Is the 200ft below Min Finish Height Rule Working?

I've always preferred a finish gate for one big reason - it drastically decreases "clockwatching" while approaching the finish, allowing more time for looking out and finding/avoiding conflicting traffic while planning how to merge into the pattern. And since you knew that you could finish either high or low, you could have a plan for each case; if high and in traffic, stay high; if alone, push over and finish fast and low; if really low, call a rolling finish and squeak in. Done all of them, and never worried about losing points by being too low, or trying to ooch over an invisible line in the sky...

Now with flarm, getting surprised by someone at the finish should be rare.

I do see the potential problem of a lot of finishers at the same time at a small field - which is where a cylinder makes sense to give everyone time (altitude) to sequence for landing.

But at a big field with lots of landing room - perhaps some brave CDs should try some gate finishes (perhaps tied to -gasp! - a speed task) and see how pilots like it.

kirk
66

On Friday, January 24, 2014 5:39:10 PM UTC-8, kirk.stant wrote:
I've always preferred a finish gate for one big reason - it drastically decreases "clockwatching" while approaching the finish, allowing more time for looking out and finding/avoiding conflicting traffic while planning how to merge into the pattern. And since you knew that you could finish either high or low, you could have a plan for each case; if high and in traffic, stay high; if alone, push over and finish fast and low; if really low, call a rolling finish and squeak in. Done all of them, and never worried about losing points by being too low, or trying to ooch over an invisible line in the sky...



Now with flarm, getting surprised by someone at the finish should be rare..



I do see the potential problem of a lot of finishers at the same time at a small field - which is where a cylinder makes sense to give everyone time (altitude) to sequence for landing.



But at a big field with lots of landing room - perhaps some brave CDs should try some gate finishes (perhaps tied to -gasp! - a speed task) and see how pilots like it.



kirk

66

That's an interesting point Kirk.

For those airports with one runway and you can't land a bunch of gliders line-abreast, I've been thinking about the new GP start (BTW - thanks to BB for coming up with an elegant and flexible approach to make that happen). Judging from observations of GP contests it seems like you might end up with most of a class finishing in a narrow time window (start as a gaggle, fly the task as a gaggle, finish as a gaggle). What do you think is a reasonable amount of altitude buffer to allow, say 12 gliders to land within a few minutes on a single runway? Do we need to abide by the "one airplane on the runway at a time" rule or do people land in formation like the Thunderbirds (notice I didn't say Blue Angels)?

9B

On Friday, January 24, 2014 7:53:34 PM UTC-6, wrote:

For those airports with one runway and you can't land a bunch of gliders line-abreast, I've been thinking about the new GP start (BTW - thanks to BB for coming up with an elegant and flexible approach to make that happen). Judging from observations of GP contests it seems like you might end up with most of a class finishing in a narrow time window (start as a gaggle, fly the task as a gaggle, finish as a gaggle). What do you think is a reasonable amount of altitude buffer to allow, say 12 gliders to land within a few minutes on a single runway? Do we need to abide by the "one airplane on the runway at a time" rule or do people land in formation like the Thunderbirds (notice I didn't say Blue Angels)?

Well, if the runway is wide enough, and everyone stays heads-up, you should be able to put a bunch down as long as everyone lands long. Alternate sides and roll out as far as you can. If I know it's going to be crowded and (via flarm or 4 mile calls) i'm in the middle of the pack, I'm going to look for a pretty high finish! If I'm in front then I'm going to speed up and fly a short fast pattern and land real long. But we should be able to land with about 200' spacing (tow-rope length) as long as everyone goes long and easy on the brakes, and keeps to their side of the runway. First guy holds 60 knots until in the flare and everybody follows at the same speed.

Kirk

On Friday, January 24, 2014 6:49:25 PM UTC-8, kirk.stant wrote:
On Friday, January 24, 2014 7:53:34 PM UTC-6, wrote:



For those airports with one runway and you can't land a bunch of gliders line-abreast, I've been thinking about the new GP start (BTW - thanks to BB for coming up with an elegant and flexible approach to make that happen).. Judging from observations of GP contests it seems like you might end up with most of a class finishing in a narrow time window (start as a gaggle, fly the task as a gaggle, finish as a gaggle). What do you think is a reasonable amount of altitude buffer to allow, say 12 gliders to land within a few minutes on a single runway? Do we need to abide by the "one airplane on the runway at a time" rule or do people land in formation like the Thunderbirds (notice I didn't say Blue Angels)?



Well, if the runway is wide enough, and everyone stays heads-up, you should be able to put a bunch down as long as everyone lands long. Alternate sides and roll out as far as you can. If I know it's going to be crowded and (via flarm or 4 mile calls) i'm in the middle of the pack, I'm going to look for a pretty high finish! If I'm in front then I'm going to speed up and fly a short fast pattern and land real long. But we should be able to land with about 200' spacing (tow-rope length) as long as everyone goes long and easy on the brakes, and keeps to their side of the runway. First guy holds 60 knots until in the flare and everybody follows at the same speed.

Kirk


Okay all the "ifs" and "as long as" made me wonder about the odds of pulling that off. Would we need a procedure?

What if the first guy has minimal energy and ends up in the middle of the runway?

9B

What if the first guy has minimal energy and ends up in the middle of the runway?
9B

Certainly if wishes were horses then beggars would ride.

But we are back to having to make rules again and god forbid... graduated penalties. If we have to accept someone will thermal at 500 ft on the edge of a 1 mile finish cylinder we have to accept someone will land in the middle of the runway and cause problems for everyone else that follows.

There are solutions but we won't like them because they increase organizer overhead or infringe on our sense of liberty. The simple solutions are lots of manpower to move the offenders or some straightforward hard discipline.

Operating in confined spaces requires much higher standards and discipline. When we have to ask the question: "What if the first guy has minimal energy and ends up in the middle of the runway?", it is an acceptance that we are unable to rise to the standards because we do not have universal and effective discipline, hence the rules to attempt to overcome these deficits.

The finish can often be an over crowded place. We need high standards and discipline to operate in this environment. The alternative is to spread the field out and give everyone more time and space.

Andy Gough

On Saturday, January 25, 2014 6:26:50 AM UTC-8, Andy Gough wrote:
What if the first guy has minimal energy and ends up in the middle of the runway?

9B

Certainly if wishes were horses then beggars would ride.

But we are back to having to make rules again and god forbid... graduated penalties. If we have to accept someone will thermal at 500 ft on the edge of a 1 mile finish cylinder we have to accept someone will land in the middle of the runway and cause problems for everyone else that follows.

There are solutions but we won't like them because they increase organizer overhead or infringe on our sense of liberty. The simple solutions are lots of manpower to move the offenders or some straightforward hard discipline.

Operating in confined spaces requires much higher standards and discipline. When we have to ask the question: "What if the first guy has minimal energy and ends up in the middle of the runway?", it is an acceptance that we are unable to rise to the standards because we do not have universal and effective discipline, hence the rules to attempt to overcome these deficits.

The finish can often be an over crowded place. We need high standards and discipline to operate in this environment. The alternative is to spread the field out and give everyone more time and space.

Andy Gough

Well said - you have to make an assessment of the environment and the capabilities of the people in it. Then you try to set it up so that the odds of exceeding the ability of the entire system to operate within acceptable limits are low. Wishing the limits were different or that people's capabilities were different won't make either one true.

On Friday, January 24, 2014 10:02:49 PM UTC-6, wrote:

What if the first guy has minimal energy and ends up in the middle of the runway?

You have to plan for that - which is why you keep extra energy in the pattern until committed to land. In this case, until the guy can hop out and get his glider off the runway, you now have 2 choices - land long (same as before, just a shorter runway to do it on) or land short (not a good choice unless you are last in the gaggle landing or are also low on energy, then probably best to land on brick one and get off runway as soon as possible - anyone following you should be able to see that soon enough to land long.

Maybe we need a Condor mission made up that simulates this situation?

Kirk

I read this RAS with thread as a non contest pilot and outside observer. The flying community will never be able to tell a pilot what he/she can/should do to mitigate risk (instructors can only suggest) - a competitive pilot will find a way to work the rules. However, I think the simple flight test would help change the risk taking out of the program.

You are found circling looking for lift (subject to trace) below 700 ft any where on course (ridge maybe lower) you are scored as a landout with a small bonus for making a good landout with downwind final pattern. No pattern no bonus. period. (hard deck)

If you have not started the task (i.e. relight scenario seen in Ionia) in start cylinder below 500 your DQ'ed (why not land a relight?)

You are found looking for lift between 1 mile and 2 miles from finish below 500 FT - scored as a landout with bonus for airport landing and/or bonus for making a pattern good landout.

I my mind all everyone is saying is "Hey PIC - Make a good risk free landing judged by a good pattern for any landing pattern - no crap short cuts - considering each ship has different flying performances - it has to be hard to determine a MFH with balanced equity. 500 ft might be easy for some and harder for others. So just complete a good pattern.

ZEN

On Saturday, January 25, 2014 9:01:08 AM UTC-8, kirk.stant wrote:
On Friday, January 24, 2014 10:02:49 PM UTC-6, wrote:

Maybe we need a Condor mission made up that simulates this situation?

Might be interesting to see what potential issues are. I've only done a little Condor flying and I don't know if it's all that great at "head on a swivel" spontaneously trying to set up landing sequencing from 300 feet.

The only reason I'm curious is that I'm guessing a CD would really want to know what the finish would look like before calling it under GP conditions. It's a bit of a speculation as it remains to be seen how much it gets called.