FAI ratifies records of illegal flights.

That's a fair claim, if that's the way it happened.Â* ...Unless the rules
state that the /_flight_/ must be legal.Â* Maybe he had navigation lights.

On 12/25/2019 11:26 AM, Roy B. wrote:
Jan:
While I am not an expert on these rules, I note that this was an Out and Return distance record that would have used a start and finish line (to make sure that the finish altitude was within 1000m of the start). Would not the "soaring performance" have ended at the finish line crossing and not at the landing? Why is time of landing (or any rule violation) after the record performance is completed relevant to validity of the record claim?
ROY

--
Dan, 5J

If sunset time is stated in hours and minutes, then minutes are what you validate, not minutes and seconds? I guess there is a lot more to this story we are not told.

https://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-3....l?dsId=4820067



The roll stopped at 19:43:59 (UTC +2)
Local Sunset was 19:27 (UTC +2)

What do the SA regulations require?

T8

Op 12/26/2019 om 16:23 schreef Tango Eight:
https://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-3....l?dsId=4820067



The roll stopped at 19:43:59 (UTC +2)
Local Sunset was 19:27 (UTC +2)

What do the SA regulations require?

T8


Sunset + 15 minutes.

On Wednesday, December 25, 2019 at 11:53:57 PM UTC-6, krasw wrote:
If sunset time is stated in hours and minutes, then minutes are what you validate, not minutes and seconds? I guess there is a lot more to this story we are not told.

Exactly my opinion, too.

On Thursday, December 26, 2019 at 2:29:01 PM UTC-8, Tom BravoMike wrote:
On Wednesday, December 25, 2019 at 11:53:57 PM UTC-6, krasw wrote:
If sunset time is stated in hours and minutes, then minutes are what you validate, not minutes and seconds? I guess there is a lot more to this story we are not told.

Exactly my opinion, too.

You can legally fly a glider after sunset IF it is equipped with navigational lights. A friend of mine did exactly that. So, unless you KNOW the glider DIDN'T have nav lights, you can't say DEFINITIVELY that the flight was illegal.

Tom

On Wednesday, December 25, 2019 at 1:43:30 AM UTC-8, Jan R wrote:
In the Dutch gliding records list, I found a flight, conducted in South
Africa that landed after the local official daylight time. For
ratification a flight must be conducted legaly, so I asked the Dutch NAC
for explanation. The responsible officer told me that a flight that
lands before 19:44:00 is still landing within the 43 th minute.
Interesting to know that the officer who told me that, was a Dutch
engineer working in a Dutch nuclear power station. So, if, all of a
sudden you do not hear anything from Holland anymore, you have a option
to think of.

I waited a few months, and was surprised to see that the FAI ratified
the record also as a African regional record. So I asked the responsible
officer of the FAI for a explanation and I was told that the observation
of the Official Observer regarding sunset time was leading. Of course
this is not true. The country where the flight is conducted issues the
official sunset time and the official daylight times.

After a few emails and not getting any answers, I dropped the case.
Then by coincidence, I met the responsible officer of the FAI at a
glider site and brought up the problem. He told me that for just a few
minutes to late, the FAI considered the flight as being still legal.

So, not South Africa is telling what illegal is in there country but the
FAI is.

Why am I telling this story? The main reason is that if somebody
claims a record and the Official Observer and the pilot himself sign the
claim form, they state that the flight was conducted in a legal way.. In
the mean time I spoke to a few OO's and none of them was prepared to
sign for such a flight. That means that different pilots are are being
treated unequally and that is, at least in my opinion, not fair. So I
asked the FAI officer to confirm the FAI point of view in writing and he
promised me to write me after he was in his office again. Unfortunately
he did not keep this promise and did not react to any mails referring to
our conversation.

If anybody has trouble to have his badge/record ratified because he
landed after official daylight time, he may refer to this posting and of
course the ratified record of the illegal flight.
The details a
Registration 1-4-2016 PH-1340 Maxim Leenders CN: UFO.
FAI record: 17793

I wish everyone a beautiful Christmas.

I thought here was a precedent for this after the Ca City Altitude record? You fly it, you own it regardless of consequences.

Two points

Within reason, I don't feel it is my business what some one else feels is a valid badge or record claim. I personally think it makes more fun to let one bad tracking point be enough to dq because it means that I get the fun of trying again. I can see that others might see this differently, but I don't see how this disagreement should lead to disapproval.

Most table of sunrise/sunset are to the nearest minute, but there is probably a legal definition and table of sun locations which would get this to the second at the actual landing point. The flight might have been without question, given the right figuring after the fact.

if you claim a record you have to sign the following statement:

I certify that this flight was conducted in accordance with the FAI
Sporting Code and with (1) all operating
limitations established by the aircraft manufacturer, (2) any more
restrictive operating limitations
imposed by national airworthiness regulations of the civil aviation
authority of the country of registration,
and (3) airspace regulations where the flight took place.
Signature of pilot

Jan:
While the contrary position is certainly reasonable, if I was the OO or the pilot here I would have confidence that a 2-3 minute late landing was neither an "operating limitation" nor an "airspace regulation" violation. I would sign the certification for that new record. I read items 1 and 2 as relating to the problem of flying overweight or similar matters, and #3 as relating to delineated controlled airspace violations. If the FAI wanted a certification that "all applicable flight regulations" were complied with - they would know how to write that, and they did not write that.
ROY

On Friday, December 27, 2019 at 12:17:25 PM UTC-5, Roy B. wrote:
if you claim a record you have to sign the following statement:

I certify that this flight was conducted in accordance with the FAI
Sporting Code and with (1) all operating
limitations established by the aircraft manufacturer, (2) any more
restrictive operating limitations
imposed by national airworthiness regulations of the civil aviation
authority of the country of registration,
and (3) airspace regulations where the flight took place.
Signature of pilot

Jan:
While the contrary position is certainly reasonable, if I was the OO or the pilot here I would have confidence that a 2-3 minute late landing was neither an "operating limitation" nor an "airspace regulation" violation. I would sign the certification for that new record. I read items 1 and 2 as relating to the problem of flying overweight or similar matters, and #3 as relating to delineated controlled airspace violations. If the FAI wanted a certification that "all applicable flight regulations" were complied with - they would know how to write that, and they did not write that.
ROY

The 2017 SC3 is worded differently.

4.4.2.a. says...

"For all claims the pilot must certify that the flight was conducted in accordance with the Code, was flown in compliance with all the glider manufacturer’s and national operating limitations, and in accordance with national flight regulations (airspace use, night flight, etc.)."

If I'd flown that flight, I'd have not submitted a record claim. I would not have signed off as an OO and I darned sure would not have ratified the record as a record keeper. And I'm only half German, lol. The flight is not diminished in any way, it's just another amusing story to tell.

The pilot that can fly 1250 km doesn't do so by accident. Do it again, do it correctly in all respects, get the record without fudging anything, have an even better story to tell and *another* wonderful flight.

Bless those fussy full blooded Germans, long may they continue to build such beautiful and capable flying machines. Bless the nitpickers, may they find jobs in QC working for our favorite manufacturers of flying machines of all types.

T8