Spot Landing Competition Rules

[gliderpilotGR]

Hello,

I would be grateful for advice on organising a Spot Landing Competion.
things like scoring / penalties, use of ground markers or "fences". Ideally someone might offer a complete set of contest rules.

Local glider community is interested in a time management / spot landing competition event as a way of stirring up interest and maintaining spectator appeal. I have been tasked to write national level rules to make this happen.

My own preference, in the interest of realism and educational value would be towards setting up simulated fences on the approach and the far end and scoring for a touchdown in relation to the approach fence. However, I am concerned that this may lead to dangerously slow / full brake approaches and heavy landings, either during the event or as bad habits passed on. Objectively penalising such techniques is difficult.

The other alternative is to measure in relation to ground markers only, but I wonder how much space should be marked and how much to penalise each metre / foot beyond the target. IMO, final resting place should not affect results as it encourages wheelbrake use.

I am aware that there are a few suggestion in a 1999 thread, but would appreciate fresh practical advice.
It is likely that Grob 103 Twin IIs will be the main type used. Some single seaters would certainly have an advantage. I suspect one may even work out a handicap system !

Many thanks in advance,

VM

[John Cochrane[_3_]]

The Chicago Glider Club annual spot landing competition uses one simple rule to make it harder: no wheel brake. Then, it's just who rolls closest to the pylon.

John Cochrane

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, August 17, 2014 9:52:00 AM UTC-7, John Cochrane wrote:
> The Chicago Glider Club annual spot landing competition uses one simple rule to make it harder: no wheel brake. Then, it's just who rolls closest to the pylon.
>
> John Cochrane

Can you put your feet out?

[WAVEGURU]

Anchor management?

Boggs

[Bruce Hoult[_2_]]

On 2014-08-16 22:43:48 +0000, gliderpilotGR said:

> My own preference, in the interest of realism and educational value
> would be towards setting up simulated fences on the approach and the
> far end and scoring for a touchdown in relation to the approach fence.

My club used to do this, usually on the day of the AGM.

A toitoi[1] fence is set up on the threshold, a domestic lawnmower used
to cut a super-short one pass wide stip down the centerline, and the
airsped and altimeter covered.

Contestents are judged by (from what I remember as a contentent, not a judge):

- releasing at a nominated height (1200 ft from memory)
- establishing a trimmed speed
- accuracy of speed control in a figure 8 turn
- starting the circuit at 800 ft
- appropriate crcuit/approach speed
- not hitting the fence
- touching down on and remaining on the center line
- stopping near a mark (no wheel brake).

I was fluky enough to win it a couple of times around the late 80s/early 90s.

Alas, I don't think the contest has been run for some time. I don't
know whether that is because the members who organised it moved out of
the area (fact); participation dropped (fact), possibly due to rising
cost of tows (speculation); the club moved from training in Blaniks to
Grob Twins (and then DG1000) (fact) and someone thought it was too
risky (speculation).

I think it may have been run a few times in the glass ships with
altimeter covered but not the airspeed.

We do still get students who are about to solo to do a flight or two in
the DG1000 with all front seat instruments covered, but without the
"marginal outlanding simulation" pressure. They are always surprised at
how much of non-issue it is.


> However, I am concerned that this may lead to dangerously slow / full
> brake approaches and heavy landings, either during the event or as bad
> habits passed on.

Yellow triangle speed, close to max brakes is what you *should* be
doing. The hilarious (and dangerous) ones are those who do a slow
shallow approach and then try to bunny hop over the fence.


[1] NZ native plant. http://bit.ly/1oT7w8E

[Andreas Maurer]

On Sat, 16 Aug 2014 15:43:48 -0700 (PDT), gliderpilotGR
> wrote:

>Hello,
>
>I would be grateful for advice on organising a Spot Landing Competion.
>things like scoring / penalties, use of ground markers or "fences". Ideally someone might offer a complete set of contest rules.
>
>Local glider community is interested in a time management / spot landing competition event as a way of stirring up interest and maintaining spectator appeal. I have been tasked to write national level rules to make this happen.
>
>My own preference, in the interest of realism and educational value would be towards setting up simulated fences on the approach and the far end and scoring for a touchdown in relation to the approach fence. However, I am concerned that this may lead to dangerously slow / full brake approaches and heavy landings, either during the event or as bad habits passed on. Objectively penalising such techniques is difficult.
>
>The other alternative is to measure in relation to ground markers only, but I wonder how much space should be marked and how much to penalise each metre / foot beyond the target. IMO, final resting place should not affect results as it encourages wheelbrake use.
>
>I am aware that there are a few suggestion in a 1999 thread, but would appreciate fresh practical advice.
>It is likely that Grob 103 Twin IIs will be the main type used. Some single seaters would certainly have an advantage. I suspect one may even work out a handicap system !


Rules we are using since at least 30 years for our annual spot landing
competition:

- Draw a very visible line on the runway - this is the touchdown
point. It is usually necessary to use some additional markers to
enhance the visibility of this line

- draw 10 lines 10 meters apart behind that line
- draw 5 lines 2 meters apart in front of that line


Here in Germany we teach that only a tail-wheel-first landing is a
good landing. Hence, the touchdown of the glider is defined by the
first ground contact of the main wheel.

- One point penalty for each meter behind the touchdown point
- Ten points penalty for each meter in front of the touchdown point

- We are using a jury that judges each landing and assigns penalties
if the landing is considered sub-standard.

- 2 competition classes: Student pilots and licensed pilots.



Works extremely well, and so far we have not found that single-seaters
offer any advantage over the bigger ships.



Best regards from Germany
Andreas

[gliderpilotGR]

Thanks to all, for the responses !

VM

[Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)]

On Saturday, August 16, 2014 6:43:48 PM UTC-4, gliderpilotGR wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would be grateful for advice on organising a Spot Landing Competion.
> things like scoring / penalties, use of ground markers or "fences". Ideally someone might offer a complete set of contest rules.
>
> Local glider community is interested in a time management / spot landing competition event as a way of stirring up interest and maintaining spectator appeal. I have been tasked to write national level rules to make this happen.
>
> My own preference, in the interest of realism and educational value would be towards setting up simulated fences on the approach and the far end and scoring for a touchdown in relation to the approach fence. However, I am concerned that this may lead to dangerously slow / full brake approaches and heavy landings, either during the event or as bad habits passed on. Objectively penalising such techniques is difficult.
>
> The other alternative is to measure in relation to ground markers only, but I wonder how much space should be marked and how much to penalise each metre / foot beyond the target. IMO, final resting place should not affect results as it encourages wheelbrake use.
>
> I am aware that there are a few suggestion in a 1999 thread, but would appreciate fresh practical advice.
> It is likely that Grob 103 Twin IIs will be the main type used. Some single seaters would certainly have an advantage. I suspect one may even work out a handicap system !
>
> Many thanks in advance,
>
> VM

Older post I know, but I can dig up the rules we used for the "Snowbird event" held Thanksgiving weekend at HHSC (Elmira, NY).
It was a combination of:
-Precision duration
-Spot landing/parking
-Altitude gain
......all scored in a single flight. The primary goal (other than fun) was energy management and off field landing practice.

It was a marked off runway (~200' total) that had landing zones, "ditch" and then park to a cone. It forced a reasonably steep approach at the correct speed so you could get the sight angle for the touchdown and not so much speed you needed good brakes to get stopped.

The drawings & rules "may" be on the HHSC website.
Note, many years ago I mentioned to the guys from M&H Soaring that, "The overall winner one year was to be the CD the next year".....I was the CD a few times...
[Thanks Heinz & Monty.....LOL....]

PS, done right, a 2-33 or 1-26 could win the event.

[ND]

http://www.harrishillsoaring.org/HHSC/Snowbird_Rules.html

Harris hill has been doing a neat spot landing competition annually for the last 70+ years.

[Dan Marotta]

<snip>

how much to penalise each metre / foot beyond the target <snip>

I always thought the target was a brick wall at the end of the landing zone. The penalty for crossing it would be heavy!

On 12/19/2014 7:27 AM, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
> how much to penalise each metre / foot beyond the target

--
Dan Marotta

[John Carlyle]

Wouldn't that be a "spot stopping contest" rather than a "spot landing contest, Dan?

-John, Q3


On Friday, December 19, 2014 11:14:33 AM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
> I always thought the target was a brick wall at the end of the landing zone. The penalty for crossing it would be heavy!
>
> Dan Marotta

[Dan Marotta]

As I recall (it's been a long time), my Commercial check ride required
me to stop short of the fence, not within a few feet beyond. It was
barbed wire, BTW, and I was not very happy with being put in that spot.
The examiner was an FAA guy and had not done a glider check ride in a
long time and probably never in such a high performance ship as a Twin
Lark. Why not add training value to the spot landing contest by
assessing a 100% penalty for passing the mark?

On several trips to Roach Dry Lake south of Jean, NV, they have a circle
outlined on the lake bed within which to stop. It was a lot of fun to
shoot for the center of the circle. The 1-26 and 2-33 usually won but I
did manage to stop in the circle a couple of times in my LAK!


On 12/19/2014 10:51 AM, John Carlyle wrote:
> Wouldn't that be a "spot stopping contest" rather than a "spot landing contest, Dan?
>
> -John, Q3
>
>
> On Friday, December 19, 2014 11:14:33 AM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
>> I always thought the target was a brick wall at the end of the landing zone. The penalty for crossing it would be heavy!
>>
>> Dan Marotta

--
Dan Marotta

[John Carlyle]

It comes down to what you want to emphasize, Dan.

If your goal is to train pilots to land a ship safely in a small field, I'd argue that it's more important to be able to land on a specific mark rather than be able to stop before an arbitrary mark. Reasoning - landing short of the field (or hitting a tree before landing) is liable to be more injurious to the pilot than doing a slow speed ground loop.

If your goal is just to meet the FAA PTS, then of course you must emphasize stopping before an arbitrary mark.

-John, Q3


On Friday, December 19, 2014 1:50:33 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
> As I recall (it's been a long time), my Commercial check ride
> required me to stop short of the fence, not within a few feet
> beyond.* It was barbed wire, BTW, and I was not very happy with
> being put in that spot.* The examiner was an FAA guy and had not
> done a glider check ride in a long time and probably never in such a
> high performance ship as a Twin Lark.* Why not add training value to
> the spot landing contest by assessing a 100% penalty for passing the
> mark?
>
>
>
> On several trips to Roach Dry Lake south of Jean, NV, they have a
> circle outlined on the lake bed within which to stop.* It was a lot
> of fun to shoot for the center of the circle.* The 1-26 and 2-33
> usually won but I did manage to stop in the circle a couple of times
> in my LAK!
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 12/19/2014 10:51 AM, John Carlyle
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Wouldn't that be a "spot stopping contest" rather than a "spot landing contest, Dan?
>
> -John, Q3
>
>
> On Friday, December 19, 2014 11:14:33 AM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
>
>
> I always thought the target was a brick wall at the end of the landing zone. The penalty for crossing it would be heavy!
>
> Dan Marotta
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dan Marotta

[Dan Marotta]

I like having fun, too!

OBTW, in the early 90s I bought an LS-6a restored from wreck. The
previous owner had gone through a fence on a landout. He died at the scene.

Safe flying!

Dan

On 12/19/2014 12:16 PM, John Carlyle wrote:
> It comes down to what you want to emphasize, Dan.
>
> If your goal is to train pilots to land a ship safely in a small field, I'd argue that it's more important to be able to land on a specific mark rather than be able to stop before an arbitrary mark. Reasoning - landing short of the field (or hitting a tree before landing) is liable to be more injurious to the pilot than doing a slow speed ground loop.
>
> If your goal is just to meet the FAA PTS, then of course you must emphasize stopping before an arbitrary mark.
>
> -John, Q3
>
>
> On Friday, December 19, 2014 1:50:33 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
>> As I recall (it's been a long time), my Commercial check ride
>> required me to stop short of the fence, not within a few feet
>> beyond. It was barbed wire, BTW, and I was not very happy with
>> being put in that spot. The examiner was an FAA guy and had not
>> done a glider check ride in a long time and probably never in such a
>> high performance ship as a Twin Lark. Why not add training value to
>> the spot landing contest by assessing a 100% penalty for passing the
>> mark?
>>
>>
>>
>> On several trips to Roach Dry Lake south of Jean, NV, they have a
>> circle outlined on the lake bed within which to stop. It was a lot
>> of fun to shoot for the center of the circle. The 1-26 and 2-33
>> usually won but I did manage to stop in the circle a couple of times
>> in my LAK!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12/19/2014 10:51 AM, John Carlyle
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Wouldn't that be a "spot stopping contest" rather than a "spot landing contest, Dan?
>>
>> -John, Q3
>>
>>
>> On Friday, December 19, 2014 11:14:33 AM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
>>
>>
>> I always thought the target was a brick wall at the end of the landing zone. The penalty for crossing it would be heavy!
>>
>> Dan Marotta
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Dan Marotta

--
Dan Marotta

[John Carlyle]

We all like fun, Dan, that's why we fly without engines!

Your story is tragic (and I don't know if I would have enjoyed flying your LS-6 knowing its history). But a fatal overrun is not an argument against making landings on a precise spot.

I wish you safe flying, too.

-John, Q3

On Friday, December 19, 2014 6:30:13 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
> I like having fun, too!
>
>
>
> OBTW, in the early 90s I bought an LS-6a restored from wreck.* The
> previous owner had gone through a fence on a landout.* He died at
> the scene.
>
>
>
> Safe flying!
>
>
>
> Dan
>
>
>
>
> On 12/19/2014 12:16 PM, John Carlyle
> wrote:
>
>
>
> It comes down to what you want to emphasize, Dan.
>
> If your goal is to train pilots to land a ship safely in a small field, I'd argue that it's more important to be able to land on a specific mark rather than be able to stop before an arbitrary mark. Reasoning - landing short of the field (or hitting a tree before landing) is liable to be more injurious to the pilot than doing a slow speed ground loop.
>
> If your goal is just to meet the FAA PTS, then of course you must emphasize stopping before an arbitrary mark.
>
> -John, Q3
>
>
> On Friday, December 19, 2014 1:50:33 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
>
>
> As I recall (it's been a long time), my Commercial check ride
> required me to stop short of the fence, not within a few feet
> beyond.* It was barbed wire, BTW, and I was not very happy with
> being put in that spot.* The examiner was an FAA guy and had not
> done a glider check ride in a long time and probably never in such a
> high performance ship as a Twin Lark.* Why not add training value to
> the spot landing contest by assessing a 100% penalty for passing the
> mark?
>
>
>
> On several trips to Roach Dry Lake south of Jean, NV, they have a
> circle outlined on the lake bed within which to stop.* It was a lot
> of fun to shoot for the center of the circle.* The 1-26 and 2-33
> usually won but I did manage to stop in the circle a couple of times
> in my LAK!
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 12/19/2014 10:51 AM, John Carlyle
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Wouldn't that be a "spot stopping contest" rather than a "spot landing contest, Dan?
>
> -John, Q3
>
>
> On Friday, December 19, 2014 11:14:33 AM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
>
>
> I always thought the target was a brick wall at the end of the landing zone. The penalty for crossing it would be heavy!
>
> Dan Marotta
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dan Marotta
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dan Marotta