, job to
comply with the FARs - since it's the pilot that gets hammered if he
gets a violation, no the SSA. And scoring complication is a software
issue, nowadays - we already score to the point of a task abort, so
"added complication" seems a bit of a stretch. I totally support the
SSA requirement to stay out of closed airspace when on task, since a
pilot should not be tasked through airspace that he may not be able to
legally fly through, or require equipment he may not have.

Anyway, I just thought this situation was interesting enough to
warrant some discussion - especially since it is a bit of a regional
problem (I can't see this being a problem back East!).

Cheers,

Kirk
66

On Sep 9, 6:09*am, "kirk.stant" wrote:
I understand (and agree with completely) the rule about no overflying
closed airspace WHEN ON TASK. *And I have no problem with losing my
score and getting penalized for this flight, because I misinterpreted
the rule that is clear as currently written and decided to take what I
considered a safe and legal route home. *My question was about whether
the rule should be amended IN THE FUTURE to allow legal overflight (or
even, with clearance, flight through) controlled airspace during part
of a contest flight that is no longer "on task" i.e. an aborted return
from a task as there is no competitive benefit for doing so (unless
one considers avoiding a long retrieve a competitive advantage ;^).

But it's not that simple. How does the scorer know where you declared
your intention to abort? The person that won the day was also
thinking of aborting at the first turn and followed a similar route
back to yours. Conditions then improved and he made a large detour to
get back toward the second turnpoint. Maybe you would have done the
same thing. How would you have cancelled your intention to abort?

I think the FAI rules would have handled this situation just fine.
You would have been scores as landing out at the class C boundary and
the distance on that leg would have been scored as progress toward the
second turnpoint.

Andy

But it's not that simple. *How does the scorer know where you declared
your intention to abort? *The person that won the day was also
thinking of aborting at the first turn and followed a similar route
back to yours. Conditions then improved and he made a large detour to
get back toward the second turnpoint. *Maybe you would have done the
same thing. How would you have cancelled your intention to abort?

I think the FAI rules would have handled this situation just fine.
You would have been scores as landing out at the class C boundary and
the distance on that leg would have been scored as progress toward the
second turnpoint.

Andy

How does the scorer know where to score to if someone aborts
normally? Doesn't the scoring program look for the farthest logger
point in the direction of the next turnpoint (that isn't actually
reached) to determine how to score distance, after it determines that
the task wasn't completed? Then it would seem easy to not assess a
violation for any airspace incursion after that point is determined.
The scorer shouldn't have to do anything.

But I admit I'm assuming a lot about Winscore, so may very well be
completely wrong about this.

Kirk

On Sep 9, 2:02*pm, "kirk.stant" wrote:
But it's not that simple. *How does the scorer know where you declared
your intention to abort? *The person that won the day was also
thinking of aborting at the first turn and followed a similar route
back to yours. Conditions then improved and he made a large detour to
get back toward the second turnpoint. *Maybe you would have done the
same thing. How would you have cancelled your intention to abort?

I think the FAI rules would have handled this situation just fine.
You would have been scores as landing out at the class C boundary and
the distance on that leg would have been scored as progress toward the
second turnpoint.

Andy

How does the scorer know where to score to if someone aborts
normally? *Doesn't the scoring program look for the farthest logger
point in the direction of the next turnpoint (that isn't actually
reached) to determine how to score distance, after it determines that
the task wasn't completed? *Then it would seem easy to not assess a
violation for any airspace incursion after that point is determined.
The scorer shouldn't have to do anything.

But I admit I'm assuming a lot about Winscore, so may very well be
completely wrong about this.

Kirk

I can definitely lay out some tasks in relation to restricted areas
(like Class C's) where the pilot would be required to backtrack away
from the next turnpoint (and home) to avoid the -100 point outcome if
s/he abandoned the task and elected to traverse the restricted area.
This would require careful piloting to ensure that your greatest
progress towards the next turnpoint was outside the restricted area.
To make this really obvious imagine that the second to last turn is
across a Class C from home and the last turn is a steering turn just
20 miles abeam of the finish. You'd have to do some clever
trigonometry to figure out how to cross the Class C after making the
second to last turn in order to get home without making progress
towards the final turn within the restricted area.

9B

On Sep 10, 1:11*am, SoaringMaps Team wrote:
On Sep 9, 2:02*pm, "kirk.stant" wrote:



But it's not that simple. *How does the scorer know where you declared
your intention to abort? *The person that won the day was also
thinking of aborting at the first turn and followed a similar route
back to yours. Conditions then improved and he made a large detour to
get back toward the second turnpoint. *Maybe you would have done the
same thing. How would you have cancelled your intention to abort?

I think the FAI rules would have handled this situation just fine.
You would have been scores as landing out at the class C boundary and
the distance on that leg would have been scored as progress toward the
second turnpoint.

Andy

How does the scorer know where to score to if someone aborts
normally? *Doesn't the scoring program look for the farthest logger
point in the direction of the next turnpoint (that isn't actually
reached) to determine how to score distance, after it determines that
the task wasn't completed? *Then it would seem easy to not assess a
violation for any airspace incursion after that point is determined.
The scorer shouldn't have to do anything.

But I admit I'm assuming a lot about Winscore, so may very well be
completely wrong about this.

Kirk

I can definitely lay out some tasks in relation to restricted areas
(like Class C's) where the pilot would be required to backtrack away
from the next turnpoint (and home) to avoid the -100 point outcome if
s/he abandoned the task and elected to traverse the restricted area.
This would require careful piloting to ensure that your greatest
progress towards the next turnpoint was outside the restricted area.
To make this really obvious imagine that the second to last turn is
across a Class C from home and the last turn is a steering turn just
20 miles abeam of the finish. *You'd have to do some clever
trigonometry to figure out how to cross the Class C after making the
second to last turn in order to get home without making progress
towards the final turn within the restricted area.

9B

But this answer displays some of the wisdom of current policy. We
don't allow flight in or over class C because it would give a
competitive advantage to those having a transponder. Originally, it
seemed like "but the race is over, so there's no competitive
advantage" was a good argument. But in this and a previous example,
it's clear that being able to press on while keeping the option alive
to glide home over the class C is a definite competitive advantage.

Bottom line, though: Given the amount of complaining from many people
about complex rules, carving out an airspace exception to fly over
class C as "self retrieve" doesn't seem like a good idea.

For a non-sanctioned contest, make up your own rules and do whatever
you want.

If a sanctioned contest really wants to do this, they should apply for
a rules waiver. It might make sense at El Tiro given the very odd
geometry of the Tucson class C relative to El Tiro and the soaring
area. That lets you adapt rules to local conditions without us having
to write some nightmare into the rules that apply to everyone.

John Cochrane

I can definitely lay out some tasks in relation to restricted areas
(like Class C's) where the pilot would be required to backtrack away
from the next turnpoint (and home) to avoid the -100 point outcome if
s/he abandoned the task and elected to traverse the restricted area.
This would require careful piloting to ensure that your greatest
progress towards the next turnpoint was outside the restricted area.
To make this really obvious imagine that the second to last turn is
across a Class C from home and the last turn is a steering turn just
20 miles abeam of the finish. *You'd have to do some clever
trigonometry to figure out how to cross the Class C after making the
second to last turn in order to get home without making progress
towards the final turn within the restricted area.

9B

But this answer displays some of the wisdom of current policy. We
don't allow flight in or over class C because it would give a
competitive advantage to those having a transponder. Originally, it
seemed like "but the race is over, so there's no competitive
advantage" was a good argument. But in this and a previous example,
it's clear that being able to press on while keeping the option alive
to glide home over the class C is a definite competitive advantage.

Bottom line, though: Given the amount of complaining from many people
about complex rules, carving out an airspace exception to fly over
class C as "self retrieve" doesn't seem like a good idea.

Ok I can see the logic in that.

Bottom line, know the rules, but do what is safe.

Fun discussion, I learned a lot (only slightly painfully!).

But we are racing again at El Tiro this weekend, so this time I'll be
more careful!

Cheers,

Kirk

On Sep 10, 6:45*am, John Cochrane
wrote:
On Sep 10, 1:11*am, SoaringMaps Team wrote:





On Sep 9, 2:02*pm, "kirk.stant" wrote:

But it's not that simple. *How does the scorer know where you declared
your intention to abort? *The person that won the day was also
thinking of aborting at the first turn and followed a similar route
back to yours. Conditions then improved and he made a large detour to
get back toward the second turnpoint. *Maybe you would have done the
same thing. How would you have cancelled your intention to abort?

I think the FAI rules would have handled this situation just fine.
You would have been scores as landing out at the class C boundary and
the distance on that leg would have been scored as progress toward the
second turnpoint.

Andy

How does the scorer know where to score to if someone aborts
normally? *Doesn't the scoring program look for the farthest logger
point in the direction of the next turnpoint (that isn't actually
reached) to determine how to score distance, after it determines that
the task wasn't completed? *Then it would seem easy to not assess a
violation for any airspace incursion after that point is determined.
The scorer shouldn't have to do anything.

But I admit I'm assuming a lot about Winscore, so may very well be
completely wrong about this.

Kirk

I can definitely lay out some tasks in relation to restricted areas
(like Class C's) where the pilot would be required to backtrack away
from the next turnpoint (and home) to avoid the -100 point outcome if
s/he abandoned the task and elected to traverse the restricted area.
This would require careful piloting to ensure that your greatest
progress towards the next turnpoint was outside the restricted area.
To make this really obvious imagine that the second to last turn is
across a Class C from home and the last turn is a steering turn just
20 miles abeam of the finish. *You'd have to do some clever
trigonometry to figure out how to cross the Class C after making the
second to last turn in order to get home without making progress
towards the final turn within the restricted area.

9B

But this answer displays some of the wisdom of current policy. We
don't allow flight in or over class C because it would give a
competitive advantage to those having a transponder. Originally, it
seemed like "but the race is over, so there's no competitive
advantage" was a good argument. But in this and a previous example,
it's clear that being able to press on while keeping the option alive
to glide home over the class C is a definite competitive advantage.

Bottom line, though: Given the amount of complaining from many people
about complex rules, carving out an airspace exception to fly over
class C as "self retrieve" doesn't seem like a good idea.

For a non-sanctioned contest, make up your own rules and do whatever
you want.

If a sanctioned contest really wants to do this, they should apply for
a rules waiver. It might make sense at El Tiro given the very odd
geometry of the Tucson class C relative to El Tiro and the soaring
area. That lets you adapt rules to local conditions without us having
to write some nightmare into the rules that apply to everyone.

John Cochrane

Agreed. Adding an exception to the rule would create a fair amount of
complexity in rule language, pilot decision-making AND scoring -
that's a triple negative. The case I was illustrating to make the
point was of a pilot who heads for home across restricted airspace
thinking he's okay because he abandoned the task but accidentally
makes some additional progress towards the next turn and gets minus
100 points anyway. The case of pilots who can head out over tiger
country on the far side of restricted airspace because they have an
"out" that another pilot without a transponder doesn't have is another
issue that speaks to fairness.

There is an analogous situation in the current rules. At the Sports
Nationals this year there was one task where a courseline choice that
took you out over a lot of unlandable terrain got you to much better
conditions and higher overall speeds. Most (but not all) of the guys
who went there had motors. I spoke to one pilot about how he thought
about the landout options out there and he said "I didn't".

Despite lots of rules to try to level the playing field the thought of
a dicey outlanding 100 miles from home in the middle of the desert
does affect decision-making. I'm not convinced there's anything to be
done about it - just pointing it out. You could imagine use of the
motor requiring that you be marked back some of the distance made on
course to that point so as to compensate for the additional distance
made into questionable areas that a motor affords you. Of course the
problem with that is that it creates a disincentive for pilots with
motors to use them.

9B

On Sep 10, 9:06*am, Andy wrote:
There is an analogous situation in the current rules. At the Sports
Nationals this year there was one task where a courseline choice that
took you out over a lot of unlandable terrain got you to much better
conditions and higher overall speeds. Most (but not all) of the guys
who went there had motors. I spoke to one pilot about how he thought
about the landout options out there and he said "I didn't".

There is no doubt in my mind that having a motor offers a huge
advantage in some contest situations. But don't change the rules, I'm
thinking of going over to the dark side.

Andy (GY)