Target Fixation

[[email protected]]

Military pilots have known about this since World War 1. It happens
when a pilot gets so engrossed in destroying his target that he flies
right into it, can happen in air to air as well as air to ground
operations. Bombing ranges around the country are dotted with little
smoking hiles in the ground that stand a silent witness to this killer
phenomenon.

I believe we may have the same thing going for (against) us in racing
only we aren't going for a target, we're going to finish. Some of us
can get so focused on finishing that we lose sight of what's going on
around us (situational awareness). I try to contact any sailplane that
I see as we approach the finish line. Occasionally I get no answer,
Why? Is the other pilot totally engrossed in finishing? Does he have,
Finish Fixation? I know of 5 finish gate accidents that may fall into
this category. The first one that comes to mind is Cal City, region 12
Championships, September 2, 1990:

Nimbus 2 driver is seen approaching the finish line, very low and very
slow. Gate crew was sure he would be landing straight in. Let's stop
the action for a moment and take a look at what was going through the
pilots mind.........

Must finish............getting pretty low, better level
off........what's my airspeed?.........too low to be looking
inside.......

Resume action........Pilot approaches the line, now about 50 feet and
50 knots........Stand-by, MARK, Good finish, Sierra Lima........Ship is
seen making a steep pull-up. Stop action....

I got it.......now make my clikbing turn to down-wind........ what's
wrong with this thing?...........Oh ****, I'm stalling........stick
forward...........Oh, NO..............

We will never know exactly what this pilot was thinking, because he is
no longer with us.

GPS has allowed us to get rid of the Start Gate, in light of accidents
like this, Isn't it time to get rid of its ugly sister, the finish
line?

JJ Sinclair
(1 of 5)

[Bill Daniels]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Military pilots have known about this since World War 1. It happens
> when a pilot gets so engrossed in destroying his target that he flies
> right into it, can happen in air to air as well as air to ground
> operations. Bombing ranges around the country are dotted with little
> smoking hiles in the ground that stand a silent witness to this killer
> phenomenon.
>
> I believe we may have the same thing going for (against) us in racing
> only we aren't going for a target, we're going to finish. Some of us
> can get so focused on finishing that we lose sight of what's going on
> around us (situational awareness). I try to contact any sailplane that
> I see as we approach the finish line. Occasionally I get no answer,
> Why? Is the other pilot totally engrossed in finishing? Does he have,
> Finish Fixation? I know of 5 finish gate accidents that may fall into
> this category. The first one that comes to mind is Cal City, region 12
> Championships, September 2, 1990:
>
> Nimbus 2 driver is seen approaching the finish line, very low and very
> slow. Gate crew was sure he would be landing straight in. Let's stop
> the action for a moment and take a look at what was going through the
> pilots mind.........
>
> Must finish............getting pretty low, better level
> off........what's my airspeed?.........too low to be looking
> inside.......
>
> Resume action........Pilot approaches the line, now about 50 feet and
> 50 knots........Stand-by, MARK, Good finish, Sierra Lima........Ship is
> seen making a steep pull-up. Stop action....
>
> I got it.......now make my clikbing turn to down-wind........ what's
> wrong with this thing?...........Oh ****, I'm stalling........stick
> forward...........Oh, NO..............
>
> We will never know exactly what this pilot was thinking, because he is
> no longer with us.
>
> GPS has allowed us to get rid of the Start Gate, in light of accidents
> like this, Isn't it time to get rid of its ugly sister, the finish
> line?
>
> JJ Sinclair
> (1 of 5)
>

That's one possible scenario for that accident.

Another is that we might have been dealing with a dehydrated, possibly
hypoxic and surely fatigued pilot who, at that moment, was unable to cope
with the situation. The finish line merely happened to be the first
challenge the pilot was unable to cope with. If he had succeeded there, he
might not have been able to cope with the landing. The finish line was just
trigger for an accident that was looking for a place to happen - an accident
that could have occurred earlier or later than it did.

I see two schools of thought here. One says that we should do the
politically correct thing and adopt rules that accommodate marginal pilots.
These rules should protect pilots from themselves. This would have the
effect of actually encouraging stupid behavior. My experience suggests that
marginal pilots will always find a way to crash regardless of the rules.

The other says that we should expect our competitors to be highly competent
pilots who consistently exhibit professional behavior. This sets the bar
higher and places the responsibility for safe behavior on the individual
pilot. Pilots who fail to meet this standard should be disqualified. This
forces a pilot to sharpen his skills and widen his skilset which in the long
run will surely have a more positive impact on safety.

I recall safety lectures at the Nationals circa 1966 which said in effect,
"What we do is inherently dangerous and should be approached with great
caution." "Competition at the national level requires far more of a pilot
than an afternoon cruising around the local field."

Pilots were advised to consume all their remaining water and to use 100%
oxygen in the last 20 minutes of the flight so their senses were as sharp as
possible for the finish and landing. I still do this.

Pilots were also encouraged to talk with more experienced competitors about
any phase of the contest about which they felt any uncertainty. I don't
recall any pilot being refused this counseling.

Bill Daniels

[5Z]

wrote:
> Nimbus 2 driver is seen approaching the finish line, very low and
very
> slow. Gate crew was sure he would be landing straight in. Let's stop
- snip -

I recall finishing over the wreckage... :( Made a pretty low pass at
the "far" end of the gate near what I thought was a group of
photographers.

General consensus was dehydration pure and simple. Rolling finishes
were an option and I beleive a few were done, so it wasn't an unheard
of option.

This individual was a heavy smoker, seen to be downing a few beers the
night before. So he was probably behind when he got in the cockpit.
We flew at 10-12K that day, so not quite high enough to demand oxygen,
but word was he didn't have any available to him - though I don't know
for sure. Two more links in the accident chain.

He was seen to be starting the high speed dive for the gate too far out
by others, so the poor decision chain got another link added to it
right there.

A low pass through the gate is a CHOICE, this pilot made a poor choice
after a long series of poor or marginal decisions. Very unfortunate.
But I want the option to make my own choice, and if blessed with excess
altitude, I'd like to make that pretty low pass and perfect landing
complete with a wingtip placed gently in my wife's hand as I come to a
stop.

-Tom