US Rules Committee to ban XC Soar in US soaring competitioneffective immediately? - Ahh the "genius!"

The RC had better start getting ready to inspect sunglasses worn at a competition:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Innovation/...into-searching

On Feb 27, 7:16*am, T8 wrote:
On Feb 27, 10:00*am, Brad wrote:









On Feb 27, 4:45*am, T8 wrote:

On Feb 26, 11:17*pm, wrote:

I have to wonder at what point if folks (like me)....when looking at the confusing compliance and scoring issues (to say nothing of leaving smartphones behind or disabling equipment) associated with contest flying...just decide "to heck with trying to figure it all out, plus the expenses/hassles of a road trip, etc...I'll just submit it to OLC and be done with it."..

I know that's the thought process I'm going through with all this. My day job has compliance issues enough for me...I'm not wanting to voluntarily bring that same type of pressure into something I'm ostensibly doing to enjoy on my time off.

RAS

OLC isn't racing.

T8

The number of participants in the OLC, and the number of participants
in sanctioned racing events tells me OLC has more appeal.

Brad

Difference between house cats and tigers. *Saying "house cats have
more appeal" may be demonstrably true. *That doesn't make them
equivalent to tigers.

Racing is two orders of magnitude more intense than OLC. *If OLC
scratches your itch, good for you. *It doesn't even come close to
scratching mine.

T8

That's cute.................Tigers also live pampered lives in Zoos!

Brad

On 2/27/2012 8:16 AM, T8 wrote:
On Feb 27, 10:00 am, wrote:
On Feb 27, 4:45 am, wrote:

On Feb 26, 11:17 pm, wrote:

I have to wonder at what point if folks (like me)....when looking at
the confusing compliance and scoring issues (to say nothing of
leaving smartphones behind or disabling equipment) associated with
contest flying...just decide "to heck with trying to figure it all
out, plus the expenses/hassles of a road trip, etc...I'll just submit
it to OLC and be done with it.".

I know that's the thought process I'm going through with all this. My
day job has compliance issues enough for me...I'm not wanting to
voluntarily bring that same type of pressure into something I'm
ostensibly doing to enjoy on my time off.

RAS

OLC isn't racing.

T8

The number of participants in the OLC, and the number of participants in
sanctioned racing events tells me OLC has more appeal.

Brad

Difference between house cats and tigers. Saying "house cats have more
appeal" may be demonstrably true. That doesn't make them equivalent to
tigers.

Racing is two orders of magnitude more intense than OLC. If OLC scratches
your itch, good for you. It doesn't even come close to scratching mine.

T8

I don't have a horse in this race - have never participated in racing or OLC
and have no desire to do either going ahead - but this particular threadlet
touches upon a critical element, i.e. desire. In America, we all get to
(pretty much) do as we please and are motivated to do. That said, at some
point(s) in every activity, the 'entry hassle' (which is to say hoops one has
to jump through in order to participate) DOES get factored into every
individual's equations, and in that sense (assuming organizers of a given
activity worry about declining participation, as evidently U.S. glider racing
folks are), the placement of (advertent or inadvertent) barriers is arguably
not a desirable thing.

Though the above is (I'd hope!) a "Duh!" observation, it's not entirely clear
to me everyone who DOES have a horse in this race gives this reality
sufficient due.

In any case, the discussion continues interesting 'from the grandstand'...!

Bob W.

T8, I would encourage more consideration for comments which are not in complete support of your longstanding views. These comments from the “little people” of our sport are not personal attacks on you, any individual or group. They are meaningful, heartfelt thoughts from an extremely important, tiny and shrinking group of pilots considering US contests.

I am starting to get the feeling (based on your comments) that more than a few of the SSA Contest Elite would rather see 40 purists flying contests in the USA than 500 with some simpler version of sailplane racing rules. I don’t quite get it. Isn’t the topic of the day our hugely declining participation? Are our priorities in line with reality?

While OLC might not “scratch you just right,” it clearly scratches A HUGE number of very nice, important people within our sport (worldwide) just fine. There are at least 10:1 more pilots in the US competing within OLC vs. SSA Contests. Why is that? OLC, when compared to this "Technology & Rules discussion," clearly eliminates much unnecessary complexity which comes along with existing Contest Soaring Rules, right or wrong. I believe that OLC has significant value in understanding what is important to the vast majority of US pilots who fly and COMPETE in sailplanes.

I fear that you unknowingly (or intentionally) have talked down, way down (via the very colorful “scratch” comment), to people who fly OLC as if they are somehow inferior to contest pilots. I would also argue that there are many excellent OLC pilots who could compete with contests pilots big time. But it’s not all about top level competition is it? There are also a lot of great people and pilots who are not in contention for the top competitive honors in our sport? They too should be very important to all of us, even top contest pilots.

The average OLC pilot is perhaps more important to our sport overall than contest pilots. OLC people are also the ones most likely to actually fly contests someday (helping to reverse course in falling participation) IF we are responsive to the reality of the situation. Without OLC our sport might be in an even worse place than it is now. If contest flying dies out entirely, I think OLC would live on and flourish. It is a foundation that contest soaring survives on at current, like it or not.

For the record Rules Committee I took a moment to read this update in detail: http://www.ssa.org/files/member/Rest...e%20Policy.pdf. I find it to be generally reasonable and fair. I understand the intent as a high level discouragement effort. Thanks for trying. That said I think that it clearly fails to solve any problem. I find it rather naïve (I know, that is probably intentional). But did you REALLY think this through?

The intentional cheater would not allow phone records to have the slightest possibility of being traced back to him or herself or team. SIM cards would likely be tossed out of the cockpit in the air before landing each day. Would the contest organizers have the guts to hold off scoring long enough to actually see the records (weeks or months)? Only a buffoon would be capable of capture via these new safeguards. Only metal detectors, airport scanners and strip searches could realistically prevent the disciplined cheater from defeating this cell phone data rule. In fact, this rule likely to only ruin a few honest pilots’ contests that forget to turn off their cell phones data (are accused of cheating) and investigated. Is the cell phone the most likely way one would get data to cheat? Radio’s?

I have no problem with metal detectors or aircraft inspections personally. When I once competed in the Pan American Games (Sailing) I had to take daily urine tests and random blood tests in the US trial and during the competition. This is normal at the top levels of many competitive sports these days. But is it really necessary in contest soaring? What is the competitive advantage of smart phone data? Is it worth it?

It all goes back to the lessons learned via the sports elites stern resistance to electronic vario’s, GPS, etc in that time. The only solution is simply to go with it. The flood of communication and electronic technology has already crashed over our heads and has been pulling us up and down the beach for years. These new rule updates are like telling the waterlogged masses to put on a raincoat.

In this case resistance actually gives MORE ADVANTAGE to the cheater than if smartphones were actually legalized. Saying nothing of safety concerns and aggravation the new rules will inevitably cause!

We should simply open the new technology up to everyone and learn to use weather information to our collective advantage in flight (something I doubt would be very effective at current anyway). These rules, while noble and well meaning from the committee's viewpoint, are not going to help contest soaring in any way. Cheaters will still be cheating!

Sincerely,

Sean
F2


On Monday, February 27, 2012 10:16:10 AM UTC-5, T8 wrote:
On Feb 27, 10:00*am, Brad wrote:
On Feb 27, 4:45*am, T8 wrote:

On Feb 26, 11:17*pm, wrote:

I have to wonder at what point if folks (like me)....when looking at the confusing compliance and scoring issues (to say nothing of leaving smartphones behind or disabling equipment) associated with contest flying...just decide "to heck with trying to figure it all out, plus the expenses/hassles of a road trip, etc...I'll just submit it to OLC and be done with it."..

I know that's the thought process I'm going through with all this. My day job has compliance issues enough for me...I'm not wanting to voluntarily bring that same type of pressure into something I'm ostensibly doing to enjoy on my time off.

RAS

OLC isn't racing.

T8

The number of participants in the OLC, and the number of participants
in sanctioned racing events tells me OLC has more appeal.

Brad

Difference between house cats and tigers. Saying "house cats have
more appeal" may be demonstrably true. That doesn't make them
equivalent to tigers.

Racing is two orders of magnitude more intense than OLC. If OLC
scratches your itch, good for you. It doesn't even come close to
scratching mine.

T8

T8 has run off to create a new thread he aptly labels "On Racing." Probably another subtle effort to discount OLC as not "real racing" or competition per my last post. Talk about running and hiding.

I continue to strongly disagree with this "vision" of OLC not being real competition. I think free distance is outstanding personally! I think of OLC as a great asset to soaring in the United States. OLC's simplicity and popularity can teach the contest community a great deal about what is really important in glider competition, PARTICIPATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I dont believe that T8 intentionally insulted the OLC. But I think he should respond in more detail as to why OLC, in his opinion, is not scratching him effectively.

These attitudes are extremely important in terms of participation and interest/focus in attracting new pilots vs. appeasing the "old guard" in my opinion. This is our leadership...and they are controlling (with an iron fist in some ways) the rules and terms by which we all might compete in contests..

Sean
F2

On Monday, February 27, 2012 5:38:30 PM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
T8, I would encourage more consideration for comments which are not in complete support of your longstanding views. These comments from the “little people” of our sport are not personal attacks on you, any individual or group. They are meaningful, heartfelt thoughts from an extremely important, tiny and shrinking group of pilots considering US contests.

I am starting to get the feeling (based on your comments) that more than a few of the SSA Contest Elite would rather see 40 purists flying contests in the USA than 500 with some simpler version of sailplane racing rules. I don’t quite get it. Isn’t the topic of the day our hugely declining participation? Are our priorities in line with reality?

While OLC might not “scratch you just right,” it clearly scratches A HUGE number of very nice, important people within our sport (worldwide) just fine. There are at least 10:1 more pilots in the US competing within OLC vs. SSA Contests. Why is that? OLC, when compared to this "Technology & Rules discussion," clearly eliminates much unnecessary complexity which comes along with existing Contest Soaring Rules, right or wrong. I believe that OLC has significant value in understanding what is important to the vast majority of US pilots who fly and COMPETE in sailplanes.

I fear that you unknowingly (or intentionally) have talked down, way down (via the very colorful “scratch” comment), to people who fly OLC as if they are somehow inferior to contest pilots. I would also argue that there are many excellent OLC pilots who could compete with contests pilots big time. But it’s not all about top level competition is it? There are also a lot of great people and pilots who are not in contention for the top competitive honors in our sport? They too should be very important to all of us, even top contest pilots.

The average OLC pilot is perhaps more important to our sport overall than contest pilots. OLC people are also the ones most likely to actually fly contests someday (helping to reverse course in falling participation) IF we are responsive to the reality of the situation. Without OLC our sport might be in an even worse place than it is now. If contest flying dies out entirely, I think OLC would live on and flourish. It is a foundation that contest soaring survives on at current, like it or not.

For the record Rules Committee I took a moment to read this update in detail: http://www.ssa.org/files/member/Rest...e%20Policy.pdf. I find it to be generally reasonable and fair. I understand the intent as a high level discouragement effort. Thanks for trying. That said I think that it clearly fails to solve any problem. I find it rather naïve (I know, that is probably intentional). But did you REALLY think this through?

The intentional cheater would not allow phone records to have the slightest possibility of being traced back to him or herself or team. SIM cards would likely be tossed out of the cockpit in the air before landing each day.. Would the contest organizers have the guts to hold off scoring long enough to actually see the records (weeks or months)? Only a buffoon would be capable of capture via these new safeguards. Only metal detectors, airport scanners and strip searches could realistically prevent the disciplined cheater from defeating this cell phone data rule. In fact, this rule likely to only ruin a few honest pilots’ contests that forget to turn off their cell phones data (are accused of cheating) and investigated. Is the cell phone the most likely way one would get data to cheat? Radio’s?

I have no problem with metal detectors or aircraft inspections personally.. When I once competed in the Pan American Games (Sailing) I had to take daily urine tests and random blood tests in the US trial and during the competition. This is normal at the top levels of many competitive sports these days. But is it really necessary in contest soaring? What is the competitive advantage of smart phone data? Is it worth it?

It all goes back to the lessons learned via the sports elites stern resistance to electronic vario’s, GPS, etc in that time. The only solution is simply to go with it. The flood of communication and electronic technology has already crashed over our heads and has been pulling us up and down the beach for years. These new rule updates are like telling the waterlogged masses to put on a raincoat.

In this case resistance actually gives MORE ADVANTAGE to the cheater than if smartphones were actually legalized. Saying nothing of safety concerns and aggravation the new rules will inevitably cause!

We should simply open the new technology up to everyone and learn to use weather information to our collective advantage in flight (something I doubt would be very effective at current anyway). These rules, while noble and well meaning from the committee's viewpoint, are not going to help contest soaring in any way. Cheaters will still be cheating!

Sincerely,

Sean
F2


On Monday, February 27, 2012 10:16:10 AM UTC-5, T8 wrote:
On Feb 27, 10:00*am, Brad wrote:
On Feb 27, 4:45*am, T8 wrote:

On Feb 26, 11:17*pm, wrote:

I have to wonder at what point if folks (like me)....when looking at the confusing compliance and scoring issues (to say nothing of leaving smartphones behind or disabling equipment) associated with contest flying....just decide "to heck with trying to figure it all out, plus the expenses/hassles of a road trip, etc...I'll just submit it to OLC and be done with it..".

I know that's the thought process I'm going through with all this.. My day job has compliance issues enough for me...I'm not wanting to voluntarily bring that same type of pressure into something I'm ostensibly doing to enjoy on my time off.

RAS

OLC isn't racing.

T8

The number of participants in the OLC, and the number of participants
in sanctioned racing events tells me OLC has more appeal.

Brad

Difference between house cats and tigers. Saying "house cats have
more appeal" may be demonstrably true. That doesn't make them
equivalent to tigers.

Racing is two orders of magnitude more intense than OLC. If OLC
scratches your itch, good for you. It doesn't even come close to
scratching mine.

T8



On Monday, February 27, 2012 5:38:30 PM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
T8, I would encourage more consideration for comments which are not in complete support of your longstanding views. These comments from the “little people” of our sport are not personal attacks on you, any individual or group. They are meaningful, heartfelt thoughts from an extremely important, tiny and shrinking group of pilots considering US contests.

I am starting to get the feeling (based on your comments) that more than a few of the SSA Contest Elite would rather see 40 purists flying contests in the USA than 500 with some simpler version of sailplane racing rules. I don’t quite get it. Isn’t the topic of the day our hugely declining participation? Are our priorities in line with reality?

While OLC might not “scratch you just right,” it clearly scratches A HUGE number of very nice, important people within our sport (worldwide) just fine. There are at least 10:1 more pilots in the US competing within OLC vs. SSA Contests. Why is that? OLC, when compared to this "Technology & Rules discussion," clearly eliminates much unnecessary complexity which comes along with existing Contest Soaring Rules, right or wrong. I believe that OLC has significant value in understanding what is important to the vast majority of US pilots who fly and COMPETE in sailplanes.

I fear that you unknowingly (or intentionally) have talked down, way down (via the very colorful “scratch” comment), to people who fly OLC as if they are somehow inferior to contest pilots. I would also argue that there are many excellent OLC pilots who could compete with contests pilots big time. But it’s not all about top level competition is it? There are also a lot of great people and pilots who are not in contention for the top competitive honors in our sport? They too should be very important to all of us, even top contest pilots.

The average OLC pilot is perhaps more important to our sport overall than contest pilots. OLC people are also the ones most likely to actually fly contests someday (helping to reverse course in falling participation) IF we are responsive to the reality of the situation. Without OLC our sport might be in an even worse place than it is now. If contest flying dies out entirely, I think OLC would live on and flourish. It is a foundation that contest soaring survives on at current, like it or not.

For the record Rules Committee I took a moment to read this update in detail: http://www.ssa.org/files/member/Rest...e%20Policy.pdf. I find it to be generally reasonable and fair. I understand the intent as a high level discouragement effort. Thanks for trying. That said I think that it clearly fails to solve any problem. I find it rather naïve (I know, that is probably intentional). But did you REALLY think this through?

The intentional cheater would not allow phone records to have the slightest possibility of being traced back to him or herself or team. SIM cards would likely be tossed out of the cockpit in the air before landing each day.. Would the contest organizers have the guts to hold off scoring long enough to actually see the records (weeks or months)? Only a buffoon would be capable of capture via these new safeguards. Only metal detectors, airport scanners and strip searches could realistically prevent the disciplined cheater from defeating this cell phone data rule. In fact, this rule likely to only ruin a few honest pilots’ contests that forget to turn off their cell phones data (are accused of cheating) and investigated. Is the cell phone the most likely way one would get data to cheat? Radio’s?

I have no problem with metal detectors or aircraft inspections personally.. When I once competed in the Pan American Games (Sailing) I had to take daily urine tests and random blood tests in the US trial and during the competition. This is normal at the top levels of many competitive sports these days. But is it really necessary in contest soaring? What is the competitive advantage of smart phone data? Is it worth it?

It all goes back to the lessons learned via the sports elites stern resistance to electronic vario’s, GPS, etc in that time. The only solution is simply to go with it. The flood of communication and electronic technology has already crashed over our heads and has been pulling us up and down the beach for years. These new rule updates are like telling the waterlogged masses to put on a raincoat.

In this case resistance actually gives MORE ADVANTAGE to the cheater than if smartphones were actually legalized. Saying nothing of safety concerns and aggravation the new rules will inevitably cause!

We should simply open the new technology up to everyone and learn to use weather information to our collective advantage in flight (something I doubt would be very effective at current anyway). These rules, while noble and well meaning from the committee's viewpoint, are not going to help contest soaring in any way. Cheaters will still be cheating!

Sincerely,

Sean
F2


On Monday, February 27, 2012 10:16:10 AM UTC-5, T8 wrote:
On Feb 27, 10:00*am, Brad wrote:
On Feb 27, 4:45*am, T8 wrote:

On Feb 26, 11:17*pm, wrote:

I have to wonder at what point if folks (like me)....when looking at the confusing compliance and scoring issues (to say nothing of leaving smartphones behind or disabling equipment) associated with contest flying....just decide "to heck with trying to figure it all out, plus the expenses/hassles of a road trip, etc...I'll just submit it to OLC and be done with it..".

I know that's the thought process I'm going through with all this.. My day job has compliance issues enough for me...I'm not wanting to voluntarily bring that same type of pressure into something I'm ostensibly doing to enjoy on my time off.

RAS

OLC isn't racing.

T8

The number of participants in the OLC, and the number of participants
in sanctioned racing events tells me OLC has more appeal.

Brad

Difference between house cats and tigers. Saying "house cats have
more appeal" may be demonstrably true. That doesn't make them
equivalent to tigers.

Racing is two orders of magnitude more intense than OLC. If OLC
scratches your itch, good for you. It doesn't even come close to
scratching mine.

T8



On Monday, February 27, 2012 5:38:30 PM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
T8, I would encourage more consideration for comments which are not in complete support of your longstanding views. These comments from the “little people” of our sport are not personal attacks on you, any individual or group. They are meaningful, heartfelt thoughts from an extremely important, tiny and shrinking group of pilots considering US contests.

I am starting to get the feeling (based on your comments) that more than a few of the SSA Contest Elite would rather see 40 purists flying contests in the USA than 500 with some simpler version of sailplane racing rules. I don’t quite get it. Isn’t the topic of the day our hugely declining participation? Are our priorities in line with reality?

While OLC might not “scratch you just right,” it clearly scratches A HUGE number of very nice, important people within our sport (worldwide) just fine. There are at least 10:1 more pilots in the US competing within OLC vs. SSA Contests. Why is that? OLC, when compared to this "Technology & Rules discussion," clearly eliminates much unnecessary complexity which comes along with existing Contest Soaring Rules, right or wrong. I believe that OLC has significant value in understanding what is important to the vast majority of US pilots who fly and COMPETE in sailplanes.

I fear that you unknowingly (or intentionally) have talked down, way down (via the very colorful “scratch” comment), to people who fly OLC as if they are somehow inferior to contest pilots. I would also argue that there are many excellent OLC pilots who could compete with contests pilots big time. But it’s not all about top level competition is it? There are also a lot of great people and pilots who are not in contention for the top competitive honors in our sport? They too should be very important to all of us, even top contest pilots.

The average OLC pilot is perhaps more important to our sport overall than contest pilots. OLC people are also the ones most likely to actually fly contests someday (helping to reverse course in falling participation) IF we are responsive to the reality of the situation. Without OLC our sport might be in an even worse place than it is now. If contest flying dies out entirely, I think OLC would live on and flourish. It is a foundation that contest soaring survives on at current, like it or not.

For the record Rules Committee I took a moment to read this update in detail: http://www.ssa.org/files/member/Rest...e%20Policy.pdf. I find it to be generally reasonable and fair. I understand the intent as a high level discouragement effort. Thanks for trying. That said I think that it clearly fails to solve any problem. I find it rather naïve (I know, that is probably intentional). But did you REALLY think this through?

The intentional cheater would not allow phone records to have the slightest possibility of being traced back to him or herself or team. SIM cards would likely be tossed out of the cockpit in the air before landing each day.. Would the contest organizers have the guts to hold off scoring long enough to actually see the records (weeks or months)? Only a buffoon would be capable of capture via these new safeguards. Only metal detectors, airport scanners and strip searches could realistically prevent the disciplined cheater from defeating this cell phone data rule. In fact, this rule likely to only ruin a few honest pilots’ contests that forget to turn off their cell phones data (are accused of cheating) and investigated. Is the cell phone the most likely way one would get data to cheat? Radio’s?

I have no problem with metal detectors or aircraft inspections personally.. When I once competed in the Pan American Games (Sailing) I had to take daily urine tests and random blood tests in the US trial and during the competition. This is normal at the top levels of many competitive sports these days. But is it really necessary in contest soaring? What is the competitive advantage of smart phone data? Is it worth it?

It all goes back to the lessons learned via the sports elites stern resistance to electronic vario’s, GPS, etc in that time. The only solution is simply to go with it. The flood of communication and electronic technology has already crashed over our heads and has been pulling us up and down the beach for years. These new rule updates are like telling the waterlogged masses to put on a raincoat.

In this case resistance actually gives MORE ADVANTAGE to the cheater than if smartphones were actually legalized. Saying nothing of safety concerns and aggravation the new rules will inevitably cause!

We should simply open the new technology up to everyone and learn to use weather information to our collective advantage in flight (something I doubt would be very effective at current anyway). These rules, while noble and well meaning from the committee's viewpoint, are not going to help contest soaring in any way. Cheaters will still be cheating!

Sincerely,

Sean
F2


On Monday, February 27, 2012 10:16:10 AM UTC-5, T8 wrote:
On Feb 27, 10:00*am, Brad wrote:
On Feb 27, 4:45*am, T8 wrote:

On Feb 26, 11:17*pm, wrote:

I have to wonder at what point if folks (like me)....when looking at the confusing compliance and scoring issues (to say nothing of leaving smartphones behind or disabling equipment) associated with contest flying....just decide "to heck with trying to figure it all out, plus the expenses/hassles of a road trip, etc...I'll just submit it to OLC and be done with it..".

I know that's the thought process I'm going through with all this.. My day job has compliance issues enough for me...I'm not wanting to voluntarily bring that same type of pressure into something I'm ostensibly doing to enjoy on my time off.

RAS

OLC isn't racing.

T8

The number of participants in the OLC, and the number of participants
in sanctioned racing events tells me OLC has more appeal.

Brad

Difference between house cats and tigers. Saying "house cats have
more appeal" may be demonstrably true. That doesn't make them
equivalent to tigers.

Racing is two orders of magnitude more intense than OLC. If OLC
scratches your itch, good for you. It doesn't even come close to
scratching mine.

T8

s

On Monday, February 27, 2012 5:38:30 PM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
T8, I would encourage more consideration for comments which are not in complete support of your longstanding views. These comments from the “little people” of our sport are not personal attacks on you, any individual or group. They are meaningful, heartfelt thoughts from an extremely important, tiny and shrinking group of pilots considering US contests.

I am starting to get the feeling (based on your comments) that more than a few of the SSA Contest Elite would rather see 40 purists flying contests in the USA than 500 with some simpler version of sailplane racing rules. I don’t quite get it. Isn’t the topic of the day our hugely declining participation? Are our priorities in line with reality?

While OLC might not “scratch you just right,” it clearly scratches A HUGE number of very nice, important people within our sport (worldwide) just fine. There are at least 10:1 more pilots in the US competing within OLC vs. SSA Contests. Why is that? OLC, when compared to this "Technology & Rules discussion," clearly eliminates much unnecessary complexity which comes along with existing Contest Soaring Rules, right or wrong. I believe that OLC has significant value in understanding what is important to the vast majority of US pilots who fly and COMPETE in sailplanes.

I fear that you unknowingly (or intentionally) have talked down, way down (via the very colorful “scratch” comment), to people who fly OLC as if they are somehow inferior to contest pilots. I would also argue that there are many excellent OLC pilots who could compete with contests pilots big time. But it’s not all about top level competition is it? There are also a lot of great people and pilots who are not in contention for the top competitive honors in our sport? They too should be very important to all of us, even top contest pilots.

The average OLC pilot is perhaps more important to our sport overall than contest pilots. OLC people are also the ones most likely to actually fly contests someday (helping to reverse course in falling participation) IF we are responsive to the reality of the situation. Without OLC our sport might be in an even worse place than it is now. If contest flying dies out entirely, I think OLC would live on and flourish. It is a foundation that contest soaring survives on at current, like it or not.

For the record Rules Committee I took a moment to read this update in detail: http://www.ssa.org/files/member/Rest...e%20Policy.pdf. I find it to be generally reasonable and fair. I understand the intent as a high level discouragement effort. Thanks for trying. That said I think that it clearly fails to solve any problem. I find it rather naïve (I know, that is probably intentional). But did you REALLY think this through?

The intentional cheater would not allow phone records to have the slightest possibility of being traced back to him or herself or team. SIM cards would likely be tossed out of the cockpit in the air before landing each day.. Would the contest organizers have the guts to hold off scoring long enough to actually see the records (weeks or months)? Only a buffoon would be capable of capture via these new safeguards. Only metal detectors, airport scanners and strip searches could realistically prevent the disciplined cheater from defeating this cell phone data rule. In fact, this rule likely to only ruin a few honest pilots’ contests that forget to turn off their cell phones data (are accused of cheating) and investigated. Is the cell phone the most likely way one would get data to cheat? Radio’s?

I have no problem with metal detectors or aircraft inspections personally.. When I once competed in the Pan American Games (Sailing) I had to take daily urine tests and random blood tests in the US trial and during the competition. This is normal at the top levels of many competitive sports these days. But is it really necessary in contest soaring? What is the competitive advantage of smart phone data? Is it worth it?

It all goes back to the lessons learned via the sports elites stern resistance to electronic vario’s, GPS, etc in that time. The only solution is simply to go with it. The flood of communication and electronic technology has already crashed over our heads and has been pulling us up and down the beach for years. These new rule updates are like telling the waterlogged masses to put on a raincoat.

In this case resistance actually gives MORE ADVANTAGE to the cheater than if smartphones were actually legalized. Saying nothing of safety concerns and aggravation the new rules will inevitably cause!

We should simply open the new technology up to everyone and learn to use weather information to our collective advantage in flight (something I doubt would be very effective at current anyway). These rules, while noble and well meaning from the committee's viewpoint, are not going to help contest soaring in any way. Cheaters will still be cheating!

Sincerely,

Sean
F2


On Monday, February 27, 2012 10:16:10 AM UTC-5, T8 wrote:
On Feb 27, 10:00*am, Brad wrote:
On Feb 27, 4:45*am, T8 wrote:

On Feb 26, 11:17*pm, wrote:

I have to wonder at what point if folks (like me)....when looking at the confusing compliance and scoring issues (to say nothing of leaving smartphones behind or disabling equipment) associated with contest flying....just decide "to heck with trying to figure it all out, plus the expenses/hassles of a road trip, etc...I'll just submit it to OLC and be done with it..".

I know that's the thought process I'm going through with all this.. My day job has compliance issues enough for me...I'm not wanting to voluntarily bring that same type of pressure into something I'm ostensibly doing to enjoy on my time off.

RAS

OLC isn't racing.

T8

The number of participants in the OLC, and the number of participants
in sanctioned racing events tells me OLC has more appeal.

Brad

Difference between house cats and tigers. Saying "house cats have
more appeal" may be demonstrably true. That doesn't make them
equivalent to tigers.

Racing is two orders of magnitude more intense than OLC. If OLC
scratches your itch, good for you. It doesn't even come close to
scratching mine.

T8



On Monday, February 27, 2012 5:38:30 PM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
T8, I would encourage more consideration for comments which are not in complete support of your longstanding views. These comments from the “little people” of our sport are not personal attacks on you, any individual or group. They are meaningful, heartfelt thoughts from an extremely important, tiny and shrinking group of pilots considering US contests.

I am starting to get the feeling (based on your comments) that more than a few of the SSA Contest Elite would rather see 40 purists flying contests in the USA than 500 with some simpler version of sailplane racing rules. I don’t quite get it. Isn’t the topic of the day our hugely declining participation? Are our priorities in line with reality?

While OLC might not “scratch you just right,” it clearly scratches A HUGE number of very nice, important people within our sport (worldwide) just fine. There are at least 10:1 more pilots in the US competing within OLC vs. SSA Contests. Why is that? OLC, when compared to this "Technology & Rules discussion," clearly eliminates much unnecessary complexity which comes along with existing Contest Soaring Rules, right or wrong. I believe that OLC has significant value in understanding what is important to the vast majority of US pilots who fly and COMPETE in sailplanes.

I fear that you unknowingly (or intentionally) have talked down, way down (via the very colorful “scratch” comment), to people who fly OLC as if they are somehow inferior to contest pilots. I would also argue that there are many excellent OLC pilots who could compete with contests pilots big time. But it’s not all about top level competition is it? There are also a lot of great people and pilots who are not in contention for the top competitive honors in our sport? They too should be very important to all of us, even top contest pilots.

The average OLC pilot is perhaps more important to our sport overall than contest pilots. OLC people are also the ones most likely to actually fly contests someday (helping to reverse course in falling participation) IF we are responsive to the reality of the situation. Without OLC our sport might be in an even worse place than it is now. If contest flying dies out entirely, I think OLC would live on and flourish. It is a foundation that contest soaring survives on at current, like it or not.

For the record Rules Committee I took a moment to read this update in detail: http://www.ssa.org/files/member/Rest...e%20Policy.pdf. I find it to be generally reasonable and fair. I understand the intent as a high level discouragement effort. Thanks for trying. That said I think that it clearly fails to solve any problem. I find it rather naïve (I know, that is probably intentional). But did you REALLY think this through?

The intentional cheater would not allow phone records to have the slightest possibility of being traced back to him or herself or team. SIM cards would likely be tossed out of the cockpit in the air before landing each day.. Would the contest organizers have the guts to hold off scoring long enough to actually see the records (weeks or months)? Only a buffoon would be capable of capture via these new safeguards. Only metal detectors, airport scanners and strip searches could realistically prevent the disciplined cheater from defeating this cell phone data rule. In fact, this rule likely to only ruin a few honest pilots’ contests that forget to turn off their cell phones data (are accused of cheating) and investigated. Is the cell phone the most likely way one would get data to cheat? Radio’s?

I have no problem with metal detectors or aircraft inspections personally.. When I once competed in the Pan American Games (Sailing) I had to take daily urine tests and random blood tests in the US trial and during the competition. This is normal at the top levels of many competitive sports these days. But is it really necessary in contest soaring? What is the competitive advantage of smart phone data? Is it worth it?

It all goes back to the lessons learned via the sports elites stern resistance to electronic vario’s, GPS, etc in that time. The only solution is simply to go with it. The flood of communication and electronic technology has already crashed over our heads and has been pulling us up and down the beach for years. These new rule updates are like telling the waterlogged masses to put on a raincoat.

In this case resistance actually gives MORE ADVANTAGE to the cheater than if smartphones were actually legalized. Saying nothing of safety concerns and aggravation the new rules will inevitably cause!

We should simply open the new technology up to everyone and learn to use weather information to our collective advantage in flight (something I doubt would be very effective at current anyway). These rules, while noble and well meaning from the committee's viewpoint, are not going to help contest soaring in any way. Cheaters will still be cheating!

Sincerely,

Sean
F2


On Monday, February 27, 2012 10:16:10 AM UTC-5, T8 wrote:
On Feb 27, 10:00*am, Brad wrote:
On Feb 27, 4:45*am, T8 wrote:

On Feb 26, 11:17*pm, wrote:

I have to wonder at what point if folks (like me)....when looking at the confusing compliance and scoring issues (to say nothing of leaving smartphones behind or disabling equipment) associated with contest flying....just decide "to heck with trying to figure it all out, plus the expenses/hassles of a road trip, etc...I'll just submit it to OLC and be done with it..".

I know that's the thought process I'm going through with all this.. My day job has compliance issues enough for me...I'm not wanting to voluntarily bring that same type of pressure into something I'm ostensibly doing to enjoy on my time off.

RAS

OLC isn't racing.

T8

The number of participants in the OLC, and the number of participants
in sanctioned racing events tells me OLC has more appeal.

Brad

Difference between house cats and tigers. Saying "house cats have
more appeal" may be demonstrably true. That doesn't make them
equivalent to tigers.

Racing is two orders of magnitude more intense than OLC. If OLC
scratches your itch, good for you. It doesn't even come close to
scratching mine.

T8



On Monday, February 27, 2012 5:38:30 PM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
T8, I would encourage more consideration for comments which are not in complete support of your longstanding views. These comments from the “little people” of our sport are not personal attacks on you, any individual or group. They are meaningful, heartfelt thoughts from an extremely important, tiny and shrinking group of pilots considering US contests.

I am starting to get the feeling (based on your comments) that more than a few of the SSA Contest Elite would rather see 40 purists flying contests in the USA than 500 with some simpler version of sailplane racing rules. I don’t quite get it. Isn’t the topic of the day our hugely declining participation? Are our priorities in line with reality?

While OLC might not “scratch you just right,” it clearly scratches A HUGE number of very nice, important people within our sport (worldwide) just fine. There are at least 10:1 more pilots in the US competing within OLC vs. SSA Contests. Why is that? OLC, when compared to this "Technology & Rules discussion," clearly eliminates much unnecessary complexity which comes along with existing Contest Soaring Rules, right or wrong. I believe that OLC has significant value in understanding what is important to the vast majority of US pilots who fly and COMPETE in sailplanes.

I fear that you unknowingly (or intentionally) have talked down, way down (via the very colorful “scratch” comment), to people who fly OLC as if they are somehow inferior to contest pilots. I would also argue that there are many excellent OLC pilots who could compete with contests pilots big time. But it’s not all about top level competition is it? There are also a lot of great people and pilots who are not in contention for the top competitive honors in our sport? They too should be very important to all of us, even top contest pilots.

The average OLC pilot is perhaps more important to our sport overall than contest pilots. OLC people are also the ones most likely to actually fly contests someday (helping to reverse course in falling participation) IF we are responsive to the reality of the situation. Without OLC our sport might be in an even worse place than it is now. If contest flying dies out entirely, I think OLC would live on and flourish. It is a foundation that contest soaring survives on at current, like it or not.

For the record Rules Committee I took a moment to read this update in detail: http://www.ssa.org/files/member/Rest...e%20Policy.pdf. I find it to be generally reasonable and fair. I understand the intent as a high level discouragement effort. Thanks for trying. That said I think that it clearly fails to solve any problem. I find it rather naïve (I know, that is probably intentional). But did you REALLY think this through?

The intentional cheater would not allow phone records to have the slightest possibility of being traced back to him or herself or team. SIM cards would likely be tossed out of the cockpit in the air before landing each day.. Would the contest organizers have the guts to hold off scoring long enough to actually see the records (weeks or months)? Only a buffoon would be capable of capture via these new safeguards. Only metal detectors, airport scanners and strip searches could realistically prevent the disciplined cheater from defeating this cell phone data rule. In fact, this rule likely to only ruin a few honest pilots’ contests that forget to turn off their cell phones data (are accused of cheating) and investigated. Is the cell phone the most likely way one would get data to cheat? Radio’s?

I have no problem with metal detectors or aircraft inspections personally.. When I once competed in the Pan American Games (Sailing) I had to take daily urine tests and random blood tests in the US trial and during the competition. This is normal at the top levels of many competitive sports these days. But is it really necessary in contest soaring? What is the competitive advantage of smart phone data? Is it worth it?

It all goes back to the lessons learned via the sports elites stern resistance to electronic vario’s, GPS, etc in that time. The only solution is simply to go with it. The flood of communication and electronic technology has already crashed over our heads and has been pulling us up and down the beach for years. These new rule updates are like telling the waterlogged masses to put on a raincoat.

In this case resistance actually gives MORE ADVANTAGE to the cheater than if smartphones were actually legalized. Saying nothing of safety concerns and aggravation the new rules will inevitably cause!

We should simply open the new technology up to everyone and learn to use weather information to our collective advantage in flight (something I doubt would be very effective at current anyway). These rules, while noble and well meaning from the committee's viewpoint, are not going to help contest soaring in any way. Cheaters will still be cheating!

Sincerely,

Sean
F2


On Monday, February 27, 2012 10:16:10 AM UTC-5, T8 wrote:
On Feb 27, 10:00*am, Brad wrote:
On Feb 27, 4:45*am, T8 wrote:

On Feb 26, 11:17*pm, wrote:

I have to wonder at what point if folks (like me)....when looking at the confusing compliance and scoring issues (to say nothing of leaving smartphones behind or disabling equipment) associated with contest flying....just decide "to heck with trying to figure it all out, plus the expenses/hassles of a road trip, etc...I'll just submit it to OLC and be done with it..".

I know that's the thought process I'm going through with all this.. My day job has compliance issues enough for me...I'm not wanting to voluntarily bring that same type of pressure into something I'm ostensibly doing to enjoy on my time off.

RAS

OLC isn't racing.

T8

The number of participants in the OLC, and the number of participants
in sanctioned racing events tells me OLC has more appeal.

Brad

Difference between house cats and tigers. Saying "house cats have
more appeal" may be demonstrably true. That doesn't make them
equivalent to tigers.

Racing is two orders of magnitude more intense than OLC. If OLC
scratches your itch, good for you. It doesn't even come close to
scratching mine.

T8



On Monday, February 27, 2012 5:38:30 PM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
T8, I would encourage more consideration for comments which are not in complete support of your longstanding views. These comments from the “little people” of our sport are not personal attacks on you, any individual or group. They are meaningful, heartfelt thoughts from an extremely important, tiny and shrinking group of pilots considering US contests.

I am starting to get the feeling (based on your comments) that more than a few of the SSA Contest Elite would rather see 40 purists flying contests in the USA than 500 with some simpler version of sailplane racing rules. I don’t quite get it. Isn’t the topic of the day our hugely declining participation? Are our priorities in line with reality?

While OLC might not “scratch you just right,” it clearly scratches A HUGE number of very nice, important people within our sport (worldwide) just fine. There are at least 10:1 more pilots in the US competing within OLC vs. SSA Contests. Why is that? OLC, when compared to this "Technology & Rules discussion," clearly eliminates much unnecessary complexity which comes along with existing Contest Soaring Rules, right or wrong. I believe that OLC has significant value in understanding what is important to the vast majority of US pilots who fly and COMPETE in sailplanes.

I fear that you unknowingly (or intentionally) have talked down, way down (via the very colorful “scratch” comment), to people who fly OLC as if they are somehow inferior to contest pilots. I would also argue that there are many excellent OLC pilots who could compete with contests pilots big time. But it’s not all about top level competition is it? There are also a lot of great people and pilots who are not in contention for the top competitive honors in our sport? They too should be very important to all of us, even top contest pilots.

The average OLC pilot is perhaps more important to our sport overall than contest pilots. OLC people are also the ones most likely to actually fly contests someday (helping to reverse course in falling participation) IF we are responsive to the reality of the situation. Without OLC our sport might be in an even worse place than it is now. If contest flying dies out entirely, I think OLC would live on and flourish. It is a foundation that contest soaring survives on at current, like it or not.

For the record Rules Committee I took a moment to read this update in detail: http://www.ssa.org/files/member/Rest...e%20Policy.pdf. I find it to be generally reasonable and fair. I understand the intent as a high level discouragement effort. Thanks for trying. That said I think that it clearly fails to solve any problem. I find it rather naïve (I know, that is probably intentional). But did you REALLY think this through?

The intentional cheater would not allow phone records to have the slightest possibility of being traced back to him or herself or team. SIM cards would likely be tossed out of the cockpit in the air before landing each day.. Would the contest organizers have the guts to hold off scoring long enough to actually see the records (weeks or months)? Only a buffoon would be capable of capture via these new safeguards. Only metal detectors, airport scanners and strip searches could realistically prevent the disciplined cheater from defeating this cell phone data rule. In fact, this rule likely to only ruin a few honest pilots’ contests that forget to turn off their cell phones data (are accused of cheating) and investigated. Is the cell phone the most likely way one would get data to cheat? Radio’s?

I have no problem with metal detectors or aircraft inspections personally.. When I once competed in the Pan American Games (Sailing) I had to take daily urine tests and random blood tests in the US trial and during the competition. This is normal at the top levels of many competitive sports these days. But is it really necessary in contest soaring? What is the competitive advantage of smart phone data? Is it worth it?

It all goes back to the lessons learned via the sports elites stern resistance to electronic vario’s, GPS, etc in that time. The only solution is simply to go with it. The flood of communication and electronic technology has already crashed over our heads and has been pulling us up and down the beach for years. These new rule updates are like telling the waterlogged masses to put on a raincoat.

In this case resistance actually gives MORE ADVANTAGE to the cheater than if smartphones were actually legalized. Saying nothing of safety concerns and aggravation the new rules will inevitably cause!

We should simply open the new technology up to everyone and learn to use weather information to our collective advantage in flight (something I doubt would be very effective at current anyway). These rules, while noble and well meaning from the committee's viewpoint, are not going to help contest soaring in any way. Cheaters will still be cheating!

Sincerely,

Sean
F2


On Monday, February 27, 2012 10:16:10 AM UTC-5, T8 wrote:
On Feb 27, 10:00*am, Brad wrote:
On Feb 27, 4:45*am, T8 wrote:

On Feb 26, 11:17*pm, wrote:

I have to wonder at what point if folks (like me)....when looking at the confusing compliance and scoring issues (to say nothing of leaving smartphones behind or disabling equipment) associated with contest flying....just decide "to heck with trying to figure it all out, plus the expenses/hassles of a road trip, etc...I'll just submit it to OLC and be done with it..".

I know that's the thought process I'm going through with all this.. My day job has compliance issues enough for me...I'm not wanting to voluntarily bring that same type of pressure into something I'm ostensibly doing to enjoy on my time off.

RAS

OLC isn't racing.

T8

The number of participants in the OLC, and the number of participants
in sanctioned racing events tells me OLC has more appeal.

Brad

Difference between house cats and tigers. Saying "house cats have
more appeal" may be demonstrably true. That doesn't make them
equivalent to tigers.

Racing is two orders of magnitude more intense than OLC. If OLC
scratches your itch, good for you. It doesn't even come close to
scratching mine.

T8

On Tuesday, February 28, 2012 9:28:19 AM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
T8 has run off to create a new thread he aptly labels "On Racing." Probably another subtle effort to discount OLC as not "real racing" or competition per my last post. Talk about running and hiding.

I continue to strongly disagree with this "vision" of OLC not being real competition. I think free distance is outstanding personally! I think of OLC as a great asset to soaring in the United States. OLC's simplicity and popularity can teach the contest community a great deal about what is really important in glider competition, PARTICIPATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Sean,

OLC isn't "racing". Nor is badge and record flying. They are all different flavors of the same activity, but they each have their unique aspects. IMO, none of them is "better" than the other, but they do emphasize different skills. There are a few pilots out there who pursue all three aspects of our sport with great success. There are others who do well in one or two but not all three. So be it.

As a dedicated racing pilot who also actively pursues records and participates in the OLC, I fervently hope that the OLC can help feed the ranks of competition pilots. However, I am under no delusion that the numbers will ever be even close to equal. The OLC, as a decentralized, DIY contest makes it very easy to participate - no long drives, no vacation, no need to learn rules or practice the unique elements (start strategy, TAT vs. MAT vs. AAT, etc.). The best we can hope for is that a few OLC pilots become interested enough in serious XC to investigate record flying and racing.

Sincerely,
Erik Mann (P3)

Considering this and recent threads combined with low participation
rates for contests, this seems appropriate:

"We have met the enemy and he is us." Seems pretty fitting to this
newbie...

RS

On Feb 26, 10:17*pm, wrote:
I have to wonder at what point if folks (like me)....when looking at the confusing compliance and scoring issues (to say nothing of leaving smartphones behind or disabling equipment) associated with contest flying...just decide "to heck with trying to figure it all out, plus the expenses/hassles of a road trip, etc...I'll just submit it to OLC and be done with it.".

I know that's the thought process I'm going through with all this. My day job has compliance issues enough for me...I'm not wanting to voluntarily bring that same type of pressure into something I'm ostensibly doing to enjoy on my time off.

RAS

On Feb 27, 12:22*pm, Robert S wrote:
Considering this and recent threads combined with low participation
rates for contests, this seems appropriate:

"We have met the enemy and he is us." *Seems pretty fitting to this
newbie...

RS

I would recommend reading the rules (http://www.ssa.org/myhome.asp?
mbr=6310235857) yourself and basing any opinion of them on that
reading, not on what you've read on RAS, especially in the last month
or so. There has been a lot of exaggeration and "what if"
extrapolation here lately.

I look at this on google groups and the title to the thread was
truncated to read:
"US Rules Committee to ban XC Soa"

I thought it was trying to say the rules committee was going to ban XC
soaring (!) With all the goings on, I thought it just might be
possible.

At 18:50 27 February 2012, Tony wrote:
On Feb 27, 12:22=A0pm, Robert S wrote:
Considering this and recent threads combined with low participation
rates for contests, this seems appropriate:

"We have met the enemy and he is us." =A0Seems pretty fitting to this
newbie...

RS

I would recommend reading the rules (http://www.ssa.org/myhome.asp?
mbr=3D6310235857) yourself and basing any opinion of them on that
reading, not on what you've read on RAS, especially in the last month
or so. There has been a lot of exaggeration and "what if"
extrapolation here lately.


As someone who has flown gliders in cloud using gyro instruments in a
country where this is still legal (UK) let me say that I would not even
consider doing so with a gps based system updating at 1 Hz. I have flown
limited panel (turn & slip) and the secret to being able to successfully
fly high rate turns in cloud is using the rate of change displayed by both
gyros and pitot instruments. With a 1 second or more lag this would almost
certainly result in PIO's and loss of control if trying to fly a thermal
turn. In my opinion positively dangerous although perhaps useful for flying
wings level with airbrakes deployed for an emergency descent if trapped
above cloud.
IMHO this whole thing is being overblown and if tried may result in an
increased accident rate, rather than increasing safety as has been
suggested.

Here in the UK in any case the advantage of climbing high in a modern
glider in cloud is debatable to say the least due to the effects of water
and ice on the wings.

Terry Walsh