2011 USA Proposed Competition Rules Changes Posted.

Is there a conflict between rule 10.9.5.3 and rule 11.2.2.4?

10.9.5.3 says the safety finish is only valid if no more points were
claimed after the finish fix:

"10.9.5.3 When a Safety finish is active, a pilot may (using a Task
Claim form - Rule 10.5.1.3.1) claim a finish by obtaining one fix
within the Safety finish cylinder, provided the slope from the claimed
fix to the Projected Finish Location is not less than 200 feet per
mile and no claimed turnpoint was achieved after the time of the
claimed fix."

But 11.2.2.4 is intended to allow a new task attempt after finishing:
What happens if a pilot make a valid safety finish then waits for the
weather to clear, restarts, and makes a second task attempt that is
abandoned after the first turnpoint? *It appears that the the first
task attempt is invalidated because a claimed turnpoint was achieved
after the safety finish fix.

Does there need to be some language in 10.9.5.3 that allows a second
task attempt?

I think it's pretty clear that "no claimed turnpoint" refers to the
first task attempt. After all, under the old rules you could land,
takeoff again and restart, and we understood the new task was not an
additional turnpoint per safety finish. All we're doing now is
changing things so you don't have to land.

John Cochrane

On Dec 28, 7:06*am, John Cochrane
wrote:
Is there a conflict between rule 10.9.5.3 and rule 11.2.2.4?

10.9.5.3 says the safety finish is only valid if no more points were
claimed after the finish fix:

"10.9.5.3 When a Safety finish is active, a pilot may (using a Task
Claim form - Rule 10.5.1.3.1) claim a finish by obtaining one fix
within the Safety finish cylinder, provided the slope from the claimed
fix to the Projected Finish Location is not less than 200 feet per
mile and no claimed turnpoint was achieved after the time of the
claimed fix."

But 11.2.2.4 is intended to allow a new task attempt after finishing:
What happens if a pilot make a valid safety finish then waits for the
weather to clear, restarts, and makes a second task attempt that is
abandoned after the first turnpoint? *It appears that the the first
task attempt is invalidated because a claimed turnpoint was achieved
after the safety finish fix.

Does there need to be some language in 10.9.5.3 that allows a second
task attempt?

I think it's pretty clear that "no claimed turnpoint" refers to the
first task attempt. After all, under the old rules you could land,
takeoff again and restart, and we understood the new task was not an
additional turnpoint per safety finish. All we're doing now is
changing things so you don't have to land.

John Cochrane

I think the significant difference between the old and new rules is
that the log file for the first attempt will now be the same log file
as for the second attempt. Under the old rules the first flight log
had to be submitted before the next attempt and was therefore
completely separate from the second attempt log file.

As long as the CD has the same interpretation and Winscore handles it
properly then no issue.

Andy

Good to see you put back the "finish" call, but wouldn't it be a good
idea to also make a call entering the pattren? With the 4-mile call,
finish, and entering down-wind for runway X, a clear flow progression
would be shown and spacing for pattern entry would be enhanced.
Calling entry to the pattern is
good airmanship and should be included in the rules. As observed at
Parowan this year, only about half the pilots were making a pattern
entry call. If I don't know who else is trying to land I can't make
adjustment to accomodate them.
Food for thought,
JJ

On Dec 27, 2:21*pm, "John Godfrey (QT)"
wrote:
Discussion invited.

http://www.ssa.org/files/member/2011...20Summary%2010...

John Godfrey (QT)
SSA Competition Rules Committee

Hmm, Item #11 - Landing at an airport - coordinates are no longer
assumed: Doug Jacobs/2010 Mifflin Regional Day 1 rule? ;-)

TA

On Dec 30, 11:09*pm, Frank wrote:
On Dec 27, 2:21*pm, "John Godfrey (QT)"
wrote:

Discussion invited.

http://www.ssa.org/files/member/2011...20Summary%2010...

John Godfrey (QT)
SSA Competition Rules Committee

Hmm, Item #11 - Landing at an airport - coordinates are no longer
assumed: *Doug Jacobs/2010 Mifflin Regional Day 1 rule? ;-)

TA

That occurrance did raise the issue. In Doug's case the correct result
was accomplished by measuring to his point of furthest progress which
was on downwind beyond the end of the airport. It did lead to a review
of the associated rules with an eye toward avoiding possible
conflicting choices by the scorer.
HNY
UH
UH