NEW Sporting Code rules

Well done FAI! You've now made it pretty much impossible to do a Silver distance from my airport with any acceptable degree of risk. The only airport that we can fly to that has terrain suitable for an outlanding near it is less than 50KM from our airport. Terminal airspace restrictions make it difficult to go farther than that particular airport. A start point (to which we would now have to tow to because that apparently is somehow more challenging than soaring to it) that is 50KM away has to be over mountainous terrain where the best case scenario for an outlanding is that you don't die. Given the altitude restrictions due to terminal airspace over the potential destination airport the release altitude would have to be at a height low enough to make the possibility of getting shot down into that unlandable terrain high enough that I couldn't in good conscience encourage it by acting as OO on such a flight. I've generally found it hard enough to get people interested in the FAI badges what with the paperwork hassle and the way they act like we're all a bunch of cheats and liars and now this. Brilliant! If they think landing at a different airport than the home field is so damned important why not just make that a requirement? As Tom pointed out the new rules don't necessarily require a landing away from the home field, just that instead of soaring to a remote start point you would now have to tow to it. I've already lost one (very experienced) friend who was well within 25KM of the home field and well within what should have been easy final glide in a modern 18M flapped ship to it who ran into sustained strong sink and was killed trying to land in the only tiny level fairly clear patch available after he had been hammered down 5,000 feet in a very short time. I've had enough flights myself where a wind shift turned an easy 15:1 final glide back to the field into a flight where if I hadn't managed to find lift and gain a few thousand feet I would have seriously considered jumping and coming down under the chute to put too much faith into the calculated final glide numbers.

Wow! Where do you fly?

On 10/14/2015 6:04 PM, wrote:
Well done FAI! You've now made it pretty much impossible to do a Silver distance from my airport with any acceptable degree of risk. The only airport that we can fly to that has terrain suitable for an outlanding near it is less than 50KM from our airport. Terminal airspace restrictions make it difficult to go farther than that particular airport. A start point (to which we would now have to tow to because that apparently is somehow more challenging than soaring to it) that is 50KM away has to be over mountainous terrain where the best case scenario for an outlanding is that you don't die. Given the altitude restrictions due to terminal airspace over the potential destination airport the release altitude would have to be at a height low enough to make the possibility of getting shot down into that unlandable terrain high enough that I couldn't in good conscience encourage it by acting as OO on such a flight. I've generally found it hard enough to get people interested in the FAI badges what with the paperwork hassle and the way they act like we're all a bunch of cheats and liars and now this. Brilliant! If they think landing at a different airport than the home field is so damned important why not just make that a requirement? As Tom pointed out the new rules don't necessarily require a landing away from the home field, just that instead of soaring to a remote start point you would now have to tow to it. I've already lost one (very experienced) friend who was well within 25KM of the home field and well within what should have been easy final glide in a modern 18M flapped ship to it who ran into sustained strong sink and was killed trying to land in the only tiny level fairly clear patch available after he had been hammered down 5,000 feet in a very short time. I've had enough flights myself where a wind shift turned an easy 15:1 final glide back to the field into a flight where if I hadn't managed to find lift and gain a few thousand feet I would have seriously considered jumping and coming down under the chute to put too much faith into the calculated final glide numbers.

--
Dan, 5J

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. In all my many XC flying all over the western US I can't recall a situation where I would have nowhere to land if I hit any sort of strong sink short of a microburst (which usually come with warning signs). Damaging the glider in less than suitable fields maybe, but nothing as deadly as described here. Certainly not a place for a silver badge attempt under any rule...

Ramy

I would say that a lot of people are commenting on the need for changes because of our "modern gliders". My glider is from 1976 and is 34:1. Hardly modern but roughly double the performance of the ships that were around when the badge was invented.
What I'm trying to say is if they are changing it for that reason, then this is 40 years late.
I'm with Tom. The silver badge should have remained what it is.

The badge system has common sense reasons to have the specified requirements. One of the most basic goals is to provide a method to recognize a person's advancement in skills and knowledge in order to achieve common-sense goals as they gain skills and knowledge.

There should ne nothing "macho" about these requirements. A new pilot is not going to impress experienced pilots with any reasonable goals as they advance in the skills and knowledge to fly tasks in a safe manner.

The prettiest badge in my opinion is the "A" badge. It marks a major step on the way to becoming a safe, competent pilot.

The diamond badge is a big deal - especially if earned in less than best soaring conditions. Even more so if earned in less than best sailplanes.

Those who have earned their Diamond badge in a Schweizer 1-26 have special bragging rights. Those who earned their Diamond Badge in a 1-26 in Kansas, have even more bragging rights!

The badge system rewards pilots who have achieved the skills and knowledge to meet a recognized standard.

For those who want or need additional goals, there are the regional, state, national and world records.

Badge rules need to make it reasonable for low time pilots to be able to safely achieve the goals. Without unreasonable, unnecessary, complications.

Tom Knauff

Remained which way that it was? Requiring an actual landing 50km away with less than 1% height loss between release and landing and a double signed landing witness form?

A 50km leg on a declared task with 1% rule applied to the entire flight?

Logging a point 50km away from a declared start point?

How many other ways "used" to count as Silver distance?

On Thursday, October 15, 2015 at 2:35:24 PM UTC-4, Tony wrote:
Remained which way that it was? Requiring an actual landing 50km away with less than 1% height loss between release and landing and a double signed landing witness form?

A 50km leg on a declared task with 1% rule applied to the entire flight?

Logging a point 50km away from a declared start point?

How many other ways "used" to count as Silver distance?

Previously it was possible to soar to a declared remote starting point, then soar to a remote finish, and if possible return home. Height loss was calculated from tow release to the finish. To do this a pilot has to fly at least 100k if he or she returns home. Our old course for this was about 140k.
It is certainly a more significant flight than a 50k straight in a Nimbus 3.. Yep, I've seen that.
UH