2008 Proposed US Competition Rules Changes

[[email protected]]

The proposed rule changes for 2008 US competition soaring
are posted at SSA.org/sailplane racing/rules & process.
Input is welcome. Final rules proposals go to the SSA for publication
in the board "Blue Book" in mid January.
Seasons Greetings to all from the SSA Competition Rules Subcommittee
UH
H Nixon
Chair

[[email protected]]

On Dec 22, 5:31 pm, wrote:
> The proposed rule changes for 2008 US competition soaring
> are posted at SSA.org/sailplane racing/rules & process.
> Input is welcome. Final rules proposals go to the SSA for publication
> in the board "Blue Book" in mid January.
> Seasons Greetings to all from the SSA Competition Rules Subcommittee
> UH
> H Nixon
> Chair

Hank,
I have a question about task changing :
Will the Contest Director still be allowed to create a new task
when pilots are already in the air? We shouldn't have 50 pilots
playing with their computers under the same cloud base.

Ryszard Krolikowski RW .

[[email protected]]

On Dec 23, 11:32*pm, wrote:
> On Dec 22, 5:31 pm, wrote:
>
> > The proposed rule changes for 2008 US competition soaring
> > are posted at SSA.org/sailplane racing/rules & process.
> > Input is welcome. Final rules proposals go to the SSA for publication
> > in the board "Blue Book" in mid January.
> > Seasons Greetings to all from the SSA Competition Rules Subcommittee
> > UH
> > H Nixon
> > Chair
>
> Hank,
> I have a question about task changing :
> Will the Contest Director still be allowed to create a new task
> when pilots are already in the air? We shouldn't have 50 pilots
> *playing with their computers under the same cloud base.
>
> Ryszard Krolikowski RW .

A review of the proposed changes will show no change in the rules with
respect to
task calling or changing in the air. Experience over the years has
shown that the ability to
adjust the task to changing conditions to be a useful and valuable
tool when used properly.
UH

[AK]

On Dec 24, 8:46 am, wrote:
> On Dec 23, 11:32 pm, wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 22, 5:31 pm, wrote:
>
> > > The proposed rule changes for 2008 US competition soaring
> > > are posted at SSA.org/sailplane racing/rules & process.
> > > Input is welcome. Final rules proposals go to the SSA for publication
> > > in the board "Blue Book" in mid January.
> > > Seasons Greetings to all from the SSA Competition Rules Subcommittee
> > > UH
> > > H Nixon
> > > Chair
>
> > Hank,
> > I have a question about task changing :
> > Will the Contest Director still be allowed to create a new task
> > when pilots are already in the air? We shouldn't have 50 pilots
> > playing with their computers under the same cloud base.
>
> > Ryszard Krolikowski RW .
>
> A review of the proposed changes will show no change in the rules with
> respect to
> task calling or changing in the air. Experience over the years has
> shown that the ability to
> adjust the task to changing conditions to be a useful and valuable
> tool when used properly.
> UH- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Could you please give me a couple of examples when creating a brand
new task while gliders are in the air is useful?

I don't think creating a brand new task while gliders are already in
the air is the right thing to do from safety point of view. If a day
is problematic the contest director should create a number of tasks
and then call one of them if he needs to change. This would allow
participants to program their computers while still on the ground.

With all this talk about safety finishes why this problem has not been
discussed? I think the safety comity should act proactively instead
retroactively. Meaning we should not have a mid air to wake us up.

Regards,

AK

[[email protected]]

On Dec 24, 9:25*am, AK > wrote:
> On Dec 24, 8:46 am, wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 23, 11:32 pm, wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 22, 5:31 pm, wrote:
>
> > > > The proposed rule changes for 2008 US competition soaring
> > > > are posted at SSA.org/sailplane racing/rules & process.
> > > > Input is welcome. Final rules proposals go to the SSA for publication
> > > > in the board "Blue Book" in mid January.
> > > > Seasons Greetings to all from the SSA Competition Rules Subcommittee
> > > > UH
> > > > H Nixon
> > > > Chair
>
> > > Hank,
> > > I have a question about task changing :
> > > Will the Contest Director still be allowed to create a new task
> > > when pilots are already in the air? We shouldn't have 50 pilots
> > > *playing with their computers under the same cloud base.
>
> > > Ryszard Krolikowski RW .
>
> > A review of the proposed changes will show no change in the rules with
> > respect to
> > task calling or changing in the air. Experience over the years has
> > shown that the ability to
> > adjust the task to changing conditions to be a useful and valuable
> > tool when used properly.
> > UH- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Could you please give me a couple of examples when creating a brand
> new task while gliders are in the air is useful?
>
> I don't think creating a brand new task while gliders are already in
> the air is the right thing to do from safety point of view. If a day
> is problematic the contest director should create a number of tasks
> and then call one of them if he needs to change. This would allow
> participants to program their computers while still on the ground.
>
> With all this talk about safety finishes why this problem has not been
> discussed? I think the safety comity should act proactively instead
> retroactively. Meaning we should not have a mid air to wake us up.
>
> Regards,
>
> AK- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The number of days where task changes have made for fairer and
in some cases, safer, are too numerous to count.
Examples; 2 days at the '07 15M Nationals would likely have been
either
no contest or highly devalued had we not had the option to change
tasks as
the weather developed.
Days were changed at the 07 Sports Nationals due to weather not
developing as
expected. If there had not been for the unsportsmanlike conduct of one
pilot jamming
the radio, the last day would also have been changed to a more
appropriate task and
the results of that contest likely would have been significantly
different.
Prior to having this option, I recall a number of days where we flew
off into bad weather
or on tasks that could mot be done because the option to change did
not exist.
I completely agree that the best option is to be able to select from
previously defined tasks.
That said, this is not always possible.
I do no programming of my pilot interface in the air- only minimal
data entry to define a task
and personally don't see this as a hazard. My choice of equipment is,
in part, done to ensure
this is easily and quickly done,if needed, in the air.
UH

[[email protected]]

Changing tasks in the air is a very good tool and should continue to
be used. In the many contests that I have flown, we have always had a
few task changes and it has always worked to make a better and safer
contest. There is no sense in sending the whole fleet into an area of
dead air or where sotrms are developing. To try to anticiapte this
before launch is just impossible. Charlie Spratt is a master at
understanding the conditions and changing the task when required.
With todays GPS and logger systems, it is far easier than the old days
of photos. When a task change occurs, just go out a little way and
find some empty space to reset the task in your computer. It doesn't
take that long anyway. I would much rather fly a task in better
conditions than being forced to fly into storms and landing out.
There lies much more danger.

ASW27 BV

[AK]

Thank you both for your examples I see your point. Do you have any
opinion on what is the best software for PDA in regards to entering
new tasks in the air? What I am looking for is any easy to operate,
with minimum attention, fewest steps software other than Glide
Navigator II. Thx.

AK

[Rick Culbertson]

On Dec 24, 12:58 pm, AK > wrote:
> Thank you both for your examples I see your point. Do you have any
> opinion on what is the best software for PDA in regards to entering
> new tasks in the air? What I am looking for is any easy to operate,
> with minimum attention, fewest steps software other than Glide
> Navigator II. Thx.
>
> AK

Hi AK,
The safety question of changing tasks in air the while somewhat
inconvenient has proven it's self to be a great tool and beneficial
for all concerned as noted by UH & BV. One of the many pre-contest
practice items to add to your check list is "changing tasks in the
air", be it AT, TAT or MAT. Once you've put a dozen in air task
changes under your belt it will be fairly easy to accomplish. Try it
in simulation mode on the ground a bunch of times to get comfortable
then repeat the process in the air, you'll be fine.

As for a software that's "easy to operate, with minimum attention,
fewest steps" I don't know why you would discount GNll, it's certainly
the easiest software I know of to enter tasks on the fly. I also have
Winpilot but prefer GNll , especially in comps for the very reasons
you're looking for it's easy to operate, with minimum attention and
the fewest steps to complete, but with less bell and whistles, hense
easier. Most comps I've attended in the last four years have had one
or two task changes in the air, so count on it occurring.

Regards,
Rick - 21

[BB]

2 more cents to add here:

Contest directors are generally very aware of the diffuculty and
dangers of task changes in midair, so they only do it when the need
for a task change outweighs the difficulty of doing it in midair.
Good CDs often take steps to minimize in-iar programming; they call
A,B,C tasks; they limit task changes to easy things to do like adding/
deleting a turnpoint rather than starting over, and they hate to
change task type e.g. MAT to TAT. I don't think we need rules unless
CD judgement were failing here, which isn't the case.

On software, realize that most of the software out there is not
designed with in-air task changes in mind, since this freedom is a US
particularity. The ease of in-air task change varies a lot. One
program I tried crashed the PDA and the 302, needing an in-air power
off restart of both, 10 minutes before start opened. Not fun.

John Cochrane

[[email protected]]

On Dec 28, 11:11 am, BB > wrote:
> On software, realize that most of the software out there is not
> designed with in-air task changes in mind, since this freedom is a US
> particularity. The ease of in-air task change varies a lot. One
> program I tried crashed the PDA and the 302, needing an in-air power
> off restart of both, 10 minutes before start opened. Not fun.

Yikes. Certainly some software is designed with this in mind.
Guess that's why we're still cranking out ILEC SN10Bs !
Best Regards, Dave "YO"

PS: Yes, I know, AATs could still be a bit easier...

[AK]

On Dec 28, 12:12*am, Rick Culbertson > wrote:
> On Dec 24, 12:58 pm, AK > wrote:
>
> > Thank you both for your examples I see your point. Do you have any
> > opinion on what is the best software for PDA in regards to entering
> > new tasks in the air? What I am looking for is any easy to operate,
> > with minimum attention, fewest steps software other than Glide
> > Navigator II. Thx.
>
> > AK
>
> Hi AK,
> The safety question of changing tasks in air the while somewhat
> inconvenient has proven it's self to be a great tool and beneficial
> for all concerned as noted by UH & BV. One of the many pre-contest
> practice items to add to your check list is "changing tasks in the
> air", be it AT, TAT or MAT. *Once you've put a dozen in air task
> changes under your belt it will be fairly easy to accomplish. Try it
> in simulation mode on the ground a bunch of times to get comfortable
> then repeat the process in the air, you'll be fine.
>
> As for a software that's "easy to operate, with minimum attention,
> fewest steps" I don't know why you would discount GNll, it's certainly
> the easiest software I know of to enter tasks on the fly. I also have
> Winpilot but prefer GNll , especially in comps for the very reasons
> you're looking for it's easy to operate, with minimum attention and
> the fewest steps to complete, but with less bell and whistles, hense
> easier. Most comps I've attended in the last four years have had one
> or two task changes in the air, so count on it occurring.
>
> Regards,
> Rick - 21

Rick,

GNII would be perfect but it does not integrate with borgelt
variometers. Software that itegrates well with these variometers
include WinPilot, SeeYou Mobile and possibly flyWithCE (this is at
least what I know). Any experiance on any of them in regards to
entering tasks.

Thank you,

AK

[Tim Taylor]

On Dec 28, 3:45 pm, AK > wrote:
> On Dec 28, 12:12 am, Rick Culbertson > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 24, 12:58 pm, AK > wrote:
>
> > > Thank you both for your examples I see your point. Do you have any
> > > opinion on what is the best software for PDA in regards to entering
> > > new tasks in the air? What I am looking for is any easy to operate,
> > > with minimum attention, fewest steps software other than Glide
> > > Navigator II. Thx.
>
> > > AK
>
> > Hi AK,
> > The safety question of changing tasks in air the while somewhat
> > inconvenient has proven it's self to be a great tool and beneficial
> > for all concerned as noted by UH & BV. One of the many pre-contest
> > practice items to add to your check list is "changing tasks in the
> > air", be it AT, TAT or MAT. Once you've put a dozen in air task
> > changes under your belt it will be fairly easy to accomplish. Try it
> > in simulation mode on the ground a bunch of times to get comfortable
> > then repeat the process in the air, you'll be fine.
>
> > As for a software that's "easy to operate, with minimum attention,
> > fewest steps" I don't know why you would discount GNll, it's certainly
> > the easiest software I know of to enter tasks on the fly. I also have
> > Winpilot but prefer GNll , especially in comps for the very reasons
> > you're looking for it's easy to operate, with minimum attention and
> > the fewest steps to complete, but with less bell and whistles, hense
> > easier. Most comps I've attended in the last four years have had one
> > or two task changes in the air, so count on it occurring.
>
> > Regards,
> > Rick - 21
>
> Rick,
>
> GNII would be perfect but it does not integrate with borgelt
> variometers. Software that itegrates well with these variometers
> include WinPilot, SeeYou Mobile and possibly flyWithCE (this is at
> least what I know). Any experiance on any of them in regards to
> entering tasks.
>
> Thank you,
>
> AK

I have flown with WinPilot for a few years and it is easy to set a
task in flight. Two different types of windows you can work with. Do
I like to do it? No! We did too many at the US 15M Nats in 2006.
The changes were good for the task, but I still think it is one of the
most dangerous things we do at a contest. Especially if it involves
TAT's with many turnpoints.

TT

[[email protected]]

On Dec 22, 3:31 pm, wrote:
> The proposed rule changes for 2008 US competition soaring
> are posted at SSA.org/sailplane racing/rules & process.
> Input is welcome.

Thank you Hank, and the entire rules committee, for faithfully
handling the annual survey and competition rules revisions that keep
our soaring competitions challenging and fair. Being a novice racer
(only two regionals to date), I know I have a long way to go to
understand all the pressures that drive changes in the rules.

I do have a concern with the creation of the Super Regional. I'm not
sure where this suggestion originated, as it was not in the annual
survey responses, but I did see the huge waiting list for Parowan last
year. The result was, as cited in the committee meeting minutes, that
very few out of region pilots were allowed to compete. My concern
stems from the fact that the conflict arises from the limited number
of slots and the super regional makes room for the out of region
pilots by reducing access for in region pilots. I believe this may run
counter to the purpose of regional competitions (to determine a
Regional Champion and to measure the performance of all entrants.
Additionally for Sports class, to provide an entry level for pilots
new to competitive sailplane racing to learn the skills and procedures
used in competition).

Specifically, I'm concerned that allowing a 0% in region slot
reservation may result in no opportunity for new racers to get their
first competition for a specific year. If a 0% slot reservation is set
for a super regional, one could argue the contest is now a mini
nationals. Perhaps there is a way to preserve access for in region
novices while keeping an increased access for out of region slots.

I would ask the rules committee to consider one or more of the
following proposed modifications:
a. Change the percentage of reservation slots for pilots in the region
to 25-75% as a balance to keep some preferred access.
b. Rather than allowing a super regional without restrictions, perhaps
the super regional cannot be declared until a regular regional has
been declared. This ensures opportunity for new in region racers.
c. Rather than establishing a super regional reservation for high
finishers at the specific super regional site, give priority to the
previous year's medallion winners regardless of the in region site.
This would allow top finishers from the pure regional to also get a
shot at the premier site.

Thank you again for allowing us to comment.

Respectfully,

Horst
L33

[AK]

On Dec 22, 5:31 pm, wrote:
> The proposed rule changes for 2008 US competition soaring
> are posted at SSA.org/sailplane racing/rules & process.
> Input is welcome. Final rules proposals go to the SSA for publication
> in the board "Blue Book" in mid January.
> Seasons Greetings to all from the SSA Competition Rules Subcommittee
> UH
> H Nixon
> Chair

Could someone explain the origin of 1.02?

The new rule says:
"7. Combined 15-Meter/Standard class
Rule Text
[R]5.8 Competition Classes
[R]5.8.1 Regional FAI-class competitions may include one or more of
the classes described in Rule 6.12.
[R]5.8.2 As an alternative to separate 15-Meter and Standard Classes,
a Combined 15-Meter Class can be
included. To enter this class a sailplane must meet the requirements
for the 15-Meter Class (6.12.4). A
sailplane that also meets the requirements for Standard Class (6.12.5)
can compete in the Combined 15-Meter
Class and receive a 2% daily scored distance bonus.
[N]11.2.3.5 Not applicable
[R]11.2.3.5 For a sailplane competing in a Combined 15-Meter Class
(Rule 5.8.2) that meets the requirements
for Standard Class, scored distance is multiplied by 1.02.
"

A typical glider in 15-meter class is an ASW-27 (if flown in Sports
class it would have a handicap of .88.
A typical glider in standard class is Discus 2 or LS-8 (if flown in
Sport class they would have a handicap of .925)

Assuming the handicap system of sports class reflects performance for
the above gliders ASW-27 is about 5% better than LS-8 or Discus 2.
Mathematically the 2% should be more like 5%.

I would expect this rule if used will drive more standard class pilots
into sports class since they will have no chance in 15-meter class (at
least looking from the math point of view). The situation looks even
worse if you look at gliders like Diana 2.

Am I wrong thinking this number should reflect true differences
between best gliders in both FAI classes?

I think the idea is great the number 1.02 not so great.

[MickiMinner]

copied from L33's post about the Super Regional:
> I would ask the rules committee to consider one or more of the
> following proposed modifications:
> a. Change the percentage of reservation slots for pilots in the region
> to 25-75% as a balance to keep some preferred access.
> b. Rather than allowing a super regional without restrictions, perhaps
> the super regional cannot be declared until a regular regional has
> been declared. This ensures opportunity for new in region racers.
> c. Rather than establishing a super regional reservation for high
> finishers at the specific super regional site, give priority to the
> previous year's medallion winners regardless of the in region site.
> This would allow top finishers from the pure regional to also get a
> shot at the premier site.
>
> Thank you again for allowing us to comment.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Horst
> L33


I have to agree with Horst in this respect. When you have contest
sites like Perry and Parowan (both coasts, if you will)..perhaps a
"super regional" is a GREAT idea...however, what happens to all the
local regional people that want to get started in competition
soaring...where can they go? I have already had a contest
registration from a newbie Region 9 pilot that has not competed
before; for the June 2008 Parowan contest. Although I would like to
take all entries (up to 50% of out of region, because parowan is such
a popular site)...I feel that the region 9 pilots that would like to
START competing are going to be SHUT out, of flying. We are not for
sure (doubtful at best) that Region 9 will have any other regional.
Perhaps we could write into the rules, something to the effect, that
prior approval is required by the Rules Committee before declaring a
"super regional", and that their approval is based upon whether or not
the region in question has another regional that year to make sure
that we aren't forgetting to get new competition pilots involved able
to enter contests!
Just my 2 cents....Micki Minner, 2008 Parowan Region 9 Contest Manager

[BB]

Rules issues aside, Parowan is not a good site or contest for someone
who does not have a lot of mountain cross country experience. There
will be a full grid of hard-charging national-level pilots, high
altitude downwind takeoffs, big tasks over spikey terrain. I would not
advise this as a first contest for someone with a fresh silver badge.
It will either be scary or discouraging.

Region 9 should hold a regional at a local, familiar site, just like
the other regions. If noone else does it, the pilots should organize
one! If no true "regional" happens, new pilots from Region 9 should
travel to nearby regions. The Hobbs regional, the air sailing sports
contest, or the region 12 contest at Warner springs are all great
places to go for a first contest.

If region 9 isn't producing a true regional, I'm not sure adding a
layer of hoops for the Parowan organizers to go through will help.

Note the super-regional can reserve 0-50% slots for in region, it can
do this differently for different classes, and it can use some inverse
seeding in sports. From the explanation on the SSA webpage: "We want
to give organizers latitude to create the most successful contest."
So the contest organizers can think about all these issues and create
the structure that works the best for their particular site and
region.

John Cochrane

[Marc Ramsey[_2_]]

BB wrote:
> Rules issues aside, Parowan is not a good site or contest for someone
> who does not have a lot of mountain cross country experience. There
> will be a full grid of hard-charging national-level pilots, high
> altitude downwind takeoffs, big tasks over spikey terrain. I would not
> advise this as a first contest for someone with a fresh silver badge.
> It will either be scary or discouraging.

When I was a newbie cross-country pilot, I'd go to Parowan every summer
because it was a *safer* place to fly cross country than the places I
normally flew. If you look at a map of the region, you'll note that
pretty much all of the soaring sites out here are near mountains, so
even pilots with fresh silver badges learn to deal with them. Perhaps
the hard-charging national-level pilots should consider going to, say, a
Nationals, if all those silver-level pilots are getting in their way...

Marc

[[email protected]]

On Dec 30, 5:26*pm, Marc Ramsey > wrote:
If you look at a map of the region, you'll note that pretty much all
of the soaring sites out here are near mountains, so even pilots with
fresh silver badges learn to deal with them. *

Marc,
Good point. I fly out of Black Forest with a field elevation of
7,000 feet and was foolish enough to earn my Silver Badge by setting
Pike's Peak (elev 14.110) as my goal to attain the 50KM distance. Some
may feel I made it too hard on myself but it has paid huge dividends
on growing my sailplane experience.
Of course, a career as a fighter pilot helped a lot as well. I
turned to soaring after retirement because the cross country tasks
give me about the same level of intensity for risk assessment and
decision making.
Finally, my club has a wealth of very helpful world class
sailplane pilots. They become especially helpful when I bring in beer
before asking them about techniques and strategies ;-0.
All this has helped me advance very quickly, but I also know not
every glider guider has this full house of advantages. Hopefully there
is a way to balance the challenge of starting new folks in racing with
the desire to keep it interesting for the old heads, regardless of the
site.

Good Soaring and Happy New Year,

Horst
L33

[ZL]

BB wrote:
> Rules issues aside, Parowan is not a good site or contest for someone
> who does not have a lot of mountain cross country experience. There
> will be a full grid of hard-charging national-level pilots, high
> altitude downwind takeoffs, big tasks over spikey terrain. I would not
> advise this as a first contest for someone with a fresh silver badge.
> It will either be scary or discouraging.
>
> Region 9 should hold a regional at a local, familiar site, just like
> the other regions. If noone else does it, the pilots should organize
> one! If no true "regional" happens, new pilots from Region 9 should
> travel to nearby regions. The Hobbs regional, the air sailing sports
> contest, or the region 12 contest at Warner springs are all great
> places to go for a first contest.
>
> If region 9 isn't producing a true regional, I'm not sure adding a
> layer of hoops for the Parowan organizers to go through will help.
>
> Note the super-regional can reserve 0-50% slots for in region, it can
> do this differently for different classes, and it can use some inverse
> seeding in sports. From the explanation on the SSA webpage: "We want
> to give organizers latitude to create the most successful contest."
> So the contest organizers can think about all these issues and create
> the structure that works the best for their particular site and
> region.
>
> John Cochrane
>
I don't particularly like the new super regional rule. May be OK when
there are other nearby regionals, but that almost never happens out here
in Region 9. From Denver, Parowan is 500 miles and the next closest
regional contest is often 1000 road miles. It is our local contest.

The die hard, experienced Region 9 contest pilots will still likely get
in if its a super regional. The real newbies may also get in if any
slots are available for reverse seeding. But that will leave a bunch of
pilots that have tried racing and liked it, but did not score very well,
with no place to go race within a days drive. Does not seem like the
best interest of the sport to allow experienced out of region pilots to
bump local want to be's from their only available venue. That goes
against the point of the regional contest system in the first place.

But then even if the new proposed rule is approved, it is still up to
the organizers whether they want their contest to be a super regional or
not. Its an option, not a requirement. We'll have to wait and see, but
I'm sure they will get pressure from both sides, which will make the job
a whole lot less fun.

So, if Parowan does go "Super", is there any interest out there in
organizing or flying in a "reliever" regional on the eastern edge of the
Rockies?

Its good to live in Region 9, where everyone wants to take their soaring
vacation :)

-Dave Leonard