US Tasking? Are way too many TATs/MATs are being called vs. NOTENOUGH ASSIGNED TASKS (3% in 2013)

[Sean Fidler]

Here is a crude but accurate Google spreadsheet summarizing the 2013 "Task Mix" in the US (SSA sanctioned).

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NO7073Z6J-r77aUbR1oOEKrusXwfYf4amtaem_Rw-E4/edit?usp=sharing

OVERALL 2013 US Tasks
Total # of Tasks 209
Turn Area Tasks 142 68%
Modified Assigned Tasks 60 29.00%
PURE Assigned Tasks 7 3% (YES, that says 3 PERCENT! 7 total AT's in the US in 2013.)
* Many of the MAT's were the infamous 1 turn MAT!

2013 US Nationals Tasks
(includes 15/18/Open/Standard/Sports/Club)
Total # of Tasks 48
Turn Area Tasks 28 58.33%
Modified Assigned Tasks 15 31.25%
PURE Assigned Tasks 5 10.42%
* All 3 of the 15/Open MATs were ONE TURN MATs
* 2 of the Sports/Club Nationals MAT's were NO TURN MATs.

Is 3% Assigned Tasks OVERALL and 10% Assigned Tasks in US Nationals the right tasking mix?

I for one would like to see FAR more pure Assigned Tasks in 2015 and beyond. What is everybody afraid of again?

Sincerely,

Sean

PS - 3% total assigned tasks in the USA in 2013? Really???????

[Echo]

On Monday, July 28, 2014 2:17:12 PM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Here is a crude but accurate Google spreadsheet summarizing the 2013 "Task Mix" in the US (SSA sanctioned).
>
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NO7073Z6J-r77aUbR1oOEKrusXwfYf4amtaem_Rw-E4/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
>
> OVERALL 2013 US Tasks
>
> Total # of Tasks 209
>
> Turn Area Tasks 142 68%
>
> Modified Assigned Tasks 60 29.00%
>
> PURE Assigned Tasks 7 3% (YES, that says 3 PERCENT! 7 total AT's in the US in 2013.)
>
> * Many of the MAT's were the infamous 1 turn MAT!
>
>
>
> 2013 US Nationals Tasks
>
> (includes 15/18/Open/Standard/Sports/Club)
>
> Total # of Tasks 48
>
> Turn Area Tasks 28 58.33%
>
> Modified Assigned Tasks 15 31.25%
>
> PURE Assigned Tasks 5 10.42%
>
> * All 3 of the 15/Open MATs were ONE TURN MATs
>
> * 2 of the Sports/Club Nationals MAT's were NO TURN MATs.
>
>
>
> Is 3% Assigned Tasks OVERALL and 10% Assigned Tasks in US Nationals the right tasking mix?
>
>
>
> I for one would like to see FAR more pure Assigned Tasks in 2015 and beyond. What is everybody afraid of again?
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Sean
>
>
>
> PS - 3% total assigned tasks in the USA in 2013? Really???????

Agree 100%. An area task or MAT should be used in a pinch, like maintenance deferrals in the airlines. Not for routine. What's the point in a race when you call 15 mile cylinders...may as well just all go fly whatever we want and post it on OLC. Racing should be as close to "round the pylons, first one home wins" as possible. This sport is complicated enough as it is, making task logic beyond an FAI style assigned task only makes it more intimidating for new people thinking of getting into racing.

Jordan
ASW20 E

[Tony[_5_]]

i think it is important to distinguish between 1 turn MAT's and more medium or long distance MAT's. The 1 turn MAT has strongly flavored most pilots opinions of MAT's in general but a well called "Long MAT" or even a "Medium MAT" is not far from a good ole fashioned assigned task in the "fun factor", in my opinion. A long MAT also allows for a lot of flexibility in the event that the day doesn't develop as quickly as hoped, or if there is a lot of question as to how quickly the day is going to develop, i.e. the last day at Sports Class Nationals 2014

As usual, this is really a CD issue, make sure your CD is educated and that your task advisors are also educated.

[Sean Fidler]

This should read:

"all 6 of the 15/Open MATS (2 classes, 3 days, 6 tasks total of the 15 for the year at Nationals) were 1 Turn MATS"

That is nearly 50% of the 15 MATS in 2013.

Sean

On Monday, July 28, 2014 3:17:12 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Here is a crude but accurate Google spreadsheet summarizing the 2013 "Task Mix" in the US (SSA sanctioned).
>
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NO7073Z6J-r77aUbR1oOEKrusXwfYf4amtaem_Rw-E4/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
>
> OVERALL 2013 US Tasks
>
> Total # of Tasks 209
>
> Turn Area Tasks 142 68%
>
> Modified Assigned Tasks 60 29.00%
>
> PURE Assigned Tasks 7 3% (YES, that says 3 PERCENT! 7 total AT's in the US in 2013.)
>
> * Many of the MAT's were the infamous 1 turn MAT!
>
>
>
> 2013 US Nationals Tasks
>
> (includes 15/18/Open/Standard/Sports/Club)
>
> Total # of Tasks 48
>
> Turn Area Tasks 28 58.33%
>
> Modified Assigned Tasks 15 31.25%
>
> PURE Assigned Tasks 5 10.42%
>
> * All 3 of the 15/Open MATs were ONE TURN MATs
>
> * 2 of the Sports/Club Nationals MAT's were NO TURN MATs.
>
>
>
> Is 3% Assigned Tasks OVERALL and 10% Assigned Tasks in US Nationals the right tasking mix?
>
>
>
> I for one would like to see FAR more pure Assigned Tasks in 2015 and beyond. What is everybody afraid of again?
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Sean
>
>
>
> PS - 3% total assigned tasks in the USA in 2013? Really???????

[[email protected]]

On Monday, July 28, 2014 1:17:12 PM UTC-6, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Here is a crude but accurate Google spreadsheet summarizing the 2013 "Task Mix" in the US (SSA sanctioned).
>
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NO7073Z6J-r77aUbR1oOEKrusXwfYf4amtaem_Rw-E4/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
>
> OVERALL 2013 US Tasks
>
> Total # of Tasks 209
>
> Turn Area Tasks 142 68%
>
> Modified Assigned Tasks 60 29.00%
>
> PURE Assigned Tasks 7 3% (YES, that says 3 PERCENT! 7 total AT's in the US in 2013.)
>
> * Many of the MAT's were the infamous 1 turn MAT!
>
>
>
> 2013 US Nationals Tasks
>
> (includes 15/18/Open/Standard/Sports/Club)
>
> Total # of Tasks 48
>
> Turn Area Tasks 28 58.33%
>
> Modified Assigned Tasks 15 31.25%
>
> PURE Assigned Tasks 5 10.42%
>
> * All 3 of the 15/Open MATs were ONE TURN MATs
>
> * 2 of the Sports/Club Nationals MAT's were NO TURN MATs.
>
>
>
> Is 3% Assigned Tasks OVERALL and 10% Assigned Tasks in US Nationals the right tasking mix?
>
>
>
> I for one would like to see FAR more pure Assigned Tasks in 2015 and beyond. What is everybody afraid of again?
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Sean
>
>
>
> PS - 3% total assigned tasks in the USA in 2013? Really???????

I agree 100% - more AST -

[John Cochrane[_3_]]

Why I prefer time-limited tasks -- MAT, long MAT, TAT -- to assigned tasks:

AST's are great tests of tactical skill. Start gate timing, watching the gaggle, start late, catch them...but not too late; pass one gaggle, get on top maybe jump to the next one...or maybe just sit on top of your gaggle and coast home. Time limited tasks are better tests of pilot skill, reading the weather and the terrain. I prefer to focus on those skills.

Time and landouts. If there is a spread in pilot skills, CDs will assign much shorter tasks so the slow guys can get home. That means fast guys fly less, maybe a lot less. Tasks are already too short.

Land 'em out, you say. Back to the good old days when the target was 70% completion and often a lot less. Indeed, the only thing that breaks up the gaggle and gets people to actually start is fear of the end of the day.

Now think hard about racing with routine 30% handouts. (Sean, since you seem to have time for data collection, get the number of land outs at nationals in your sample. I'm willing to bet it's way less than 30%). This means a dedicated crew is a necessity. Or a motor. There is a reason Europe is full of motor gliders.

How many pilots are really going to go take their gliding vacations racing, if racing means lots of high traffic gaggle flying, shorter flights, lots and lots of land outs, needing a crew or a motor? How many new pilots are going to stick with it if they land out day after day after day?

Not for me.

But, as others have pointed out, this is not about rules. It's about CDs. It would be a very good idea at the safety meeting for a CD to poll the pilots about how much they want pure AST, long MAT, MAT, or TAT. And, specifically, in less than perfect weather. When there are storms, blue holes, cirrus, etc., y'all really want to be sent to specific airports?

John Cochrane

[Tony[_5_]]

On Monday, July 28, 2014 4:33:09 PM UTC-5, John Cochrane wrote:
> Why I prefer time-limited tasks -- MAT, long MAT, TAT -- to assigned tasks:
>
>
>
> AST's are great tests of tactical skill. Start gate timing, watching the gaggle, start late, catch them...but not too late; pass one gaggle, get on top maybe jump to the next one...or maybe just sit on top of your gaggle and coast home. Time limited tasks are better tests of pilot skill, reading the weather and the terrain. I prefer to focus on those skills.
>
>
>
> Time and landouts. If there is a spread in pilot skills, CDs will assign much shorter tasks so the slow guys can get home. That means fast guys fly less, maybe a lot less. Tasks are already too short.
>
>
>
> Land 'em out, you say. Back to the good old days when the target was 70% completion and often a lot less. Indeed, the only thing that breaks up the gaggle and gets people to actually start is fear of the end of the day.
>
>
>
> Now think hard about racing with routine 30% handouts. (Sean, since you seem to have time for data collection, get the number of land outs at nationals in your sample. I'm willing to bet it's way less than 30%). This means a dedicated crew is a necessity. Or a motor. There is a reason Europe is full of motor gliders.
>
>
>
> How many pilots are really going to go take their gliding vacations racing, if racing means lots of high traffic gaggle flying, shorter flights, lots and lots of land outs, needing a crew or a motor? How many new pilots are going to stick with it if they land out day after day after day?
>
>
>
> Not for me.
>
>
>
> But, as others have pointed out, this is not about rules. It's about CDs. It would be a very good idea at the safety meeting for a CD to poll the pilots about how much they want pure AST, long MAT, MAT, or TAT. And, specifically, in less than perfect weather. When there are storms, blue holes, cirrus, etc., y'all really want to be sent to specific airports?
>
>
>
> John Cochrane

Right on John. If the weather would've been just a touch bluer or the task just a bit larger, the AST called for the 2014 Club Class would've been a mass landout. As it was, somewhere around half of the Modern Class landed out on their AST, which I think was 40 miles longer than Clubs. As it was, at least the younger half of the Club Class that I had supper with that night seemed to really enjoy the task, probably mostly because hardly any of us had ever flown one. I know it was my first time after flying only Sports Class Regionals and the 1-26 Championships. I couldn't help thinking though that we were not far from a mass landout and showing the "dark side" of the AST.

I for one fly with a crew and don't mind landing out (i'm really good at it actually!) but I think most competitors would tire of that quickly. Maybe having more AST's would inspire more pilots to fly with a crew instead of driving them away from contests.

[Ron Gleason]

On Monday, 28 July 2014 15:33:09 UTC-6, John Cochrane wrote:
> Why I prefer time-limited tasks -- MAT, long MAT, TAT -- to assigned tasks:
>
>
>
> AST's are great tests of tactical skill. Start gate timing, watching the gaggle, start late, catch them...but not too late; pass one gaggle, get on top maybe jump to the next one...or maybe just sit on top of your gaggle and coast home. Time limited tasks are better tests of pilot skill, reading the weather and the terrain. I prefer to focus on those skills.
>
>
>
> Time and landouts. If there is a spread in pilot skills, CDs will assign much shorter tasks so the slow guys can get home. That means fast guys fly less, maybe a lot less. Tasks are already too short.
>
>
>
> Land 'em out, you say. Back to the good old days when the target was 70% completion and often a lot less. Indeed, the only thing that breaks up the gaggle and gets people to actually start is fear of the end of the day.
>
>
>
> Now think hard about racing with routine 30% handouts. (Sean, since you seem to have time for data collection, get the number of land outs at nationals in your sample. I'm willing to bet it's way less than 30%). This means a dedicated crew is a necessity. Or a motor. There is a reason Europe is full of motor gliders.
>
>
>
> How many pilots are really going to go take their gliding vacations racing, if racing means lots of high traffic gaggle flying, shorter flights, lots and lots of land outs, needing a crew or a motor? How many new pilots are going to stick with it if they land out day after day after day?
>
>
>
> Not for me.
>
>
>
> But, as others have pointed out, this is not about rules. It's about CDs. It would be a very good idea at the safety meeting for a CD to poll the pilots about how much they want pure AST, long MAT, MAT, or TAT. And, specifically, in less than perfect weather. When there are storms, blue holes, cirrus, etc., y'all really want to be sent to specific airports?
>
>
>
> John Cochrane

What John wrote 8-)

I would like to reemphasize that the contest management folks and task advisers should get input from the pilots. If a certain class wants AT's then let them have em. IMO these tasks put much more pressure on task selecting and understanding the weather and the tasking area

[Bill D]

(Many snips)

> Now think hard about racing with routine 30% handouts. This means a dedicated crew is a necessity.

> John Cochrane

WX needed a crew for the 15M Nationals in Montague. He got one the easy way - he asked - right here on RAS. Try it. I had fun crewing for him.

[John Cochrane[_3_]]

>
> WX needed a crew for the 15M Nationals in Montague. He got one the easy way - he asked - right here on RAS. Try it. I had fun crewing for him.

I have brought crew to many contests, some paid, some volunteers. My family doesn't go. Many have been nice people, and some have benefited from the experience. Still, even if just covering expenses, we're talking a substantial amount of money, and a person to take care of. Even at nationals these days, up to half the pilots arrive without crew. If we go to assigned tasks, and thus substantially up the land out percentage, we substantially raise the cost of participating.

John Cochrane

[Bruce Hoult[_2_]]

My take on this is simple:

- FAI classes should almost always be racing ASTs.
- MATs are useful in handicapped races with a range of performance.

John Cochrane makes a point about climatic conditions sometimes making
it difficult or risky to get to a specific point. Perhaps ironically,
the old fashioned sector turnpoints can often solve that problem, at
the cost of flying some unscored extra distance. That's better than not
completing the task.

[Bruce Hoult[_2_]]

On 2014-07-29 02:09:48 +0000, Bruce Hoult said:

> My take on this is simple:
>
> - FAI classes should almost always be racing ASTs.
> - MATs are useful in handicapped races with a range of performance.
>
> John Cochrane makes a point about climatic conditions sometimes making
> it difficult or risky to get to a specific point. Perhaps ironically,
> the old fashioned sector turnpoints can often solve that problem, at
> the cost of flying some unscored extra distance. That's better than not
> completing the task.

Here's a turnpoint option I've never seen proposed or discussed:

Assume you're going from turnpoint A via B to C.

You are defined to have sucessfully rounded turnpoint B when:

- current distance to B is less than N km (10 or 20 maybe), AND

- curent distance to A plus current distance to C is greater than B to
A plus B to C


The second part defines an ellipse with A and C at the focal points and
passing through B. Flying from A to any point on the boundary of the
ellipse to C is always the same distance as actually going to B.

Given a GPS this is dead easy to calculate. You could do it even with
an ancient GPS (e.g. CAI Model 10) if you can add two distances
together in your head. Given a new one, or a PDA app it's trivial.

[noel.wade]

See this post from just a couple of days ago:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.aviation.soaring/SwAzZSifKnc/eWg9-ugkr8IJ

Then repeat after me: "AT/ASTs are NOT like pylon racing. They are NOT like Yacht Racing. I, [state your name], do solemnly swear to stop making bad/inaccurate analogies, and try to learn what skills are actually measured in a glider contest - and how."

Look, I get it. Some of you like the concept that your butt flies over the same exact spot on the ground as someone else. That makes it feel to you like a set "course" that you're all flying. But that is _not_ the reality of the situation at all! And flying to the same turnpoint in an AT has _nothing_ to do with how it is scored (relative to a TAT/MAT), or the flying skills that it measures.

If you desire a race like an automobile race or a yacht race, you want to advocate for a Grand Prix start. Because what you want is all the gliders in the same are at the same _time_.

The differences between an AT, a TAT, or a MAT pale in comparison to the differences in the air that you and I fly through if we fly over the same spot several minutes apart. This is a unique and challenging part of soaring competition: The course is not "set" and is 4-dimensional. How do you measure pilots against each other when the course itself is changing from moment to moment?

Again: You can make the case that many contests call "easier" tasks these days, and a 20-30 mile cylinder around every turn takes some of the challenge out of a TAT. But don't crucify the task type just because some task-setters don't call them the way you want. Instead, advocate for tasks to be called more-intelligently!

--Noel

[Richard[_9_]]

On Monday, July 28, 2014 12:17:12 PM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Here is a crude but accurate Google spreadsheet summarizing the 2013 "Task Mix" in the US (SSA sanctioned).
>
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NO7073Z6J-r77aUbR1oOEKrusXwfYf4amtaem_Rw-E4/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
>
> OVERALL 2013 US Tasks
>
> Total # of Tasks 209
>
> Turn Area Tasks 142 68%
>
> Modified Assigned Tasks 60 29.00%
>
> PURE Assigned Tasks 7 3% (YES, that says 3 PERCENT! 7 total AT's in the US in 2013.)
>
> * Many of the MAT's were the infamous 1 turn MAT!
>
>
>
> 2013 US Nationals Tasks
>
> (includes 15/18/Open/Standard/Sports/Club)
>
> Total # of Tasks 48
>
> Turn Area Tasks 28 58.33%
>
> Modified Assigned Tasks 15 31.25%
>
> PURE Assigned Tasks 5 10.42%
>
> * All 3 of the 15/Open MATs were ONE TURN MATs
>
> * 2 of the Sports/Club Nationals MAT's were NO TURN MATs.
>
>
>
> Is 3% Assigned Tasks OVERALL and 10% Assigned Tasks in US Nationals the right tasking mix?
>
>
>
> I for one would like to see FAR more pure Assigned Tasks in 2015 and beyond. What is everybody afraid of again?
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Sean
>
>
>
> PS - 3% total assigned tasks in the USA in 2013? Really???????

Are too many TATs being called at the Worlds in Leszno? 3 in 3 days 100%. Really????????

I would like to see more TATs called in US comps. It makes for a much more enjoyable contest and will increase participation.

Richard

[kirk.stant]

I too prefer Assigned Speed Tasks - especially in good conditions, when calling an area task seems such a waste.

TATs are fun, and easier for the CD to call (I've landed out the whole field on ASTs - not fun). But they should be used due to weather or handicap reasons, and be tailored to keep the field close - no sequential 30 mile areas that turn into an OLC task, please.

Long MATs are OK too - but one or no turn MATs should be abolished! They are a total copout by the CD and should be refused by the competitors.

A comment about gaggles - really? On the one hand we complain about lack of participation at contests, then complain that the gaggles will be too big? Perhaps at the Nationals or Worlds, but at the average Regional with 12 participants, you could all start a speed task at the same time and probably not get a gaggle organized!

Kirk
66

[Tony[_5_]]

If the handicap range is wide there is really no choice on a TAT other than large circles.and the handicap range doesn't have to be terribly wide to produce a wide variation on speeds achieved. On a good long soaring day that drives the requirement for a wide range between minimum and maximum distance

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 10:25:28 AM UTC-4, Tony wrote:
> If the handicap range is wide there is really no choice on a TAT other than large circles.and the handicap range doesn't have to be terribly wide to produce a wide variation on speeds achieved. On a good long soaring day that drives the requirement for a wide range between minimum and maximum distance

Not true Tony.
Add another turn area and the size of the cylinders drops significantly.
This allows the variability in task length without using cylinders that are 30 miles in radius.
I prefer cylinders of 10 to 15 mile radius maximum in part because this allows the pilot to see enough of the usable area to make decisions.
4 turn areas seem to work well for this.
UH

[Sean Fidler]

I am enjoying the posts all on both sides of the issue. Thanks!

I agree there is a need for a TAT. My question is how much of a need?

I agree that "LONG" (emphasis on LONG!) MATs are better than TAT's (better test of skill, more fun). They also allow for AT like tasks with wider handicap ranges.

But only 3% of US tasking in 2013 was pure AT! That's right, ONLY 3 PERCENT!

Isnt that WAY, WAAAAY too low a proportion of the US Tasks? Or is this what "we" want? The AT is now "virtually gone" for all intents and purposes in the US. Furthermore, many (MANY) of the MATs were only 1 turn. 2 of 8 (25%) tasks in the 2013 Sports/Club Class Nationals (Mifflin) we actually ZERO turn MAT's. Is that even fair for a non local pilot? That is 2 ZERO turn MAT's at a National Championship? I was shocked to see this.

It seems to me that we are running wild on eliminating ATs from our tasking.. Quality tasks are dropping dangerously low (assuming that you think pure, simple Assigned Tasks are of higher quality than TATs). We are now almost exclusively calling wide turn area tasks or one turn MAT's in the US. Even at Nationals only 10% of the tasks are Pure AT's.

Overall, we are down to 3% AT's in the entire SSA and USA in 2013. That is a stunning, glaring fact.

Sean

On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 10:39:28 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 10:25:28 AM UTC-4, Tony wrote:
>
> > If the handicap range is wide there is really no choice on a TAT other than large circles.and the handicap range doesn't have to be terribly wide to produce a wide variation on speeds achieved. On a good long soaring day that drives the requirement for a wide range between minimum and maximum distance
>
>
>
> Not true Tony.
>
> Add another turn area and the size of the cylinders drops significantly.
>
> This allows the variability in task length without using cylinders that are 30 miles in radius.
>
> I prefer cylinders of 10 to 15 mile radius maximum in part because this allows the pilot to see enough of the usable area to make decisions.
>
> 4 turn areas seem to work well for this.
>
> UH

[[email protected]]

On Monday, July 28, 2014 12:17:12 PM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Here is a crude but accurate Google spreadsheet summarizing the 2013 "Task Mix" in the US (SSA sanctioned).

Some of this depends on exactly what the goal is (besides "more ATs!" - what is the underlying gliding experience you are going for). To some extent it's also a function of what you are willing to sacrifice to get to that goal. We have come to the current structure as a tradeoff among a series of objectives - some of them conflicting, like "use as much of the soaring day as possible" and "make sure most pilots get home". CDs also have a set of tradeoffs and are trying to manage in the face of a lot of uncertainty.

ATs generally force the field together more. Noel's point is also important here - you're not really together unless you are together in space AND time. You can go for a grand prix start to compress the field even more and replace the 1 mile cylinders with 45 degree sectors (the old FAI and photo-style). The conflicting goals to this format are not landing out a bunch of gliders, not making the thermals too crowded when the field gets bigger than a certain size and not congesting the finish and landing. Those things can be managed by calling conservative/shorter ATs with smaller groups of gliders so that the beginning and end of the day are well within the margin of error for forecasting or pilot/glider capability and not calling them when the weather isn't highly predictable.

I think the honest assessment is that many CDs are trying to call more ATs or Long MATs. But there are a lot of days that you would just call off rather than be forced into an AT when you have no idea whether the weather is going to work. I think many CD's would rather call a 3-hour TAT than a 2.5 hour AT. In my experience most CDs don't call no-turn or one-turn MATs out of stupidity or laziness - they are trying to get a contest day in highly uncertain weather. I remember in the old AT-only days taking a start and watching 50 gliders struggle in the rain for 30 miles ultimately to meet a muddy fate.

Long MATs are essentially the same as ATs without the requirement to land out if the day doesn't go exactly as forecast. (Sean - you should call out "long MATs" in your stats as I think you will see that they are starting to get used more). The last day at 15M/Open Nats this year was a pretty good long MAT, but a little shift in the weather would have changed things substantially as four of the legs required long glides through the blue - mostly over open desert. The later Open Class starters had more challenges with the last couple of turnpoints, so the ability to go home without being landed out can be a useful option.

9B

[SF]

You can have an impact on these type of decisions by agreeing to be a task adviser at the contest, or by lobbying the task adviser for your class. What the pilots at the contest want, and don't want, is usually taken into account when making tasking decisions. The weather forecast is usually the deciding factor in the decision to use the one point MAT. Most of the CD's that I have worked with listen to the task advisers, and the weather forecaster before concocting the days tasks, and most really try to call a variety of tasks. There is no external mandate to call certain types of tasks. Devising the different tasks is not as easy as would first appear once you participate in the process. Then there are some days when the CD's title needs to be changed to TEO "The Evil One."

[Sean Fidler]

All semantics aside, we had only 7 total (5 in nationals) pure AT tasks in 2013.

Are you guys "kinda" thinking this is OK? 3%?

Are we resigned to only be tested in tasks that involve weather guessing "skills", our watches and our flight computers these days? Sorry, I know, a bit of a cheap shot there. But 30 mile turn area's and 1 turn MATs are pretty "loose" tests of flying skill at best.

In the immortal words of the band "Twisted Sister" "I wanna race!" ;-)

I will beg my CD for sure (sorry in advance guys and girls). But overall, I am shocked that we are not collectively looking at this 3% statistic and worrying. Wouldn't guidance that produces a number closer to 20% ATs (35% in nationals) be more healthy for us? Especially at Nationals?

I am shocked that 3% ATs (even if you prefer TATs) appears OK to many. Its basically all we do anymore. That is a bummer to me.

Sean

[Richard[_9_]]

On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 10:04:43 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> All semantics aside, we had only 7 total (5 in nationals) pure AT tasks in 2013.
>
>
>
> Are you guys "kinda" thinking this is OK? 3%?
>
>
>
> Are we resigned to only be tested in tasks that involve weather guessing "skills", our watches and our flight computers these days? Sorry, I know, a bit of a cheap shot there. But 30 mile turn area's and 1 turn MATs are pretty "loose" tests of flying skill at best.
>
>
>
> In the immortal words of the band "Twisted Sister" "I wanna race!" ;-)
>
>
>
> I will beg my CD for sure (sorry in advance guys and girls). But overall, I am shocked that we are not collectively looking at this 3% statistic and worrying. Wouldn't guidance that produces a number closer to 20% ATs (35% in nationals) be more healthy for us? Especially at Nationals?
>
>
>
> I am shocked that 3% ATs (even if you prefer TATs) appears OK to many. Its basically all we do anymore. That is a bummer to me.
>
>
>
> Sean

100% TAT in the world only 3 days 9 TATs and counting.

Richard

[Ron Gleason]

On Tuesday, 29 July 2014 11:04:43 UTC-6, Sean Fidler wrote:
> All semantics aside, we had only 7 total (5 in nationals) pure AT tasks in 2013.
>
>
>
> Are you guys "kinda" thinking this is OK? 3%?
>
>
>
> Are we resigned to only be tested in tasks that involve weather guessing "skills", our watches and our flight computers these days? Sorry, I know, a bit of a cheap shot there. But 30 mile turn area's and 1 turn MATs are pretty "loose" tests of flying skill at best.
>
>
>
> In the immortal words of the band "Twisted Sister" "I wanna race!" ;-)
>
>
>
> I will beg my CD for sure (sorry in advance guys and girls). But overall, I am shocked that we are not collectively looking at this 3% statistic and worrying. Wouldn't guidance that produces a number closer to 20% ATs (35% in nationals) be more healthy for us? Especially at Nationals?
>
>
>
> I am shocked that 3% ATs (even if you prefer TATs) appears OK to many. Its basically all we do anymore. That is a bummer to me.
>
>
>
> Sean

I would like to echo what SF stated; you should talk with and consult the task adviser's and let them know what you want. The CD works with them.

Idle threats of harassment will get you no where in my book. Please remember that the folks enabling contests are volunteers and are doing the task so that you can have fun, soar and participate in some friendly competition.

Maybe you should just CD your own contests, call all AT's and let us know how it goes.

[Evan Ludeman[_4_]]

Sean, the "no turn MATs" you refer to at Sports Nats 2013 (Mifflin) were actually MATs with restrictions that the score sheet isn't equipped to display. For example, day one, a four hour minimum time and the following restrictions.

1. First turn must be one of the following three (Orbisonia, McConnelsburg, Dicke's Mtn).

2. No turnpoint may be used more than once.

Memorably, this was announced 15 minutes before first launch, on a ridge day.

It did seem unnecessarily "gamey", especially for the new-to-site guys (day 1, after a rained out practice period). I'm sure it sounded fun in the task advisors' meeting and I had a blast with it myself.

However, a *fairer* task would have been a long MAT or AT constructed along the lines of the tasks that the fast guys flew.

AT, long MAT (with 2-3 longish legs to start please), or AAT (5 & 10 mi circles please) are all good tasks. Less restricted MATs and larger circle AATs get days in when the wx is problematic and better avoid mass landouts. My chief competition aggravation is that we get so consumed with ripping marginal tasks from crappy wx that we can't seem to get out of timid-mode when the wx finally gets good.

Evan Ludeman / T8

[Andy K]

On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 2:40:47 PM UTC-4, Evan Ludeman wrote:
> Sean, the "no turn MATs" you refer to at Sports Nats 2013 (Mifflin) were actually MATs with restrictions that the score sheet isn't equipped to display. For example, day one, a four hour minimum time and the following restrictions.
>
>
>
> 1. First turn must be one of the following three (Orbisonia, McConnelsburg, Dicke's Mtn).
>
>
>
> 2. No turnpoint may be used more than once.
>
>
>
> Memorably, this was announced 15 minutes before first launch, on a ridge day.
>
>
>
> It did seem unnecessarily "gamey", especially for the new-to-site guys (day 1, after a rained out practice period). I'm sure it sounded fun in the task advisors' meeting and I had a blast with it myself.
>
>
>
> However, a *fairer* task would have been a long MAT or AT constructed along the lines of the tasks that the fast guys flew.
>
>
>
> AT, long MAT (with 2-3 longish legs to start please), or AAT (5 & 10 mi circles please) are all good tasks. Less restricted MATs and larger circle AATs get days in when the wx is problematic and better avoid mass landouts. My chief competition aggravation is that we get so consumed with ripping marginal tasks from crappy wx that we can't seem to get out of timid-mode when the wx finally gets good.
>
>
>
> Evan Ludeman / T8

Yes, this is such a waste of time and money and one reason that some people avoid flying contests.
"My chief competition aggravation is that we get so consumed with ripping marginal tasks from crappy wx that we can't seem to get out of timid-mode when the wx finally gets good."

[Sean Fidler]

Evan,

Agreed and good points!

I think everybody means well here, but it would be nice to have a bit more balance. Also, from the other thread..."what is it that glider pilots are being measured on" is a huge discussion point.

Some want the "freedom" of wide turn area's, weather guessing, time variance and what I call "uncontrolled variables (luck)" to be the dominant feature of the sport while others what more controlled variables (grand prix or shorter window starts and AT's). Personally I think wide area TAT's are to close to OLC (especially with free start times). I think contests (competition) should be more objective that they are today.

OLC "contests" are great for free flight distance competition!

Remember, all I am asking for here is more balance. Many are arguing for more TAT's and less AT's which would entirely eliminate AT's from the sport in the USA.

50/25/25 for example. Right now we are doing roughly 70/27/3.

Sean

On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 2:40:47 PM UTC-4, Evan Ludeman wrote:
> Sean, the "no turn MATs" you refer to at Sports Nats 2013 (Mifflin) were actually MATs with restrictions that the score sheet isn't equipped to display. For example, day one, a four hour minimum time and the following restrictions.
>
>
>
> 1. First turn must be one of the following three (Orbisonia, McConnelsburg, Dicke's Mtn).
>
>
>
> 2. No turnpoint may be used more than once.
>
>
>
> Memorably, this was announced 15 minutes before first launch, on a ridge day.
>
>
>
> It did seem unnecessarily "gamey", especially for the new-to-site guys (day 1, after a rained out practice period). I'm sure it sounded fun in the task advisors' meeting and I had a blast with it myself.
>
>
>
> However, a *fairer* task would have been a long MAT or AT constructed along the lines of the tasks that the fast guys flew.
>
>
>
> AT, long MAT (with 2-3 longish legs to start please), or AAT (5 & 10 mi circles please) are all good tasks. Less restricted MATs and larger circle AATs get days in when the wx is problematic and better avoid mass landouts. My chief competition aggravation is that we get so consumed with ripping marginal tasks from crappy wx that we can't seem to get out of timid-mode when the wx finally gets good.
>
>
>
> Evan Ludeman / T8

[Richard[_9_]]

On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 7:39:19 PM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Evan,
>
>
>
> Agreed and good points!
>
>
>
> I think everybody means well here, but it would be nice to have a bit more balance. Also, from the other thread..."what is it that glider pilots are being measured on" is a huge discussion point.
>
>
>
> Some want the "freedom" of wide turn area's, weather guessing, time variance and what I call "uncontrolled variables (luck)" to be the dominant feature of the sport while others what more controlled variables (grand prix or shorter window starts and AT's). Personally I think wide area TAT's are to close to OLC (especially with free start times). I think contests (competition) should be more objective that they are today.
>
>
>
> OLC "contests" are great for free flight distance competition!
>
>
>
> Remember, all I am asking for here is more balance. Many are arguing for more TAT's and less AT's which would entirely eliminate AT's from the sport in the USA.
>
>
>
> 50/25/25 for example. Right now we are doing roughly 70/27/3.
>
>
>
> Sean
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 2:40:47 PM UTC-4, Evan Ludeman wrote:
>
> > Sean, the "no turn MATs" you refer to at Sports Nats 2013 (Mifflin) were actually MATs with restrictions that the score sheet isn't equipped to display. For example, day one, a four hour minimum time and the following restrictions.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > 1. First turn must be one of the following three (Orbisonia, McConnelsburg, Dicke's Mtn).
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > 2. No turnpoint may be used more than once.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Memorably, this was announced 15 minutes before first launch, on a ridge day.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > It did seem unnecessarily "gamey", especially for the new-to-site guys (day 1, after a rained out practice period). I'm sure it sounded fun in the task advisors' meeting and I had a blast with it myself.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > However, a *fairer* task would have been a long MAT or AT constructed along the lines of the tasks that the fast guys flew.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > AT, long MAT (with 2-3 longish legs to start please), or AAT (5 & 10 mi circles please) are all good tasks. Less restricted MATs and larger circle AATs get days in when the wx is problematic and better avoid mass landouts. My chief competition aggravation is that we get so consumed with ripping marginal tasks from crappy wx that we can't seem to get out of timid-mode when the wx finally gets good.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Evan Ludeman / T8

Grubs again Grumble Grumble! 3 more TATs called at the Worlds in Lezno that is 12 of 12 100%. They do call them AATs.

Richard

[Steve Leonard[_2_]]

On Wednesday, July 30, 2014 8:41:39 AM UTC-5, Richard wrote:
> Grubs again Grumble Grumble! 3 more TATs called at the Worlds in Lezno that is 12 of 12 100%. They do call them AATs. Richard

Pretty big risk of storms, too. 10 KM finish cylinder, 400 meter min finish height. Sounds like they are dealing with rather uncertain weather, and handling it the way we do here with shorter tasks and enough turn areas to provide the flexibility to not have anyone max out on distance, but also not so long as to start landing everyone out.

I find it interesting that their final "steering" turn has a much smaller radius than their finish cylinder today. Funnel in, then spread out.

[Sean Fidler]

Task call today from USA Region 9 (Nephi, UT)...

Wait for it.....................

3, 30 mile radius turn cylinders (THATS RIGHT, 3 THIRTY MILE RADIUS).

Photo of task sheet (sent by my spy) here: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bx7KRpMugGmfYUhRRkdHb2dCVDQ/edit?usp=docslist_api

The AM report for the day actually say's the words "LETS RACE!" ROTFL. -->http://www.ssa.org/Contests?cid=2268&show=blog&id=3756&ContestName=Region+9+North

Ready, set, go............fly anywhere you want like OLC and have fun! But it's no race folks. Not even remotely close to a race. That's for sure.

Weather considerations for the task selection you may ask? Read it for yourself...

"Just finished the pilot meeting, spirits are high and optimism is high for a great day of racing.
One task for all classes; 02 Start, 78 Wayne Wonder, 43 Milford and 22 Delta Muni all turnpoints have 30 mile radi.
Nominal 280, maximum 402.6 and minium 182.
Duration 3:30
Task B is same as A but 3:00 duration.
Weather is forecated to be 4-6F warmer, trigger temperature passed by launch, TOL 14-15K+, lift 5 knots average+, cumulus clouds should be present and winds at TOL 15-18 MPH.
Tasks on SSA tracker site, happy viewing
Let's race" (<--- yes they really said that!)

I rest my case.

:-)

Sean

[John Cochrane[_3_]]

As much as I hate "races" with 30 mile cylinders, lots of pilots seem to like flying the OLC. If this is what it takes to get them to fly in sanctioned contests, so be it. The rules allow assigned tasks, short MAT, long MAT, turn areas with lots of small turns, or turn areas with huge radii. If the pilots at the contest are happy, who are we to complain, from our armchairs a thousand miles away. If the pilots at the contest don't like it, the pilots at the contest should complain to the task advisers and cds.
John Cochrane

[Tony[_5_]]

it's a challenge accomodating a dry LS-3 or LS-4 as well as a watered JS-1C on the same task without using big circles.

and "what John said"

[Sean Fidler]

They kinda are complaining when they text me photo's of the tasks with frowny faces... I agree that pilots should voice their disgust at the pilots meeting. Perhaps the culture of the CD, task advisors, etc is too stogy for most new pilots to want to express their concern? I think most pilots assume the CD and task advisors are doing the right thing. Perhaps they are wrong.

So, in this case, it is obviously not the weather that resulted in the 3 massive 30 mile radius Turn Area task, nor is it the handicap range (LS-3 or Discus is lowest I think). So, what guidelines were being followed that resulted in this call of 3 turn areas with 60 MILE DIAMETERS??? Do we, perhaps, need to adjust those guidelines in order to return to a reasonable balance or ATs vs. TAT/MATs?

I refer back to the title of this thread.

US Tasking? Are way to many TATs/MATs being called vs. NOT ENOUGH ASSIGNED TSASKS (3% in 2013)

Is the assigned task truly dead in the USA? Why? Per Noel, "what are contest task supposed to me measuring?" Objective racing skill or pure weather luck in which massive swings in conditions are the primary factor?

Isn't calling one giant TAT for 3 classes on a good flying day a little "lazy?" Again, I am fine with a TAT if the compromise is required (weather, handicap range, etc), but aren't racing tasks preferred when the conditions are suitable for it?

Sean

[Tony[_5_]]

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 3:57:31 PM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
> They kinda are complaining when they text me photo's of the tasks with frowny faces... I agree that pilots should voice their disgust at the pilots meeting. Perhaps the culture of the CD, task advisors, etc is too stogy for most new pilots to want to express their concern? I think most pilots assume the CD and task advisors are doing the right thing. Perhaps they are wrong.
>
>
>
> So, in this case, it is obviously not the weather that resulted in the 3 massive 30 mile radius Turn Area task, nor is it the handicap range (LS-3 or Discus is lowest I think). So, what guidelines were being followed that resulted in this call of 3 turn areas with 60 MILE DIAMETERS??? Do we, perhaps, need to adjust those guidelines in order to return to a reasonable balance or ATs vs. TAT/MATs?
>
>
>
> I refer back to the title of this thread.
>
>
>
> US Tasking? Are way to many TATs/MATs being called vs. NOT ENOUGH ASSIGNED TSASKS (3% in 2013)
>
>
>
> Is the assigned task truly dead in the USA? Why? Per Noel, "what are contest task supposed to me measuring?" Objective racing skill or pure weather luck in which massive swings in conditions are the primary factor?
>
>
>
> Isn't calling one giant TAT for 3 classes on a good flying day a little "lazy?" Again, I am fine with a TAT if the compromise is required (weather, handicap range, etc), but aren't racing tasks preferred when the conditions are suitable for it?
>
>
>
> Sean

Assigned task is not available for the sports class.

There is quite a speed difference between all the gliders in the contest, like I mentioned. Not unreasonable to assume a 30 mph difference between a slow dry glider and a fast glider in one of the FAI classes. that adds up to a big mileage spread over a 3:30 task.

[Andy K]

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 4:57:31 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> They kinda are complaining when they text me photo's of the tasks with frowny faces... I agree that pilots should voice their disgust at the pilots meeting. Perhaps the culture of the CD, task advisors, etc is too stogy for most new pilots to want to express their concern? I think most pilots assume the CD and task advisors are doing the right thing. Perhaps they are wrong.
>
>
>
> So, in this case, it is obviously not the weather that resulted in the 3 massive 30 mile radius Turn Area task, nor is it the handicap range (LS-3 or Discus is lowest I think). So, what guidelines were being followed that resulted in this call of 3 turn areas with 60 MILE DIAMETERS??? Do we, perhaps, need to adjust those guidelines in order to return to a reasonable balance or ATs vs. TAT/MATs?
>
>
>
> I refer back to the title of this thread.
>
>
>
> US Tasking? Are way to many TATs/MATs being called vs. NOT ENOUGH ASSIGNED TSASKS (3% in 2013)
>
>
>
> Is the assigned task truly dead in the USA? Why? Per Noel, "what are contest task supposed to me measuring?" Objective racing skill or pure weather luck in which massive swings in conditions are the primary factor?
>
>
>
> Isn't calling one giant TAT for 3 classes on a good flying day a little "lazy?" Again, I am fine with a TAT if the compromise is required (weather, handicap range, etc), but aren't racing tasks preferred when the conditions are suitable for it?
>
>
>
> Sean

Sean I think in your latest post you are asking very good questions. Maybe the contest should be called sanctioned OLC contest. If properly named why not, but probably a good group of people showed up there to race not fly OLC and they will be disappointing and rightfully so. It is true different people prefer different tasks make tasking philosophy part of the contest description then so we know which OLC like events to avoid unless we want to fly OLC.

AK

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 4:57:31 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> They kinda are complaining when they text me photo's of the tasks with frowny faces... I agree that pilots should voice their disgust at the pilots meeting. Perhaps the culture of the CD, task advisors, etc is too stogy for most new pilots to want to express their concern? I think most pilots assume the CD and task advisors are doing the right thing. Perhaps they are wrong.
>
>
>
> So, in this case, it is obviously not the weather that resulted in the 3 massive 30 mile radius Turn Area task, nor is it the handicap range (LS-3 or Discus is lowest I think). So, what guidelines were being followed that resulted in this call of 3 turn areas with 60 MILE DIAMETERS??? Do we, perhaps, need to adjust those guidelines in order to return to a reasonable balance or ATs vs. TAT/MATs?
>
>
>
> I refer back to the title of this thread.
>
>
>
> US Tasking? Are way to many TATs/MATs being called vs. NOT ENOUGH ASSIGNED TSASKS (3% in 2013)
>
>
>
> Is the assigned task truly dead in the USA? Why? Per Noel, "what are contest task supposed to me measuring?" Objective racing skill or pure weather luck in which massive swings in conditions are the primary factor?
>
>
>
> Isn't calling one giant TAT for 3 classes on a good flying day a little "lazy?" Again, I am fine with a TAT if the compromise is required (weather, handicap range, etc), but aren't racing tasks preferred when the conditions are suitable for it?
>
>
>
> Sean

Good thing you didn't go- you'd be havin' a stroke - LOL
I do think it would be better to use more circles of smaller size, but I haven't looked at the site to see how well it would work.
But- let's return to the topic.
Forcing any particular task can have unfortunate consequences.
Example- Current WGC. They have had tough weather to work with and wisely used area tasks to get the fairest tasks they could. They have strong guidance in the rules that says they must call a minimum of 1/3 of each type of task. They called AT's on Sunday, no doubt strongly influenced by the task "guidelines" and due to to some unfortunate weather, land the entire fleet out(yes a few flew home). What got measured on that day was the willingness to accept risk flying in storms, the wisdom of having an engine to come home on, and the wisdom to not bring a glider that you spent many years building. Little else got measured in my view, but the brave got strongly rewarded.
Today(Tuesday) they had the obvious AT again, and landed 1/2 the 15M class out, and about 1/4 of the opens, including a world champion.
I don't envy the task callers, especially when they are constrained as they are.
That said, following the US task guidance which encourages a variety of tasks, make good sense to me.
I suspect the folks at R9 are having a good time and wish I was there.
UH

[Sean Fidler]

I might not have a stroke but I would definitely be running a mild fever with slight nausea! ;-)

Guys I am not trying to be crazy here. I just want a little more assigned tasking. Hell the Club Class wanted it and rebelled a little for it. But even in 18/15/Open Nationals it is extremely rare these days.

I don't want to lose it and hope that we can have at least 25% AT's in the future, not 3%! Racing is more fun and fairer!

Sean

[Bill D]

Without commenting on a particular task, I humbly suggest the real problem is contest attendance - or rather the lack of it.

Asking pilots at_a_contest about task preferences is looking through the wrong end of the telescope. For meaningful data - and to grow contest flying - one should be asking those NOT attending contests what sort of tasks THEY prefer.

I suspect the answers to this hypothetical survey would range from "Those we understand." to "You won't like the answer."

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 2:03:28 PM UTC-6, John Cochrane wrote:
Snip----
If the pilots at the contest don't like it, the pilots at the contest should complain to the task advisers and cds.
>
> John Cochrane



On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 2:03:28 PM UTC-6, John Cochrane wrote:
> As much as I hate "races" with 30 mile cylinders, lots of pilots seem to like flying the OLC. If this is what it takes to get them to fly in sanctioned contests, so be it. The rules allow assigned tasks, short MAT, long MAT, turn areas with lots of small turns, or turn areas with huge radii. If the pilots at the contest are happy, who are we to complain, from our armchairs a thousand miles away. If the pilots at the contest don't like it, the pilots at the contest should complain to the task advisers and cds.
>
> John Cochrane

[Evan Ludeman[_4_]]

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 5:21:51 PM UTC-4, Tony wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 3:57:31 PM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
>
> > They kinda are complaining when they text me photo's of the tasks with frowny faces... I agree that pilots should voice their disgust at the pilots meeting. Perhaps the culture of the CD, task advisors, etc is too stogy for most new pilots to want to express their concern? I think most pilots assume the CD and task advisors are doing the right thing. Perhaps they are wrong.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > So, in this case, it is obviously not the weather that resulted in the 3 massive 30 mile radius Turn Area task, nor is it the handicap range (LS-3 or Discus is lowest I think). So, what guidelines were being followed that resulted in this call of 3 turn areas with 60 MILE DIAMETERS??? Do we, perhaps, need to adjust those guidelines in order to return to a reasonable balance or ATs vs. TAT/MATs?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I refer back to the title of this thread.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > US Tasking? Are way to many TATs/MATs being called vs. NOT ENOUGH ASSIGNED TSASKS (3% in 2013)
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Is the assigned task truly dead in the USA? Why? Per Noel, "what are contest task supposed to me measuring?" Objective racing skill or pure weather luck in which massive swings in conditions are the primary factor?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Isn't calling one giant TAT for 3 classes on a good flying day a little "lazy?" Again, I am fine with a TAT if the compromise is required (weather, handicap range, etc), but aren't racing tasks preferred when the conditions are suitable for it?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Sean
>
>
>
> Assigned task is not available for the sports class.
>
>
>
> There is quite a speed difference between all the gliders in the contest, like I mentioned. Not unreasonable to assume a 30 mph difference between a slow dry glider and a fast glider in one of the FAI classes. that adds up to a big mileage spread over a 3:30 task.

But there's no earthly reason to give the FAI classes the same task as Sports.

Evan Ludeman / T8

[Tony[_5_]]

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 6:57:00 PM UTC-5, Evan Ludeman wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 5:21:51 PM UTC-4, Tony wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 3:57:31 PM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > They kinda are complaining when they text me photo's of the tasks with frowny faces... I agree that pilots should voice their disgust at the pilots meeting. Perhaps the culture of the CD, task advisors, etc is too stogy for most new pilots to want to express their concern? I think most pilots assume the CD and task advisors are doing the right thing. Perhaps they are wrong.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > So, in this case, it is obviously not the weather that resulted in the 3 massive 30 mile radius Turn Area task, nor is it the handicap range (LS-3 or Discus is lowest I think). So, what guidelines were being followed that resulted in this call of 3 turn areas with 60 MILE DIAMETERS??? Do we, perhaps, need to adjust those guidelines in order to return to a reasonable balance or ATs vs. TAT/MATs?
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > I refer back to the title of this thread.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > US Tasking? Are way to many TATs/MATs being called vs. NOT ENOUGH ASSIGNED TSASKS (3% in 2013)
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Is the assigned task truly dead in the USA? Why? Per Noel, "what are contest task supposed to me measuring?" Objective racing skill or pure weather luck in which massive swings in conditions are the primary factor?
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Isn't calling one giant TAT for 3 classes on a good flying day a little "lazy?" Again, I am fine with a TAT if the compromise is required (weather, handicap range, etc), but aren't racing tasks preferred when the conditions are suitable for it?
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Sean
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Assigned task is not available for the sports class.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > There is quite a speed difference between all the gliders in the contest, like I mentioned. Not unreasonable to assume a 30 mph difference between a slow dry glider and a fast glider in one of the FAI classes. that adds up to a big mileage spread over a 3:30 task.
>
>
>
> But there's no earthly reason to give the FAI classes the same task as Sports.
>
>
>
> Evan Ludeman / T8

Evan,

I would tend to agree

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 5:40:02 PM UTC-4, Bill D wrote:
> Without commenting on a particular task, I humbly suggest the real problem is contest attendance - or rather the lack of it.
>
>
>
> Asking pilots at_a_contest about task preferences is looking through the wrong end of the telescope. For meaningful data - and to grow contest flying - one should be asking those NOT attending contests what sort of tasks THEY prefer.
>
>
>
> I suspect the answers to this hypothetical survey would range from "Those we understand." to "You won't like the answer."
>
>
>
> This has been looked at quite a bit. The most common barrier to contest participation is the same as it is for the rest of soaring- time and money.
Given that a contest requires an even greater amount of both, it is a significant hurdle for many folks.
UH

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Bill D]

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 6:50:16 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 5:40:02 PM UTC-4, Bill D wrote:
>
> > Without commenting on a particular task, I humbly suggest the real problem is contest attendance - or rather the lack of it.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Asking pilots at_a_contest about task preferences is looking through the wrong end of the telescope. For meaningful data - and to grow contest flying - one should be asking those NOT attending contests what sort of tasks THEY prefer.
>
> >

> > This has been looked at quite a bit. The most common barrier to contest participation is the same as it is for the rest of soaring- time and money..



What you say is entirely correct in the general sense but it applies equally to every other racing sport. A neighbor, who is by no means wealthy, trailers his drag boat to 20 or so races a year held all around the country. Another does the same for motocross racing.

Out of 15,000 or so glider pilots in the US, you need less than a hundred additional competitors to exceed what the existing contest infrastructure (Airport space, tow planes)could accommodate. I suspect at least that many have the time and money to compete. If they could be persuaded to do so, it would turn the situation around.

But the question was about what TASK the non-participants prefer. I think the current task selections may have something to do with the problem. The biggest objection I hear is, "I don't understand the rules or tasks." Or, "Why travel? It's just like the OLC."

If you want these people to participate, you have to give them a reason. I think real racing tasks could be that reason.

[Ron Gleason]

On Wednesday, 6 August 2014 13:47:40 UTC-6, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Task call today from USA Region 9 (Nephi, UT)...
>
>
>
> Wait for it.....................
>
>
>
> 3, 30 mile radius turn cylinders (THATS RIGHT, 3 THIRTY MILE RADIUS).
>
>
>
> Photo of task sheet (sent by my spy) here: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bx7KRpMugGmfYUhRRkdHb2dCVDQ/edit?usp=docslist_api
>
>
>
> The AM report for the day actually say's the words "LETS RACE!" ROTFL. -->http://www.ssa.org/Contests?cid=2268&show=blog&id=3756&ContestName=Region+9+North
>
>
>
> Ready, set, go............fly anywhere you want like OLC and have fun! But it's no race folks. Not even remotely close to a race. That's for sure..
>
>
>
> Weather considerations for the task selection you may ask? Read it for yourself...
>
>
>
> "Just finished the pilot meeting, spirits are high and optimism is high for a great day of racing.
>
> One task for all classes; 02 Start, 78 Wayne Wonder, 43 Milford and 22 Delta Muni all turnpoints have 30 mile radi.
>
> Nominal 280, maximum 402.6 and minium 182.
>
> Duration 3:30
>
> Task B is same as A but 3:00 duration.
>
> Weather is forecated to be 4-6F warmer, trigger temperature passed by launch, TOL 14-15K+, lift 5 knots average+, cumulus clouds should be present and winds at TOL 15-18 MPH.
>
> Tasks on SSA tracker site, happy viewing
>
> Let's race" (<--- yes they really said that!)
>
>
>
> I rest my case.
>
>
>
> :-)
>
>
>
> Sean

I do not have time to respond with the level of detail anyone here would require and I am trying not to respond emotionally with a '**** off you have no clue what you are talking about since you are not here understanding all the parameters we are dealing with'

I have one request for Sean; please take down the link you posted for the task sheet. It has peoples personal telephone numbers, including mine, on it that are volunteering so that 37-38 pilots and their crew can have fun, race gliders and experience central UT. Your disregard for privacy and complete lack of understanding on our situation is appalling and disgusting.

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 1:57:31 PM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:

> So, in this case, it is obviously not the weather that resulted in the 3 massive 30 mile radius Turn Area
> task, nor is it the handicap range (LS-3 or Discus is lowest I think).

Center of the first turnpoint was inside a line of OD and rain and sits at the far end of a pretty high escarpment that is 20 x 50 miles and totally unlandable except for the airport at the turnpoint on the far side (Wayne Wonderland). Second turnpoint (Milford) was in the clear. Third turnpoint (Delta) was 25 miles into a blue hole in the desert. Around 20x60 miles in the center of the task area was a giant mass of OD with rain and lightening. The exact location of the OD was not predictable with any certainty at time of launch.

The tasking in general appeared to be into the best weather - most everywhere else was OD'd or blue. As I write this the sky is full of thunderstorms in most directions as far as the eye can see and then some.

Maybe not a poster-child for Assigned Task racing, meteorologically speaking. You might've been able to call an AST but the landout/abandon rate would've been pretty high unless you got lucky with all the widespread OD. Even with a much shorter task you would have had a decent chance of sending the fleet into driving rain or the blue over open desert. High desert weather can be unpredictable because it's so dynamic. On a non-monsoon day Nephi can support some awesome Assigned Tasks.

15-Meter Nationals will be here in 2016. Should be fun. Put on some 15 meter tips and give it a shot.

Task sheet pic - couldn't resist a good troll. ;-)

Andy

[Tim Taylor]

Sean,

Sorry you are way off base on today's call. I'm not on the task committee but I thought it was a good call. I like AST's but we have been on the edge of storms for three days. Hard to predict where it will OD right now.

We had a forty mile long cell of rain down the middle of the task area today. It gave pilots the option of how to fly around it today.

Also the first turn area was over very intimidating terrain. The more advance pilots could fly over the high plateau but allowed the newer pilots with less mountain experience to fly where they were more comfortable. I ran a ledge next to a thunderstorm for fifty miles over a high plateau, I don't expect a newer pilot to do the same.

Today's task was really a triangle that all the pilots followed similar paths so much less variation than you would think for three turns with big rings.

As you remember from your last contest at Parowan this can be intimidating weather and country for new pilots. If I remember correctly you did not fly a few days because it was too advanced for your skill level at the time.

The task committee has done a nice job for the last three days with very dynamic weather. We have thunderstorms rolling through right now that could have easily been right through the course area today.

TT

[Sean Fidler]

Tim,

"A superior pilot uses his superior judgment to avoid situations that would require the use of his superior skills." -unknown. :-)

Interesting that you bring up my decision not to fly that day at Parawon during 2011(?) sports class nationals. I did not fly because the CD decided to launch on a day which was windier (gusts to 40 mph) than the day before (35 mph, which was cancelled due to the "extremely strong winds"). Sorta makes your brain hurt when you think about it. I decided not to fly on a day where the Porta Potties on the North end of the Parowan runway actually blew over while we were out on the grid "considering" things. Crews had to sit on the wings without pause as they would bang around violently. The intense winds made emergency landing options on tow extremely dangerous (IMO) off the south end of the runway. The tow planes made a right turn directly over the town of Parowan at about 100 ft.

I made a "judgement" decision that the strong wind conditions were just too unsafe (based on the previous days decision and common sense) and talked to the CD about it and informed him that I was going to pull off the grid for that day. I felt the CD was under tremendous pressure from certain pilots to launch as the previous day one pilot was able to get up and fly. My argument, other than the simple wind strength, was that if 40 gliders launched and were stuck at or near tow release altitude and then needed to return it would be crowded and dangerous, and that towing itself was dangerous as well. The sniffers were struggling to get up and drifting downwind rapidly. The turbulence along the mountain at tow release hight was another concern. The way to get up at parawon was to work up over that high terrain and often that meant being less than 1000 AGL. Etc, etc.

Yes, I was dissapionted with the decision to hold a contest day in such strong winds when two fatalities had just occurred that summer in strong winds (20-25 mph) at contests.

Francois Pin also pulled off the runway that day and did not fly. I guess the conditions were to advanced for him too? I'm not sure that your assessment of our decision not to fly that day is entirely accurate. I also believe the Air Force Acadamy grounded all of its gliders as well.

After that, with only one or two days left in the contest and no real competitive concerns, I decided to tour the local parks with my wife who had just flown in. I had already had a great time and was not worried about the results anymore. I had no problem with the terrain itself (on days with surface winds less that 40 mph), it was just a matter of maximizing a fun vacation when the competitive chances were no longer important.

Zion is amazing by the way!!!

I just see it a little differently then you describe Tim. I hope that helps you understand. I do have all sort of pictures and video from on the grid and of the conditions that were launched in that day. I'm sure historical weather records are available. Perhaps I should post them for you?

Sean

[Sean Fidler]

Tim,

If the call was justified I am fine with it. I am happy to be corrected. From the weather report on the SSA page however it looked good and high (16k) and strong (5-6 knots) with no mention of thunderstorms. That weather report / the call for a TAT with 3 60 mile turns = why I brought it up. 3 60 milers is a pretty extreme TAT to say the least.

But that goes both ways. If you do have a good Nephi weather day I hope assigned tasks are called for at least some of the classes. That is actually far less extreme of a call than the 3 60 mile turn TAT.

I would like to be the first to introduce a new nickname for this type of "TAT" task...the TAOLC! A TAOLC task is any task with more than one 30/60 mile turn area.

Seriously, If we are going to be calling tasks like this becuase of difficult weather, why have any limitations at all? Why force pilots to edge near storms if the area is in the wrong place or perhaps "too small?" Why not allow 100 mile turn areas or entire quadrants to be scoreable? Why not come up with a time limited (or no time limit) task simply called TAOLC? No computers needed, just a watch.

Back to ATs, remember that only 3% of US tasks in 2013 were AT. Does that mean that only 3% of the tasks had weather that could support an AT? Do our guidelines need updating? Are we happy with 3%. Do TATs alone provide a fair contest?

I'm trying to get people to think broadly here, not specifically. Remember, 3%....

Sean

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, August 7, 2014 6:14:39 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
>
> I made a "judgement" decision that the strong wind conditions were just too unsafe (based on the previous days decision and common sense) and talked to the CD about it and informed him that I was going to pull off the grid for that day. I felt the CD was under tremendous pressure from certain pilots to launch as the previous day one pilot was able to get up and fly.

All sorts of decisions about whether to fly, the type of task to fly, the direction of tasking, etc. require judgments about evolving conditions and potential scenarios for things to go bad. CDs and Task Committees, in my experience try hard to ignore the shouts of the mob and apply their judgment as to to what would make a safe and competitive task. You don't want sailplane racing to be about who has the highest personal risk tolerance.

It goes for takeoff and climb out in strong winds as much as judgements about how to task so that the competitors aren't sent into harm's way (in this case extensive OD and driving rain) out on course with tasks that are too constrained for the conditions.

[Sean Fidler]

New "cropped" photo of task sheet: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bx7KRpMugGmfbHJiS01ZYV81Tzg&authuser=0

On Monday, July 28, 2014 3:17:12 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Here is a crude but accurate Google spreadsheet summarizing the 2013 "Task Mix" in the US (SSA sanctioned).
>
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NO7073Z6J-r77aUbR1oOEKrusXwfYf4amtaem_Rw-E4/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
>
> OVERALL 2013 US Tasks
>
> Total # of Tasks 209
>
> Turn Area Tasks 142 68%
>
> Modified Assigned Tasks 60 29.00%
>
> PURE Assigned Tasks 7 3% (YES, that says 3 PERCENT! 7 total AT's in the US in 2013.)
>
> * Many of the MAT's were the infamous 1 turn MAT!
>
>
>
> 2013 US Nationals Tasks
>
> (includes 15/18/Open/Standard/Sports/Club)
>
> Total # of Tasks 48
>
> Turn Area Tasks 28 58.33%
>
> Modified Assigned Tasks 15 31.25%
>
> PURE Assigned Tasks 5 10.42%
>
> * All 3 of the 15/Open MATs were ONE TURN MATs
>
> * 2 of the Sports/Club Nationals MAT's were NO TURN MATs.
>
>
>
> Is 3% Assigned Tasks OVERALL and 10% Assigned Tasks in US Nationals the right tasking mix?
>
>
>
> I for one would like to see FAR more pure Assigned Tasks in 2015 and beyond. What is everybody afraid of again?
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Sean
>
>
>
> PS - 3% total assigned tasks in the USA in 2013? Really???????

[Sean Fidler]

New cropped photo of the task: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bx7KRpMugGmfbHJiS01ZYV81Tzg&authuser=0

PS...if anyone was going to call the numbers at the bottom of the original page, I feel for you! ;-) ROTFL!

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 3:47:40 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Task call today from USA Region 9 (Nephi, UT)...
>
>
>
> Wait for it.....................
>
>
>
> 3, 30 mile radius turn cylinders (THATS RIGHT, 3 THIRTY MILE RADIUS).
>
>
>
> Photo of task sheet (sent by my spy) here: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bx7KRpMugGmfYUhRRkdHb2dCVDQ/edit?usp=docslist_api
>
>
>
> The AM report for the day actually say's the words "LETS RACE!" ROTFL. -->http://www.ssa.org/Contests?cid=2268&show=blog&id=3756&ContestName=Region+9+North
>
>
>
> Ready, set, go............fly anywhere you want like OLC and have fun! But it's no race folks. Not even remotely close to a race. That's for sure.
>
>
>
> Weather considerations for the task selection you may ask? Read it for yourself...
>
>
>
> "Just finished the pilot meeting, spirits are high and optimism is high for a great day of racing.
>
> One task for all classes; 02 Start, 78 Wayne Wonder, 43 Milford and 22 Delta Muni all turnpoints have 30 mile radi.
>
> Nominal 280, maximum 402.6 and minium 182.
>
> Duration 3:30
>
> Task B is same as A but 3:00 duration.
>
> Weather is forecated to be 4-6F warmer, trigger temperature passed by launch, TOL 14-15K+, lift 5 knots average+, cumulus clouds should be present and winds at TOL 15-18 MPH.
>
> Tasks on SSA tracker site, happy viewing
>
> Let's race" (<--- yes they really said that!)
>
>
>
> I rest my case.
>
>
>
> :-)
>
>
>
> Sean

[Sean Fidler]

Very surprised that there was no comment to this one...hmmm.

On Thursday, August 7, 2014 9:14:39 AM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Tim,
>
>
>
> "A superior pilot uses his superior judgment to avoid situations that would require the use of his superior skills." -unknown. :-)
>
>
>
> Interesting that you bring up my decision not to fly that day at Parawon during 2011(?) sports class nationals. I did not fly because the CD decided to launch on a day which was windier (gusts to 40 mph) than the day before (35 mph, which was cancelled due to the "extremely strong winds"). Sorta makes your brain hurt when you think about it. I decided not to fly on a day where the Porta Potties on the North end of the Parowan runway actually blew over while we were out on the grid "considering" things. Crews had to sit on the wings without pause as they would bang around violently. The intense winds made emergency landing options on tow extremely dangerous (IMO) off the south end of the runway. The tow planes made a right turn directly over the town of Parowan at about 100 ft.
>
>
>
> I made a "judgement" decision that the strong wind conditions were just too unsafe (based on the previous days decision and common sense) and talked to the CD about it and informed him that I was going to pull off the grid for that day. I felt the CD was under tremendous pressure from certain pilots to launch as the previous day one pilot was able to get up and fly. My argument, other than the simple wind strength, was that if 40 gliders launched and were stuck at or near tow release altitude and then needed to return it would be crowded and dangerous, and that towing itself was dangerous as well. The sniffers were struggling to get up and drifting downwind rapidly. The turbulence along the mountain at tow release hight was another concern. The way to get up at parawon was to work up over that high terrain and often that meant being less than 1000 AGL. Etc, etc.
>
>
>
> Yes, I was dissapionted with the decision to hold a contest day in such strong winds when two fatalities had just occurred that summer in strong winds (20-25 mph) at contests.
>
>
>
> Francois Pin also pulled off the runway that day and did not fly. I guess the conditions were to advanced for him too? I'm not sure that your assessment of our decision not to fly that day is entirely accurate. I also believe the Air Force Acadamy grounded all of its gliders as well.
>
>
>
> After that, with only one or two days left in the contest and no real competitive concerns, I decided to tour the local parks with my wife who had just flown in. I had already had a great time and was not worried about the results anymore. I had no problem with the terrain itself (on days with surface winds less that 40 mph), it was just a matter of maximizing a fun vacation when the competitive chances were no longer important.
>
>
>
> Zion is amazing by the way!!!
>
>
>
> I just see it a little differently then you describe Tim. I hope that helps you understand. I do have all sort of pictures and video from on the grid and of the conditions that were launched in that day. I'm sure historical weather records are available. Perhaps I should post them for you?
>
>
>
> Sean

[[email protected]]

On Monday, August 11, 2014 2:44:43 PM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Very surprised that there was no comment to this one...hmmm.
>
>
>
> It seemed that you felt you needed to "defend" your safety decision.
There was no reason to do so.
I did not interpret Tim's comment as being critical in any way.
A couple personal rules I have are that I never second guess my decision to do the safe thing and I strongly discourage others from making a comment that would cause another pilot to second guess his or her safe decision. I think Tim avoided that poor practice. If anything I think he positively noted that you made a safe decision.
UH

[Sean Fidler]

I'm sure that Tim will comment.