RIP Tomas Reich - SGP Chile

On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 8:01:59 AM UTC-8, wrote:
I've got an idea. Lets mandate that all contest ships be motor equiped and fly the tasks running their engines. The pilots can all use earplugs so they dont hear the motor running and we can pretend we are "soaring". Guys would still put themselves into dangerous situations. So the ultimate solution seems to be, line up all the contestants on their computers and run a condor based contest. That will show us who the best are and wow no risk to manage other than maybe blowing a fuse.

Ridiculous ideas? For sure they are. But so is the continual dumbing down of the skill set necessary to xc soar. Cross country soaring is unforgiving of the idiotic and the inexperienced and the arrogant. It always has been, it always will be. All the rules in the world will not change that fact. Just like all the tea in china won't make a cup of coffee.

Heres an idea that would probably save more lives than any of the above mentioned rules. Before a guy can fly in a contest, he needs to actually demonstrate the ability to land his ship over a 60 ft obstacle With MINIMUM ENERGY stopping within 800ft of the obstacle. I can tell you the failure rate at that test would be high. But those that actually spent the money and time to nail that skill will keep themselves alive even if they have to put down in a vineyard or a sagebrush covered valley or even a rock pile. I have been part of retreaves for all of the above mentioned landings, ships were busted up, sure, but injuries were all minor. Mostly just bruised egos and pocketbooks. CONTROLLED flight into rough terrain IS survivable, not pretty but survivable. Ask me how I know. But it takes a mindset thats ready for it.

Should guys not put themselves in these type situations? You bet. But even the most conservative contest flier will tell you they have found themselves in a pickle at least once in their racing career which they extracated themselves from or survived vowing to never do that again. I know I have been there. Neither the lack or the presence of rules put them in that pickle, THEY PUT THEMSELVES in it! I put myself in it! The guy thats gonna kill himself racing, is gonna kill himself racing period due to his own mindset. All the rules out there just forstall the inevitable. We all know the guys out there who push beyond good reason. Put a rule in to prevent foolishness in one area and those same guys will push it in another area. It becomes a never ending cycle of reactionary thinking that never addresses the true problem and just curtails the liberties of others (sounds like the government lol). When all is said and done, the end outcome for the guy who doesn't appreciate the seriousness of his decisions or his lack of decisions is the same untill that guy changes internally.

Once again, the value I place in this idea is not that it will keep fools from being fools. Rather, it will save me from having to compete with fools. That is a big difference.

Once you have violated the hard deck you can be as foolish as you like, thermal right into the ground in an attempt to prevent a retrieve, I don't care. But you didn't win the contest by being foolish. We are not trying to legislate behavior with rules. We are trying to stop rewarding foolishness with a trophy, and punishing the wise by leaving them in the audience.

If your desire is to not have to compete with "fools", good luck, there will always be idiots that you will have to compete with. Some may not be "idiots" in the classic sense but they may seem "idiotic" in that they fly differently than you do, and have a different set of soaring values and self imposed limitations. Once again, if thats what you want , an idiotless contest, condor is where you need to be.

As for setting a hard deck such that a guy always has a landable spot within gliding distance in a place like minden once again good luck. Having lived and soared out of minden for over 20 years, way before most of you even realized it existed (only three guys regularly there, me, Carl Herold and Marcel Goudinat), Your going to need a 4,000 ft agl hard deck depending on the task specially since most guys flying today cringe at the very thought of having to put down in a 300 ft clearing in the sagebrush. Their idea of a "land out" is setting down at an away-from-home airport.

Your hard deck concept may have some merit on days of strong soaring conditions. On strong days a hard deck would eliminate guys who screw up needlessly and get low trying to save the day. But what about weak days where a contest is meant to test a guys ability to put up a good time when the soaring is marginal . There is a completely different skill set needed to win on those days and there are masters who excell in those type conditions. Low saves and low cruising are part and parcel for that type day. Your scheme eliminates their abilities.

Maybe its just a sign of the times where guys have no desire or ability to do anything on marginal days. Soaring competative xc is not all about fantastic speeds and 60 mile final glides. Sometimes its about scratching around at low altitude, trying to gain a few more miles. The majority of competition pilots have disgarded this type of contest. As such, the skill set needed to compete safely in these conditions has been forgotten. No wonder we have so many accidents on non-booming days involving low level soaring.

Very interesting having a hard deck for a contest out of Truckee. What would the hard deck be on the Pine Nuts coming home?

On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 9:34:58 AM UTC-8, wrote:
If your desire is to not have to compete with "fools", good luck, there will always be idiots that you will have to compete with. Some may not be "idiots" in the classic sense but they may seem "idiotic" in that they fly differently than you do, and have a different set of soaring values and self imposed limitations. Once again, if thats what you want , an idiotless contest, condor is where you need to be.

As for setting a hard deck such that a guy always has a landable spot within gliding distance in a place like minden once again good luck. Having lived and soared out of minden for over 20 years, way before most of you even realized it existed (only three guys regularly there, me, Carl Herold and Marcel Goudinat), Your going to need a 4,000 ft agl hard deck depending on the task specially since most guys flying today cringe at the very thought of having to put down in a 300 ft clearing in the sagebrush. Their idea of a "land out" is setting down at an away-from-home airport.

Your hard deck concept may have some merit on days of strong soaring conditions. On strong days a hard deck would eliminate guys who screw up needlessly and get low trying to save the day. But what about weak days where a contest is meant to test a guys ability to put up a good time when the soaring is marginal . There is a completely different skill set needed to win on those days and there are masters who excell in those type conditions. Low saves and low cruising are part and parcel for that type day. Your scheme eliminates their abilities.

Maybe its just a sign of the times where guys have no desire or ability to do anything on marginal days. Soaring competative xc is not all about fantastic speeds and 60 mile final glides. Sometimes its about scratching around at low altitude, trying to gain a few more miles. The majority of competition pilots have disgarded this type of contest. As such, the skill set needed to compete safely in these conditions has been forgotten. No wonder we have so many accidents on non-booming days involving low level soaring.

Well Johnathan, thats the question isn't it. One guy posted on here that the hard deck would apply mostly to the average valley floors, and guys would be free to "scrap the rocks" as much as they want while crossing ridges or trying to soar the slopes. But as we know most guys kill themselves screwing up in the mtns, not over the valleys. Now we end up with another new rule that doesn't do much regarding true safety except for the guy who screws up thermalling low in a valley.

This thread has been more interesting in getting a feel for the general mindset of competitors than it has in actually solving any safety issues.

I think for me it is revealing three very distinct modalities of thought.:
1. The paradigm of more rules=more safety.
2. The paradigm of more rules=fairer competition, eliminating points for risk takers.
3. Some guys just accept competition as it is, want to prevent any further curtailments of someone trying to define a flying style,and accept the resulting consequences both in contest standing and in contest risk.

I don't think there will ever be a solution to satisfy all three mindsets.

I would add:

4. The paradigm of more rules=fewer opportunities for pilots with better skills to be rewarded for them.
5. Some pilots are [mostly] in agreement with the many rules changes that have reduced risk (I detailed 21 since I started flying contests in 1968) but they want to evaluate each new proposed change on a cost/benefit basis: the cost in terms of complications and restrictions on flying and perhaps even an impact on whether certain days are contest days vs. the potential benefit of fewer accidents.

On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 2:13:04 PM UTC-5, wrote:
This thread has been more interesting in getting a feel for the general mindset of competitors than it has in actually solving any safety issues.

I think for me it is revealing three very distinct modalities of thought..:
1. The paradigm of more rules=more safety.
2. The paradigm of more rules=fairer competition, eliminating points for risk takers.
3. Some guys just accept competition as it is, want to prevent any further curtailments of someone trying to define a flying style,and accept the resulting consequences both in contest standing and in contest risk.

Just popping in to say, consalances and prayers to family and friends of the pilot.
Rules issues SHOULD be in another thread..........
Period.......

Frikkin autocorrect is a PITA......

On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 2:13:04 PM UTC-5, wrote:
This thread has been more interesting in getting a feel for the general mindset of competitors than it has in actually solving any safety issues.

I think for me it is revealing three very distinct modalities of thought.:
1. The paradigm of more rules=more safety.
2. The paradigm of more rules=fairer competition, eliminating points for risk takers.
3. Some guys just accept competition as it is, want to prevent any further curtailments of someone trying to define a flying style,and accept the resulting consequences both in contest standing and in contest risk.

I don't think there will ever be a solution to satisfy all three mindsets.

Yes, and let's not forget to ban trans fats from contest dinners. They can really kill us. Oh, and let's not forget about the real killer, salt.

On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 7:34:51 PM UTC-5, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 2:13:04 PM UTC-5, wrote:
This thread has been more interesting in getting a feel for the general mindset of competitors than it has in actually solving any safety issues.

I think for me it is revealing three very distinct modalities of thought.:
1. The paradigm of more rules=more safety.
2. The paradigm of more rules=fairer competition, eliminating points for risk takers.
3. Some guys just accept competition as it is, want to prevent any further curtailments of someone trying to define a flying style,and accept the resulting consequences both in contest standing and in contest risk.

I don't think there will ever be a solution to satisfy all three mindsets.

Yes, and let's not forget to ban trans fats from contest dinners. They can really kill us. Oh, and let's not forget about the real killer, salt.

Or crossing the street against the "don't walk" sign going to the pilot's meeting.
UH

On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 1:54:42 PM UTC-5, wrote:
Well Johnathan, thats the question isn't it. One guy posted on here that the hard deck would apply mostly to the average valley floors, and guys would be free to "scrap the rocks" as much as they want while crossing ridges or trying to soar the slopes. But as we know most guys kill themselves screwing up in the mtns, not over the valleys. Now we end up with another new rule that doesn't do much regarding true safety except for the guy who screws up thermalling low in a valley.

Yep, tt will start innocent just in a flatland then it will be implemented in the mountains then it will be raised again and again like with the finish height was, until we all thermal every 5 miles.