SENIORS CONTEST

At 00:00 19 March 2005, wrote:
It turns out the numbers are easier than I thought.
30-degree arc at
one mile is about 2700 feet of arc on the face of the
cylinder. That's
almost 700 feet narrower than the finish gate. So the
fleet is coming
in 15 degrees either side of the nominal courseline
at speeds between
60 knots and 140 knots - separation of traffic not
intended nor
required. Eyes on the panel. No regulation of traffic
approaching,
piercing, or pulling up in the cylinder. I'm not quite
getting how this
is safer,

Oh, that's good! Let's use all of the finish line,
even though we know the pilots go for the nearest corner..........
.............And let's just use 1/12th of the finish
cylinder..................That aught make the numbers
look good.

other than the fact that we're 450 feet higher (which
is
still not high enough to bail out) but plenty high
enough to lead to
all sorts of interesting pattern decisions.

Placebo safety. I feel safer, therefore I am safe.
Doh! The notion that
this is safer is a bawd. Neaderthals, despite their
thick brows and
tendency to druel (with sinful pride), at least know
how to measure and
reduce risk. The Wusses though seem content to soar
in ignorant bliss.
I treat the cylinder with as much or more respect as
I do the finish
line. Problem is, I'm not quite sure what to do after
I enter since I
have absolutely no clue what anyone else will be doing.

I don't understand this kind of thinking; When I finish
at 500 feet and still a mile from the airport, I know
exactly what I'm going to do..........Head for the
nearest runway! I don't know how a pilot would be
able to do anything else. Who's 'milling around' in
this situation?

LCD. If
everyone is ignorant, it's a no fault proposition,
right?

Tell you what. For the sake of ongoing discussion,
let's just say the
finish line is too dangerous for the majority of soaring
pilots and
should be abolished. Let's also assume the assumption
that a cylinder
finish is safe, as it is currently construed, is little
more than an
exercise in optimism,

I know of no accidents in the finish cylinder, but
I know of 5 in the finish gate. Them's the facts, not
an exercise in optimism.


but without foundation. So, how do we finish
safely, so that the majority of pilots needn't get
too close to the
ground, fly too fast, nor risk impaling themselves
on a competing brand
of glider?

How might a cylinder have solved this, save no one would have witnessed
it?

The simple way of solving the the fast finishers and target fixation is
simple
Make the finish line/cylinder 20 kms or more from the airfield
The loggers will record finish height/speed ,then the pilots will
have to thermal on the way home.
Scoring came sort out any variations
This removes two problems, the target fixation and it aligns all traffic
in one direction.
Have a clearly marked fast lane and slow lane ,all pilots check in
with height and speed on entry to the fast lane and no passing without
prior contact between the aircraft.
One possible variation for scoring is have a fixed number of points
extra for the section from the finish line /cylinder to the home field and
deduct from that bonus for not keeping within the rules as set out.
Make the aborting of your run easy by making the slow lane closer in .
The important bit is have a massive penalty for non compliance from
losing all points from your best scoring day to being banned from
being launched for the rest of the contest.
This also gives a clear location to watch the finishing for spectators.
gary

"John Sinclair" wrote in message
...
Been tried, Todd. Problem is some saw the advantage
to be gained by coming in fast and low, then declaring
a rolling finish. That lead to the 5 minute penalty
for a rolling finish.
JJ


At 01:00 19 March 2005, Toad wrote:

wrote:

exercise in optimism, but without foundation. So,
how do we finish
safely, so that the majority of pilots needn't get
too close to the
ground, fly too fast, nor risk impaling themselves
on a competing
brand
of glider?

What would you think about a finish gate at 1000 ft
agl, 1 mile abeam
the landing runway. Everybody hits that gate, turns
toward the middle
of the runway, then enters downwind for the favored
runway ?

Or just the exact same gate finish as the old days,
at 1000 ft agl ?

Todd
3S

The difference between glider pilots
and racers. Yes, there is a difference. If I am not
improving my skills
in some meaningful, measurable way, I lose interest
in a sport very,
very quickly. It is ALL about the skills. doesn't
make us better
or worse. It simply means we operate under a different
set of
priorities. Safety is one of them.

SNIP-
Agreed


But I think we're willing to put a
lot more effort into developing the skills necessary
to be safe in more
varied and dynamic enivornments than many other pilots.

SNIP-

Sorta agree...there are more avenues to explore then
just racing...but I see your point.


But recent attempts to use 'safety' as a rubric for
ill-considered changes in rules and practices have
increasingly 'dumbed
down' the sport without really improving its safety.
Seems safer. But
seems ain't is.

SNIP-
Yes...I have to deal with high altitude airports living
in the mts of Colorado...does constantly dealing with
nasty conditions around the airport make me 'more skilled'--not
really. I would prefer not to have to deal with these
conditions...but then I would not fly. And I don't
necesarily need those from other environments telling
me when these conditions are unsafe.

But on the flip side....I don't encourage flying in
marginal conditions as a test of 'skill or bravery
or whatever'.

At 18:00 19 March 2005, John Sinclair wrote:


Oh, that's good! Let's use all of the finish line,
even though we know the pilots go for the nearest corner..........

.............And let's just use 1/12th of the finish
cylinder..................That aught make the numbers
look good.

This part of the discussion has gotten a little silly.
On an AST or TAT there
is no way that the traffic is going to be finishing
from 360-degrees. Maybe
on a MAT, though I've not heard anyone suggest using
a gate for a MAT
with no final turnpoint. It's true that if the gate
is close to parallel to the
final courseline people will try to 'hook' it, but
I've not seen a CD set up a
task that way in some time. Yeah, I guess even if the
gate is 45-degrees to
the final course line pilots will converge on the close
end. You could make
a similar argument about the cylinder - there's always
a single point that is
closest to the final turnpoint. I've just never had
a problem with inadequate
space to finish under either scenario.

I don't know of any pilot who would deliberately fly
into someone to beat
them to the line, so the question has to be does one
form of finishing
inherently lead to finishers being unable to see and
avoid on another? I've
heard lots of arguments but thankfully no evidence
of actual collisions - a
couple of 'encounters' have been mentioned for both
gates and cylinders.
So, on this one we're definitely talking about problems
in the theoretical. I
personally have found more people finishing at different
speeds and
altitudes and directions under cylinders than gates
and in my mind this
creates mor opportunity for a glider to come at you
from an unexpected
direction. I've gotten surprised once myself in this
way in a cylinder, never
in a gate, but that's just me.

The second part of the argument has been about energy
management, this
is an entirely separate argument from finish line configuration.
It is true
that it's possible for someone to make a legal gate
finish with too little
energy and have a problem trying to make a pattern
afterwards. JJ has his
list of 5 accidents. We also have some examples of
pullups and spins trying
to make 500' at the edge of the cylinder. Some see
it clearly one way - I
look at it and see a more mixed picture. That's why
I say we leave it up to
the CD and contest organizers to decide what's most
suitable for the site,
the day and the contestants.

Over the 30 years I've been flying contests I have
found the sport
becoming progressvely more antiseptic, with less and
less of a visceral
sense of racing from starts and finishes to navigation,
tasks and scoring.
The start I don't miss much and I have found the new
tasks to offer new
challenges that in some ways cvompensate for the fact
that you spend
most of the flight flying by yourself. Waiting sometimes
overnight to find
out who won has been a downer. Overall most of us
have been willing to
make these tradeoffs. Maybe the finish gate is the
last tangible feature of
the sport that actually feels like racing - and just
maybe that's why some of
us want to hang on to it.

Otherwise we may as well all do OLC - or get copies
of Sailors of the Sky.

9B

At 18:00 19 March 2005, John Sinclair wrote:


Oh, that's good! Let's use all of the finish line,
even though we know the pilots go for the nearest corner..........

.............And let's just use 1/12th of the finish
cylinder..................That aught make the numbers
look good.

This part of the discussion has gotten a little silly.
On an AST or TAT there
is no way that the traffic is going to be finishing
from 360-degrees. Maybe
on a MAT, though I've not heard anyone suggest using
a gate for a MAT
with no final turnpoint. It's true that if the gate
is close to parallel to the
final courseline people will try to 'hook' it, but
I've not seen a CD set up a
task that way in some time. Yeah, I guess even if the
gate is 45-degrees to
the final course line pilots will converge on the close
end. You could make
a similar argument about the cylinder - there's always
a single point that is
closest to the final turnpoint. I've just never had
a problem with inadequate
space to finish under either scenario.

I don't know of any pilot who would deliberately fly
into someone to beat
them to the line, so the question has to be does one
form of finishing
inherently lead to finishers being unable to see and
avoid on another? I've
heard lots of arguments but thankfully no evidence
of actual collisions - a
couple of 'encounters' have been mentioned for both
gates and cylinders.
So, on this one we're definitely talking about problems
in the theoretical. I
personally have found more people finishing at different
speeds and
altitudes and directions under cylinders than gates
and in my mind this
creates mor opportunity for a glider to come at you
from an unexpected
direction. I've gotten surprised once myself in this
way in a cylinder, never
in a gate, but that's just me.

The second part of the argument has been about energy
management, this
is an entirely separate argument from finish line configuration.
It is true
that it's possible for someone to make a legal gate
finish with too little
energy and have a problem trying to make a pattern
afterwards. JJ has his
list of 5 accidents. We also have some examples of
pullups and spins trying
to make 500' at the edge of the cylinder. Some see
it clearly one way - I
look at it and see a more mixed picture. That's why
I say we leave it up to
the CD and contest organizers to decide what's most
suitable for the site,
the day and the contestants.

Over the 30 years I've been flying contests I have
found the sport
becoming progressvely more antiseptic, with less and
less of a visceral
sense of racing from starts and finishes to navigation,
tasks and scoring.
The start I don't miss the high-speed starts much and
I have found the new
tasks to offer new
challenges that in some ways cvompensate for the fact
that you spend
most of the flight flying by yourself. Waiting sometimes
overnight to find
out who won has been a downer. Overall most of us
have been willing to
make these tradeoffs. Maybe the finish gate is the
last tangible feature of
the sport that actually feels like racing - and just
maybe that's why some of
us want to hang on to it.

Otherwise we may as well all do OLC - or get copies
of Sailors of the Sky.

9B

At 19:00 19 March 2005, wrote:
How might a cylinder have solved this, save no one
would have witnessed
it?


I would suggest that his race would have ended back
at the finish cylinder and his only focus would have
been on just making a safe landing. He might not have
had the altitude to make the 500 foot, but then he
would have been keenly aware that he must land ASAP,
in order to get his clock stopped. Surely he would
have done the obvious thing and just land straight
ahead. He might have been suffering from dehydration,
but was still functioning well enough to find the airport
(pre GPS) and fly wings level to the finish line. If
he was dehydrated, his limited thought pattern was;
finish & pull-up. Remove the finish line and his limited
thought pattern would have been; finish & land.
JJ

"Andy Blackburn" wrote in message
...
Maybe the finish gate is the
last tangible feature of
the sport that actually feels like racing - and just
maybe that's why some of
us want to hang on to it.

Otherwise we may as well all do OLC - or get copies
of Sailors of the Sky.

9B

My feelings exactly Andy. I am very close to calling the entire SSA racing
scene quits due to this nonsense. Everyone should read the excellent
account of the Reno nationals in Soaring. It puts it all in perspective.

I am sick and tired of others projecting their insecurities upon the rest of
us. If safety is of the upmost importance to them then they are in the
wrong sport. Try bowling or badmitten or just simply walking away from
glider racing. Life comes with no guarantees. Please leave those of us
that love the freedom and challenge of flying fast and low alone and quit
trying to change the sport to a sterile rubberized version of what it once
was. I truly and honestly think that this will very possibly be the end of
sailplane racing in the United States as we know it now. And should you
think that I am a lone voice, this is the same response I am hearing from
nearly all of our local racing pilots in Arizona. I am hopeful that you all
are only a vocal minority. I also hope that the rules committee is lurking.

Casey Lenox
KC
Phoenix

All of this argument could be solved by going to a task described to me by
Ray Gimmey:

RETURN DISTANCE

Go anywhere you want and then turn toward home. Only mileage toward home
from the farthest point counts.

End of rules.
;-)
-Bob Korves

"Andy Blackburn" wrote in message
...
At 18:00 19 March 2005, John Sinclair wrote:


Oh, that's good! Let's use all of the finish line,
even though we know the pilots go for the nearest corner..........

.............And let's just use 1/12th of the finish
cylinder..................That aught make the numbers
look good.

This part of the discussion has gotten a little silly.
On an AST or TAT there
is no way that the traffic is going to be finishing
from 360-degrees. Maybe
on a MAT, though I've not heard anyone suggest using
a gate for a MAT
with no final turnpoint. It's true that if the gate
is close to parallel to the
final courseline people will try to 'hook' it, but
I've not seen a CD set up a
task that way in some time. Yeah, I guess even if the
gate is 45-degrees to
the final course line pilots will converge on the close
end. You could make
a similar argument about the cylinder - there's always
a single point that is
closest to the final turnpoint. I've just never had
a problem with inadequate
space to finish under either scenario.

I don't know of any pilot who would deliberately fly
into someone to beat
them to the line, so the question has to be does one
form of finishing
inherently lead to finishers being unable to see and
avoid on another? I've
heard lots of arguments but thankfully no evidence
of actual collisions - a
couple of 'encounters' have been mentioned for both
gates and cylinders.
So, on this one we're definitely talking about problems
in the theoretical. I
personally have found more people finishing at different
speeds and
altitudes and directions under cylinders than gates
and in my mind this
creates mor opportunity for a glider to come at you
from an unexpected
direction. I've gotten surprised once myself in this
way in a cylinder, never
in a gate, but that's just me.

The second part of the argument has been about energy
management, this
is an entirely separate argument from finish line configuration.
It is true
that it's possible for someone to make a legal gate
finish with too little
energy and have a problem trying to make a pattern
afterwards. JJ has his
list of 5 accidents. We also have some examples of
pullups and spins trying
to make 500' at the edge of the cylinder. Some see
it clearly one way - I
look at it and see a more mixed picture. That's why
I say we leave it up to
the CD and contest organizers to decide what's most
suitable for the site,
the day and the contestants.

Over the 30 years I've been flying contests I have
found the sport
becoming progressvely more antiseptic, with less and
less of a visceral
sense of racing from starts and finishes to navigation,
tasks and scoring.
The start I don't miss much and I have found the new
tasks to offer new
challenges that in some ways cvompensate for the fact
that you spend
most of the flight flying by yourself. Waiting sometimes
overnight to find
out who won has been a downer. Overall most of us
have been willing to
make these tradeoffs. Maybe the finish gate is the
last tangible feature of
the sport that actually feels like racing - and just
maybe that's why some of
us want to hang on to it.

Otherwise we may as well all do OLC - or get copies
of Sailors of the Sky.

9B

Those of us who run contests have an obligation to
do so in the safest possible manner. To ignore known
safety considerations like the long list of finish
gate accidents is nothing short of ignoring a known
hazard. I see several pilots complaining about loosing
their right to have fun, but I don't see them volunteering
to run contests.
JJ Sinclair

At 02:30 20 March 2005, Kilo Charlie wrote:

'Andy Blackburn' wrote in message
...
Maybe the finish gate is the
last tangible feature of
the sport that actually feels like racing - and just
maybe that's why some of
us want to hang on to it.

Otherwise we may as well all do OLC - or get copies
of Sailors of the Sky.

9B

My feelings exactly Andy. I am very close to calling
the entire SSA racing
scene quits due to this nonsense. Everyone should
read the excellent
account of the Reno nationals in Soaring. It puts
it all in perspective.

I am sick and tired of others projecting their insecurities
upon the rest of
us. If safety is of the upmost importance to them
then they are in the
wrong sport. Try bowling or badmitten or just simply
walking away from
glider racing. Life comes with no guarantees. Please
leave those of us
that love the freedom and challenge of flying fast
and low alone and quit
trying to change the sport to a sterile rubberized
version of what it once
was. I truly and honestly think that this will very
possibly be the end of
sailplane racing in the United States as we know it
now. And should you
think that I am a lone voice, this is the same response
I am hearing from
nearly all of our local racing pilots in Arizona.
I am hopeful that you all
are only a vocal minority. I also hope that the rules
committee is lurking.

Casey Lenox
KC
Phoenix