Is the 200ft below Min Finish Height Rule Working?

I was simply putting out an interesting video of an 18 yr. old kid doing a minimal energy, final glide into a rolling finish. Clearly this video is highly relevant to this thread.

I am a surprised that more RC supporters did not comment on the safety connotations of this kids final glide since it is clearly deemed unsafe and bad behavior by the RC. I am also surprised that more supporters of no MFH and less severe of a penalty did not comment in support of this kids exciting finish as what they want to do at their next contest.

I'll ask some questions this time around: Was this kids final glide decision safe or unsafe? Is successfully pulling off this kind of low finish fun or too risky? Is it a good thing for the sport of soaring or is it a bad thing? Is it good for soaring in the USA? Is it good for growing US contest participation or bad? Etc.

Here are some more "good" (US illegal) final glides:

1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZpRbg80kis

2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZxvYMC2QvI

3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-xOZ2luGZA

Sean

On Sunday, January 26, 2014 4:42:50 PM UTC-5, kirk.stant wrote:
On Sunday, January 26, 2014 1:52:11 PM UTC-6, Sean F (F2) wrote:

Wow. That sure shut everyone up.....



What's your point?



Without context, that was either a perfectly judged final glide, or a really lucky rolling finish.



I've done both in the past, and squeakers are no fun, but they sure can be exhilarating! And tend to make you come in really high the next time!



And since he was over landable fields all the way in, how was this dangerous? At most places in US, this would be stupid, and wouldn't be worth the risk.



So - wanna be safe, stay high. Wanna take a chance, how much of a safety pad do you want? Too low, you are the PIC, you make the decision - land out safely, because breaking a glider is guaranteed to lose you the contest!



Don't like having to make tough decisions about final glides in order to win? Funny, I thought we were talking about racing...



Kirk

66

Good luck trying that out west (any of the glider fields in Arizona), Parowan, Moriarty etc, etc. There's a big difference in executing the final glide in smooth late day European conditions over landable fields than over rocks and cactus in the late afternoon sink!

The rules have to anticipate the worst case conditions, not the most favorable!

Mike

Was it safe? Yes.

As Kirk points out at no time, once he was below 1000 ft, did he not have a landing option directly in front of him.

Was it fun? I doubt it, no one wants to cut it that close.
Is it good for US contests? It depends on the location, Uvalde, Hobbs, no. Somewhere in the middle of Kansas, could be.

But let's look at some other questions?

Was the pilot familiar with the area?
Did the pilot know he had landing options within the last 1-2 km


As has been pointed out on RAS before, many of the European teams do a good reconnaissance of the approach areas to the airport and determine what fields are landable on the approaches to the airport. This kind of preparation on the ground is really beneficial when you are on a marginal glide.

Another thing to consider is that the finish on that task was a 3 km cylinder and according to IGC rules, once you have crossed the finish line you don't have to land at the airport. According to his IGC file, he stopped his landing roll 2.5 km inside the cylinder and crossed the cylinder at 250ft AGL. since he didn't have to land at the airport to get all the points, he had no rules incentive to continue to the airport. Therefore, one could presume that in his determination he had sufficient height to land at the airport.

From what I see in the video, he was right - he could make it.

On Sunday, January 26, 2014 4:55:44 PM UTC-7, Dave Springford wrote:
Was it safe? Yes.



As Kirk points out at no time, once he was below 1000 ft, did he not have a landing option directly in front of him.



Was it fun? I doubt it, no one wants to cut it that close.

Is it good for US contests? It depends on the location, Uvalde, Hobbs, no. Somewhere in the middle of Kansas, could be.



But let's look at some other questions?



Was the pilot familiar with the area?

Did the pilot know he had landing options within the last 1-2 km





As has been pointed out on RAS before, many of the European teams do a good reconnaissance of the approach areas to the airport and determine what fields are landable on the approaches to the airport. This kind of preparation on the ground is really beneficial when you are on a marginal glide.



Another thing to consider is that the finish on that task was a 3 km cylinder and according to IGC rules, once you have crossed the finish line you don't have to land at the airport. According to his IGC file, he stopped his landing roll 2.5 km inside the cylinder and crossed the cylinder at 250ft AGL. since he didn't have to land at the airport to get all the points, he had no rules incentive to continue to the airport. Therefore, one could presume that in his determination he had sufficient height to land at the airport.



From what I see in the video, he was right - he could make it.

I agree with Dave on this. Its the JWGC, they might be young but they are good. He had plenty of options and seems to already know where he would be landing. Sure, no one wants a finish like that, but it shows it can be done with prior planning. World Teams scout out all the landable fields ahead of time, not only around the airport, but out on course.
It may surprize you, that some of our top pilots do the same scouting when they go to a US National. Some even arrive early and drive around the task area looking over the fields.

#711.

On Sunday, January 26, 2014 6:06:55 PM UTC-8, Tom Kelley #711 wrote:

It may surprize you, that some of our top pilots do the same scouting when they go to a US National. Some even arrive early and drive around the task area looking over the fields.

#711.

Guess why I've been spending time around Montague Tom.

This is a very good idea, not just for final glide. I've scouted unmarked runways, roads, better fields in a number of task areas in the spots where airfields are spotty and terrain is - um - unpleasant. The best ones go into my personal waypoint database in case they are needed.

On Sunday, January 26, 2014 10:54:51 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Sunday, January 26, 2014 6:06:55 PM UTC-8, Tom Kelley #711 wrote:



It may surprize you, that some of our top pilots do the same scouting when they go to a US National. Some even arrive early and drive around the task area looking over the fields.



#711.



Guess why I've been spending time around Montague Tom.



This is a very good idea, not just for final glide. I've scouted unmarked runways, roads, better fields in a number of task areas in the spots where airfields are spotty and terrain is - um - unpleasant. The best ones go into my personal waypoint database in case they are needed.

Yes, its true. One of our very best US Team pilots who has almost as many National titles as KS, always arrives several days early at a Nationals. They take one full day just driving around, remarking maps and looking over off airport landing sites. Going so far even to check to see how much it might have rained in one area versus another.
I know others who use IGC files from those who do well at a contest site, looking at their traces where they stopped and thermaled at and marking those spots on a map to see if theirs any correlation(if thats the right word) going on.
Watching uTube videos and not being their, then trying to past judgement, is rather extremely difficult to do. Those pilots who make it to the WJGC's are good and they do task extremely hard. I believe at the last WJSC that Boyd Willat flew in, he did finish the task, but landed off airport. Down in Argentina, the same was happening. One day that Kawa won, he simply out drifted everyone to make the greatest distance. Its the contest site that allows this. Some of our sites just don't offer this. Thats where good judgement and wise decisions are needed.
Maybe best to say its been a good discussion. Several years ago we had clouds, then silly Walmart cell phones, now this. Next year might be more chemicals and better toilet paper in the potties are needed.....hell if I know..

#711.

Major snippage...

I agree with Dave on this. Its the JWGC, they might be young but they are
good. He had plenty of options and seems to already know where he would be
landing. Sure, no one wants a finish like that, but it shows it can be done
with prior planning. World Teams scout out all the landable fields ahead of
time, not only around the airport, but out on course. It may surprize you,
that some of our top pilots do the same scouting when they go to a US
National. Some even arrive early and drive around the task area looking
over the fields.

#711

FWIW, no need to wait until "you're a nationals level contest pilot to
pre-scout fields"...a thought I'd hope would be obvious to every (potential)
XC pilot...but which I know for a fact, isn't! :-)

I started scouting fields (& brain picking, and cross-checking
information/feedback) before I had my license, so foreign to my brain was the
very idea of not landing at the gliderport of my takeoff, much a
never-before-seen field. Continued to pre-scout over the next 3+ decades.
Eventually moving to the intermountain west (where fields in the hills can be
few, far-between, misplaced on maps [and now databases], etc., etc.), simply
increased my motivation for "ground truth." Since us northern hemispherians
have reason to believe spring will (eventually) arrive, I've found spring a
Great Time to use those unsoarable (rainy, foggy, dreary) days for extended
day excursions into the hills/boonies to scope out ground truth...good for
one's personal soaring safety/confidence, can be good for the fambly and
mutts, good for everyone's souls...

Bob - never a "real contest pilot" - W.

I dont think anyone wants to do that at their next contest sean.... Thats silly to say.

On Sunday, January 26, 2014 2:44:11 PM UTC-8, Sean F (F2) wrote:

I'll ask some questions this time around: Was this kids final glide decision safe or unsafe? Is successfully pulling off this kind of low finish fun or too risky? Is it a good thing for the sport of soaring or is it a bad thing? Is it good for soaring in the USA? Is it good for growing US contest participation or bad? Etc.

Sean - It's pretty easy to tell when you're trolling.

It's pretty simple:

If you make it it was safe, if you brake your glider it was unsafe, if you die or kill someone it was really unsafe.

Trouble is you can't predict ahead of time - otherwise what you dial into the glide computer 40 miles out would be pretty much exactly what you see when you cross the finish. Saying that it's the PIC's job to manage the risk is a bit of a misuse of language. Risk is by definition the part that you can't manage - it's the pilot's job to decide if (s)he wants to take a risk or not - with imperfect information. We can set the system up such that lots of risks are allowed or not, with winning on the line against a small, but impossible to calculate probability that the risk that can win the day might also end in catastrophe. Sometime it does - not because the pilot was unskilled or dumb, but because (s)he was just unlucky despite skilled piloting.

Having watched a friend (on the US World Team) put a final glide with a bit of extra sink between the high and low wires at the airport boundary and having pulled the shattered wreckage of my glider off a road while they carted my Dad (a 10,000 hour experimental test pilot) off to the hospital for a 5-month stay from which he never totally recovered I have to say that I don't really see the point of the sport to see how close we can fly to obstacles without chickening out.

So my view is some reasonable structures in how the game is set up are appropriate. It needs to strike a balance and be appropriate to the circumstances - terrain, airport, number of competitors, experience levels, glider performance. This thread started with a contention that there is dangerous behavior (circling low) that needs to be addressed in the rules, rather than left to pilot judgement, so there is some agreement that the rules shouldn't tempt people to take unnecessary risks - we just have to decide which ones and how to do it with the minimum possible impact on the enjoyment of the sport.

This is from a guy who had JJ yell at me more than once for doing beatups at contests.

But that's just me.

9B

I'll ask some questions this time around: Was this kids final glide decision safe or unsafe? Is successfully pulling off this kind of low finish fun or too risky? Is it a good thing for the sport of soaring or is it a bad thing? Is it good for soaring in the USA? Is it good for growing US contest participation or bad? Etc.

Sean, I think your answer lies in another question to the community. It is,

1) Are you (a current or potential contestant) willing to execute the sort of finish shown in the videos in a contest?

2) If the answer is NO, would you accept pilots executing this sort of approach on a given day in order to earn speed points, whereas you would only earn distance points for executing a safe landout?

There is a large contingent of pilots that reasonably thinks that if you make it to the airport property, you should earn your speed points. However, for other pilots who are not willing to execute a marginal final glide like that, in some ways it is unfair to them that someone can "out-crazy" them and do better in the contest.

Consider this as well, while a pilot may answer Yes to first question I presented, maybe even a majority, it is not good for the community or the sport when someone gets killed doing this, or worse yet unexpectedly kills some poor guy on the ground while attempting this sort of final glide. As a result, I think the most prudent decision would be to have a finish that leaves abundant energy for a full pattern without attempting this sort of stuff shown in the videos, as exhilarating as it may be for some pilots. Leave the dicey final glides, VNE starts, low passes after finishes, etc to Condor.

Best Regards,
Daniel Sazhin