Neanderthat vs. Wuss Gate

We solved the problem by simply switching to the finish
cylinder, no complaints.

At 01:00 16 March 2005, wrote:
In response to your first paragraph, at aiports all
over the country
aircraft come within less than 500 feet of structures
and people at
speeds above 150 mph thousands of times each day, every
day of the
year. Midway, Reagan National, and Laguardia all have
approaches that
bring them over people and buildings. I have on many
occasions watched
landings from a park several hunderd feet from the
threshold of one of
Reagan National's runways. Planes pass overhead no
more than 200 feet
above the ground.

The rule, as I recall, states 'except for take-off
and landing...' Note
that most CDs post NOTAMs closing the airport during
contest launch and
recovery operations. This implies a tacit waiver for
a variety of
soaring related operations in the vicinity of the airport.

As for a the owner of mobile home, parked on the airport
during a
scheduled, sanctioned soaring contest asking for a
change in
practices, I'd be tempted to point at the wheels and
leave my answer at
that. But that wouldn't be very diplo. Perhaps a better
way to address
it would be to require RVs stay out of the way of glider
operations.
You can park your RV here. This will avoid any conflict
with aircraft.
I'll bet the argument goes the other way... convenience
over perceived
safety issues. Its just a matter of crafting the either/or.

As for the cylinder, in another thread someone suggested
I not pull up
after piercing the side, but just bleed off speed as
I head towards the
airport. Now I have pilots attacking me from below.
How much drag does
a ball turret gun cost?

At 02:00 16 March 2005, Toad wrote:
Regarding the difficulty of sequencing gliders for
landing after a
cylinder finish, this is exactly what gliders do every
good soaring
day.

Never had a problem myself on a typical non-contest
day without a finish cylinder. So why do you think
problems arise with cylinders in contest situations?


My theory is that the modern GPS-enabled minimum-time
tasks compress finishers more than the old system and
the cylinder introduces just enough randomness to reshuffle
the landing sequence from the finish sequence. The
net result is a bit more 'pattern roulette' than I
knew from gate finishes in the old AST world. Not
a problem for pilots who exert good judgement and use
the radio - potentially an issue for those who don't.

9B

Andy Blackburn wrote:
At 02:00 16 March 2005, Toad wrote:
Regarding the difficulty of sequencing gliders for
landing after a
cylinder finish, this is exactly what gliders do every
good soaring
day.

Never had a problem myself on a typical non-contest
day without a finish cylinder. So why do you think
problems arise with cylinders in contest situations?

I have never had or seen a problem with the cylinder finish. It is also
the only finish type that I have used, since I started racing in 2002
and fly in sports class with my 20 year old glider.

I have seen plenty of "pattern roulette" at busy soaring sites on
non-contest days. Most of those patterns are non-events. Everybody
lands somewhere, leaving as much space as possible for the next guy.

Todd

At 00:30 17 March 2005, Toad wrote:

My point is that moving that poor judgement UP 500-1000
ft DOES help
solve problems.

Todd

My experience is it introduces about as many as it
solves: mixed traffic between the cylinder edge and
the airport, re-sequencing of traffic from finish to
pattern entry, potential for low altitude thermalling
to make the 500 (or 1000) foot limit, ballistic pullups
below stall speed for the same reason, mixed finish
techniques leading to conflicts (pull-up or press on).
That's just the ones that have happened so far. Of
course none whould have happened had the pilots involved
exercised better judgement.

On the proximity issue, keep in mind that a low energy
finish on a 500' cylinder will have you less than 500'
from whatever you're flying over prior to entering
the landing pattern and therefore at least as much
in violation of any relevant FARs as a gate finisher.
My view after reading the regs is they both are legal.

Of course we cold solve all of this AND address the
15-minute rule if we just made the rules read that
you have to finish no lower than you start. Now THAT
would spice things up.

9B

Andy Blackburn wrote:
Of course we cold solve all of this AND address the
15-minute rule if we just made the rules read that
you have to finish no lower than you start. Now THAT
would spice things up.

This, I like 8^)