Why does the Sporting code require "Goal" to be a finish point???

[Mark Zivley]

If you want to make a flight to a "goal" the sporting code says that the
"goal" is a "finish point" and the definition of "finish point is
defined as the end of the flight (for simplicity). Either a landing, a
declared "finish point", or engine start location.

My question is why does the goal need to be a finish point???? Why
can't the "goal" be any pre-declared waypoint? If there is a record
attempt that is made from a start point to a "goal" then why should it
matter if there were waypoints used before or after the "goal" is
reached? I'm NOT suggesting that the pilot get credit for the extra
distance. He/she would only get credit for the straight line distance
from the start point to the goal point.

Consider this example. The current state record for "distance to a
goal" is say 100km. You declare an out and return to a waypoint which
is 155km from the start point because if you make it back you'd get your
300k badge flight. Even though you made it to a pre-declared point (a
"goal" if you will) you won't get credit for the state record for
"distance to a goal" because you didn't finish at the declared waypoint.
even though the distance to the waypoint beats the 100km record by 55k.

Why not state that the "goal" must be a pre-declared waypoint OR finish
point and that the distance that is credited for the "distance to a
goal" be defined as the straight line distance from the start point to
the declared waypoint.

Mark

[tango4]

There is no reason why you can't fly an out and return and claim the
outbound leg as the goal part of the flight. The TP then becomes the finish.
The problem is that only one declaration can be in effect at a time when it
comes to the course you intend to fly so you either have to declare a goal
flight or an O/R.

Ian.



"Mark Zivley" > wrote in message
m...
> If you want to make a flight to a "goal" the sporting code says that the
> "goal" is a "finish point" and the definition of "finish point is defined
> as the end of the flight (for simplicity). Either a landing, a declared
> "finish point", or engine start location.
>
> My question is why does the goal need to be a finish point???? Why can't
> the "goal" be any pre-declared waypoint? If there is a record attempt
> that is made from a start point to a "goal" then why should it matter if
> there were waypoints used before or after the "goal" is reached? I'm NOT
> suggesting that the pilot get credit for the extra distance. He/she would
> only get credit for the straight line distance from the start point to the
> goal point.
>
> Consider this example. The current state record for "distance to a goal"
> is say 100km. You declare an out and return to a waypoint which is 155km
> from the start point because if you make it back you'd get your 300k badge
> flight. Even though you made it to a pre-declared point (a "goal" if you
> will) you won't get credit for the state record for "distance to a goal"
> because you didn't finish at the declared waypoint. even though the
> distance to the waypoint beats the 100km record by 55k.
>
> Why not state that the "goal" must be a pre-declared waypoint OR finish
> point and that the distance that is credited for the "distance to a goal"
> be defined as the straight line distance from the start point to the
> declared waypoint.
>
> Mark
>

[Denis]

Mark Zivley wrote:

> My question is why does the goal need to be a finish point????

Because it is written like this.

I know this is a poor reason but I cannot find a better one...

On the other hand, it is allowed to claim a triangle and to score also
an out and return record (see annex C). Thus the logic would be to allow
also to score a goal flight along with an out and return (and/or a
triangle, keeping in mind that only 2 records are allowed in the same
flight)

But as it has already be said here many times, there are many odd things
in the Sporting code and this is just another one. Ask your delegate to
IGC to improve it ! Or submit the question to the IGC discussion list :
igc-discuss at fai.org


--
Denis

R. Parce que ça rompt le cours normal de la conversation !!!
Q. Pourquoi ne faut-il pas répondre au-dessus de la question ?

[Tim Newport-Peace]

X-no-archive: yes
In article >, Denis <moncourrielest
> writes
>Mark Zivley wrote:
>
>> My question is why does the goal need to be a finish point????
>
>Because it is written like this.
>
>I know this is a poor reason but I cannot find a better one...
>
>On the other hand, it is allowed to claim a triangle and to score also
>an out and return record (see annex C). Thus the logic would be to allow
> also to score a goal flight along with an out and return (and/or a
>triangle, keeping in mind that only 2 records are allowed in the same
>flight)
>
>But as it has already be said here many times, there are many odd things
>in the Sporting code and this is just another one. Ask your delegate to
>IGC to improve it ! Or submit the question to the IGC discussion list :
>igc-discuss at fai.org
>
I must disagree here. Asking your IGC delegate to improve the rules is
the only answer. A question to the discussion list is just that, it will
not in itself produce a change. However, a request from your delegate to
the discussion list for support for such a change may get you what you
want. It needs to be a formal request to the next Plenary meeting for a
change, to achieve anything.

Tim Newport-Peace

"Indecision is the Key to Flexibility."

[Eric Greenwell]

Mark Zivley wrote:

> If you want to make a flight to a "goal" the sporting code says that the
> "goal" is a "finish point" and the definition of "finish point is
> defined as the end of the flight (for simplicity). Either a landing, a
> declared "finish point", or engine start location.
>
> My question is why does the goal need to be a finish point???? Why
> can't the "goal" be any pre-declared waypoint? If there is a record
> attempt that is made from a start point to a "goal" then why should it
> matter if there were waypoints used before or after the "goal" is
> reached? I'm NOT suggesting that the pilot get credit for the extra
> distance. He/she would only get credit for the straight line distance
> from the start point to the goal point.
>
> Consider this example. The current state record for "distance to a
> goal" is say 100km. You declare an out and return to a waypoint which
> is 155km from the start point because if you make it back you'd get your
> 300k badge flight.

USA state records and FAI badges are independent: state records are
handled by the SSA record keeper for the state, and the badge
application is handled by the SSA "badge lady" who represents the FAI
interests. So, you should be able to have two declarations, one for the
SSA and one for the FAI. I don't know if anyone has tried this, but the
FAI badge rules and SSA State record rules don't prohibit declarations
that aren't for their purposes.


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Mark Zivley]

> USA state records and FAI badges are independent: state records are
> handled by the SSA record keeper for the state, and the badge
> application is handled by the SSA "badge lady" who represents the FAI
> interests. So, you should be able to have two declarations, one for the
> SSA and one for the FAI. I don't know if anyone has tried this, but the
> FAI badge rules and SSA State record rules don't prohibit declarations
> that aren't for their purposes.
>
>
Eric,

The problem is that you actually have to "finish" as in "land", or have
the goal point as your only waypoint (i.e. finish point), etc. For 300k
free distance this is no big deal as you can "finish" for the record and
then after the fact declare your "finish point" for the 300k, but for
diamond goal then it'd wouldn't because you would have to declare the
specific 300k route.

[Denis]

Tim Newport-Peace wrote:

>>But as it has already be said here many times, there are many odd things
>>in the Sporting code and this is just another one. Ask your delegate to
>>IGC to improve it ! Or submit the question to the IGC discussion list :
>>igc-discuss at fai.org
>>
>
> I must disagree here. Asking your IGC delegate to improve the rules is
> the only answer. A question to the discussion list is just that, it will
> not in itself produce a change. However, a request from your delegate to
> the discussion list for support for such a change may get you what you
> want. It needs to be a formal request to the next Plenary meeting for a
> change, to achieve anything.

You're right, but my suggestion to open a discussion before attempting a
formal change proposal was in the hope that someone on this discussion
list be able to provide a reason I did not think about to justify
keeping the existing wording...

--
Denis

R. Parce que ça rompt le cours normal de la conversation !!!
Q. Pourquoi ne faut-il pas répondre au-dessus de la question ?

[Eric Greenwell]

Mark Zivley wrote:

>
>> USA state records and FAI badges are independent: state records are
>> handled by the SSA record keeper for the state, and the badge
>> application is handled by the SSA "badge lady" who represents the FAI
>> interests. So, you should be able to have two declarations, one for
>> the SSA and one for the FAI. I don't know if anyone has tried this,
>> but the FAI badge rules and SSA State record rules don't prohibit
>> declarations that aren't for their purposes.
>>
>>
> Eric,
>
> The problem is that you actually have to "finish" as in "land", or have
> the goal point as your only waypoint (i.e. finish point), etc. For 300k
> free distance this is no big deal as you can "finish" for the record and
> then after the fact declare your "finish point" for the 300k, but for
> diamond goal then it'd wouldn't because you would have to declare the
> specific 300k route.

Your example was claiming a state record and a badge leg on the same
flight. My point, which I believe to be true, is you can have TWO
declarations: one for the state record, one for the badge. I see no
prohibition in either set of rules about declarations used for a purpose
covered by a different set the rules. So, declare the 155 km goal on one
form for the state record; declare the 300k O&R for the badge on a
different form.

Whether you use the finish point for your landing is immaterial, because
neither task requires it.


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Mark Zivley]

But what do you store in your logger as your task? For 300k diamond
goal you would need to have both the O&R and the finish point included.
You can't have both points in the task for the state record "goal".

Eric Greenwell wrote:
> Mark Zivley wrote:
>
>>
>>> USA state records and FAI badges are independent: state records are
>>> handled by the SSA record keeper for the state, and the badge
>>> application is handled by the SSA "badge lady" who represents the FAI
>>> interests. So, you should be able to have two declarations, one for
>>> the SSA and one for the FAI. I don't know if anyone has tried this,
>>> but the FAI badge rules and SSA State record rules don't prohibit
>>> declarations that aren't for their purposes.
>>>
>>>
>> Eric,
>>
>> The problem is that you actually have to "finish" as in "land", or
>> have the goal point as your only waypoint (i.e. finish point), etc.
>> For 300k
>> free distance this is no big deal as you can "finish" for the record
>> and then after the fact declare your "finish point" for the 300k, but
>> for diamond goal then it'd wouldn't because you would have to declare
>> the specific 300k route.
>
>
> Your example was claiming a state record and a badge leg on the same
> flight. My point, which I believe to be true, is you can have TWO
> declarations: one for the state record, one for the badge. I see no
> prohibition in either set of rules about declarations used for a purpose
> covered by a different set the rules. So, declare the 155 km goal on one
> form for the state record; declare the 300k O&R for the badge on a
> different form.
>
> Whether you use the finish point for your landing is immaterial, because
> neither task requires it.
>
>

[Eric Greenwell]

Mark Zivley wrote:
> But what do you store in your logger as your task? For 300k diamond
> goal you would need to have both the O&R and the finish point included.
> You can't have both points in the task for the state record "goal".

It's not required that the declaration be in the logger, though that can
be the most convenient at times. For a dual declaration, the easiest
would be two paper ones, or perhaps one in the logger, one on paper. If
you had two loggers, you could do it that way.


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Ian Cant]

I got lost a long way back in this thread, so please
re-educate me. The FAI sporting code sect 4.2 defines
declaration requirements and says 'the last declaration
made before takeoff is the only one valid for the flight,
but a concurrently flown and different competition
task is allowed.' Seems that your electronic declaration
on the roll is the only one that counts.

Also, to confuse me further, Annex C sect 4.5 illustrates
multiple claims from a single declared flight. It
seems to say a Diamond goal may be claimed between
two declared turnpoints which are neither start nor
finish, but elements in a more complicated course.
In the given example, if I read it right, the 'goal'
is not the finish point...perhaps I am not the only
one confused here ?

Should we call in the lawyers ?

Ian



At 15:24 10 October 2004, Eric Greenwell wrote:
>Mark Zivley wrote:
>> But what do you store in your logger as your task?
>> For 300k diamond
>> goal you would need to have both the O&R and the finish
>>point included.
>> You can't have both points in the task for the state
>>record 'goal'.
>
>It's not required that the declaration be in the logger,
>though that can
>be the most convenient at times. For a dual declaration,
>the easiest
>would be two paper ones, or perhaps one in the logger,
>one on paper. If
>you had two loggers, you could do it that way.
>
>
>--
>Change 'netto' to 'net' to email me directly
>
>Eric Greenwell
>Washington State
>USA
>

[Eric Greenwell]

Ian Cant wrote:
> I got lost a long way back in this thread, so please
> re-educate me. The FAI sporting code sect 4.2 defines
> declaration requirements and says 'the last declaration
> made before takeoff is the only one valid for the flight,
> but a concurrently flown and different competition
> task is allowed.' Seems that your electronic declaration
> on the roll is the only one that counts.

Only the most recent declaration is valid. The electronic declaration
can be made well before the takeoff (even months), and can be superceded
by a more recent declaration on paper. The paper one requires an
official observer to be valid; the electronic one doesn't (at least for
the recorders I am familier with).



--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Eric Greenwell]

Mark Zivley wrote:

> But what do you store in your logger as your task? For 300k diamond
> goal you would need to have both the O&R and the finish point included.
> You can't have both points in the task for the state record "goal".

Use paper declarations instead an electronic declaration, or carry two
loggers, one for the state record and one for the badge.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Judy Ruprecht]

At 03:12 09 October 2004, Eric Greenwell wrote:
>you should be able to have two declarations, one for
>the
>SSA and one for the FAI. I don't know if anyone has
>tried this, but the
>FAI badge rules and SSA State record rules don't prohibit
>declarations
>that aren't for their purposes.

Hmmmm. Don't bet the farm on it. State Record Rules
follow FAI Sporting Code requirements for World Records,
except as specifically amended for State Records. (State
Record Rules are online on the SSA web page, under
'Badges & Records' at the 'forms' link.)

I don't see an excption on the one-to-a-customer/last-one-before-t
ake-off approach to declarations.

Da Badge Lady

[Edward Downham]

I would agree with the other posters here about only having one declaration. I
would be rather concerned (as an OO) if someone leafed through a bunch of
declarations before handing me the 'right' one...

However, my interpretation of the regulations for record/badge claims is this:

You can claim as many 'performances' as you like from one flight, as long as
they meet the criteria set down. You could declare a 1000Km triangle and if you
took over 5hrs to complete it and gained >5000m on the way round, you could
claim your Silver, Gold and Diamond badges plus the 1000Km Diploma.

In terms of records, this is true as well. If you take a particular segment of
the flight and it qualifies _in its own right_ for a soaring performance, then
you can claim it. The only exception I can find is this:

"3.0.2 Records in any one flight.

Any record or records may be broken in any one flight for which the
requirements
are met, except that only one speed record may be certificated for a flight
over a triangular or out and return course, the record being certificated for
the
record distance immediately less than the official distance of the flight."

So I take that as meaning I could declare a 3-TP quadrilateral 500Km, and claim
everything up to and including Diamond Distance (see SC-3 4.5). If I carried on
in the same direction-ish, and landed much further away I could maybe claim a
free distance record. I could also claim a 300Km triangle speed record and
maybe even a 100Km goal record, if it complied with the 1000m rule and crossed
a synthetic finish line/ FAI sector. And so on.

I think there is confusion over the application of the terms START, FINISH &
GOAL. I look at these in relative terms when considering a particular
performance from a flight segment. I don't decide on what they are then fix
this for all evidence related to that flight.

For instance, it's well known you can claim Silver Distance from one leg of a
triangle, provided you comply with the 1000m rule (assuming <100Km leg) or take
the penalty. You also have to prove a valid start & finish - at least one of
these will start off as a TP in the declaration and no-one seems to have a
problem with that...

[Eric Greenwell]

Judy Ruprecht wrote:
> At 03:12 09 October 2004, Eric Greenwell wrote:
>
>>you should be able to have two declarations, one for
>>the
>>SSA and one for the FAI. I don't know if anyone has
>>tried this, but the
>>FAI badge rules and SSA State record rules don't prohibit
>>declarations
>>that aren't for their purposes.
>
>
> Hmmmm. Don't bet the farm on it. State Record Rules
> follow FAI Sporting Code requirements for World Records,
> except as specifically amended for State Records. (State
> Record Rules are online on the SSA web page, under
> 'Badges & Records' at the 'forms' link.)

They do include FAI rules by reference, but USA State Records are not
FAI records in any way, and the FAI has no control over them at all.

>
> I don't see an excption on the one-to-a-customer/last-one-before-t
> ake-off approach to declarations.

Perhaps it's about what a "declaration" is: if it's on paper, the FAI OO
has to sign it; if it's in the logger, the logger validates it, but the
FAI OO has to verify the logger is on board glider during the flight.
So, you can have a suitcase full of papers with all kinds of tasks on
them, but none qualify as declarations because they aren't signed by the
OO; similarly, you could carry several loggers, but if they aren't
verified as "on board" by the FAI OO, they are irrelevant. I don't know
of any restriction in the FAI rules on that suitcase full of tasks or
carrying more than one logger.

I think it's just a piece of paper until you point at it and say "that's
the declaration for my FAI badge flight attempt", and that's what it
becomes. If you point to another piece of paper and say "that's the
declaration for my Washington state record flight attempt", you aren't
making an FAI badge flight declaration.

I see no reason to prohibit concurrent declarations for things like
state records, club ladders, and so on. If the FAI rule about a single
declaration was intended to prohibit declarations for all non-FAI flight
purposes, they should explicitly state that, but as written, I think the
ban only applies to declarations for FAI purposes.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[John Gilbert]

Eric Greenwell > wrote in message >...
> Judy Ruprecht wrote:
> > At 03:12 09 October 2004, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> >
> >>you should be able to have two declarations, one for
> >>the
> >>SSA and one for the FAI. I don't know if anyone has
> >>tried this, but the
> >>FAI badge rules and SSA State record rules don't prohibit
> >>declarations
> >>that aren't for their purposes.
> >
> >
> > Hmmmm. Don't bet the farm on it. State Record Rules
> > follow FAI Sporting Code requirements for World Records,
> > except as specifically amended for State Records. (State
> > Record Rules are online on the SSA web page, under
> > 'Badges & Records' at the 'forms' link.)
>
> They do include FAI rules by reference, but USA State Records are not
> FAI records in any way, and the FAI has no control over them at all.
>

The (USA) State record rules say "Except as provided by these rules,
State Records shall comply with the FAI Sporting Code, Section 3
("SC3") and to the additional requirements of Section 6.0 below."

In the Sporting Code Section 3, Chapter 4.2.2 Declaration Validity,
paragraph a. "The last declaration made before takeoff is the only one
valid for the flight, but a concurrently flown and different
competition task is allowed."

So I don't see any way that more than one (valid) declaration can
exist for a flight AND still comply with the Sporting Code. Either
the one in the flight recorder is the last one made, or the paper one
is the last one made. Maybe you can talk an OO into verifying a flight
with two "valid" declarations, but I think it is not in the intention
of the rules to do so. It ain't, well, sporting.

Regards,
John

PS Volkslogger (and other?) flight recorder owners need to be aware
that the Volkslogger will automatically declare the most recently
stored declaration before each following flight, when power is turned
on. If you declare on paper, then climb in the glider and take off,
the last valid declaration will be in the flight recorder. You need to
declare on paper, after you power up the Volkslogger.



> >
> > I don't see an excption on the one-to-a-customer/last-one-before-t
> > ake-off approach to declarations.
>
> Perhaps it's about what a "declaration" is: if it's on paper, the FAI OO
> has to sign it; if it's in the logger, the logger validates it, but the
> FAI OO has to verify the logger is on board glider during the flight.
> So, you can have a suitcase full of papers with all kinds of tasks on
> them, but none qualify as declarations because they aren't signed by the
> OO; similarly, you could carry several loggers, but if they aren't
> verified as "on board" by the FAI OO, they are irrelevant. I don't know
> of any restriction in the FAI rules on that suitcase full of tasks or
> carrying more than one logger.
>
> I think it's just a piece of paper until you point at it and say "that's
> the declaration for my FAI badge flight attempt", and that's what it
> becomes. If you point to another piece of paper and say "that's the
> declaration for my Washington state record flight attempt", you aren't
> making an FAI badge flight declaration.
>
> I see no reason to prohibit concurrent declarations for things like
> state records, club ladders, and so on. If the FAI rule about a single
> declaration was intended to prohibit declarations for all non-FAI flight
> purposes, they should explicitly state that, but as written, I think the
> ban only applies to declarations for FAI purposes.

[Ian Cant]

In the case of the Colibri, the declaration is made
automatically when logging starts, which is when you
reach forty knots or so on the takeoff roll. A little
hard to make [and photograph ?] a paper declaration
after that..?

Ian




At 07:48 15 October 2004, John Gilbert wrote:
>
>In the Sporting Code Section 3, Chapter 4.2.2 Declaration
>Validity,
>paragraph a. 'The last declaration made before takeoff
>is the only one
>valid for the flight, but a concurrently flown and
>different
>competition task is allowed.'
>
>So I don't see any way that more than one (valid) declaration
>can
>exist for a flight AND still comply with the Sporting
>Code. Either
>the one in the flight recorder is the last one made,
>or the paper one
>is the last one made. Maybe you can talk an OO into
>verifying a flight
>with two 'valid' declarations, but I think it is not
>in the intention
>of the rules to do so. It ain't, well, sporting.
>
>Regards,
>John
>
>PS Volkslogger (and other?) flight recorder owners
>need to be aware
>that the Volkslogger will automatically declare the
>most recently
>stored declaration before each following flight, when
>power is turned
>on. If you declare on paper, then climb in the glider
>and take off,
>the last valid declaration will be in the flight recorder.
>You need to
>declare on paper, after you power up the Volkslogger.
>
>

[Tom Serkowski]

It may be copied into the flight log, but I doubt the declaration time
is changed to the current time. The time of the declaration should be
the time at which you pressed "save" when originally making it.

If you then make several flights, all will have this same declaration
time.

-Tom

(John Gilbert) wrote in message >...

> PS Volkslogger (and other?) flight recorder owners need to be aware
> that the Volkslogger will automatically declare the most recently
> stored declaration before each following flight, when power is turned
> on. If you declare on paper, then climb in the glider and take off,
> the last valid declaration will be in the flight recorder. You need to
> declare on paper, after you power up the Volkslogger.

[Ian Cant]

Todd,
You are absolutely correct that the pilot,
not the instrument, makes the declaration. Nevertheless,
'electronic declarations' do exist and are accepted
by the FAI. And the content of a full declaration
includes the date of flight, not just the date at which
the pilot defined the task. Quoting from my Colibri
manual 'the selected task is automatically declared
after takeoff'. This declaration, even though it is
implemented by the instrument, is acceptable for FAI
purposes. So if it exists, it is the latest declaration.
Agreed, the pilot may make paper declarations after
entering the FR task but before the flight, but if
he wants to make the paper declaration valid it is
his responsibility to deselect or disable the electronic
one prior to takeoff. And since the FR data is required
to document the flight, it is hard to pretend that
any associated electronic declaration does not exist.

I guess that if someone really wanted to flex the
spirit of the rules, he could carry a sheaf of paper
declarations and have several FRs running, then decide
after takeoff which one he wanted to use today - then
the latest declaration would be the one in the pilot's
head as he started his task, or maybe what he recalled
postflight as his last pre-start intention ??

Soaring season must be winding down.

Ian




At 23:06 15 October 2004, Todd Pattist wrote:
>Ian Cant wrote:
>
>>In the case of the Colibri, the declaration is made
>>automatically when logging starts, which is when you
>>reach forty knots or so on the takeoff roll. A little
>>hard to make [and photograph ?] a paper declaration
>>after that..?
>>Ian
>
>Only a pilot can make a declaration, not a Colibri.
> The
>declaration was made when the pilot entered data into
>the
>Colibri. That declaration could be superseded by a
>subsequent paper or electronic declaration, regardless
>of
>what the Colibri does at 'forty knots or so on the
>takeoff
>roll.' :-)
>Todd Pattist - 'WH' Ventus C
>(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)
>

[Marc Ramsey]

From the FAI perspective, the date/time of an electronic declaration is
that contained in columns 2-13 of the first C record line in the IGC
file. That date/time is determined when the declaration is first
entered into the unit, not at takeoff. If a paper declaration is made
at a later time, then it overrides the electronic declaration. It is up
to the official observer to certify that the pilot has provided a paper
declaration which is dated after the electronic declaration contained in
the IGC file.

Speaking with my GFAC hat on,
Marc

Ian Cant wrote:
> Todd,
> You are absolutely correct that the pilot,
> not the instrument, makes the declaration. Nevertheless,
> 'electronic declarations' do exist and are accepted
> by the FAI. And the content of a full declaration
> includes the date of flight, not just the date at which
> the pilot defined the task. Quoting from my Colibri
> manual 'the selected task is automatically declared
> after takeoff'. This declaration, even though it is
> implemented by the instrument, is acceptable for FAI
> purposes. So if it exists, it is the latest declaration.
> Agreed, the pilot may make paper declarations after
> entering the FR task but before the flight, but if
> he wants to make the paper declaration valid it is
> his responsibility to deselect or disable the electronic
> one prior to takeoff. And since the FR data is required
> to document the flight, it is hard to pretend that
> any associated electronic declaration does not exist.
>
> I guess that if someone really wanted to flex the
> spirit of the rules, he could carry a sheaf of paper
> declarations and have several FRs running, then decide
> after takeoff which one he wanted to use today - then
> the latest declaration would be the one in the pilot's
> head as he started his task, or maybe what he recalled
> postflight as his last pre-start intention ??
>
> Soaring season must be winding down.

[Eric Greenwell]

John Gilbert wrote:


> The (USA) State record rules say "Except as provided by these rules,
> State Records shall comply with the FAI Sporting Code, Section 3
> ("SC3") and to the additional requirements of Section 6.0 below."

Even though they "must comply with the Sporting Code", the rules are not
part of the Sporting Code. State records are operated independent of the
FAI system, and simply copy the rules.
>
> In the Sporting Code Section 3, Chapter 4.2.2 Declaration Validity,
> paragraph a. "The last declaration made before takeoff is the only one
> valid for the flight, but a concurrently flown and different
> competition task is allowed."

I think you have to read these context: these rules apply to FAI flight
achievements, not SSA records, which are not part of the FAI system.
>
> So I don't see any way that more than one (valid) declaration can
> exist for a flight AND still comply with the Sporting Code.

I agree with that you that Sporting Code allows only one valid
declaration for a Badge or World Record flight. This is to prevent the
pilot from choosing declaration in or after flight. But why can't you
have another declaration for another set of rules by a different
organization? This declaration would not be valid for FAI badge or World
record claims - no question about that -but it would/should be valid for
a USA state record claim. Because the SSA State rules only allow one
valid declaration, the declaration for the FAI badges, etc., would not
be valid for the State Record attempt.

These are separate sets of rules, and even though the SSA State record
rules reference the FAI rules, they are NOT FAI rules!

> Either
> the one in the flight recorder is the last one made, or the paper one
> is the last one made. Maybe you can talk an OO into verifying a flight
> with two "valid" declarations, but I think it is not in the intention
> of the rules to do so. It ain't, well, sporting.

The OO is not being asked to verify a claim with two "valid"
declarations, he just observes the flight and attests to the correctness
of the procedures and documentation. The FAI badge claim, with
supporting documentation (including the declaration made for the FAI),
is sent to the FAI Award representative (Judy Ruprecht currently) for
the USA. She evaluates the claim.

The SSA State record claim, with it's supporting documentation
(including the declaration made for the SSA), is sent to the SSA record
keeper for the State, who evaluates the claim for the State.

The intent of the FAI rules is to have one declaration, and only one,
apply to the Badge/world record claim, and that would be achieved; ditto
for the SSA record claim. The pilot would not be allowed to pick which
declaration went with which claim after the flight.

I see nothing unsporting about following the rules. The claim for a
badge/world record is not affected in any way by a concurrent claim for
an SSA state record. No matter what was on each declaration, it would
not have the slightest impact on the claim supported by the other
declaration.

Since it seems like this has not come up before, I doubt that there is
any precedence, so it would be wise to discuss this with Judy R and your
state record keeper before trying it. My opinion may not sway the people
that have to evaluate your claim!

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Tony Burton]

In article >, Ian Cant
> wrote:

> Todd,
snip
>
> I guess that if someone really wanted to flex the
> spirit of the rules, he could carry a sheaf of paper
> declarations and have several FRs running, then decide
> after takeoff which one he wanted to use today - then
> the latest declaration would be the one in the pilot's
> head as he started his task, or maybe what he recalled
> postflight as his last pre-start intention ??
>
> Soaring season must be winding down.

The new Code has amended the FR procedures so that a pilot can't
"cherry-pick" from more than one FR containing different declarations.
Now, the IGC file of ALL FRs on board must be submitted with a
badge/record claim. para 4.6.4b

The Code has also been changed (para 1.4.3 and new para 3.0.2b) to limit
the number of distance records claimed in one flight - in particular, you
can no longer claim a declared record course and tack on the free distance
record. The philosophy of the change is that a record, in part, ought to
be honoured for its rarity and performance - getting a free record for
free, so to speak, goes against that.

--
Tony Burton

[Ian Cant]

Marc,
I happily defer to your knowledge, but let
me ask this question. Let's say for some reason I
had stored in the FR three different declarations made
on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. If I fly on Saturday
with the Monday declaration selected, that is an accepted
valid declaration . Now let's say I also have on
board a paper declaration made on Tuesday evening.
Does that override all the electronic declarations,
or only the ones made on Monday and earlier on Tuesday
? Or does the electronic Wednesday version count as
'latest' even though not selected at flight time ?


Your answer makes it clear that the paper version overrrides
provided that the OO is aware of the existence of both
versions.
What if the pilot retrospectively decides he preferred
one of the electronic versions ? He says to OO, 'the
FR used my Monday declaration, but I intended to fly
the later Wednesday one' ? If the OO can adjudicate
that paper on Tuesday beats the stored FR from Monday,
can he not reasonably also adjudicate that electronic
stored Wednesday beats both of the above ?

Just asking, I'm happy to live with the rules 'as-interpreted'.

Ian




At 04:24 16 October 2004, Marc Ramsey wrote:
> From the FAI perspective, the date/time of an electronic
>declaration is
>that contained in columns 2-13 of the first C record
>line in the IGC
>file. That date/time is determined when the declaration
>is first
>entered into the unit, not at takeoff. If a paper
>declaration is made
>at a later time, then it overrides the electronic declaration.
> It is up
>to the official observer to certify that the pilot
>has provided a paper
>declaration which is dated after the electronic declaration
>contained in
>the IGC file.
>
>Speaking with my GFAC hat on,
>Marc
>
>Ian Cant wrote:[i]
>> Todd,
>> You are absolutely correct that the pilot,
>> not the instrument, makes the declaration. Nevertheless,
>> 'electronic declarations' do exist and are accepted
>> by the FAI. And the content of a full declaration
>> includes the date of flight, not just the date at
>>which
>> the pilot defined the task. Quoting from my Colibri
>> manual 'the selected task is automatically declared
>> after takeoff'. This declaration, even though it
>>is
>> implemented by the instrument, is acceptable for
>>FAI
>> purposes. So if it exists, it is the latest declaration.
>> Agreed, the pilot may make paper declarations after
>> entering the FR task but before the flight, but if
>> he wants to make the paper declaration valid it is
>> his responsibility to deselect or disable the electronic
>> one prior to takeoff. And since the FR data is required
>> to document the flight, it is hard to pretend that
>> any associated electronic declaration does not exist.
>>
>> I guess that if someone really wanted to flex the
>> spirit of the rules, he could carry a sheaf of paper
>> declarations and have several FRs running, then decide
>> after takeoff which one he wanted to use today - then
>> the latest declaration would be the one in the pilot's
>> head as he started his task, or maybe what he recalled
>> postflight as his last pre-start intention ??
>>
>> Soaring season must be winding down.
>

[Marc Ramsey]

Ian Cant wrote:
> Marc,
> I happily defer to your knowledge, but let
> me ask this question. Let's say for some reason I
> had stored in the FR three different declarations made
> on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. If I fly on Saturday
> with the Monday declaration selected, that is an accepted
> valid declaration [I really hope I am correct in that
> assertion at least].

As "stephanevdv" stated, there is one (or no) valid electronic
declaration at any given time. Whatever task was the last declared
prior to takeoff is the one that applies.

> Now let's say I also have on
> board a paper declaration made on Tuesday evening.
> Does that override all the electronic declarations,
> or only the ones made on Monday and earlier on Tuesday
> ? Or does the electronic Wednesday version count as
> 'latest' even though not selected at flight time ?

SC3 Section 4.2.2a makes it quite clear that the last declaration made
before takeoff is the only valid one. So, if you make an electronic
declaration after a paper declaration signed and dated by the OO, the
electronic declaration applies.

> Your answer makes it clear that the paper version overrrides
> provided that the OO is aware of the existence of both
> versions.
>
> What if the pilot retrospectively decides he preferred
> one of the electronic versions ? He says to OO, 'the
> FR used my Monday declaration, but I intended to fly
> the later Wednesday one' ? If the OO can adjudicate
> that paper on Tuesday beats the stored FR from Monday,
> can he not reasonably also adjudicate that electronic
> stored Wednesday beats both of the above ?
>

The OO must be aware of the paper declaration, as the OO must sign and
date it. If it is not signed and dated by the OO, it is not a
declaration. The OO will be aware of the electronic declaration, as the
OO is required to review the IGC file after the flight. The OO must use
the last made declaration, whether paper or electronic.

Marc

[John Gilbert]

OH, gee, Eric, I know we have to get down to brass tacks when we
disagree. I always learn something when you have lively discussions
with any of us.

My replies follow in context below.

Eric Greenwell > wrote in message >...
> John Gilbert wrote:
>
> > The (USA) State record rules say "Except as provided by these rules,
> > State Records shall comply with the FAI Sporting Code, Section 3
> > ("SC3") and to the additional requirements of Section 6.0 below."
>
> Even though they "must comply with the Sporting Code", the rules are not
> part of the Sporting Code. State records are operated independent of the
> FAI system, and simply copy the rules.

Agreed, my point exactly. One must follow the Sporting Code rules.

> >
> > In the Sporting Code Section 3, Chapter 4.2.2 Declaration Validity,
> > paragraph a. "The last declaration made before takeoff is the only one
> > valid for the flight, but a concurrently flown and different
> > competition task is allowed."
>
> I think you have to read these context: these rules apply to FAI flight
> achievements, not SSA records, which are not part of the FAI system.

Ah, I read this literally. "The last declaration made before takeoff
is the only one valid for the flight, ..."

One declaration per flight. Not one declaration per organization. Not
one declaration per rule making body.

> >
> > So I don't see any way that more than one (valid) declaration can
> > exist for a flight AND still comply with the Sporting Code.
>
> I agree with that you that Sporting Code allows only one valid
> declaration for a Badge or World Record flight. This is to prevent the
> pilot from choosing declaration in or after flight. But why can't you
> have another declaration for another set of rules by a different
> organization? This declaration would not be valid for FAI badge or World
> record claims - no question about that -but it would/should be valid for
> a USA state record claim. Because the SSA State rules only allow one
> valid declaration, the declaration for the FAI badges, etc., would not
> be valid for the State Record attempt.
>
> These are separate sets of rules, and even though the SSA State record
> rules reference the FAI rules, they are NOT FAI rules!

True, but if the FAI rules say one declaration per flight, then that
is it.

>
> > Either
> > the one in the flight recorder is the last one made, or the paper one
> > is the last one made. Maybe you can talk an OO into verifying a flight
> > with two "valid" declarations, but I think it is not in the intention
> > of the rules to do so. It ain't, well, sporting.
>
> The OO is not being asked to verify a claim with two "valid"
> declarations, he just observes the flight and attests to the correctness
> of the procedures and documentation. The FAI badge claim, with

The procedure is to have one declaration for the flight, as I read it.

> supporting documentation (including the declaration made for the FAI),
> is sent to the FAI Award representative (Judy Ruprecht currently) for
> the USA. She evaluates the claim.
>
> The SSA State record claim, with it's supporting documentation
> (including the declaration made for the SSA), is sent to the SSA record
> keeper for the State, who evaluates the claim for the State.
>
> The intent of the FAI rules is to have one declaration, and only one,
> apply to the Badge/world record claim, and that would be achieved; ditto
> for the SSA record claim. The pilot would not be allowed to pick which
> declaration went with which claim after the flight.

Only starting and finish points, and turnpoints, are required on a
declaration.
There seems to be no requirement to declare what attempt is being
made. There is no place in my flight recorder to say what performance
is to be claimed. How can an OO know which declaration went with which
claim after the flight?

>
> I see nothing unsporting about following the rules. The claim for a
> badge/world record is not affected in any way by a concurrent claim for
> an SSA state record. No matter what was on each declaration, it would
> not have the slightest impact on the claim supported by the other
> declaration.

Concurrent claims are not the issue. FAI and national and (in US)
state claims all can be made on one declaration and its corresponding
flight. And free distance claims can be made on declared flights with
declared performance.

I have no doubt that SSA rules could allow a separate declaration for
a different declared performance, and as you describe, would not
conflict with the FAI rules. But I don't see any such exception.
Apparently, neither did Judy, after reading her previous email.

>
> Since it seems like this has not come up before, I doubt that there is
> any precedence, so it would be wise to discuss this with Judy R and your
> state record keeper before trying it. My opinion may not sway the people
> that have to evaluate your claim!

Well, I really think that you got your answer. If Judy R sees two
different claims coming in from the same person/same flight she is
going to see if there were two declarations. The big question is,
which claim will not be validated? I think it will be the one that
goes with the declaration with the earlier time (stamp).

Regards,
John

[Eric Greenwell]

John Gilbert wrote:

>
>>>In the Sporting Code Section 3, Chapter 4.2.2 Declaration Validity,
>>>paragraph a. "The last declaration made before takeoff is the only one
>>>valid for the flight, but a concurrently flown and different
>>>competition task is allowed."
>>
>>I think you have to read these context: these rules apply to FAI flight
>>achievements, not SSA records, which are not part of the FAI system.
>
>
> Ah, I read this literally. "The last declaration made before takeoff
> is the only one valid for the flight, ..."
>
> One declaration per flight. Not one declaration per organization. Not
> one declaration per rule making body.

This is the part that I don't think is clear. I believe the rules refer
to FAI purposes only, and the rule isn't explicit about it because the
writers thought it obvious or didn't imagine the circumstance. From the
other rules, it's clear the intention of the writers is to prevent the
pilot from choosing a different set of points after takeoff, and the
method I describe does this. I suggest that the "The last declaration
made before takeoff is the only one valid for the flight,..." is just
imprecise writing that makes it more restrictive than was intended for
the purpose of prohibiting post-launch choosing.

snip

> Only starting and finish points, and turnpoints, are required on a
> declaration.
> There seems to be no requirement to declare what attempt is being
> made. There is no place in my flight recorder to say what performance
> is to be claimed. How can an OO know which declaration went with which
> claim after the flight?

The pilot fills out two paper forms, labels one "FAI badge attempt", and
the other, "SSA record attempt". These are signed and dated by the OO,
and the pilot doesn't attempt to make a declaration to the logger.


>
> Concurrent claims are not the issue. FAI and national and (in US)
> state claims all can be made on one declaration and its corresponding
> flight. And free distance claims can be made on declared flights with
> declared performance.
>
> I have no doubt that SSA rules could allow a separate declaration for
> a different declared performance, and as you describe, would not
> conflict with the FAI rules. But I don't see any such exception.
> Apparently, neither did Judy, after reading her previous email.


>>Since it seems like this has not come up before, I doubt that there is
>>any precedence, so it would be wise to discuss this with Judy R and your
>>state record keeper before trying it. My opinion may not sway the people
>>that have to evaluate your claim!
>
>
> Well, I really think that you got your answer. If Judy R sees two
> different claims coming in from the same person/same flight she is
> going to see if there were two declarations. The big question is,
> which claim will not be validated? I think it will be the one that
> goes with the declaration with the earlier time (stamp).

THis part of my reasoning: Judy only gets the FAI documentation, NOT the
State record documentation, which goes the State record keeper.


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[John Gilbert]

(Tom Serkowski) wrote in message >...
> It may be copied into the flight log, but I doubt the declaration time
> is changed to the current time. The time of the declaration should be
> the time at which you pressed "save" when originally making it.
>
> If you then make several flights, all will have this same declaration
> time.
>
> -Tom

Tom,

Have you verified that with your Volkslogger? Every .igc file from
mine has the first "C record", where the declaration date is supposed
to be, the same date and time as the first "B record", the fix data.
(see TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION
FOR IGC-APPROVED GNSS FLIGHT RECORDERS somewhere on the FAI website)

Just to make sure I am interpreting my IGC files correctly, I looked
in the Volkslogger manual (2/21/2000), p. 24. "During the turn-on of
the instrument, the recording of a new IGC-file commmences
immediately. At this time the data, which are still in the declaration
form, are copied automatically into the corresponding places of the
IGC-files. The "automatic" declaration is, like any other declaration,
coded with the date and time of the turn-on."

In essence, one is declaring when one turns on the Volkslogger.

Regards,
John

>
> (John Gilbert) wrote in message >...
>
> > PS Volkslogger (and other?) flight recorder owners need to be aware
> > that the Volkslogger will automatically declare the most recently
> > stored declaration before each following flight, when power is turned
> > on. If you declare on paper, then climb in the glider and take off,
> > the last valid declaration will be in the flight recorder. You need to
> > declare on paper, after you power up the Volkslogger.

[Daniel]

<some deleted>
> Well, I really think that you got your answer. If Judy R sees two
> different claims coming in from the same person/same flight she is
> going to see if there were two declarations. The big question is,
> which claim will not be validated? I think it will be the one that
> goes with the declaration with the earlier time (stamp).
>
> Regards,
> John

I hate to interfere, but IGC Sporting code SC3-1999-AL5, page 14,
article 4.2.2 a, says "the LAST (emphasis mine) declaration made
before take-off is the only one valid for the flight, but a
concurrently flown and different competition task is allowed."
I agree, one declaration per flight; the last, whether electronic or
on paper. We're just lucky to live in a place where one can conceive
of multiple tasks/records on one flight!

[John Gilbert]

Daniel,

Maybe I wrote unclearly, I think we agree. The latest declaration is the
valid one, any earlier declarations are not valid.

John

Daniel wrote:
> <some deleted>
>
>>Well, I really think that you got your answer. If Judy R sees two
>>different claims coming in from the same person/same flight she is
>>going to see if there were two declarations. The big question is,
>>which claim will not be validated? I think it will be the one that
>>goes with the declaration with the earlier time (stamp).
>>
>>Regards,
>>John
>
>
> I hate to interfere, but IGC Sporting code SC3-1999-AL5, page 14,
> article 4.2.2 a, says "the LAST (emphasis mine) declaration made
> before take-off is the only one valid for the flight, but a
> concurrently flown and different competition task is allowed."
> I agree, one declaration per flight; the last, whether electronic or
> on paper. We're just lucky to live in a place where one can conceive
> of multiple tasks/records on one flight!

[Tom Serkowski]

That's very unfortunate. In my 302, the time of declaration is when I
stored it into the logger. It then copies this declaration with an
unmodified time into each newly started log. In this way, I know for
sure whether the paper or electronic declaration is the current one.
If there's a power glitch just before takeoff and after the paper
declaration has been made - possibly in haste due to not having easy
access to the VL to change the declarateion, then the pilot is SOL.

I do have a bug report in to CAI regarding the fact that it's
impossible to change a declaration while the unit is in the middle of
a 'flight'. Consider the example of a pilot deciding to change the
declaration, so he lands, redeclares and launches again in the span of
a minute or so. The 302 does not see enough time of inactivity to
decide to start a new log, so the declaration doesn't make it into the
new flight. What the 302 need is an option to start a new log, so the
pilot is sure this has really happened.

I suppose this really boils down to whether we really need this rule
to stand. Now that the OO's signature is no longer needed, why not
restrict the declaration to occur before the start instead of before
the launch.

-Tom

(John Gilbert) wrote in message >...
> Have you verified that with your Volkslogger? Every .igc file from
> mine has the first "C record", where the declaration date is supposed
> to be, the same date and time as the first "B record", the fix data.
> (see TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION
> FOR IGC-APPROVED GNSS FLIGHT RECORDERS somewhere on the FAI website)
>
> Just to make sure I am interpreting my IGC files correctly, I looked
> in the Volkslogger manual (2/21/2000), p. 24. "During the turn-on of
> the instrument, the recording of a new IGC-file commmences
> immediately. At this time the data, which are still in the declaration
> form, are copied automatically into the corresponding places of the
> IGC-files. The "automatic" declaration is, like any other declaration,
> coded with the date and time of the turn-on."
>
> In essence, one is declaring when one turns on the Volkslogger.
>
> Regards,
> John
>
> >
> > (John Gilbert) wrote in message >...
> >
> > > PS Volkslogger (and other?) flight recorder owners need to be aware
> > > that the Volkslogger will automatically declare the most recently
> > > stored declaration before each following flight, when power is turned
> > > on. If you declare on paper, then climb in the glider and take off,
> > > the last valid declaration will be in the flight recorder. You need to
> > > declare on paper, after you power up the Volkslogger.

[Mark James Boyd]

Until I figured out how to erase all declarations, I used to turn on my VL,
and then have the O/O sign a paper copy (with time & date) of my
"most recent" declaration. This after I missed a badge persformance
due to this oversight...

>In essence, one is declaring when one turns on the Volkslogger.
>
>Regards,
>John
>> > on. If you declare on paper, then climb in the glider and take off,
>> > the last valid declaration will be in the flight recorder. You need to
>> > declare on paper, after you power up the Volkslogger.


--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd