Hard Deck

Seems there are good ideas ...... and the only thing you know is "if you do the same thing you will get the same result"

What is to stop any CD from making a Hard Deck at any Regional (maybe without penalties to begin with, just verbal flogging) - see if it draws people or if the pilots like it - was it safer.

Why must we buy it when we can rent it first. Seems to me Regional s is we need to experiment more.

Rules are what competion is all about - imagine a chess game where you move any piece how ever you feel - it is about optimizing performance within the constraint of the Rules - without Rules, you have an outing not a contest.

WH

What P3 said. Despite the impressive Reg. 2 numbers, most soaring pilots DON'T want to fly contests...for various reasons. No problem, unless they're misinformed about what really goes on at a contest. That's possible; there's still a problem with the nagging rumor that when bad weather puts the whole contest in doubt, the pilot with the lowest cumulative score at that point is offered up as a human sacrifice hoping for sun.

When I hear that a lot of pilots elsewhere mention safety as a big impediment, I suspect some survey bias. Not just "is the need to compromise your safety and incur added risks in contest flying a big reason why you don't do it?" Safety is a concern for all. But it's also a socially acceptable way to decline without worrying about coming across as timid or fearful. I'm not saying everyone who cites safety is being dishonest with him/herself or with others. But competitive gliding is stressful, expensive, time consuming, frustrating, depressing at times, selfish.... I could on (to the point of talking myself out of flying this year!). But you REALLY have to want to do it to overcome all the practical reasons not to.

Frankly, if a pilot tried it once and didn't come back because of safety, I would suspect gaggle flying more than anything. You don't encounter that density and intensity outside of competition. The risks of landing out are also perceived negatively by almost everyone no matter your experience.

Yes, competitive soaring has inherent risks. That's not the same as assuming that if we implemented a wholesale hard deck, launch grids around the country would suddenly fill up like free seats at the Super Bowl. Gaggle and landout risks would remain.

Contest pilots I know ARE worried about safety. And potential midairs are high on the list--with good reason. They're (fortunately) rare. But almost all of my near disasters have involved close encounters with other gliders. That's why most contest pilots bought into FLARM.

Just my opinion.

Chip Bearden

Perhaps we could get more participation and promote xc soaring by having a few more OLC games type meets. I know this does nothing to pick National Champion but it might help increase the number of people flying and get some inactive members back where they can fly with friends in a low stress environment, stay for the whole meet or just part, weak day and don't want to chance it, don't. Not only do we need more people racing, but we need more people in our sport!

On Wednesday, January 31, 2018 at 2:57:22 PM UTC-8, wrote:
What P3 said. Despite the impressive Reg. 2 numbers, most soaring pilots DON'T want to fly contests...for various reasons. No problem, unless they're misinformed about what really goes on at a contest. That's possible; there's still a problem with the nagging rumor that when bad weather puts the whole contest in doubt, the pilot with the lowest cumulative score at that point is offered up as a human sacrifice hoping for sun.

When I hear that a lot of pilots elsewhere mention safety as a big impediment, I suspect some survey bias. Not just "is the need to compromise your safety and incur added risks in contest flying a big reason why you don't do it?" Safety is a concern for all. But it's also a socially acceptable way to decline without worrying about coming across as timid or fearful. I'm not saying everyone who cites safety is being dishonest with him/herself or with others. But competitive gliding is stressful, expensive, time consuming, frustrating, depressing at times, selfish.... I could on (to the point of talking myself out of flying this year!). But you REALLY have to want to do it to overcome all the practical reasons not to.

Frankly, if a pilot tried it once and didn't come back because of safety, I would suspect gaggle flying more than anything. You don't encounter that density and intensity outside of competition. The risks of landing out are also perceived negatively by almost everyone no matter your experience.

Yes, competitive soaring has inherent risks. That's not the same as assuming that if we implemented a wholesale hard deck, launch grids around the country would suddenly fill up like free seats at the Super Bowl. Gaggle and landout risks would remain.

Contest pilots I know ARE worried about safety. And potential midairs are high on the list--with good reason. They're (fortunately) rare. But almost all of my near disasters have involved close encounters with other gliders.. That's why most contest pilots bought into FLARM.

Just my opinion.

Chip Bearden

On Wednesday, January 31, 2018 at 5:39:30 PM UTC-5, wrote:
Seems there are good ideas ...... and the only thing you know is "if you do the same thing you will get the same result"

What is to stop any CD from making a Hard Deck at any Regional (maybe without penalties to begin with, just verbal flogging) - see if it draws people or if the pilots like it - was it safer.

Why must we buy it when we can rent it first. Seems to me Regional s is we need to experiment more.

Rules are what competion is all about - imagine a chess game where you move any piece how ever you feel - it is about optimizing performance within the constraint of the Rules - without Rules, you have an outing not a contest.

WH

I really believe that imposing a hard deck will not draw anyone new to contests. I think they simply don't care about it. if they want to compete, the absence of a hard deck isn't what's holding them back. if we are talking about a pilot who doesn't want to compete, there's not one single one out there who abstains from competition because there's no hard deck. no, i don't think a hard deck and contest participation have any correlation. The effect will be this: Imposing oa hard deck will **** off a bunch of current active competitors. they won't stop racing because of it though.

what would the hard deck be? I think they tossed out the number 500 AGL. i am wholeheartedly against the hard deck idea, but 500 agl seems like a reasonable number. i maintain that just because there's a hard deck, it won't stop people from circling below it if they think they have a fighting chance to stay out of a field. over an airport, maybe it's a different story. so if the hard deck doesn't prevent bad behavior, what does it do? it punishes people. punishments are designed to dissuade people from doing "bad" things. but this won't stop people from circling below the hard deck, so why instate it?

I want to get one more thing out the

Out of all the hours of contest flights flown each year, how many minutes of circling is really done below the proposed hard deck?

Out of all the people who get below 500 feet agl in contests each year, how many of them attempted to circle? i'm going to stick my neck out an say extremely few.

See, what i'm saying is that you are chasing a miniscule figure with the hard deck idea. You'll say, "if it saves even one life it's worth it". you're not wrong. i agree that saving lives is important. i think it would be much more effective to police it by confronting the individuals who seem to be the big offenders.

I'm going to say this. and before i do i want to remind everyone that i'm a new dad, and i'm not into taking unnecessary risks. i'm careful. nothing ****es me off more than seeing someone get onto the airport and not get speed points, UNLESS their approach to the field was actually scary. equally, if someone was able to make a low save and make it home, but just barely busted the hard deck in doing so, can you imagine? they made it around in my eyes. and yes i acknowledge the fact that there was some risk there. but if the pilot has the skills and is willing to accept the risk, i have no problem with it. if i see john seymour (for example, although maybe he wouldn't) circling at 480 feet at a flatland site, over a great field, i've got nothing to say about it. now if a 19 year old flying his first nationals did the same thing.... i have a problem, hard deck or not.