2007 US Contest Rules Poll and Meeting Minutes

[[email protected]]

The results of the 2007 Contest Rules Pilot poll and the minutes of
the SSA Competition Rules Subcommittee Meeting are posted at
SSA.org>Sailplane Racing>Rules &Process.
Proposed Draft Rules will be available for review 12/22/07.
H Nixon
SSA Competition Rules Subcommitte Chair

[JJ Sinclair]

You guys done good, thanks for doing a thankless job, well.
JJ

On Dec 16, 2:00 pm, wrote:
> The results of the 2007 Contest Rules Pilot poll and the minutes of
> the SSA Competition Rules Subcommittee Meeting are posted at
> SSA.org>Sailplane Racing>Rules &Process.
> Proposed Draft Rules will be available for review 12/22/07.
> H Nixon
> SSA Competition Rules Subcommitte Chair

[[email protected]]

Thanks for the "headsup" on the postings Hank. Unfortuanately I've not
been able to access any of that data from the SSA website as
indicated . Anyone else having difficulty ?

Ron (ZA).

[JJ Sinclair]

No problem here, SSA page, then click on Sailplane Racing, then click
on Rules, then open 2008 Proposed Rule Changes PDF.
With the proposed changes, the guy that hits the finish circle 50' low
will loose 2 points / 10' (2 X 5= 10 points), sounds good to me. I
also like the straight forward way to deal with sailplane
"Modifications", add a wing fairing, loose 1%, add winglets, loose 1%
(no more measuring winglet heights), add zig-zag, loose 1%. This
sounds fail and it gives the CD firm guidance to deal with modified
ships. Looks like I will get tagged with a 2% reduction to the
published .939 for my Genesis 2 which becomes .920 due to wing fairing
and zig-zag additions. That sound just about right, the fairing got it
to climb in a 1 knot thermal and the zig-zag slowed down the thermal
speed to 45 knots. She will now climb with most ships and it always
did run like sting. This is a major change, so it won't take affect
until 2009.
Good on you guys,
JJ


On Dec 17, 2:19 pm, " > wrote:
> Thanks for the "headsup" on the postings Hank. Unfortuanately I've not
> been able to access any of that data from the SSA website as
> indicated . Anyone else having difficulty ?
>
> Ron (ZA).

[BB]

I'm writing a few "contest corners" for Soaring magazine to explain
this year's rule changes. The explanation for the new cylinder finish
penalty is on my webpage at

http://faculty.chicagogsb.edu/john.cochrane/research/Papers/contest_corner_finish_cylinder.htm

This will be in Feb Soaring, and more will follow.

John Cochrane

[[email protected]]

On Dec 18, 9:29 am, JJ Sinclair > wrote:
> No problem here, SSA page, then click on Sailplane Racing, then click
> on Rules, then open 2008 Proposed Rule Changes PDF.
> With the proposed changes, the guy that hits the finish circle 50' low
> will loose 2 points / 10' (2 X 5= 10 points), sounds good to me. I
> also like the straight forward way to deal with sailplane
> "Modifications", add a wing fairing, loose 1%, add winglets, loose 1%
> (no more measuring winglet heights), add zig-zag, loose 1%. This
> sounds fail and it gives the CD firm guidance to deal with modified
> ships. Looks like I will get tagged with a 2% reduction to the
> published .939 for my Genesis 2 which becomes .920 due to wing fairing
> and zig-zag additions. That sound just about right, the fairing got it
> to climb in a 1 knot thermal and the zig-zag slowed down the thermal
> speed to 45 knots. She will now climb with most ships and it always
> did run like sting. This is a major change, so it won't take affect
> until 2009.
> Good on you guys,
> JJ
>
> On Dec 17, 2:19 pm, " > wrote:
>
>
>
> > Thanks for the "headsup" on the postings Hank. Unfortuanately I've not
> > been able to access any of that data from the SSA website as
> > indicated . Anyone else having difficulty ?
>
> > Ron (ZA).- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Minutes and poll results are shown as of now. Text of proposed changes
will follow in a few days.
Items you mentioned will all be effective for contest year 2008.
I had no trouble viewing Tue AM.
UH

[kirk.stant]

Looks like an excellent change to the circle finish procedure.

Sure wish it had been in effect last year! ;>)

Good work, guys.

Kirk
66

[Chip Bearden]

Same comments as others. I can live with this.

Thanks to John Cochrane for the discussion on his Web page. One
question: could a pilot who's low on final glide enter the finish
cylinder below the floor, land out just short of the contest site, and
receive distance points MINUS a low finish penalty? That seems a bit
harsh but is how I interpret John's statement, below. I could be
mistaken:

"If there isn't even a weak thermal [on a marginal final glide that
winds up inside the cylinder but just short of the contest site], the
70 points you will lose on the finish, combined with the new larger
distance points, mean that there is less to be lost by landing in
that last nice field on this side of the trees."

I actually had trouble finding the part in the Rules where it says you
have to land back at the contest site to get speed points. You get a
finish time just by entering the cylinder without regard to where you
land:

10.9.3.3 The Finish Point, radius, and minimum height define a three-
dimensional Finish
Cylinder. A finish occurs when a sailplane enters the Finish Cylinder;
at least one fix must lie
within the cylinder. The finish time is taken as the interpolated time
the sailplane first
entered the Finish Cylinder.

But a later paragraph finally says you have to land back to complete
the task:

11.2.2.4 Task completion - If all turnpoints are valid, yield a scored
distance (Rule 11.2.3)
not less than the Standard Minimum Task Distance and the pilot
obtained a scored start
time, a finish time prior to finish closing and landed at the contest
site, then the pilot has
completed the task. Otherwise the task is incomplete.

OK, flying is over for me until next spring. I just don't want to be
worrying about this low on final glide next year. :)

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
U.S.A.

[kirk.stant]

On Dec 18, 12:00 pm, Chip Bearden > wrote:
> Same comments as others. I can live with this.
>
> Thanks to John Cochrane for the discussion on his Web page. One
> question: could a pilot who's low on final glide enter the finish
> cylinder below the floor, land out just short of the contest site, and
> receive distance points MINUS a low finish penalty? That seems a bit
> harsh but is how I interpret John's statement, below. I could be
> mistaken:
>
> "If there isn't even a weak thermal [on a marginal final glide that
> winds up inside the cylinder but just short of the contest site], the
> 70 points you will lose on the finish, combined with the new larger
> distance points, mean that there is less to be lost by landing in
> that last nice field on this side of the trees."
>
> I actually had trouble finding the part in the Rules where it says you
> have to land back at the contest site to get speed points. You get a
> finish time just by entering the cylinder without regard to where you
> land:
>
> 10.9.3.3 The Finish Point, radius, and minimum height define a three-
> dimensional Finish
> Cylinder. A finish occurs when a sailplane enters the Finish Cylinder;
> at least one fix must lie
> within the cylinder. The finish time is taken as the interpolated time
> the sailplane first
> entered the Finish Cylinder.
>
> But a later paragraph finally says you have to land back to complete
> the task:
>
> 11.2.2.4 Task completion - If all turnpoints are valid, yield a scored
> distance (Rule 11.2.3)
> not less than the Standard Minimum Task Distance and the pilot
> obtained a scored start
> time, a finish time prior to finish closing and landed at the contest
> site, then the pilot has
> completed the task. Otherwise the task is incomplete.
>
> OK, flying is over for me until next spring. I just don't want to be
> worrying about this low on final glide next year. :)
>
> Chip Bearden
> ASW 24 "JB"
> U.S.A.

Chip, this could get interesting! What is the definition of "the
contest site"? Out west, you could find an old WW2 airfield and
almost have the one mile finish circle within the airport boundaries.

Do you have to land on a designated runway? What about Ionia, where
landing on the infield (between paved runway and taxiway) is allowed?
Or landing on a ramp/taxiway/clear area after floating across the
fence?

Still a good start. Come on spring!

Good stuff for discussion around the virtual fireplace, while
consuming a non-virtual adult beverage...

Kirk
66

[[email protected]]

On Dec 18, 1:00 pm, Chip Bearden > wrote:
> Same comments as others. I can live with this.
>
> Thanks to John Cochrane for the discussion on his Web page. One
> question: could a pilot who's low on final glide enter the finish
> cylinder below the floor, land out just short of the contest site, and
> receive distance points MINUS a low finish penalty? That seems a bit
> harsh but is how I interpret John's statement, below. I could be
> mistaken:
>
> "If there isn't even a weak thermal [on a marginal final glide that
> winds up inside the cylinder but just short of the contest site], the
> 70 points you will lose on the finish, combined with the new larger
> distance points, mean that there is less to be lost by landing in
> that last nice field on this side of the trees."
>
> I actually had trouble finding the part in the Rules where it says you
> have to land back at the contest site to get speed points. You get a
> finish time just by entering the cylinder without regard to where you
> land:
>
> 10.9.3.3 The Finish Point, radius, and minimum height define a three-
> dimensional Finish
> Cylinder. A finish occurs when a sailplane enters the Finish Cylinder;
> at least one fix must lie
> within the cylinder. The finish time is taken as the interpolated time
> the sailplane first
> entered the Finish Cylinder.
>
> But a later paragraph finally says you have to land back to complete
> the task:
>
> 11.2.2.4 Task completion - If all turnpoints are valid, yield a scored
> distance (Rule 11.2.3)
> not less than the Standard Minimum Task Distance and the pilot
> obtained a scored start
> time, a finish time prior to finish closing and landed at the contest
> site, then the pilot has
> completed the task. Otherwise the task is incomplete.
>
> OK, flying is over for me until next spring. I just don't want to be
> worrying about this low on final glide next year. :)
>
> Chip Bearden
> ASW 24 "JB"
> U.S.A.

If you don't land on the contest site as defined by the CD, you get
disatnce points.
You get speed points by:
Finishing in the cylinder with plenty of energy like a "good boy:.
Or landing on the contest site after missing the bottom of the
cylinder
and getting speed points less the penalty fopr missing the bottom.
The
good news is that if you miss there is no reason to rush the landing
or do something
stupid, you just land safely. This is the essence of the change John
suggested.
UH

[Chip Bearden]

Come on, guys, play along. What I was "griping" about was the prospect
of arriving back really low, hitting the new finish cylinder just
above the trees and then dumping it into the last field before the
barbed wire fence around the airport. BB implies (well, he goes
further than that; you be the judge) that you would get distance
points only AND get banged with a low finish penalty. Depending on how
the new rule is implemented, you've scored a finish time because if
you'd floated across the fence, you would have completed the task. But
since you're sitting in the dirt staring up at the real finishers, the
rules say you haven't finished the task. So...distance points for the
non-completion minus a penalty for the low finish; in other words,
significantly fewer points that the guy who landed in the field behind
you who didn't get to the cylinder?

I'm not making this up; read below from BB's article (emphasis
added). :)

"...the 70 points you will lose on the finish, COMBINED WITH the new
larger
distance points, mean that there is less to be lost by landing in
that last nice field on this side of the trees."

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
U.S.A.

[[email protected]]

On Dec 18, 4:28 pm, Chip Bearden > wrote:
> Come on, guys, play along. What I was "griping" about was the prospect
> of arriving back really low, hitting the new finish cylinder just
> above the trees and then dumping it into the last field before the
> barbed wire fence around the airport. BB implies (well, he goes
> further than that; you be the judge) that you would get distance
> points only AND get banged with a low finish penalty. Depending on how
> the new rule is implemented, you've scored a finish time because if
> you'd floated across the fence, you would have completed the task. But
> since you're sitting in the dirt staring up at the real finishers, the
> rules say you haven't finished the task. So...distance points for the
> non-completion minus a penalty for the low finish; in other words,
> significantly fewer points that the guy who landed in the field behind
> you who didn't get to the cylinder?
>
> I'm not making this up; read below from BB's article (emphasis
> added). :)
>
> "...the 70 points you will lose on the finish, COMBINED WITH the new
> larger
> distance points, mean that there is less to be lost by landing in
> that last nice field on this side of the trees."
>
> Chip Bearden
> ASW 24 "JB"
> U.S.A.

It's in the sentance structure- He's really comparing the score of a 1
ft short finish to a
missed cylinder speed finish. The spread is less than before.
If you don't get the finish, you don't get the low finish penalty.
John's "social engineering" is intended to take away scoring
incentives for marginal
finishes.
Winter must be upon us.
UH

[toad]

> Winter must be upon us.
> UH

Look out the window Hank, winter is here in force.

Todd Smith
3S

[Chip Bearden]

> It's in the sentance structure- He's really comparing the score of a 1
> ft short finish to a
> missed cylinder speed finish. The spread is less than before.
> If you don't get the finish, you don't get the low finish penalty.
> John's "social engineering" is intended to take away scoring
> incentives for marginal
> finishes.
> Winter must be upon us.
> UH-

Thanks. I feel much better. :)

But just in case, I'm going to print out this thread and take it with
me to next year's contests to avoid a situation like we had at
Fairfield where everyone agreed the intent of the rules was almost
certainly X but the letter of the rules was Y.

JB

[JJ Sinclair]

Chip,
Do I detect a rather large tongue in a small cheek, here? I don't see
any way you could be given a finish circle penalty, if you were scored
as a land-out. Why don't you ask Uncle Hank if us poor standard class
guys will be given the 2% reward, if we are forced to fly with those
big bad 15 meter pukes in a small regionals?
JJ

> But just in case, I'm going to print out this thread and take it with
> me to next year's contests to avoid a situation like we had at
> Fairfield where everyone agreed the intent of the rules was almost
> certainly X but the letter of the rules was Y.
>
> JB

[[email protected]]

On Dec 18, 6:07 pm, JJ Sinclair > wrote:
> Chip,
> Do I detect a rather large tongue in a small cheek, here? I don't see
> any way you could be given a finish circle penalty, if you were scored
> as a land-out. Why don't you ask Uncle Hank if us poor standard class
> guys will be given the 2% reward, if we are forced to fly with those
> big bad 15 meter pukes in a small regionals?
> JJ
>
>
>
> > But just in case, I'm going to print out this thread and take it with
> > me to next year's contests to avoid a situation like we had at
> > Fairfield where everyone agreed the intent of the rules was almost
> > certainly X but the letter of the rules was Y.
>
> > JB- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Just for you big guy- It's in for 2008.
Actually it was supposed to be in for 07 and we dropped the ball.
UH

[chris]

On Dec 18, 9:49 am, BB > wrote:

2 points per 10 feet?

How about simple the math, you know that thing about common
denominators.
How about stating it as 1 point for 5 feet, nit picky yes but clearer.

Would the cylinder still work the same way if you pierce the edge at
400agl at 120 knots at 1 mile then 15-60 seconds later pull up to
500agl will the scoring program award you which ever is the more
advantageous score? [earlier vs higher?]

Overall the concept is nice because it simplifies the finish and lets
people focus on landing/flying.

Chris

[[email protected]]

On Dec 18, 6:41 pm, chris > wrote:
> On Dec 18, 9:49 am, BB > wrote:
>
> 2 points per 10 feet?
>
> How about simple the math, you know that thing about common
> denominators.
> How about stating it as 1 point for 5 feet, nit picky yes but clearer.
>
> Would the cylinder still work the same way if you pierce the edge at
> 400agl at 120 knots at 1 mile then 15-60 seconds later pull up to
> 500agl will the scoring program award you which ever is the more
> advantageous score? [earlier vs higher?]
>
> Overall the concept is nice because it simplifies the finish and lets
> people focus on landing/flying.
>
> Chris

If you get into the cylinder either from the side(preferred), or by
pulling up
into the bottom, you get a speed finish.
UH

[Chip Bearden]

On Dec 18, 6:07 pm, JJ Sinclair > wrote:
> Chip,
> Do I detect a rather large tongue in a small cheek, here? I don't see
> any way you could be given a finish circle penalty, if you were scored
> as a land-out.

JJ,

Not until I started reading the rules with this whole concept in mind
that I realized technically you can get a finish (by entering the
finish cylinder) but not complete the task (because you land on the
wrong side of the airport fence). To me "good finish" and speed points
were synonomous. So depending on how the rules are written AND (more
important) how WinScore treats it, I can see a situation--a big finish
circle displaced from the contest site and a low final glide from the
wrong direction (i.e., passing over the center of the finish circle to
get to the contest site) where someone might get distance points and
still get nailed with a low finish penalty.

Stranger things have happened. I alluded to the problem at Fairfield
Reg. 4N in October. We used two different start cylinders on different
days because of the TFR over Camp David. One pilot missed the change
and started out of the wrong cylinder, which was farther from the
contest site. So he did not have a valid start. He didn't miss it by
much so we all assumed he'd get a penalty, as below:

10.8.5.4 A pilot may claim a start when no fix is within the Start
Cylinder; such a start
incurs a penalty. [more details]

But he had flown THROUGH the correct start cylinder before it opened
on the way to the wrong cylinder so technically speaking (per the
Rules and WinScore), he wasn't entitled to a start with a penalty;
i.e., he had no start at all.

The start cylinder is defined by:

10.8.5.2 The Start Point, Start Radius, and MSH define a three-
dimensional Start Cylinder. [end of paragraph]

Per this paragraph, the start cylinder exists 24/7, it's just not open
for valid starts until the CD says it is. And the pilot had flown
through it a few minutes before it opened so he had fixes in the
cylinder. Which means he wasn't entitled to claim a start with a
penalty.

After some spirited late evening, post-refreshment discussion, calls
to the Rules Committee were made ("boy, you guys really screwed up big
time now, what the @!$% do you mean he's not entitled to the
penalty?") and the matter was resolved intelligently.

Perhaps you can understand why I raised the issue. With only a handful
of pilots in this country able to understand the current scoring
formulas, we're at the mercy of WinScore when it comes to points. And
the computer does exactly what it's told to do. If it's told to
subtract X points if a pilot finishes below Y feet, it must also be
told to verify whether that pilot completed the task or otherwise make
certain the penalty isn't applied to distance points.

I can't wait for spring for someone to try this out at a contest...

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
U.S.A.

[BB]

>
> Would the cylinder still work the same way if you pierce the edge at
> 400agl at 120 knots at 1 mile then 15-60 seconds later pull up to
> 500agl will the scoring program award you which ever is the more
> advantageous score? [earlier vs higher?]

Like Hank said, you get the most advantageous score. Rules aside
though, I would hope any CD who saw this maneuver either in person or
on a trace would slap the pilot with a huge unsafe flying penalty.
Lots of gliders are finishing, and you can't see the guy behind and
above you who you just pulled up into -- and he can't see you either.
This isn't just theory. I have had a glider dive over the top of me
right at the finish cylinder, missing by 20 feet -- good thing I
didn't do any pulling up, or I wouldn't be here writing right now.
Please just cross the cylinder wall at your final glide speed, then
gently slow down and enter the pattern. The manever you describe also
wastes points -- the pilot would have done better by simply gliding at
90 knots to the cylinder wall.

John Cochrane.

[kirk.stant]

On Dec 19, 10:53 am, BB > wrote:
> > Would the cylinder still work the same way if you pierce the edge at
> > 400agl at 120 knots at 1 mile then 15-60 seconds later pull up to
> > 500agl will the scoring program award you which ever is the more
> > advantageous score? [earlier vs higher?]
>
> Like Hank said, you get the most advantageous score. Rules aside
> though, I would hope any CD who saw this maneuver either in person or
> on a trace would slap the pilot with a huge unsafe flying penalty.
> Lots of gliders are finishing, and you can't see the guy behind and
> above you who you just pulled up into -- and he can't see you either.
> This isn't just theory. I have had a glider dive over the top of me
> right at the finish cylinder, missing by 20 feet -- good thing I
> didn't do any pulling up, or I wouldn't be here writing right now.
> Please just cross the cylinder wall at your final glide speed, then
> gently slow down and enter the pattern. The manever you describe also
> wastes points -- the pilot would have done better by simply gliding at
> 90 knots to the cylinder wall.
>
> John Cochrane.

Interesting. Since the bloody cylinder finish is all about safety,
why not only allow the first point of entry to count for score, and
remove the incentive to pull up inside the cylinder if finishing
slightly low? Obviously, if you have the energy to get back up above
500 ft after entering the cylinder, you had the energy to finish above
500ft in the first place. Unless the finish is on a ridge, of
course....

On second thought, it still encourages pulling up to cross at 501 ft,
instead of 499, and losing a few points...so the safety advantage is
somewhat illusory. Better to enforce penalizing dangerous flying in
the cylinder/during the finish/in the pattern.

Seriously, if the low finish penalty is 2pts for every 10 ft, how will
Winscore handle a 2 or 3 foot low finish? Is it all or nothing? O pts
for 2 ft low, 1 point for 3 feet low, 2 points for 1 ft low? Just
curious...

Better to hash this out amicably when the field is covered with snow
than on the grid during the first contest of the season!

Happy Holiday, all

66

[JJ Sinclair]

On Dec 19, 6:18 am, Chip Bearden > wrote:
> On Dec 18, 6:07 pm, JJ Sinclair > wrote:
>
> > Chip,
> > Do I detect a rather large tongue in a small cheek, here? I don't see
> > any way you could be given a finish circle penalty, if you were scored
> > as a land-out.
>
> JJ,
>
> Not until I started reading the rules with this whole concept in mind
> that I realized technically you can get a finish (by entering the
> finish cylinder) but not complete the task (because you land on the
> wrong side of the airport fence). To me "good finish" and speed points
> were synonomous. So depending on how the rules are written AND (more
> important) how WinScore treats it, I can see a situation--a big finish
> circle displaced from the contest site and a low final glide from the
> wrong direction (i.e., passing over the center of the finish circle to
> get to the contest site) where someone might get distance points and
> still get nailed with a low finish penalty.
>
> Stranger things have happened. I alluded to the problem at Fairfield
> Reg. 4N in October. We used two different start cylinders on different
> days because of the TFR over Camp David. One pilot missed the change
> and started out of the wrong cylinder, which was farther from the
> contest site. So he did not have a valid start. He didn't miss it by
> much so we all assumed he'd get a penalty, as below:
>
> 10.8.5.4 A pilot may claim a start when no fix is within the Start
> Cylinder; such a start
> incurs a penalty. [more details]
>
> But he had flown THROUGH the correct start cylinder before it opened
> on the way to the wrong cylinder so technically speaking (per the
> Rules and WinScore), he wasn't entitled to a start with a penalty;
> i.e., he had no start at all.
>
> The start cylinder is defined by:
>
> 10.8.5.2 The Start Point, Start Radius, and MSH define a three-
> dimensional Start Cylinder. [end of paragraph]
>
> Per this paragraph, the start cylinder exists 24/7, it's just not open
> for valid starts until the CD says it is. And the pilot had flown
> through it a few minutes before it opened so he had fixes in the
> cylinder. Which means he wasn't entitled to claim a start with a
> penalty.
>
> After some spirited late evening, post-refreshment discussion, calls
> to the Rules Committee were made ("boy, you guys really screwed up big
> time now, what the @!$% do you mean he's not entitled to the
> penalty?") and the matter was resolved intelligently.
>
WinScore only flags events that may be a penalty.................it's
up to the CD to look and decide on any penalty.
Enough of this..............someone ask what's the best wax to use!
JJ

> Perhaps you can understand why I raised the issue. With only a handful
> of pilots in this country able to understand the current scoring
> formulas, we're at the mercy of WinScore when it comes to points. And
> the computer does exactly what it's told to do. If it's told to
> subtract X points if a pilot finishes below Y feet, it must also be
> told to verify whether that pilot completed the task or otherwise make
> certain the penalty isn't applied to distance points.
>
> I can't wait for spring for someone to try this out at a contest...
>
> Chip Bearden
> ASW 24 "JB"
> U.S.A.

[[email protected]]

On Dec 19, 12:32 pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> On Dec 19, 10:53 am, BB > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Would the cylinder still work the same way if you pierce the edge at
> > > 400agl at 120 knots at 1 mile then 15-60 seconds later pull up to
> > > 500agl will the scoring program award you which ever is the more
> > > advantageous score? [earlier vs higher?]
>
> > Like Hank said, you get the most advantageous score. Rules aside
> > though, I would hope any CD who saw this maneuver either in person or
> > on a trace would slap the pilot with a huge unsafe flying penalty.
> > Lots of gliders are finishing, and you can't see the guy behind and
> > above you who you just pulled up into -- and he can't see you either.
> > This isn't just theory. I have had a glider dive over the top of me
> > right at the finish cylinder, missing by 20 feet -- good thing I
> > didn't do any pulling up, or I wouldn't be here writing right now.
> > Please just cross the cylinder wall at your final glide speed, then
> > gently slow down and enter the pattern. The manever you describe also
> > wastes points -- the pilot would have done better by simply gliding at
> > 90 knots to the cylinder wall.
>
> > John Cochrane.
>
> Interesting. Since the bloody cylinder finish is all about safety,
> why not only allow the first point of entry to count for score, and
> remove the incentive to pull up inside the cylinder if finishing
> slightly low? Obviously, if you have the energy to get back up above
> 500 ft after entering the cylinder, you had the energy to finish above
> 500ft in the first place. Unless the finish is on a ridge, of
> course....
>
> On second thought, it still encourages pulling up to cross at 501 ft,
> instead of 499, and losing a few points...so the safety advantage is
> somewhat illusory. Better to enforce penalizing dangerous flying in
> the cylinder/during the finish/in the pattern.
>
> Seriously, if the low finish penalty is 2pts for every 10 ft, how will
> Winscore handle a 2 or 3 foot low finish? Is it all or nothing? O pts
> for 2 ft low, 1 point for 3 feet low, 2 points for 1 ft low? Just
> curious...
>
> Better to hash this out amicably when the field is covered with snow
> than on the grid during the first contest of the season!
>
> Happy Holiday, all
>
> 66- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You get the highest score by going through the side of the cylinder
which
represents the shortest path. In any case, first fix in the cylinder
stops the clock.
Small misses get small penalty.
Best bet is for pilots to simply avoid the problem with good judgement
and finish
50 ft high.
UH

[kirk.stant]

On Dec 19, 1:27 pm, wrote:

> Best bet is for pilots to simply avoid the problem with good judgement
> and finish 50 ft high.

1. If we had good judgement, we wouldn't need all these nit-picky
rules.

2. If we had really good judgement, we wouldn't be racing aircraft
without engines - what if the wind quits!

Believe me, I learned my lesson about shaving the finish this season!
I also leaned to find out everything about the rules beforehand -
preferably from the experts, like you, UH!

Kirk
66

[[email protected]]

On Dec 19, 2:44 pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> On Dec 19, 1:27 pm, wrote:
>
> > Best bet is for pilots to simply avoid the problem with good judgement
> > and finish 50 ft high.
>
> 1. If we had good judgement, we wouldn't need all these nit-picky
> rules.
>
> 2. If we had really good judgement, we wouldn't be racing aircraft
> without engines - what if the wind quits!
>
> Believe me, I learned my lesson about shaving the finish this season!
> I also leaned to find out everything about the rules beforehand -
> preferably from the experts, like you, UH!
>
> Kirk
> 66

Suck UP!

[g l i d e r s t u d]

I get confused when you mention snow......what's that?

[Richard[_1_]]

On Dec 19, 9:48 am, JJ Sinclair > wrote:
> On Dec 19, 6:18 am, Chip Bearden > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 18, 6:07 pm, JJ Sinclair > wrote:
>
> > > Chip,
> > > Do I detect a rather large tongue in a small cheek, here? I don't see
> > > any way you could be given a finish circle penalty, if you were scored
> > > as a land-out.
>
> > JJ,
>
> > Not until I started reading the rules with this whole concept in mind
> > that I realized technically you can get a finish (by entering the
> > finish cylinder) but not complete the task (because you land on the
> > wrong side of the airport fence). To me "good finish" and speed points
> > were synonomous. So depending on how the rules are written AND (more
> > important) how WinScore treats it, I can see a situation--a big finish
> > circle displaced from the contest site and a low final glide from the
> > wrong direction (i.e., passing over the center of the finish circle to
> > get to the contest site) where someone might get distance points and
> > still get nailed with a low finish penalty.
>
> > Stranger things have happened. I alluded to the problem at Fairfield
> > Reg. 4N in October. We used two different start cylinders on different
> > days because of the TFR over Camp David. One pilot missed the change
> > and started out of the wrong cylinder, which was farther from the
> > contest site. So he did not have a valid start. He didn't miss it by
> > much so we all assumed he'd get a penalty, as below:
>
> > 10.8.5.4 A pilot may claim a start when no fix is within the Start
> > Cylinder; such a start
> > incurs a penalty. [more details]
>
> > But he had flown THROUGH the correct start cylinder before it opened
> > on the way to the wrong cylinder so technically speaking (per the
> > Rules and WinScore), he wasn't entitled to a start with a penalty;
> > i.e., he had no start at all.
>
> > The start cylinder is defined by:
>
> > 10.8.5.2 The Start Point, Start Radius, and MSH define a three-
> > dimensional Start Cylinder. [end of paragraph]
>
> > Per this paragraph, the start cylinder exists 24/7, it's just not open
> > for valid starts until the CD says it is. And the pilot had flown
> > through it a few minutes before it opened so he had fixes in the
> > cylinder. Which means he wasn't entitled to claim a start with a
> > penalty.
>
> > After some spirited late evening, post-refreshment discussion, calls
> > to the Rules Committee were made ("boy, you guys really screwed up big
> > time now, what the @!$% do you mean he's not entitled to the
> > penalty?") and the matter was resolved intelligently.
>
> WinScore only flags events that may be a penalty.................it's
> up to the CD to look and decide on any penalty.
> Enough of this..............someone ask what's the best wax to use!
> JJ
>
>
>
> > Perhaps you can understand why I raised the issue. With only a handful
> > of pilots in this country able to understand the current scoring
> > formulas, we're at the mercy of WinScore when it comes to points. And
> > the computer does exactly what it's told to do. If it's told to
> > subtract X points if a pilot finishes below Y feet, it must also be
> > told to verify whether that pilot completed the task or otherwise make
> > certain the penalty isn't applied to distance points.
>
> > I can't wait for spring for someone to try this out at a contest...
>
> > Chip Bearden
> > ASW 24 "JB"
> > U.S.A.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Whats the best wax to use? I am assuming it must have silicone in it.

Richard
www.craggyaero.com

[[email protected]]

On Dec 19, 4:57�pm, Richard > wrote:
> On Dec 19, 9:48 am, JJ Sinclair > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 19, 6:18 am, Chip Bearden > wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 18, 6:07 pm, JJ Sinclair > wrote:
>
> > > > Chip,
> > > > Do I detect a rather large tongue in a small cheek, here? I don't see
> > > > any way you could be given a finish circle penalty, if you were scored
> > > > as a land-out.
>
> > > JJ,
>
> > > Not until I started reading the rules with this whole concept in mind
> > > that I realized technically you can get a finish (by entering the
> > > finish cylinder) but not complete the task (because you land on the
> > > wrong side of the airport fence). To me "good finish" and speed points
> > > were synonomous. So depending on how the rules are written AND (more
> > > important) how WinScore treats it, I can see a situation--a big finish
> > > circle displaced from the contest site and a low final glide from the
> > > wrong direction (i.e., passing over the center of the finish circle to
> > > get to the contest site) where someone might get distance points and
> > > still get nailed with a low finish penalty.
>
> > > Stranger things have happened. I alluded to the problem at Fairfield
> > > Reg. 4N in October. We used two different start cylinders on different
> > > days because of the TFR over Camp David. One pilot missed the change
> > > and started out of the wrong cylinder, which was farther from the
> > > contest site. So he did not have a valid start. He didn't miss it by
> > > much so we all assumed he'd get a penalty, as below:
>
> > > 10.8.5.4 A pilot may claim a start when no fix is within the Start
> > > Cylinder; such a start
> > > incurs a penalty. [more details]
>
> > > But he had flown THROUGH the correct start cylinder before it opened
> > > on the way to the wrong cylinder so technically speaking (per the
> > > Rules and WinScore), he wasn't entitled to a start with a penalty;
> > > i.e., he had no start at all.
>
> > > The start cylinder is defined by:
>
> > > 10.8.5.2 The Start Point, Start Radius, and MSH define a three-
> > > dimensional Start Cylinder. [end of paragraph]
>
> > > Per this paragraph, the start cylinder exists 24/7, it's just not open
> > > for valid starts until the CD says it is. And the pilot had flown
> > > through it a few minutes before it opened so he had fixes in the
> > > cylinder. Which means he wasn't entitled to claim a start with a
> > > penalty.
>
> > > After some spirited late evening, post-refreshment discussion, calls
> > > to the Rules Committee were made ("boy, you guys really screwed up big
> > > time now, what the @!$% do you mean he's not entitled to the
> > > penalty?") and the matter was resolved intelligently.
>
> > WinScore only flags events that may be a penalty.................it's
> > up to the CD to look and decide on any penalty.
> > Enough of this..............someone ask what's the best wax to use!
> > JJ
>
> > > Perhaps you can understand why I raised the issue. With only a handful
> > > of pilots in this country able to understand the current scoring
> > > formulas, we're at the mercy of WinScore when it comes to points. And
> > > the computer does exactly what it's told to do. If it's told to
> > > subtract X points if a pilot finishes below Y feet, it must also be
> > > told to verify whether that pilot completed the task or otherwise make
> > > certain the penalty isn't applied to distance points.
>
> > > I can't wait for spring for someone to try this out at a contest...
>
> > > Chip Bearden
> > > ASW 24 "JB"
> > > U.S.A.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Whats the best wax to use? �I am assuming it must have silicone in it.
>
> Richardwww.craggyaero.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Snow for a Southern Californian is called ....dang.....ruff..........

Ya, yep, sure is.........best wax......is that soar..ta like being
a ...polished...sitter...........

.................NBA is now going to allow for the ball to go up thur
the hoop and then be pulled back down...........
..................NFL is removing the crossbar......just as long as
ball gets into the stands.... fans will be happier.........
.........hmmmmmmm....gps altitude is not created equal, something
like 1.5 X horizonal error for just a starter.
......To hear woop woop pull up pull up glide low.......need radar
altimeter..........or suck up............
..........so whats a few more bucks and a guy going
do............WTF.........

[Chip Bearden]

> Like Hank said, you get the most advantageous score. Rules aside
> though, I would hope any CD who saw this maneuver either in person or
> on a trace would slap the pilot with a huge unsafe flying penalty.
> Lots of gliders are finishing, and you can't see the guy behind and
> above you who you just pulled up into -- and he can't see you either.
> This isn't just theory. I have had a glider dive over the top of me
> right at the finish cylinder, missing by 20 feet -- good thing I
> didn't do any pulling up, or I wouldn't be here writing right now.

BB,

Wow, sounds like this whole finish cylinder thing is pretty dangerous!
And way too complicated to be thinking about at low altitude when we
should be focusing on flying the glider. Better to just aim at the
good ole finish line. No calculations to consider. You can actually
SEE it! Everybody tries to cross at about the same spot going in the
same direction. And if you're marginal, everyone knows you're landing
straight ahead whereas if you just nick the cylinder floor, you're
still flying who knows where? I think we should revisit this. There
was a theory I heard about: KISS...

It's snowing here. Again. On top of the frozen sleet. Which is on top
of the snow. Which is on top of the ice.

JB

[Tim Taylor]

On Dec 19, 6:23 pm, Chip Bearden > wrote:
> > Like Hank said, you get the most advantageous score. Rules aside
> > though, I would hope any CD who saw this maneuver either in person or
> > on a trace would slap the pilot with a huge unsafe flying penalty.
> > Lots of gliders are finishing, and you can't see the guy behind and
> > above you who you just pulled up into -- and he can't see you either.
> > This isn't just theory. I have had a glider dive over the top of me
> > right at the finish cylinder, missing by 20 feet -- good thing I
> > didn't do any pulling up, or I wouldn't be here writing right now.
>
> BB,
>
> Wow, sounds like this whole finish cylinder thing is pretty dangerous!
> And way too complicated to be thinking about at low altitude when we
> should be focusing on flying the glider. Better to just aim at the
> good ole finish line. No calculations to consider. You can actually
> SEE it! Everybody tries to cross at about the same spot going in the
> same direction. And if you're marginal, everyone knows you're landing
> straight ahead whereas if you just nick the cylinder floor, you're
> still flying who knows where? I think we should revisit this. There
> was a theory I heard about: KISS...
>
> It's snowing here. Again. On top of the frozen sleet. Which is on top
> of the snow. Which is on top of the ice.
>
> JB

Now if we can do something about the unreasonable start cylinder
penalty. Most I have seen are nearly 150 points if you are not in the
cylinder for the full 2 minutes. On a three hour task this is equal
to about a 27 minute penalty.

Tim

[g l i d e r s t u d]

>
> Now if we can do something about the unreasonable start cylinder
> penalty. Most I have seen are nearly 150 points if you are not in the
> cylinder for the full 2 minutes. On a three hour task this is equal
> to about a 27 minute penalty.
>
> Tim- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -



There is no rule that says you must stay IN the cylinder, but you must
stay UNDER the height.

John Good has made a great guide, it is a little old but on page
10-11:

http://www.sailplane-racing.org/Articles/SRA/CompGuidev52%20Illustrated.pdf

[Tim Taylor]

On Dec 19, 7:50 pm, g l i d e r s t u d >
wrote:
> > Now if we can do something about the unreasonable start cylinder
> > penalty. Most I have seen are nearly 150 points if you are not in the
> > cylinder for the full 2 minutes. On a three hour task this is equal
> > to about a 27 minute penalty.
>
> > Tim- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> There is no rule that says you must stay IN the cylinder, but you must
> stay UNDER the height.
>
> John Good has made a great guide, it is a little old but on page
> 10-11:
>
> http://www.sailplane-racing.org/Articles/SRA/CompGuidev52%20Illustrat...


I just think the current penalty is extreme. I made an error last
year and it cost me 148 points for not being under the full two
minutes. I was under for over a minute and left at standard speed,
but the penalty was equal to nearly 38 minutes on the flight. Each
minute was worth about 4 points that day.

[g l i d e r s t u d]

We all make mistakes:

Ive left through the wrong start cylinder and slowed my speed from
103-105mph to 70' something.

Ive programmed the wrong size turn area....basically landed
out....that cost me 700plus points.

first contest i flew I got to visit the scorer and CD almost every
day. Took the picture from the wrong angle, too long of GPS gap, One
day im not sure why I got a zero for the day.

Radioed the wrong start time.

The 2min is not a way to give you a penalty, but keep the guys
blasting down from wave, nicking the start gate at speeds ....then off
on course turning the excess speed back into height. The good old days
of VNE +20 are over.....at least on the start.

[Rick Culbertson]

On Dec 16, 3:00 pm, wrote:
> The results of the 2007 Contest Rules Pilot poll and the minutes of
> the SSA Competition Rules Subcommittee Meeting are posted at
> SSA.org>Sailplane Racing>Rules &Process.
> Proposed Draft Rules will be available for review 12/22/07.
> H Nixon
> SSA Competition Rules Subcommitte Chair

Entertaining comments, it all makes sense to me, not that I claim to
fully understand every minuscule detail but the big picture is fairly
straight forward, keep a reasonable finish cushion in your pocket &
fly safe, got it!

Just for fun, I'm surprised no one has brought up the "Super Regional"
"what if" questions, BTW I'm Ok with the concept, just thought I'd
shift the focus of the subject. Thanks UH and committee members for
tackling a tough task, well done!

More snow is arriving in Denver tonight so we'll have lots of time to
pour over the details ;-)
21