Is the 200ft below Min Finish Height Rule Working?

1. Missed start height or time below by using a penalty
2. Missed turn points with a penalty
3. Missed finish height with penalty

All of these could be removed and make it black or white, zero points for all errors. Does that encourage pilots to race? No we will just see more pack up early or not come at all.



A minor point here, especially to those of you who think the US should use IGC rules.

IGC rules give none of these graduated penalties. 1 meter out of the start gate? Tough, look harder next time. Miss a turnpoint by a meter? Tough again, you just landed. Airspace: real simple. One fix in, you landed. One fix a meter away, you're ok. None of this major penalty minor penalty stuff. Oh, and you can overfly airspace, just stay one meter above. Top is 17,999.99 not 17,500.

Participation isn't great everywhere, but not drastically worse than in the US. There is no international clamor to bring the US 10 pages of graduated penalty rules into IGC competition.

The idea that we need carefully structured graduated penalties so every pilot can nick every checkpoint with a foot to spare and all shall come home and all shall have prizes, or else people will stay away from contests in droves, just doesn't bear out in the facts. Most new pilots are completely unaware of these rules anyway. Actually, as we have seen, most experienced pilots are pretty foggy on the complex penalty structure too! Quick quiz: Just how many points per foot do you lose if you miss a turnpoint?

I will admit, one meter above the airport fence and you get speed points, you're ok, even if there is a truck in the way, and that too has limited effects on participation. Safety is only loosely related to participation, especially where, as in most responses to this thread, the vast majority of pilots can tell themselves that only bozos would do this stuff and they're immune. But there are reasons other than participation for rules not to dangle hundreds of points in front of pilots for doing stupid stuff.

John Cochrane

All this talk of "safety" and you post a picture you took of your
speedometer while driving at 72 MPH? And probably on a two lane road.
Sheesh...


"Dave Nadler" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, January 22, 2014 2:55:32 PM UTC-5, Luke Szczepaniak wrote:
I finally got to try a line finish in a contest at Hobbs last year.
In my opinion it is the safest option available...

Perhaps you were absent when a pilot blew a final glide from
the North, and landed on a street in a housing development
close to the airport?

See race day 7:
http://www.nadler.com/public/2013_Hobbs/2013_Hobbs.html

Some of us will make sure to have safe options,
but not all, and it cannot be legislated to cover
all conditions anyway...

On Thursday, January 23, 2014 10:12:42 AM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
All this talk of "safety" and you post a picture you took of your speedometer while driving at 72 MPH? And probably on a two lane road. Sheesh...

Yeah. That is way too slow, Dave. I have taken pictures of the speedo at upwards of 100 MPH on two lane roads. Step it up, will ya?

Actually, Dan. Dave's picture was of the odometer. Just happens you also get to see the speedometer. :-)

Steve

If a 700ft finish is too low for a 18 meter national contest, then it is probably too low for a Regional. Yes, I understand the caveat of diving off a ridge and would not have a problem with that.

Last year at Perry and at Cordele, I was racing my Silent-IN, the 12 meter, 31/1 L/D.

We had 700 foot finishes at both sites. I understand this is comfortable for a modern 15 or 18 meter ship and leaves plenty of margin.

This does not leave much if any margin for me, and found that I needed to take extra height to be safe.

I am racing too, and this leaves us essentially racing to a different finish points. You are racing to a finish height that gives you an adequate safety margin and I am racing to the same point, but having to take more altitude for the same safety factor.

I understand UH's comment about immediately joining the pattern in an orderly fashion, but I think this could also be done with a 1000 foot finish and some more spoilers added.

This also gives a little more room is someone has a problem on landing and obstructs the runway.

Kevin
192

Good points Kevin.

On Friday, January 24, 2014 8:01:17 AM UTC-5, wrote:
If a 700ft finish is too low for a 18 meter national contest, then it is probably too low for a Regional. Yes, I understand the caveat of diving off a ridge and would not have a problem with that.



Last year at Perry and at Cordele, I was racing my Silent-IN, the 12 meter, 31/1 L/D.



We had 700 foot finishes at both sites. I understand this is comfortable for a modern 15 or 18 meter ship and leaves plenty of margin.



This does not leave much if any margin for me, and found that I needed to take extra height to be safe.



I am racing too, and this leaves us essentially racing to a different finish points. You are racing to a finish height that gives you an adequate safety margin and I am racing to the same point, but having to take more altitude for the same safety factor.



I understand UH's comment about immediately joining the pattern in an orderly fashion, but I think this could also be done with a 1000 foot finish and some more spoilers added.



This also gives a little more room is someone has a problem on landing and obstructs the runway.



Kevin

192

On Friday, January 24, 2014 8:01:17 AM UTC-5, wrote:
If a 700ft finish is too low for a 18 meter national contest, then it is probably too low for a Regional. Yes, I understand the caveat of diving off a ridge and would not have a problem with that. Last year at Perry and at Cordele, I was racing my Silent-IN, the 12 meter, 31/1 L/D. We had 700 foot finishes at both sites. I understand this is comfortable for a modern 15 or 18 meter ship and leaves plenty of margin. This does not leave much if any margin for me, and found that I needed to take extra height to be safe. I am racing too, and this leaves us essentially racing to a different finish points. You are racing to a finish height that gives you an adequate safety margin and I am racing to the same point, but having to take more altitude for the same safety factor. I understand UH's comment about immediately joining the pattern in an orderly fashion, but I think this could also be done with a 1000 foot finish and some more spoilers added. This also gives a little more room is someone has a problem on landing and obstructs the runway. Kevin 192

I Fly an ASK-21 that has similar performance in a couple contests each year.. If the finish position and the pattern are such that I think we will need a bit more margin, I add it in the last couple miles and get on with it. That is part of what handicapped racing is about.
Most finishes set at 700 feet result in a bit more altitude available because few fly the finish perfectlyand most have some excess energy.
In any case, if pilots at a race have a concern about the finish height, the CD has the option to adjust it. That said, at a big contest like Perry, adjusting the finish and complicating the pattern for 65 gliders to accomodate 1 or 2 makes not too much sense.
UH

In any case, if pilots at a race have a concern about the finish height, the CD has the option to adjust it. That said, at a big contest like Perry, adjusting the finish and complicating the pattern for 65 gliders to accomodate 1 or 2 makes not too much sense.

UH

Wise from UH. There is way too much asking the rules committee to impose from on high things that you can just talk to the CD about.

But..700 feet is really 500 feet, and 500 feet, 40 knots, and one mile from the south or north is really uncomfortable even in 15 meters at Perry. I also don't agree with Hank's idea that too much altitude leads to traffic problems. More energy always good. The CD can suggest an extended pattern if youse don't know what to do with yourselves for a few hundred feet. So if anyone wants to ask for 1000 feet at Perry, you'll have another voice to agree with it.

John Cochrane

First of all I would like to congratulate Sean for being able to pick the most controversial subjects to discuss on RAS. Just about every thread Sean starts or joins turns into a weeks long exchange that explores every possible nuance to the point of ad nauseam. If newcomers to the sport could be encouraged to the same degree we would see a boom in soaring participation.

But I digress my main observation is that twenty years ago before GPS to receive a good finish one had to arrive within the airfield boundaries with flying speed and it was necessary to complete a touchdown, roll out and stop without catastrophic incident. If you landed before the fence or executed an arrival rather than a landing, points for a successful finish were not awarded. The difference now is we are required to arrive above and within the horizontal boundaries of the top of an invisible cylinder. The cylinder itself is no different than a line of trees on the airfield boundary, enter it from anywhere other than above and you did not make the finish. Except of course we have graduated penalties, which change the whole safety objective, the main reason for going to a finish cylinder. Imagine if we had the same graduated penalties in the finish line scenario:
· hit the fence post but cause only superficial damage 20 points
· stall and groundloop just inside the airfield boundary, breaking off the tail boom 500 points
· but come to rest past the runway threshold 100 points
Well I hope you get the picture. Logically, if you don't complete the mission the way it is intended you don't deserve the points.

If safety is not the reason for adopting a finish cylinder then we might as well go back to the old finish line at least it was fun and it was simple to determine a valid finish. Both methods open the possibility to pull ups and thermalling low and close to the airport. Is this the behaviour we are trying to mitigate? Thermalling low down or aggressive pull ups can occur anywhere on task, this behaviour is not governed by proximity to the finish. However funnelling the fleet into a 1 mile radius cylinder at 500 ft may concentrate traffic to the point this behaviour can be detrimental to more than the individual performing these manoeuvres. We use a 5 mile cylinder for the start to provide separation should we not do the same at the finish. It could be argued that there is greater concentration at the start than the finish, but gaggling ensures a mass finish is not unusual. Finishing the race further out would necessitate a higher cylinder to allow the glider to cover the distance to the airport and extra height is needed to perform a circuit. The desired circuit arrival height can be used to determine the height at which the race ends at the circle boundary. Spectator value disappeared along with the finish line but if one is bent on thrilling the onlookers there is plenty more time and room to execute the move using the remote finish.

Contest site management already has the leeway to set a finish height. We have testimony that unless the finish is set high enough lower performance gliders entering the finish cylinder at the optimum height may encounter difficulty completing a satisfactory circuit and landing. Again if safety is the motivation then maybe we need to allow contest management the ability to set realistic safety parameters to suit the contest they are running. In a large contest at a restricted site a wider finish ring with height set high enough to ensure an orderly circuit for the given site and different finish heights to suit each class might alleviate safety concerns and given the more generous margins obviate the need for penalty points and the arguments they create. In short flexible finish height and an elastic cylinder radius may be the answer but despite all the risks I still prefer the old fashioned flying finish the most.

Andy Gough

On 01/24/2014 9:56 AM, wrote:
But..700 feet is really 500 feet, and 500 feet, 40 knots, and one mile from the south or north is really uncomfortable even in 15 meters at Perry.

Why are you coming in at 40kts? Is it perhaps because you made a bad
decision earlier in the flight and didn't stop for a climb, or were
running to hot and realized it too late? If you know you will be
uncomfortable don't fly to the minimums........

Luke

Why are you coming in at 40kts? Is it perhaps because you made a bad
decision earlier in the flight and didn't stop for a climb, or were
running to hot and realized it too late? If you know you will be
uncomfortable don't fly to the minimums........


Luke

Once again, real slow.

The problem with finishes does not occur when things work out as planned, and we bash home at 100 knots. Well, yes, actually, there were plenty of brain fade after finish problems, but that wasn't the real motivation for moving things up.

And yes, every sane pilot tanks up and doesn't set out across the woods separating himself from home until he has a decent energy reserve. Nobody plans to arrive at 500 feet and 40 knots.

But, welcome to soaring. Sometimes things don't work out as planned. 20 miles out, you had Mc 3 and 500 feet. But now it's 10 miles out, you found a lot of sink, and you're down to Mc 0 and 100 feet, about 2000' AGL. It looks like a few fields ahead. Keep going? Well, there are all those great stories of hero pilots who pulled up over the fence and made it.

And now, despite all your great planning, you're 5 miles out, Mc 0 + 100 feet. 750 feet AGL. You're doing great in the contest so far. Last field below. Trees ahead. Hero stories ringing in your ears. You know they'd do it -- they've said so a hundred times. This is how contests are won, no? Are you really going to stop, with 750 feet still remaining, while the computer says you can make it?

Maybe yes. I have known a lot of pilots who made the decision to throw away a nationals in this circumstance and land. I have. I know a lot of pilots who went for it, and made it, and were heroes. I know a few pilots who went for it and did not make it.

In any case, if you do it, you are going to fly at best glide -- 53 knots, and then end up stretching the glide over the cylinder by gently slowing down to 40 knots.

Recognize that this is a very tough decision. If you just say "I won't be tempted" you are in deep, deep denial, totally fooling yourself and ripe to make the wrong decision. Think very very hard about this little coffin corner before you get there, have a set of quantitative guidelines ready. Pilots who get this right do it by knowing they will be tempted and guarding against that.

To your point, it does not matter how good your earlier decisions are, how conservatively you start your final glide. This situation will come to you sooner or later. It came to me once after leaving the last thermal 1500 feet over Mc 3. I landed one mile out, in the last good field, with everyone watching. I had 300 feet at that last field, but it was nothing but houses and powerlines to the airport.

Now, once we're honest with ourselves and realize how tough this decision is, how tempting it will be to continue, and how much going for it is part of the racing tradition and important toolkit of contest-winning pilots who aim to win nationals and worlds... How about we move the whole affair up 500 feet?

John Cochrane