A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Hard Deck



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 26th 18, 07:53 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Jim White[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 258
Default Hard Deck

Time to change the subject line?

I have been thinking about the hard deck idea. Possibly fine in flat land
soaring but I am not sure it adds much when ridge flying.

I perceive another problem: Turbos are even more dangerous near the ground
than pure gliders. I may be happy in my 27 at 500ft but in a turbo?

Setting a 1000ft deck because that is safer for turbos will take away the
advantage that real gliders have in this zone. Many pure pilots would say
this advantage goes some of the way to make up for the additional
opportunities turbo pilots have in competition.

Setting a turbo deck for everyone will force everyone to go to the dark
side!

Jim

Ads
  #2  
Old January 26th 18, 08:42 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,035
Default Hard Deck

As ex CFIG, how low do you want to recover from a stall/spin?
For me higher the better......
  #3  
Old January 26th 18, 09:33 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Clay[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default Hard Deck

Would a flat 100 point penalty for each violation make it more palatable? Again, serial offenders would be exposed, which would be beneficial if they are the ones more likely to have an incident (I have no idea if that is so, but would seem likely).

I also think the start cylinder can be a place where it's very tempting to thermal low, no one wants to relight in front of the entire field, slow up the launch, etc. Tough be be penalized before you're even out on course, but I can think of one pilot who might still be alive if that were the case.
  #4  
Old January 26th 18, 11:00 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
John Cochrane[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 314
Default Hard Deck

Thanks, it was time to start a proper threat. Let me put out a concrete proposal so we know what we're talking about.

The purpose of the hard deck is not to prevent bad behavior. The purpose is to remove the points incentive for very low thermaling, which has led to many crashes. It is not intended to alleviate all points incentives for all bad behavior -- such as flying too close to rocks, flying over unlandable terrain, and so forth. It is a small step, not a cure all.

Proposal. The contest organizers prepare a set of sua (special use airspace) files, just like those used to define restricted areas, class B and C, and other forbidden airspace. The SUAs denote a minimum MSL altitude for that area. The MSL altitudes should be round numbers, such as 500 foot increments. They should be roughly 500 - 1500 feet AGL, with higher values over unlandable terrain. The SUAs are designed for altitudes above valley floors, where handouts take place. In normal circumstances there is no hard deck over mountains and ridges. Specified ridge routes, where ridge soaring less than 500 feet over the valley floor, are carved out. The SUA stops short of the ridge in such areas.

These SUAs are forbidden airspace like any other. The penalty is that you are landed out at the point of entry.

Long disclaimers about pilot responsibility. The SUA may be at too low an altitude for safety. Below the SUA you are not forced to land out -- do what you want, thermal up, get home if you can. We're just not going to give contest points for anything you do after you get in the SUA.

Try it first on relatively flat sites. The SUAs may need to be more complex for mountain and ridge sites, so obviously we move there after the concept is proved at flatland sites.

Again, we're not here to forbid anything or tell pilots what to do. We just are no longer going to give points for very low altitude saves. We may not even dent the accident rate. We just want to remove it as a competitive necessity and temptation.

John Cochrane
  #5  
Old January 26th 18, 11:09 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 451
Default Hard Deck

I also think the start cylinder can be a place where it's very tempting to thermal low, no one wants to relight in front of the entire field, slow up the launch, etc. Tough be be penalized before you're even out on course, but I can think of one pilot who might still be alive if that were the case..

It's situational. At small contests with slow launches, I agree it's a temptation to hang on over the airport hoping for a save. But I've radioed ops, then given up above 1,000', pulled the brakes, and landed quickly at places like Hobbs when the field has launched because it can be faster to get back to 2,000' via a towplane than it is to climb up slowly with full water.

Chip Bearden
  #6  
Old January 26th 18, 11:38 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
John Cochrane[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 314
Default Hard Deck

Yes, 5 miles around the contest site is a hole in the hard deck, allowing relights. If CDs want to penalize low thermaling at the contest site, they can do that separately.

Or, hard deck applies only after start.

  #7  
Old January 26th 18, 11:53 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
jfitch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 911
Default Hard Deck

On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 11:00:05 AM UTC-8, Jim White wrote:
Time to change the subject line?

I have been thinking about the hard deck idea. Possibly fine in flat land
soaring but I am not sure it adds much when ridge flying.

I perceive another problem: Turbos are even more dangerous near the ground
than pure gliders. I may be happy in my 27 at 500ft but in a turbo?

Setting a 1000ft deck because that is safer for turbos will take away the
advantage that real gliders have in this zone. Many pure pilots would say
this advantage goes some of the way to make up for the additional
opportunities turbo pilots have in competition.

Setting a turbo deck for everyone will force everyone to go to the dark
side!

Jim


Jim, on the turbo thing: exactly the opposite is true. Non-motorglider pilots allege that motorglider pilots have a competitive advantage because they can overfly unlandable terrain low, taking on faith (and it is Faith) that the turbo will save them while the non-motorglider does not have that option. The hard deck prevents anyone from gaining points by flying that low in that location, eliminating any perceived advantage for the turbo pilot.
  #8  
Old January 26th 18, 11:54 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
MNLou
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 176
Default Hard Deck

If one were setting a hard deck so that windmill start turbos were at a "safe" altitude, the hard deck would be somewhere about 1500 agl.

I won't pull mine out any lower than that unless I am on a long high downwind to a runway.

YMMV

Lou
  #9  
Old January 27th 18, 05:28 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,035
Default Hard Deck

OK, question for everyone to ponder.

Many years ago we had a "backside of the ridge" day at Ridge Soaring. Last turnpoint was Williamsport, return to Ridge Soaring.
Just before the airport, the ridge rises a bunch, but we were on the wrong side (KS in the lead, SM second, me a little behind and a little lower.....).
Suddenly, KS made a hard right turn towards the ridge followed by SM. I figured they knew something I didn't so, either we get through or 3 broken ASW-20's in one spot.
There was a low saddle just before the rising terrain, with some ridge speed (which we all had) it was to make sure you cleared the clothesline in someone's side yard.
Then, terrain follow down the backside to the finish, from memory, we were likely 800' above the airport 1-2 miles from the finish with plenty of speed.

No issues, perfectly safe.
If the current idea of a hard deck was in place, would we all be landed out?
Ground clearance was "maybe" a wingspan but with plenty of "zoomie speed" if need be.

Just asking.......;-)
  #10  
Old January 27th 18, 05:49 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
JS[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 349
Default Hard Deck

The three of you landed out, Charlie. You're not allowed to do your own energy management.
The hard deck allows you to store energy as height, but doesn't take energy stored as velocity into account.
Jim


On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 8:28:39 AM UTC-8, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
OK, question for everyone to ponder.

Many years ago we had a "backside of the ridge" day at Ridge Soaring. Last turnpoint was Williamsport, return to Ridge Soaring.
Just before the airport, the ridge rises a bunch, but we were on the wrong side (KS in the lead, SM second, me a little behind and a little lower.....).
Suddenly, KS made a hard right turn towards the ridge followed by SM. I figured they knew something I didn't so, either we get through or 3 broken ASW-20's in one spot.
There was a low saddle just before the rising terrain, with some ridge speed (which we all had) it was to make sure you cleared the clothesline in someone's side yard.
Then, terrain follow down the backside to the finish, from memory, we were likely 800' above the airport 1-2 miles from the finish with plenty of speed.

No issues, perfectly safe.
If the current idea of a hard deck was in place, would we all be landed out?
Ground clearance was "maybe" a wingspan but with plenty of "zoomie speed" if need be.

Just asking.......;-)


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Melting Deck Plates Muddle - V-22 on LHD deck.... Mike Naval Aviation 79 December 14th 09 07:00 PM
hard wax application Tuno Soaring 20 April 24th 08 03:04 PM
winter is hard. Bruce Greef Soaring 2 July 3rd 06 06:31 AM
It ain't that hard Gregg Ballou Soaring 8 March 23rd 05 02:18 AM
Who says flying is hard? Roger Long Piloting 9 November 1st 04 09:57 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.