Is the 200ft below Min Finish Height Rule Working?

On 01/24/2014 1:52 PM, Eric Bick (1DB) wrote:
Reassure me that the rules do enable basically safe flying in contests.


In short, they do. Come fly a contest, use your best judgement as pilot
in command to be safe, learn a ton and have fun.

These winter discussions stem from differences in opinion. Some people
find it unacceptable that the rules don't prevent each and every pilot
from making mistakes, so they want to make a rule that covers every
single possibility, I on the other hand believe that the responsibility
lies with the guy behind the controls.

Luke Szczepaniak

Some people find it unacceptable that the rules don't prevent each and
every pilot from making mistakes, so they want to make a rule that covers every
single possibility, I on the other hand believe that the responsibility
lies with the guy behind the controls.

Luke Szczepaniak

For about the 150th time, the finish rule (nor the RC philosophy behind it) does NOT attempt to "prevent pilots from making mistakes", "cover every single possibility" "legislate safety" or take any "responsibility" away from the PIC. The rules (and law) state explicitly that the PIC is responsible for all safety decisions.

The finish rule is designed to remove what was a strong temptation to unsafe behavior, and put decision making back in the pilots' hands. Befo 400 points if you can squeak over the quarry and clear the fence. Now: same points either way, you make the decision. Who is telling who what to do? Who is taking away responsibility?

I'm getting grumpy, because this calumny just keeps getting repeated over and over. And answered over and over.

John Cochrane

In article ,
"Eric Bick (1DB)" wrote:

.

Wow. This whole thread is fascinating - I'm looking at flying my first
competitions this season, and finding I'm in way over my head. My comments
are a bit off the main thread, but relevant to me and perhaps others that
aren't competition pros.

The idea of thermaling at 500' AGL or lower is beyond my comprehension at
this point in my soaring career, and entering a landing pattern at 500' -
700' from a mile out contrary to all my student piloting lessons (even though
I can calculate that it is readily doable in my glider).

The rules themselves seem straightforward, even though I have little idea of
how they play out in a contest. And the start and finish cylinder concepts
seem straightforward. All I'm really interested in for my first tries is
finishing each day, flying safely, not doing anything stupid, leaving plenty
of margin, scoring some points, and having a challenge and fun (i.e. wanting
to do it again).

I expect as time goes on, flying more contests will lead to my learning and
appreciating the strategies and tactics discussed in a lot of this thread -
but my main concerns are whether the current rules are in fact safe for a
neophyte to contests and a relatively low-timer. From the discussions, I'm
not getting a clear sense of whether they are or not (specifically as related
to the finish).

I understand we are all subject to sometimes making dumb decisions, or the
weather making our plans (and margins) vanish - but the rules should
basically enable safe flying in contests, even accounting to some degree the
wide variance in risk different pilots are willing to take under varying
circumstances. Reassure me that the rules do enable basically safe flying in
contests. I have to assume they do since the fatality rate doesn't seem to be
something that draws headline attention.

Eric Bick

Hi Eric,

You are gonna love contest flying. I look at a contest as a way to go
spend a week flying cross country with a few dozen of my best friends, a
bunch of people around just to make sure I have great time with tow
availability guaranteed on a predictable schedule, weather forecasting
and tasking done for me, food and drink arranged if I want it, evening
socializing, retrieve crew spring-loaded. Sometimes the weather even
cooperates for a truly great day. What could be better?

As far as taking risks: How much are you willing to risk to win a little
bronze coin and your matchbook sized portrait in the December issue of
SOARING? Not much? Same here. Rules or not, fly to have fun and live to
fly again.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

Hello Eric, and other non-contest pilots.

Don't be put off from contest flying by the Winter rantings and discussions of rules Minutia.

99% of the time Race rules are very simple. Start below a certain height, fly to all the turn points and finish above a the designated height.
Have fun, you will probably fly to destinations and distance you might not otherwise fly to.

Like another poster said it is basically a week of flying with a bunch other glider pilots who happen to be flying a similar course.

Brian

On Sunday, January 26, 2014 6:15:46 PM UTC-8, Brian wrote:
Hello Eric, and other non-contest pilots.



Don't be put off from contest flying by the Winter rantings and discussions of rules Minutia.



99% of the time Race rules are very simple. Start below a certain height, fly to all the turn points and finish above a the designated height.

Have fun, you will probably fly to destinations and distance you might not otherwise fly to.



Like another poster said it is basically a week of flying with a bunch other glider pilots who happen to be flying a similar course.



Brian

Being totally a racing neophyte, what I'm wondering is why so much discussion about complexities, or rather, why such complexities to discuss? Racing would seem to be a simple concept - start/fly the course/finish. Basic safety and points rules are necessary. Beyond that, first to finish is winner.

There would be more points associated with finishing than landing out going really fast - crossing the finish line is what counts. You run different classes to account for performance differences, but everyone within a class is on an equal handicap (none) basis. Start and finish lines are lines to be crossed in a specified direction, and don't have to be takeoff or landing field (to enable multiple planes abreast dashes to finish). (Maybe this is touching on GP format, not sure.) Basic idea is that racing means who is fastest around a course.

Whole point is "simpler is better." Tactics and strategies still enter in, but for getting across the line first. I'm looking at badge flying where turnpoints are made or not. Doesn't matter how far past a turn point you fly, either you make it or you don't. Make the turn points, you get the badge. Miss one by a meter, you don't. Only finish height rule is loss of height penalty - start/finish. Otherwise, totally up to pilot.

And why are the races on closed courses each day? Why not Field A to Field B day one; Field B to Field C day 2; and final day Field N to Field A? Maybe some logistical challenges, but might add some challenge and interest.

All these questions/comments probably are a different thread, but what the heck - it's winter ... even in SoCal it's winter (sort of).

Can't wait to try my first contest this spring ... fly it like you say - start/fly course/finish per rules - massage the complexities during the winter.

Once again, real slow.


John,

I really appreciate you taking the time to explain things "real slow" to
me, the 2 brain cells I have left after beating my head against the wall
couldn't keep up with you before.

Recognize that this is a very tough decision. If you just say "I won't be tempted" you are in deep, deep denial, totally fooling yourself and ripe to make the wrong decision. Think very very hard about this little coffin corner before you get there, have a set of quantitative guidelines ready. Pilots who get this right do it by knowing they will be tempted and guarding against that.

After unsuccessful attempts to explain, due to possible brain damage, I
will be more direct;
I realize that I will be tempted, I accept it as a part of soaring, I
welcome it as a test of personal constitution.

But, welcome to soaring. Sometimes things don't work out as planned.

This is precisely what keeps me coming back. It isn't an experiment
under controlled laboratory conditions boiled down to a mathematical
formula. I fly on the good days, I fly on the bad days, each flight is a
totally different experience that feeds the dark lump of coal which
beats inside my chest.

And now, despite all your great planning, you're 5 miles out, Mc 0 + 100 feet. 750 feet AGL. You're doing great in the contest so far. Last field below. Trees ahead. Hero stories ringing in your ears. You know they'd do it -- they've said so a hundred times. This is how contests are won, no? Are you really going to stop, with 750 feet still remaining, while the computer says you can make it?

Risk management is a big part of soaring, most racing pilots aren't dare
devils, they manage the risk according to any number of factors.
Gliding is much more than the MacCready theory and technique, it's not
just numbers on a spread sheet. Knowing how to control your emotions
and distinguishing impulse from intuition are a key part of the game.

Maybe yes. I have known a lot of pilots who made the decision to throw away a nationals in this circumstance and land. I have. I know a lot of pilots who went for it, and made it, and were heroes. I know a few pilots who went for it and did not make it.


You are diluting the sport to statistics and probability. Being an
excellent pilot and a smart man you realize that, mathematically
speaking, one of the few ways for the other guy to beat you is by taking
a bigger risk. Based on your posts in this thread it appears to me that
you are trying to mitigate that possibility by changing the rules to
meet your own criteria and are using "safety" as a battling ram.

Last year one of my goals was to stop trying to beat the other guy and
just fly my own flight. As a result my enjoyment of contests has been
increased exponentially - highly recommended.

Luke Szczepaniak

On Friday, January 24, 2014 12:20:32 PM UTC-8, Luke Szczepaniak wrote:

Risk management is a big part of soaring, most racing pilots aren't dare
devils, they manage the risk according to any number of factors.

You are diluting the sport to statistics and probability. Being an
excellent pilot and a smart man you realize that, mathematically
speaking, one of the few ways for the other guy to beat you is by taking
a bigger risk.

Luke Szczepaniak

Hi Luke.

Your comment(s) made me very curious. I'd like to understand the full range of views in the community.

Two questions for you:

Is your preferred configuration no penalty structure for finishing low? Having a minimum finish height is almost entirely a safety-motivated rule.

Second, would you prefer to remove the requirement that finisher land at the home airport in order to earn speed points? This would be the next safety-motivated rule in the finish sequence.

I'm trying to figure out if you prefer not to have safety-oriented rules as a matter of principle or a matter of degree.

Thanks,

9B

I would personally prefer to have a minimum 50 foot flying line finish
at the airport with the possibility of a rolling finish as a safe
alternative. It is the pilots responsibility to conduct a safe finish.
If there is a real safety concern the pilot should be penalized
accordingly by the CD.

If the 1 mile circle is my only option the simple guy in me wants to say
that it should be a hard deck, if you can't cross the finish line above
MFH you didn't complete the task, 0 speed points. Having said that, I
see the other side of the coin, and am easily swayed towards a linear
reduction in points all the way to the ground. I do not like the
graduated penalty of some arbitrary number that will be shifted every year.

As a completely out side of the box proposition we could always use the
1000m IGC height loss rule. Keeps people lower in the start cylinder,
keeps people higher in the finish, as an added bonus it gets us back in
line with the record/badge world so there is a possibility of setting a
record in a contest.

The requirement to land at the airport is a personal favourite of mine,
I hope you are not edging me on . In my opinion the rule as written
right now promotes unsafe behaviour. The pilot completes the task,
chooses the safer option to land out (who lands out when they don't have
to?), but we take away all the speed points? Makes no sense to me.

Thanks for keeping an open mind.
Luke Szczepaniak







On 01/24/2014 5:32 PM, wrote:
On Friday, January 24, 2014 12:20:32 PM UTC-8, Luke Szczepaniak wrote:

Risk management is a big part of soaring, most racing pilots aren't dare
devils, they manage the risk according to any number of factors.

You are diluting the sport to statistics and probability. Being an
excellent pilot and a smart man you realize that, mathematically
speaking, one of the few ways for the other guy to beat you is by taking
a bigger risk.

Luke Szczepaniak

Hi Luke.

Your comment(s) made me very curious. I'd like to understand the full range of views in the community.

Two questions for you:

Is your preferred configuration no penalty structure for finishing low? Having a minimum finish height is almost entirely a safety-motivated rule.

Second, would you prefer to remove the requirement that finisher land at the home airport in order to earn speed points? This would be the next safety-motivated rule in the finish sequence.

I'm trying to figure out if you prefer not to have safety-oriented rules as a matter of principle or a matter of degree.

Thanks,

9B