Hard Deck

A few years back, I was turning final for a land-out at Swee****er strip (45 miles south of Minden). At 300 feet I hit a large bump and thought about trying one turn in it to see if I could climb, but declined because my hard deck was 500 feet. I landed, called in, then I watched another sailplane hit the same bump, but he turned in it, climbed away and made it home. Should he be penalized? Maybe he had more experience than I had. Maybe he knew that when a west wind blew, it went around mount Patterson and then met again on the east side.......right where my big bump was found. We can't legislate judgement or experience!
JJ..............PS, I'm old enough to remember when the national rules were only 2 pages!

It would be interesting to know how may podium finishes in Nationals were due to a 500 ft save during the contest. After a certain number or percentage then I think you can argue that you'd really be changing the way the game is played with a hard deck. But if it's close to zero ....

I believe the intent of a hard deck would, indeed, be to change the way the game is played.

Lou

At 15:58 29 January 2018, Clay wrote:
It would be interesting to know how may podium finishes in Nationals
were
d=
ue to a 500 ft save during the contest. After a certain number or
percent=
age then I think you can argue that you'd really be changing the way
the
ga=
me is played with a hard deck. But if it's close to zero .... =20


Off hand, without doing any research whatsoever, I can think of at
least one USA Nationals, and at least 3 WGC's where this happened.
I'm sure there are many more...

RO

On Monday, January 29, 2018 at 11:45:06 AM UTC-5, Michael Opitz wrote:
At 15:58 29 January 2018, Clay wrote:
It would be interesting to know how may podium finishes in Nationals
were
d=
ue to a 500 ft save during the contest. After a certain number or
percent=
age then I think you can argue that you'd really be changing the way
the
ga=
me is played with a hard deck. But if it's close to zero .... =20


Off hand, without doing any research whatsoever, I can think of at
least one USA Nationals, and at least 3 WGC's where this happened.
I'm sure there are many more...

RO

I'd very much like to see the flight logs. These logs ought to be public domain, so let's shine some light on the subject.

best,
Evan Ludeman / T8

At 18:36 29 January 2018, Tango Eight wrote:
On Monday, January 29, 2018 at 11:45:06 AM UTC-5, Michael
Opitz wrote:
At 15:58 29 January 2018, Clay wrote:
It would be interesting to know how may podium finishes in
Nationals
were
d=
ue to a percent=
age then I think you can argue that you'd really be changing
the way
the
ga=
me is played with a hard deck. But if it's close to zero .... =20


Off hand, without doing any research whatsoever, I can think of
at
least one USA Nationals, and at least 3 WGC's where this
happened.
I'm sure there are many more...

RO

I'd very much like to see the flight logs. These logs ought to be
public
domain, so let's shine some light on the subject.

best,
Evan Ludeman / T8

Those that immediately came to my mind were from the time before
loggers.. 1958, 1983, 1985, 1988....

RO

On Monday, January 29, 2018 at 7:10:52 AM UTC-7, wrote:
A few years back, I was turning final for a land-out at Swee****er strip (45 miles south of Minden). At 300 feet I hit a large bump and thought about trying one turn in it to see if I could climb, but declined because my hard deck was 500 feet. I landed, called in, then I watched another sailplane hit the same bump, but he turned in it, climbed away and made it home. Should he be penalized? Maybe he had more experience than I had. Maybe he knew that when a west wind blew, it went around mount Patterson and then met again on the east side.......right where my big bump was found. We can't legislate judgement or experience!
JJ..............PS, I'm old enough to remember when the national rules were only 2 pages!

I very much agree with you, JJ. A lot of what is magical about soaring and glider racing is the element of self-determination, operating independent of authorities and deciding your own fate. Towards that, I want to give up no airspace and I do not want any more cumbersome rules and restrictions. I want the liberty to make all of my own choices as I deem best for me. It's for those reasons that I opposed the original incarnation of hard deck.

Yet it is truly painfully for all of us that we are suffering too many serious accidents. It would seem that there is an opportunity to significantly reduce one of the several categories of accidents and give up almost nothing in terms of flying liberty. My proposition is that giving up only the altitude below 300 ft in the flats really is giving up almost nothing. If you might have glossed through my alternative hard deck proposal of yesterday afternoon, take a look at that as a separate consideration please. I know that it can only help the overall accident problem a wee bit -- perhaps it's just one guy every ten years that might be saved from his own temptation. Maybe he's worth saving if we can do it with no new rules and no new complications to how we fly contests?

Thanks JJ for sharing. I have had the same thing happen to me, nice to know I am not alone. I had a firm hard deck back then (should probably readdress this) and I was fine with my decision to land as it was made a year before after a friend hit a bump tried a few circles and then couldn't make his intended landing spot. After my fried broke his bird, I made my hard deck and several time over the years I have come up against the hard deck while hitting a bump, NEVER have I made that turn, as I had decided long before..

Having said the above, I did come to an outlanding last summer very low. Got to a "dry lake" with obstacles encroaching from both sides a small stream running through the middle. I arrived at the lake at 300 ft AGL and felt I needed to fly the length of the landing area to pick my path turn 180 degrees fly back, another 180 degree turn and land. The final turn was at 100 feet AGL as per my flight logger. A hard deck would not have changed anything. I made a mistake in pushing on 15 miles south of where I landed. I should have stayed and got the altitude or abandoned the task. I did no low attitude thermaling (other than scrapping rocks trying to break a thermal lose) while still at altitude over valley floor, yet still I was not in the best situation.

Mind you I had a sustainer with a starter and did not think of using it as I was too low when I got to dry lake. I am with Steve Koerner on this matter. Whether the goal is safety or leveling the competition field a fool like me will still screw up 15, 30minutes before the deck and end up where we tried to prevent by more rules and airspace restriction.

On Monday, January 29, 2018 at 6:10:52 AM UTC-8, wrote:
A few years back, I was turning final for a land-out at Swee****er strip (45 miles south of Minden). At 300 feet I hit a large bump and thought about trying one turn in it to see if I could climb, but declined because my hard deck was 500 feet. I landed, called in, then I watched another sailplane hit the same bump, but he turned in it, climbed away and made it home. Should he be penalized? Maybe he had more experience than I had. Maybe he knew that when a west wind blew, it went around mount Patterson and then met again on the east side.......right where my big bump was found. We can't legislate judgement or experience!
JJ..............PS, I'm old enough to remember when the national rules were only 2 pages!