Minutes of Fall 2014 USA Rules Committee meeting posted on SSA website

The minutes of the Fall 2014 USA Rules Committee meeting have been posted on the SSA website under "Racing Rules and Process" and can be accessed directly via the link below.

http://www.ssa.org/files/member/2014...ng_Minutes.pdf

If you can't get the link to work automatically, copy its text and paste it into a program like Notepad, then copy the text from Notepad and paste it into your browser.

For the Committee,
John Godfrey (QT), Chair

On Saturday, January 10, 2015 at 8:35:19 PM UTC-5, John Godfrey (QT) wrote:
The minutes of the Fall 2014 USA Rules Committee meeting have been posted on the SSA website under "Racing Rules and Process" and can be accessed directly via the link below.

http://www.ssa.org/files/member/2014...ng_Minutes.pdf

If you can't get the link to work automatically, copy its text and paste it into a program like Notepad, then copy the text from Notepad and paste it into your browser.

For the Committee,
John Godfrey (QT), Chair

"Rules Committee plans to remove the prohibition on electronic devices in the cockpit in 2016. Comments are welcomed."

The context implies that this includes artificial horizon tools of all sorts, comm gear of all sorts (real time flight location and data for instance), satellite links... basically anything anyone wants to pay for. Is that what is actually intended here?

Evan Ludeman / T8

On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 2:34:35 PM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:
On Saturday, January 10, 2015 at 8:35:19 PM UTC-5, John Godfrey (QT) wrote:
The minutes of the Fall 2014 USA Rules Committee meeting have been posted on the SSA website under "Racing Rules and Process" and can be accessed directly via the link below.

http://www.ssa.org/files/member/2014...ng_Minutes.pdf

If you can't get the link to work automatically, copy its text and paste it into a program like Notepad, then copy the text from Notepad and paste it into your browser.

For the Committee,
John Godfrey (QT), Chair

"Rules Committee plans to remove the prohibition on electronic devices in the cockpit in 2016. Comments are welcomed."

The context implies that this includes artificial horizon tools of all sorts, comm gear of all sorts (real time flight location and data for instance), satellite links... basically anything anyone wants to pay for. Is that what is actually intended here?

Evan Ludeman / T8

They are just embracing the reality that it is impossible to prohibit such devices in the days of pocket computers (often masquerading as telephones) that have apps that can do much of what a dedicated instrument can. Having live weather data is a safety benefit for everyone and I could make a similar case for gyro instruments. Remember when varios and then GPS were not allowed?

Mike

On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 5:57:01 PM UTC-5, Mike the Strike wrote:
On Sunday, January 11, 2015 at 2:34:35 PM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:
On Saturday, January 10, 2015 at 8:35:19 PM UTC-5, John Godfrey (QT) wrote:
The minutes of the Fall 2014 USA Rules Committee meeting have been posted on the SSA website under "Racing Rules and Process" and can be accessed directly via the link below.

http://www.ssa.org/files/member/2014...ng_Minutes.pdf

If you can't get the link to work automatically, copy its text and paste it into a program like Notepad, then copy the text from Notepad and paste it into your browser.

For the Committee,
John Godfrey (QT), Chair

"Rules Committee plans to remove the prohibition on electronic devices in the cockpit in 2016. Comments are welcomed."

The context implies that this includes artificial horizon tools of all sorts, comm gear of all sorts (real time flight location and data for instance), satellite links... basically anything anyone wants to pay for. Is that what is actually intended here?

Evan Ludeman / T8

They are just embracing the reality that it is impossible to prohibit such devices in the days of pocket computers (often masquerading as telephones) that have apps that can do much of what a dedicated instrument can. Having live weather data is a safety benefit for everyone and I could make a similar case for gyro instruments. Remember when varios and then GPS were not allowed?

Mike

I am simply trying to clarify what it is that is (provisionally, comments invited) being embraced. You must admit, that *is* a little surprising in view of the positions that have been articulated over the last few years.

I'm one of the guys that helps put the toys in your panel, I'm no luddite.

-Evan

Hooray! Ed Kilbourne's prediction will now come true!

"Have you heard the news, that the LS-22s will have nothing on their panel but a screen.
That give the latest views from the satellite you choose and display the sink in red, the lift in green.
There's no stick upon the floor, no rudders anymore, just two wires that you plug into your brain.
A computer reads your mind through a fiber optic line and with this information flies the plane."

From "The New Glider Blues" copyright 1988 Ed Kilbourne

And speaking of the Law of Inintended Consequences, by the new planned definition from 3.23 "Living Will for Dying Nationals", the 2014 Open Class Nationals would not have been permitted? The contest had 9 people entered. Everyone flew every day. Last place at the end of the contest had 63.5% of the winners score. Valid Nationals requires at least 8 people to have greater than 40% of the winners score at the end of the contest. Requirement met. Now, there is a proposal to not let a contest start unless you have at least 10 (minimum that will get at least 40% of the winners score plus 2) or maybe as low as 7 (if everyone entered has a 92 or above ranking)?

I guess I missed something. If we are combining contests at a given site, why are we also bumping up the minimum number of people required to even start the contest? BB, I see this listed as your request. Would you be willing to explain, here or in private?

Thanks,
Steve Leonard

My Bad. I see "no change". But, I would still be interested in knowing why, if you have a moment, John.

Thanks for all you guys do!

Steve

The issue with the current system: If you start with the minimum number of pilots, then there is a danger of it all falling apart if one guy has problems -- equipment breaks, small damage, so on. Also, a weird thing has happened where the whole rest of the fleet has to devote themselves on the last day to making sure the last guy on the scoresheet doesn't land out, and finishes with the required 40%. So the idea was to build a buffer in to starting a contest.

The RC wisely decided not to implement it.

There is a larger question. What do we do with slowly diminishing classes? Having contests fail, as standard did at Hobbs last year, is not a great way to run a railroad.

On electronics. Yes, the whole business of policing turn and banks in iPhones was getting out of hand. But technology changes in both ways. Now that we have flight recorders, we can detect serious cloud flying. A ban on carriage is much more important when you have no idea what people are doing out there. If you circle up a few thousand feet over cloudless, expect a long hard talk with the CD. If you do it often and start winning contests expect longer and harder talks.

There is also a big philosophical push towards making rules simple. Please keep that in mind when making requests.

John Cochrane BB

I note that the rules committee felt that UK style Handicap Distance Tasks
did not give enough benefit to warrant the difficulty of scoring.

In the UK we ran handicap distance tasks in several regional contests last
season and the feedback was almost universally good. Some high handicap
(fast) gliders didn't like it as they found that that they had to work
harder to stay ahead!

To overcome the scoring difficulties, we wrote some software and worked
with Naviter to make it easy to use See You Competition to score the tasks.
This has worked well.

If you use some other software then it could be harder although the process
is simple for those that complete. In theory all gliders flown equally well
will complete in the same elapsed time. Compare the handicapped speed of
each glider to the winners' for speed points. Distance points are the
same.

The difficulty comes with determining distance points for land outs. In the
UK we accept that there are some anomalies between handicaps on the grounds
that the point is to get round.

I am keen to facilitate universal acceptance of this exciting new format as
I believe that it will attract more pilots into competition. If I can help
please give me a shout.

For more information or to download the software go to
www.boffins.co.uk/gliding

Jim

On Monday, January 12, 2015 at 11:58:11 AM UTC-6, John Cochrane wrote:
The issue with the current system: If you start with the minimum number of pilots, then there is a danger of it all falling apart if one guy has problems -- equipment breaks, small damage, so on. Also, a weird thing has happened where the whole rest of the fleet has to devote themselves on the last day to making sure the last guy on the scoresheet doesn't land out, and finishes with the required 40%. So the idea was to build a buffer in to starting a contest.

The RC wisely decided not to implement it.

There is a larger question. What do we do with slowly diminishing classes? Having contests fail, as standard did at Hobbs last year, is not a great way to run a railroad.

On electronics. Yes, the whole business of policing turn and banks in iPhones was getting out of hand. But technology changes in both ways. Now that we have flight recorders, we can detect serious cloud flying. A ban on carriage is much more important when you have no idea what people are doing out there. If you circle up a few thousand feet over cloudless, expect a long hard talk with the CD. If you do it often and start winning contests expect longer and harder talks.

There is also a big philosophical push towards making rules simple. Please keep that in mind when making requests.

John Cochrane BB

Thank you for the reply, John. I am well aware of watching the numbers drop as a contest goes on. And it is often due to things outside of the contest that has people leaving. Guess it is the risk we will have to keep if we fly in a minimally subscribed class.

Suggestion (tongue in cheek) to a CD that has to have "the talk" with someone for climbing above cloudbase. "Next time you do that, how about you record the climb "along the edge of the cloud" for all to see at the pilot's meeting."

I had the rare fortune to do a climb up the side of a cu at a contest at TSA. In the cylinder, before the task opened. Got about 1000 feet higher than anyone else. On that day, 2 knots was a good climb, so I had 5 minutes on them at the start! Too bad that by the time I got to the "correct" side of the start cylinder, I was back down with them. But, you should have seen them searching down below me out in the blue!

Steve Leonard