RIP Tomas Reich - SGP Chile

Jon, That reasoning would work if the hard deck were somehow offered in lieu of the hard ground. Unfortunately we would have to deal with both at the same time. Would we not?


Why is the hard deck any different than the hard ground? Do you find the hard ground to be a distraction? You already successfully race over a hard deck - the ground. Why is this one any different?

In fact it is far less of a distraction, because violation of the rules results in a penalty, and violation of the ground results in death.

Coming back to the Chilean Grand Prix
Extract of the Commentary at about 1h10m

"very low",

"I have never seen a Chilean glider in this area",

"this is usually an area were we do not fly",

"they are very very low",

"you see my face, I would not like",

"one of the situation people get into particularly on the last day where everybody just want to keep going and normaly, they would have stopped for a climb even if it is weak",

"this evening you will be hearing stories about "I have never been so low" ",

"they look like good fields, they are not",

"a lot of fields with vines here",

"Chilean pilots will tell you they are no outlanding fields in Chili",

"this turnpoint is very tricky because in a valley with no good climb",

"we have never been at that low altitude in this area",

Thank you to "Fleg" from the French www.volavoile.net Forum for this extract.

On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 5:49:24 AM UTC-8, Steve Koerner wrote:
Jon, That reasoning would work if the hard deck were somehow offered in lieu of the hard ground. Unfortunately we would have to deal with both at the same time. Would we not?


Why is the hard deck any different than the hard ground? Do you find the hard ground to be a distraction? You already successfully race over a hard deck - the ground. Why is this one any different?

In fact it is far less of a distraction, because violation of the rules results in a penalty, and violation of the ground results in death.

Steve, the hard deck replaces the ground in your thinking as it is above the ground. Once violated, now you've ended your contest points accumulation and can fly however you like. If placed at a reasonable altitude (this would be site related) you needn't worry about the ground until then, other than the normal keeping track of potential landing sites given your energy as we all do all the time (or should). The whole intent of a hard deck is that if perfectly designed, as long as you are above it you have a safe glide to a safe landing area. It isn't a perfect world but that is the intent.

In Kansas with landable farm fields as far as you can see, the deck could be 700 ft AGL or whatever people are comfortable with. I quit thermalling well above that myself even in flatlands. In the Minden area and east, the hard deck in many places could be 5000 AGL or even higher as it is a 40 mile glide to the next safe landing area. As you know from flying there, any reasonable day you will be 7000 feet above that. And again, this has nothing to do with ridges and mountains, which will poke through the deck and you can dust the rocks if you choose.

I've seen a number of pilots well below what I consider my hard deck. I've seen pilots down in the Lake Tahoe basin hoping to ridge soar Daydreams to make it out. I've seem pilots down in the canyons south of Mammoth, rocks on every side and no way out. Often then get away. But some of them are dead or no longer own an unbroken glider. I do not want to compete against that behavior.