Outstanding video on the sport of Glider RACING

On 01/20/2015 7:41 PM, Sean Fidler wrote:
Dave - I hope you are kidding!

I don't think he is!

On Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 6:41:53 PM UTC-6, Sean Fidler wrote:
Dave - I hope you are kidding!

My take is that when Dave says "day long" he is referring to the using all of the soarable part of the day and not "dawn to dusk".

Regardless, U.S. regionals mostly run tasks in the 2.50-3.5 hour range right in the heart of the soarable part of the day. From what I have been told, the Europeans start earlier and go right until the last gasp of lift or light, whichever comes first. Lots of land-outs that way.

The post was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but in general, I feel tasks are too short and that the maximum amount of day is not used.

However, there is a significant reason European tasks are longer and it has to do with Latitude. Many European contest sites are in the 50's in Latitude (or hilly/mountain sites) and the soarable day can start as early as 10 am and go as late as 8 pm.

Most US contest sites have Latitudes in the 30's and the soaring doesn't start until at least noon and then is done around 5-6 pm. So by necessity the task times are shorter.

In my opinion 2-2.5 hour tasks are too short and 3-4 hour tasks should be the norm. Of course, there are some days when a short tasks is necessary to fit into a weather window, but these should be the exception.

Dave, I agree and raise you 3 just for the fun of it!

1) I think 40% of task should be AT tasks and not 10% ;-).

2) I think we should have a 30-60 minute start window and not be able to hang out indefinitely. ;-)

3) I think we should be required to announce our start times (within 10 minutes) so we can feel like we are racing if we meet with a competitor on task (you know, in the 60 mile turn area) ;-). Yep I know this is counter to a proposed rule change.

I do think our tasking is generally quite conservative and not challenging enough for many at regionals. That said, the last two 18 meter Nationals (CD Eric Mozer at Bermuda High and John Godfrey at Minden) were really fun and challenging. I think 4 hours was median. The later had a very difficult job with surprise special airspace and weather challenges. Kudos to the task committees as well.

I guess I am fine with knowing we will at least have challenging tasking at nationals. I am willing to support the conservative tasks at our regionals if it helps maintain and grow contest soaring in the US however. But a zero land out tasking strategy is not realistic or fair either. A novice contest pilot should be comfortable with and expect an occasional land out while learning the sport. Novice pilots (especially) should therefore bring crews. I sure did (land out alot and be sure to bring crews)! Crewless pilots "hands" at first pilots meetings is big pressure on regional CDs....and thats not right.

On Wednesday, January 21, 2015 at 10:50:06 PM UTC-5, Dave Springford wrote:
The post was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but in general, I feel tasks are too short and that the maximum amount of day is not used.

However, there is a significant reason European tasks are longer and it has to do with Latitude. Many European contest sites are in the 50's in Latitude (or hilly/mountain sites) and the soarable day can start as early as 10 am and go as late as 8 pm.

Most US contest sites have Latitudes in the 30's and the soaring doesn't start until at least noon and then is done around 5-6 pm. So by necessity the task times are shorter.

In my opinion 2-2.5 hour tasks are too short and 3-4 hour tasks should be the norm. Of course, there are some days when a short tasks is necessary to fit into a weather window, but these should be the exception.

I actually had two points.

1st: Dave nailed the first point with the duration of tasks being generally twice as long in Europe as in the States. With more time and distance comes more route options.

But 2nd, and more to my intended point: There is a HUGE difference between flying above the mountains (flying from one mountain-peak-thermal to the next while never descending below the peaks) to spending the majority of the task below the peaks over completely unlandable terrain. The choices we have are to fly around the mountains (slow speed, but with many landout options), along the nearest mountains (medium speed, but with limited landout options), or deep in the mountains (fastest speed, with few landout options out of sight and at the limit of gliding distance).

So, my issue was Sean's comment that flying in the mountains was 'simply flying from one mountain thermal to the next.' Perhaps in the American Rockies where you never descend below 10,000 feet that might be true. Come fly the Alps where we're flying at 6,000 feet surrounded by 12,000 foot mountains. We'll see if you still feel that way after just one hour on task.

Chris

On Wednesday, January 21, 2015 at 11:44:12 PM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
Dave, I agree and raise you 3 just for the fun of it!

1) I think 40% of task should be AT tasks and not 10% ;-).

2) I think we should have a 30-60 minute start window and not be able to hang out indefinitely. ;-)

3) I think we should be required to announce our start times (within 10 minutes) so we can feel like we are racing if we meet with a competitor on task (you know, in the 60 mile turn area) ;-). Yep I know this is counter to a proposed rule change.

I do think our tasking is generally quite conservative and not challenging enough for many at regionals. That said, the last two 18 meter Nationals (CD Eric Mozer at Bermuda High and John Godfrey at Minden) were really fun and challenging. I think 4 hours was median. The later had a very difficult job with surprise special airspace and weather challenges. Kudos to the task committees as well.

I guess I am fine with knowing we will at least have challenging tasking at nationals. I am willing to support the conservative tasks at our regionals if it helps maintain and grow contest soaring in the US however. But a zero land out tasking strategy is not realistic or fair either. A novice contest pilot should be comfortable with and expect an occasional land out while learning the sport. Novice pilots (especially) should therefore bring crews. I sure did (land out alot and be sure to bring crews)! Crewless pilots "hands" at first pilots meetings is big pressure on regional CDs....and thats not right.

On Wednesday, January 21, 2015 at 10:50:06 PM UTC-5, Dave Springford wrote:
The post was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but in general, I feel tasks are too short and that the maximum amount of day is not used.

However, there is a significant reason European tasks are longer and it has to do with Latitude. Many European contest sites are in the 50's in Latitude (or hilly/mountain sites) and the soarable day can start as early as 10 am and go as late as 8 pm.

Most US contest sites have Latitudes in the 30's and the soaring doesn't start until at least noon and then is done around 5-6 pm. So by necessity the task times are shorter.

In my opinion 2-2.5 hour tasks are too short and 3-4 hour tasks should be the norm. Of course, there are some days when a short tasks is necessary to fit into a weather window, but these should be the exception.

Sean,

While I agree it would be most fun and interesting to fly assigned tasks using the maximum portion of the day, it is the general consensus by the majority of contest pilots that they don't want to deal with many landouts. If we use an honest-to-god assigned task on a given day, it is likely to end up in landouts in anywhere from 0-half of the fleet. Possibly more if it is REALLY overcalled. (Think about our Condor tasks).

However, that does not necessarily preclude the possibility of using assigned tasks, it's just they need to compromise too to the reality of the US soaring scene. What if the assigned tasks are intentionally slightly under-called to provide landout insurance? Say the nominal distance on a TAT would have been 150 miles on a contest day, and call a 120 mile Assigned Task instead? Sure, for the top tier it would be best to have a racing task that uses the whole day and all, but perhaps by shortening assigned tasks a bit to ensure a higher completion rate, we can have better "racing" than a TAT or MAT while also making it realistic for novices to finish.

Best,
Daniel

Pilots who don't want to risk a land-out should be flying in Sports
class. That's what its for. FAI classes should be balls to the wall
racing that use the day to the max.

Just my 1.6 cents
Luke Szczepaniak

The risk of a land out is part of the sport? Definitely part of XC comp
flying.

The weather in the UK can be sufficiently poor that a comp director will
launch the field knowing that the whole field are probably going to wind up
in fields.

Why waste the day? If you under set the task the top 50% will go around so
fast that the day is de-valued. Set it to maximize the day and you will get
90 - 100% of the competitors around. The 10% will learn and in time go
faster.

All of the above said, the idea of the GP format is to set smaller tasks
which keep the spectators interested. Different type of flying to normal
comps.


At 14:41 22 January 2015, wrote:
On Wednesday, January 21, 2015 at 11:44:12 PM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
Dave, I agree and raise you 3 just for the fun of it!
=20
1) I think 40% of task should be AT tasks and not 10% ;-).
=20
2) I think we should have a 30-60 minute start window and not be able
to
=
hang out indefinitely. ;-)
=20
3) I think we should be required to announce our start times (within 10
m=
inutes) so we can feel like we are racing if we meet with a competitor on
t=
ask (you know, in the 60 mile turn area) ;-). Yep I know this is counter
t=
o a proposed rule change.
=20
I do think our tasking is generally quite conservative and not
challengin=
g enough for many at regionals. That said, the last two 18 meter
Nationals=
(CD Eric Mozer at Bermuda High and John Godfrey at Minden) were really
fun=
and challenging. I think 4 hours was median. The later had a very
diffic=
ult job with surprise special airspace and weather challenges. Kudos to
the=
task committees as well.
=20
I guess I am fine with knowing we will at least have challenging
tasking
=
at nationals. I am willing to support the conservative tasks at our
region=
als if it helps maintain and grow contest soaring in the US however. But
a=
zero land out tasking strategy is not realistic or fair either. A
novice
=
contest pilot should be comfortable with and expect an occasional land
out
=
while learning the sport. Novice pilots (especially) should therefore
brin=
g crews. I sure did (land out alot and be sure to bring crews)!
Crewless
=
pilots "hands" at first pilots meetings is big pressure on regional
CDs....=
and thats not right.
=20
On Wednesday, January 21, 2015 at 10:50:06 PM UTC-5, Dave Springford
wrot=
e:
The post was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but in general, I feel tasks
are=
too short and that the maximum amount of day is not used.
=20
However, there is a significant reason European tasks are longer and
it=
has to do with Latitude. Many European contest sites are in the 50's in
L=
atitude (or hilly/mountain sites) and the soarable day can start as early
a=
s 10 am and go as late as 8 pm.
=20
Most US contest sites have Latitudes in the 30's and the soaring
doesn'=
t start until at least noon and then is done around 5-6 pm. So by
necessit=
y the task times are shorter.
=20
In my opinion 2-2.5 hour tasks are too short and 3-4 hour tasks
should
=
be the norm. Of course, there are some days when a short tasks is
necessar=
y to fit into a weather window, but these should be the exception.

Sean,

While I agree it would be most fun and interesting to fly assigned tasks
us=
ing the maximum portion of the day, it is the general consensus by the
majo=
rity of contest pilots that they don't want to deal with many landouts.
If
=
we use an honest-to-god assigned task on a given day, it is likely to end
u=
p in landouts in anywhere from 0-half of the fleet. Possibly more if it
is
=
REALLY overcalled. (Think about our Condor tasks).=20

However, that does not necessarily preclude the possibility of using
assign=
ed tasks, it's just they need to compromise too to the reality of the US
so=
aring scene. What if the assigned tasks are intentionally slightly
under-ca=
lled to provide landout insurance? Say the nominal distance on a TAT
would
=
have been 150 miles on a contest day, and call a 120 mile Assigned Task
ins=
tead? Sure, for the top tier it would be best to have a racing task that
us=
es the whole day and all, but perhaps by shortening assigned tasks a bit
to=
ensure a higher completion rate, we can have better "racing" than a TAT
or=
MAT while also making it realistic for novices to finish.

Best,
Daniel

On Thursday, January 22, 2015 at 10:22:29 AM UTC-5, Luke Szczepaniak wrote:
Pilots who don't want to risk a land-out should be flying in Sports
class. That's what its for. FAI classes should be balls to the wall
racing that use the day to the max.

Just my 1.6 cents
Luke Szczepaniak

Entirely granted. It would be fun to fly in such a contest. However, I would rather have occasional short assigned tasks rather than the strict status quo of TATs and MATs.

Best,
Daniel

The reason that UK competition tasks are generally set between 3 and 4
hours long (for most pilots) is that our scoring system devalues the day if
the task comes in less than 3 hours.

It also devalues the day if the task setter is a **** and lands a load of
people out in the first 40% of the task.

Task setters / competition directors seem to have the idea that they must
set 3 hour tasks. This is not actually so. On a **** weather day they can
set tasks as short as the defined minima for the class which is as little
as 80k (50Miles) in a regionals. I have seen many champions who have had a
challenging and satisfying day flying just 50 miles!

IMO whilst 3 hour + tasks are good, it is best to set a task that you
expect most competitors to complete even if it has to be short and
completed in less than 3 hours.

We have also had problems with turbos in the bigger classes. One task
setter said to me that it didn't matter to him that everyone landed out as
most had turbos! I didn't have one so abandoned the contest after 3
consecutive mass land out days.

Jim