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

Silver Badge Fun (?)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 9th 03, 05:46 PM
Mark Zivley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I think badges do serve a useful purpose to soaring, but I'm guessing
that Al's comment is more geared toward the paperwork, documentation
side of badges rather than the benefit that having a structured seat of
goals established

Badges keep many pilots focused on soaring where a lack of established
goals and objectives would allow some pilots to become less focused,
then bored, and then less active in soaring, then no longer soaring pilots.

  #2  
Old July 9th 03, 06:15 PM
Al
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thats part of it Mark.

At the end of the day you fly for your own satisfaction.
If getting badges is your bag baby then so be it.

Mine is just the shear fun excitement and fear involved in long distance
flying with a bit of Acro thrown in for fun.

Al



"Mark Zivley" wrote in message
...
I think badges do serve a useful purpose to soaring, but I'm guessing
that Al's comment is more geared toward the paperwork, documentation
side of badges rather than the benefit that having a structured seat of
goals established

Badges keep many pilots focused on soaring where a lack of established
goals and objectives would allow some pilots to become less focused,
then bored, and then less active in soaring, then no longer soaring

pilots.



  #3  
Old July 9th 03, 06:18 PM
Mark James Boyd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Silver Badge Fun (?)

First of all, I don't know if "bollocking" is a nasty word,
but I certainly wouldn't want one.

Next, I want to make it clear that my main issue is that the
rules seem to be complex to account for the old "barograph
and people watching" style of badge flying, and have a lot of
requirements that are superceded by GPS loggers.

I also want to make clear that there is a large drop in
numbers as we go from local flying to XC, and I think that
some of it is because the Silver is daunting, and made moreso
by the complexity of the rules and the realities like mine.

It's also important to note that a Silver badge is a way to
qualify for Sports regionals and that plus gold 300km gets
one qualified for other classes.

I have heard my own club members naysay the badge program
because of the complexity, and when my PW-5 syndicate talked
about the Avenal regionals, I was surprised how few had
Silver badges and wouldn't even enter a sport class if it
had been available (in the 1-26 or 2-33).

So I really like the badge program for encouraging X-C,
and would like to see what I think are more consistent rules
which make common sense and are simpler (mostly with
regard to gps). I think this would ease that transition from
local to X-C flying.

First, despite the threat of a "good bollocking," if a pilot does
wander 50km from start and then lands (without having any
declaration), that meets the Silver. If one disagrees with this
rule, please start a new thread. I interpret this to mean
that Silver is more about the X-C skill than the finding the
exact turnpoint and doing photos, but also that this was the
only way to validate (historically) that the flight was done.
Only the altitude of the landing airport was known (how
can one show from a baro trace that the pilot was above
the airport at X feet?). If the pilot did an out and
return without a declaration, and took a photo of some
random point, how can it be verified?

A gps logger solves these problems. We don't need to
use the airport altitude, we can find a point 50km away
and see what it's altitude was. We don't need to look
at random photos, we know where the glider went.

Does it make common sense that a pilot who flies
50km out, then makes it halfway back and lands out
has less skill than the pilot who landed at the 50km
away point? No. If one ends up over the landout
airport with altitude gain but then lands there
with too much loss, does this show less skill than
a pilot who lands at an airport 300 feet higher but
never made any gain? No.

Is a wandering flight to a 50km away landing really
better than a wandering 50km x 2 out and return? No.

If you think the 50km undeclared flight to a landing is
wrong and would like this eliminated, I'd understand,
and this would make the rules consistent. Then
there is a goal flight required in the Silver just like
the Gold (which very specifically says pre-declared
O&R or triangle).

But I think the Silver distance is NOT a Silver goal
flight, and should not be treated as one. I think the
inconsistency violates common sense. I think that a pilot
who can show on a gps that there were two points during
a flight which were 50km apart and met the altitude
rules has earned Silver distance. That pilot either
flew twice that distance during the flight or had a
landout. Either way, that pilot's flight was just
as noteworthy as the pilot that wandered exactly 50km
away and landed. GPS loggers allow us to validate and
recognise this flight.











  #4  
Old July 9th 03, 06:26 PM
Brent Sullivan \SAM\
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In my opinion it's silly for the Silver Badge flight documentation to be
more onerous than the documentation of a flight in a (US) regional or
national competition.
Declare it
Fly it
Turn in the gps log
Put the pin on your funny hat

Brent

"Mark James Boyd" wrote in message
...
First of all, I don't know if "bollocking" is a nasty word,
but I certainly wouldn't want one.

Next, I want to make it clear that my main issue is that the
rules seem to be complex to account for the old "barograph
and people watching" style of badge flying, and have a lot of
requirements that are superceded by GPS loggers.

I also want to make clear that there is a large drop in
numbers as we go from local flying to XC, and I think that
some of it is because the Silver is daunting, and made moreso
by the complexity of the rules and the realities like mine.

It's also important to note that a Silver badge is a way to
qualify for Sports regionals and that plus gold 300km gets
one qualified for other classes.

I have heard my own club members naysay the badge program
because of the complexity, and when my PW-5 syndicate talked
about the Avenal regionals, I was surprised how few had
Silver badges and wouldn't even enter a sport class if it
had been available (in the 1-26 or 2-33).

So I really like the badge program for encouraging X-C,
and would like to see what I think are more consistent rules
which make common sense and are simpler (mostly with
regard to gps). I think this would ease that transition from
local to X-C flying.

First, despite the threat of a "good bollocking," if a pilot does
wander 50km from start and then lands (without having any
declaration), that meets the Silver. If one disagrees with this
rule, please start a new thread. I interpret this to mean
that Silver is more about the X-C skill than the finding the
exact turnpoint and doing photos, but also that this was the
only way to validate (historically) that the flight was done.
Only the altitude of the landing airport was known (how
can one show from a baro trace that the pilot was above
the airport at X feet?). If the pilot did an out and
return without a declaration, and took a photo of some
random point, how can it be verified?

A gps logger solves these problems. We don't need to
use the airport altitude, we can find a point 50km away
and see what it's altitude was. We don't need to look
at random photos, we know where the glider went.

Does it make common sense that a pilot who flies
50km out, then makes it halfway back and lands out
has less skill than the pilot who landed at the 50km
away point? No. If one ends up over the landout
airport with altitude gain but then lands there
with too much loss, does this show less skill than
a pilot who lands at an airport 300 feet higher but
never made any gain? No.

Is a wandering flight to a 50km away landing really
better than a wandering 50km x 2 out and return? No.

If you think the 50km undeclared flight to a landing is
wrong and would like this eliminated, I'd understand,
and this would make the rules consistent. Then
there is a goal flight required in the Silver just like
the Gold (which very specifically says pre-declared
O&R or triangle).

But I think the Silver distance is NOT a Silver goal
flight, and should not be treated as one. I think the
inconsistency violates common sense. I think that a pilot
who can show on a gps that there were two points during
a flight which were 50km apart and met the altitude
rules has earned Silver distance. That pilot either
flew twice that distance during the flight or had a
landout. Either way, that pilot's flight was just
as noteworthy as the pilot that wandered exactly 50km
away and landed. GPS loggers allow us to validate and
recognise this flight.













  #5  
Old July 9th 03, 06:59 PM
Mark James Boyd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

To answer a few other posts...

Yes I'm now hooked on X-C. I now understand the idea of
interthermal sink. When I was flying the 1-26 and 2-33,
penetration was such a problem that X-C days were few
and far between, and X-C was less a matter of skill than
weather. High L/D and penetration really do help for
creating hope and X-C. Having few soarable days can
be very disappointing. Lower performing ships are great
trainers, but I'd encourage new pilots to step up
quickly for (mainly) psychological reasons. The PW-5
was perfect for this (no ballast, no flaps, no retracts,
easy to assemble). I have two 1-26 X-C and nine PW-5
X-C. A trailer and easy-to-assemble glider are a
big deal. Still dunno what the fuss is about
automatic hookups though...the manual ones seem
to work fine so far and they are right in plain view
and easy to inspect...

My Volkslogger had some courses in it, and I had declared
one by pressing buttons. I changed my mind, disconnected
power, and wrote a written declaration. I reconnected
power and flew the flight. Much to my chagrin, the logger
had the old declaration on the .IGC file. Yep, I tested
this a couple more times. Bad feature. I've now eliminated
all courses from the logger. Problem solved, no more
electronic declarations. Since you have to provide the .igc
file with the paperwork, and the electronic declaration
is more recent, no way around this otherwise. Also be careful
because a small power interruption can cause this same redeclaration.
I use a seperate battery for the VL (actually a drill battery).
I like the idea of a written declaration anyway so my
towpilot and crew know the plan.

Yes the towpilot is usually my OO. Technically I think tampered
with means and includes removing power from the VL. Also, if
you run out of memory before the OO disconnects the logger, how
can the OO verify the trace? So I have the OO note the time
the logger is disconnected and then it is consistent with an
uninterrupted .IGC file. I don't have the slightest idea how
one could tamper with an .IGC file (isn't this like
a public key cipher? No-one has figured out how to
crack these, right? Factoring two large primes' product?
Yikes), but apparently this is a concern to someone.

Landing witnesses? OK this is also just silly. Violates
common sense when using a GPS logger. Way back in the good
ol' days, maybe you could convince some farmer to lift
your glider on the back of a trailer and drive it over
flat ground to the next airport. Unbroken baro in hand,
your OO got suspicious and called the FAI and asked them to
change the rule. But with a logger? If the logger was
put in the glider with the pilot, and the towpilot
released, what, was there some kind of midair pilot
switch? OK, assume no-one saw the landing, but the GPS says
you were there and the .IGC file is uninterrupted
(leave the battery connected until your non-ssa
crew and you get back to the home field and the
OO towpilot disconnects it). How do you fake a longer flight?
What does the landing witness add to this that
a towpilot release statement would not? Common sense
means a towpilot release statement should be a fine
substitute for a landing witness.

How about GPS altitudes? I suspect all new GPS's will
have WAAS, and if it's good enough for the 767 landing
0/0, it'll be good enough for us. 3-7 meters of
accuracy is darned good. I'm betting Garmin can easily
be swayed to put .IGC capability in their $200 GPS's
and this will be a non-issue quickly. Using pressure
altitudes for badges and records is simply outdated.
The FAI I'm certain will see this and accept either
form of proof, once the first WAAS and .igc producing
gps is manufactured.
  #6  
Old July 9th 03, 07:22 PM
Mark James Boyd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The badge program really did keep me going, but the
complexity was really a downside. Also, hearing about a
pilot attempt an out and return, but then make a
landout less than 50km away from start, and not get credit
for a Silver distance (I think the pilot made the
turnpoint first, but am not sure) was disappointing.
I thought the pilot had made a good Silver distance,
and didn't think this should be treated as a
Silver goal flight and therefore not count. Keep
in mind that declaring an out and return from
a certain turnpoint means one must make the turnpoint
at start too, not just tow release. This is
another complexity that would be eliminated
by a change allowing post-flight turnpoint
selection for distance (not goal) flights.





  #7  
Old July 9th 03, 07:30 PM
Martin Gregorie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 9 Jul 2003 09:18:42 -0800, (Mark James Boyd)
wrote:

First of all, I don't know if "bollocking" is a nasty word,
but I certainly wouldn't want one.

That would be a "chewing out" in American.

Next, I want to make it clear that my main issue is that the
rules seem to be complex to account for the old "barograph
and people watching" style of badge flying, and have a lot of
requirements that are superceded by GPS loggers.

I'm certain there are hang overs from the old days, but under the
current rules you can do the distance with an uncalibrated barograph
and witnesses to the take-off and landing. The barograph is only there
to make sure you didn't get a relight along the way.

That said, the remaining rules about witnesses and the barograph are
to stop the trace being faked with a pressure chamber.

I also want to make clear that there is a large drop in
numbers as we go from local flying to XC, and I think that
some of it is because the Silver is daunting, and made moreso
by the complexity of the rules and the realities like mine.

Sure, but the Silver isn't the cause - after all you don't HAVE to get
one, but its nice to have, both for the reasons you give below and
because its a good skill indication if you visit another club and want
to fly.

Example 1: I'm visiting the Wasserkuppe in Germany later this month. I
rang to check on flying requirements and mentioned I had Silver. Their
reaction was: "Oh, well just bring your license and medical and you
can fly".

Example 2: When I rolled up at Avenal in Oct, 2001, having Silver got
me an immediate area familiarisation flight in a 2-33. If I'd had
longer I'm certain I could have flown the 1-26 as well. Its on my
to-do list... next time!

It's also important to note that a Silver badge is a way to
qualify for Sports regionals and that plus gold 300km gets
one qualified for other classes.

I have heard my own club members naysay the badge program
because of the complexity, and when my PW-5 syndicate talked
about the Avenal regionals, I was surprised how few had
Silver badges and wouldn't even enter a sport class if it
had been available (in the 1-26 or 2-33).

That's a club thing. In my club its expected that new solo pilots will
go for their Bronze XC Endorsement (UK prerequisite for xc) and Silver
as they learn to go xc. It is expected that the club Discii and Pegase
will be flown xc - why else would we have them? However, not all UK
clubs have this attitude.

So I really like the badge program for encouraging X-C,
and would like to see what I think are more consistent rules
which make common sense and are simpler (mostly with
regard to gps). I think this would ease that transition from
local to X-C flying.

First, despite the threat of a "good bollocking," if a pilot does
wander 50km from start and then lands (without having any
declaration), that meets the Silver.

Only if he can get both the take-off and landing witnessed by an OO or
two other persons and had a logger on board . If he just 'wandered
off' that's rather unlikely.

I interpret this to mean
that Silver is more about the X-C skill than the finding the
exact turnpoint and doing photos, but also that this was the
only way to validate (historically) that the flight was done.

That's true enough.

Only the altitude of the landing airport was known (how
can one show from a baro trace that the pilot was above
the airport at X feet?).

You can't. The height rules are intended to stop things like being
towed to 10,000 ft AGL and then gliding 50 km from there. This is why
the start height and destination ground level are important.

If the pilot did an out and
return without a declaration, and took a photo of some
random point, how can it be verified?

Of course it can't be verified. Photo verification only works with the
crayon mark on the canopy showing in a photographic declaration pre
launch and the post-landing photo evidence. The OO must remove the
camera after landing and get the film developed as a single strip.
Digital cameras are not legal. 'Random points' don't cut it either -
the photo must be of a recognizable TP and taken from a point within
the FAI sector so that an OO can look at the photo and recognise the
TP and where the glider was when it was photographed.

A gps logger solves these problems. We don't need to
use the airport altitude, we can find a point 50km away
and see what it's altitude was. We don't need to look
at random photos, we know where the glider went.

All true, but there are still novices who don't have a GPS. The
current rules allow them to do a valid Silver using only witnesses and
a barograph or pressure-only logger. If they are flying a club's
post-solo glider (Junior, K-8, PW-5, 1-26 ...) that may be all its
equipped with. Would you really want to change the rules to exclude
them just because they don't have a GPS available?

There are other reasons too: my club prefers the Silver distance to be
done using only a map and pressure logger or barograph and to land at
a declared gliding field. The reasoning is to prove to the pilot (and
those who sent him off) that he can navigate on pure VFR and land on a
previously unseen airfield. Having done it that way gives an enormous
confidence boost to the newly minted Silver pilot.

Does it make common sense that a pilot who flies
50km out, then makes it halfway back and lands out
has less skill than the pilot who landed at the 50km
away point?

Yes. It shows that he understands the task, which is to fly a straight
line distance of 50 km or more. If the glider ends up closer than that
its not made the straight line distance regardless of how far it flew
or where it went in getting there.

If one ends up over the landout
airport with altitude gain but then lands there
with too much loss, does this show less skill than
a pilot who lands at an airport 300 feet higher but
never made any gain?

It shows the pilot didn't understand the task requirements and either
picked too close a destination or started too high.

Is a wandering flight to a 50km away landing really
better than a wandering 50km x 2 out and return? No.

No, but the rules are clear on this. If you use a remote start or
finish and don't land there you MUST get home carrying proof that you
did in fact get there.

If you think the 50km undeclared flight to a landing is
wrong and would like this eliminated, I'd understand,
and this would make the rules consistent. Then
there is a goal flight required in the Silver just like
the Gold (which very specifically says pre-declared
O&R or triangle).

Actually, I think I would prefer it to be a goal flight for the same
reasons that my club prefers it to be flown as if it is one.

I think that a pilot
who can show on a gps that there were two points during
a flight which were 50km apart and met the altitude
rules has earned Silver distance.

Definitely not. This would eliminate the intention to fly to a
predetermined point and so would allow the clueless to drift off
downwind and earn a silver distance by default, not knowing where they
were or how they got there.

I think that you're possibly missing the point that the Silver is
pretty well designed to demonstrate that its holder is competent pilot
who has acquired the basic skills for xc flying. IMO it works this
way:

- 1000m height gain demonstrates the ability to find and ride thermals
to a significant height

- 5 hour duration shows the ability to stay airborne long enough to
complete tasks of up to 300 km and to maintain concentration over that
period

- 50 km xc shows that the pilot can navigate well enough to find a
destination or at least to go in a fairly straight line for a
significant distance.

--
martin@ : Martin Gregorie
gregorie : Harlow, UK
demon :
co : Zappa fan & glider pilot
uk :

  #8  
Old July 9th 03, 08:07 PM
Mark James Boyd
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I think pilots can get the same things from soaring on their
own as from the Badge program, but I am grateful it was there for
me. And man am I grateful for thebadgelady.

Thats part of it Mark.
At the end of the day you fly for your own satisfaction.
If getting badges is your bag baby then so be it.
Mine is just the shear fun excitement and fear involved in long distance
flying with a bit of Acro thrown in for fun.
Al


There are some other motivations for me than own satisfaction.

I'd like to fly in competitions and Silver plus gold distance is
required (For me this also means Diamond goal. I've
thought about this so much I almost think they're the same.)
Is there a way to fly in a regional without this?

I like publicizing my home gliderport. Badge and record flights
seem to be an accepted way to generate publicity. Sure I
like having a record or badge, but getting more people
to come out and soar is even better.

I think it is a concise way of explaining experience.
And it provides a focus for discussion about aspects of gliding.
When I talk about these badges, each element is
interesting to newcomers.

Lastly, for me it provides structure to continue developing
my pilot skills, and select courses and tasks that are
reasonable. I've come to realize that flying the PW-5
great distances is pretty hard (although William Snead
might disagree). So I'm being pulled into interesting
tasks and ideas. Without the Gold altitude, I wouldn't
have tried to max out a thermal a few weeks ago. The Diamond
goal has really got me thinking about routes over good
thermalling terrain.

Anyway, this IS my bag, baby. Yeahhh!
Thanks to all you cool cats who've put
your mummblies out there to make this a swinging
sport. Yeahhh! Smashing!

P.S.

I don't use the word "fear." I call it
a "moment of great concern."

And it isn't a "cloud,"
it's an "area of limited visibility."

It isn't "expensive dental work" it's a
"firm landing."

I don't say "he brought
most of the field back with him in the gear well,"
I say he "landed out."


Mark


"Behind every great man is a woman rolling her eyes."


  #9  
Old July 9th 03, 08:41 PM
Kirk Stant
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Mark,

Congratulations on getting your Silver - It only gets better!

Sounds like you managed to find all the ways to not get it first!

Actually, now with GPS loggers, it's really easy. But you definitely
have to understand the rules, jump through the hoops (in the right
direction), and finish the paperwork. That's why it's a badge, after
all. Otherwise, just go out and fly 50 km and be happy! (What's
wrong, Al, scared you might make a mistake?).

While on the subject of badges, I wonder why we don't have any speed
badges to go with the distance ones - since speed is what is now one
of the main objectives of XC soaring. Something like 50 kph (30 mph)
over 50 km for Silver Speed, 100 kph (60mph) over 150 km for Gold
Speed, and 150 kph (90 mph) over 300 km for Diamond Speed.

Just a thought...

Kirk
66
  #10  
Old July 9th 03, 10:44 PM
Martin Gregorie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 9 Jul 2003 09:59:04 -0800, (Mark James Boyd)
wrote:

My Volkslogger had some courses in it, and I had declared
one by pressing buttons. I changed my mind, disconnected
power, and wrote a written declaration. I reconnected
power and flew the flight. Much to my chagrin, the logger
had the old declaration on the .IGC file. Yep, I tested
this a couple more times. Bad feature. I've now eliminated
all courses from the logger. Problem solved, no more
electronic declarations. Since you have to provide the .igc
file with the paperwork, and the electronic declaration
is more recent, no way around this otherwise. Also be careful
because a small power interruption can cause this same redeclaration.
I use a seperate battery for the VL (actually a drill battery).
I like the idea of a written declaration anyway so my
towpilot and crew know the plan.

Thanks for the clarification. That makes sense now.

I'm surprised with what you say about the time stamp on the electronic
declaration. The EW model D manual says that the declaration is time
stamped from the logger's internal clock when the declaration is
recorded and that this time stamp is retained until the logger's
internal clock is reset, at which time the task declaration is wiped
and must be re-entered.

If the VL doesn't treat the declaration time stamp the same as the EW
model D then I'm certain you've done the right thing by clearing all
declaration information out of it. However, it may be worth double
checking that it really does reset the time stamp on power recycling
before giving up on electronic declaration.

I don't use electronic declarations, but then I use the EW model D,
which is a portable device that can only have a declaration recorded
via a computer (no keyboard - only one button on it) and I don't own a
glider, so may not always fly the same one. This just means that a
paper declaration is more convenient for me, but ymmv.

Technically I think tampered
with means and includes removing power from the VL.

That varies with the type of logger. Most loggers that use external
GPS receivers also include disconnecting the GPS as tampering. The EW
model D could care less about power (it has a 9v built-in backup
battery) but it records GPS disconnect/connect events, so
tamper-proofing includes looping the GPS data line round a permanent
part of the glider structure in such a way that it must be
disconnected to remove GPS and/or logger from the aircraft.

Also, if
you run out of memory before the OO disconnects the logger, how
can the OO verify the trace?

Is the VL so memory limited? The EW model D will record GPS and
pressure for 24 hours at a 4 second sample interval. I'd assumed this
was pretty standard.


--
martin@ : Martin Gregorie
gregorie : Harlow, UK
demon :
co : Zappa fan & glider pilot
uk :

 




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
Air Police Badge B2431 Military Aviation 7 November 8th 10 08:09 AM
The Silver Star Medal Registry Otis Willie Naval Aviation 1 October 10th 04 11:00 PM
P-51 wings: silver paint or natural metal ? Vicente Vazquez Military Aviation 7 July 13th 04 01:37 AM
Badge clue to pilot Otis Willie Military Aviation 9 March 17th 04 05:25 AM
Bronze Star v. Combat Infantry Badge ArtKramr Military Aviation 22 July 29th 03 03:58 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.