AFA Cadet XC Team - MIA at Montegue?

[Rick Culbertson]

At the risk of being harshly chastised, can anyone tell me or
factually clarify what happened to the AFA Cadet XC Team attending
R-11 or any of the info. presented below? I was informed (by a AFA
team member) in Parowan during the Region 9 comp. the reason why all
five AFA XC team members blew off the Final (Day 7) was to get to the
Region 11 contest in time, perhaps I was misinformed as to the
destination but not the reason for leaving early.

I and others also noticed during the Parowan contest, on one day, all
but one of the five Cadet teams curiously didnt come close to
completing the task. On another day all but one zeroed. I was told the
Cadets were ordered not to exceed a 40 mile distance from the Parowan
airport on one day, negating any possibility of completing the task. I
don’t know what happened the other day. The rumor (?) is the commander
was disciplining the entire team for an individual’s mistake. This
somewhat myopic action was the likely reason the entire Sports class
was devalued that day, affecting all participants, not cool in my
book.

I love seeing the Cadets at the Regional’s but I've questioned in the
past and once again I surly question the AFA commands narrowly focused
mindset and pre-contest preparation at these civilian events. These
fine AFA Cadets have so much they can learn and positively take away
from this civilian contest experience by earnestly taking part from
the beginning to completion of such an event. I find it a bit
disappointing that they seem to be short changed with this unique and
fleeting opportunity. That’s three wasted days out of a seven day
maximum subscribed contest, IM not so HO, One should be all in or all
out.

Respectfully,
21

[Mike the Strike]

If they are going to fly with an extra set of rules the rest of us
don't have, maybe we should put them in their own class?

Mike

[Jim Beckman[_2_]]

At 21:24 03 July 2008, Rick Culbertson wrote:
>
>I love seeing the Cadets at the Regional=92s but I've questioned in the
>past and once again I surly question the AFA commands narrowly focused
>mindset and pre-contest preparation at these civilian events.

This is an example of your basic "military intelligence"
at work.

Jim Beckman

[[email protected]]

It's difficult and dangerous to criticize the US Air Force soaring
competition program from the outside. I don't know what their
objectives are or how they measure success. I did have the opportunity
to observe the fleet competing at the regional contest during the
Hobbs Standard Class Nationals last year. I chatted with a number of
the cadets and was impressed with their enthusiasm and surprisingly
good (given their relatively brief exposure to soaring in most cases)
skills. I was also struck by the regimented nature of the flying.
Missions were planned in a structured way before takeoff (though
obviously the cadets were capable of adapting to the inevitable
changes in conditions during the day). The most frustrating--to me--
event was where a cadet pilot was ordered to turn back and land at an
airport along with a large number of non-finishers even though,
apparently, he could have completed the task. Whether that was known
at the time or only in hindsight, I don't know, nor do I know the
qualifications of the individual who gave that order.

In any case, the AF's objectives and constraints are doubtless quite
different from, say, mine. While it was obviously frustrating to a lot
of us (including the cadet pilot) to see the AF miss an opportunity to
be among a small number of finishers in difficult weather, the risk/
reward ratio might have been in conflict with their program's
objectives. They're flying state-of-the-art gliders that are very
expensive--especially in terms of tax payers' dollars. And the AF
pilots may not have the same experience as most civilian pilots at
these contests, in particular in landing off the airport in high-
performance sailplanes. In Hobbs, I tried not to judge and just to
encourage the young pilots there hoping that some of them would
continue in soaring long term.

As for whether an AF order resulted in the day being devalued for the
Parawan competitors, every day of every contest has the potential for
one or more individual's personal objectives, risk profiles, and
decisions influencing the scores of others. I hope we continue to
welcome the AF program to our contests and do everything we can to
encourage them. If change is warranted, it's likely to take time and
best come from within as a result of the learning process.

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
USA

[Ralph Jones[_2_]]

On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 11:49:37 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

>It's difficult and dangerous to criticize the US Air Force soaring
>competition program from the outside. I don't know what their
>objectives are or how they measure success. I did have the opportunity
>to observe the fleet competing at the regional contest during the
>Hobbs Standard Class Nationals last year. I chatted with a number of
>the cadets and was impressed with their enthusiasm and surprisingly
>good (given their relatively brief exposure to soaring in most cases)
>skills. I was also struck by the regimented nature of the flying.
>Missions were planned in a structured way before takeoff (though
>obviously the cadets were capable of adapting to the inevitable
>changes in conditions during the day). The most frustrating--to me--
>event was where a cadet pilot was ordered to turn back and land at an
>airport along with a large number of non-finishers even though,
>apparently, he could have completed the task. Whether that was known
>at the time or only in hindsight, I don't know, nor do I know the
>qualifications of the individual who gave that order.
>
>In any case, the AF's objectives and constraints are doubtless quite
>different from, say, mine.

The AA soaring program has varied all over the map in the three
decades I've been soaring at Black Forest or Owl Canyon...the officer
in charge of it doesn't stay long in the job, and generally seems not
to come from a soaring background. I remember Dave Allen as the best
-- fine soaring pilot, teacher and motivator.

Circa 1974, they were making cadets fly the 1-26 in crash helmets,
which made things a bit tough for the big guys...

At one BFGP Labor Day Contest, the flight line closed on the day of
the barbecue with everybody accounted for except one cadet in a 1-26
who had been out of radio contact for hours. Rather than drive the
trailer endlessly around the course, the CO announced that the team
would settle down for the barbecue and the cadet would be credited
with a day of survival training. With meat going on the fire and
darkness descending, there was a low whistle and the cadet entered the
pattern...he had made it around the course at approximately no knots.

Few years later, I had just finished one day in a contest at Las Vegas
NM and heard a cadet call in from the AFA's 1-34. We watched her come
nicely down a final glide, visibly gaining on the glide slope, nice
safe finish in the bag...and then she racked it over, opened the
brakes, and landed in the sagebrush. 1000 AGL was the Academy's "hard
deck" -- when you were down to that altitude and not in the pattern
you landed out, period.

rj

[Jim Beckman[_2_]]

At 18:49 04 July 2008, wrote:
>
> The most frustrating--to me--
>event was where a cadet pilot was ordered to turn back and land at an
>airport along with a large number of non-finishers even though,
>apparently, he could have completed the task. Whether that was known
>at the time or only in hindsight, I don't know, nor do I know the
>qualifications of the individual who gave that order.

Most likely the person who gave the order had the only
qualification that really matters in that situation: rank.

>They're flying state-of-the-art gliders that are very
>expensive--especially in terms of tax payers' dollars.

But relative to the other tax payer financed machines
that the AF flies (and occasionally wrecks) those gliders
are practically free.

No doubt the AF operates under restrictions we don't
realize, and they won't tell us about. Avoiding damage
of any kind is probably more of a Public Relations ploy
than any consideration of expense. Also a CYA
maneuver for whoever commands the glider program.

Back in the day (not so long ago) when the AF cadets
flew 1-26s, I flew in a 1-26 Championships hosted by
the AF Academy in Colorado Springs. The cadets were
hugely impressive guys. As I recall, their officers also
flew some of the contest tasks. And none of them seemed
averse to the occasional landout. Each of their 1-26s had
a little row of emblems below the canopy rail, where a
fighter of 65 years ago might have painted swastikas
to tally shootdowns. In the case of the 1-26s, they were
little Holstein cows. The implication was obvious.

One of the real old-timers in 1-26 racing is Vern Hutchison,
who was in submarines during WWII. I well remember one
late afternoon after the flying when the keg was tapped
and Vern was surrounded by a group of cadets, hanging
on his every word as he told his tales of submarine
combat.

[BTW, that contest was one the rare, perhaps unique,
glider meets that started with a low pass down the
contest runway by a formation of four f-16s, just for
us. We appreciated the gesture.]

Jim Beckman

[[email protected]]

On Jul 5, 4:27 am, Jim Beckman > wrote:
> At 18:49 04 July 2008, wrote:
>
>
>
> > The most frustrating--to me--
> >event was where a cadet pilot was ordered to turn back and land at an
> >airport along with a large number of non-finishers even though,
> >apparently, he could have completed the task. Whether that was known
> >at the time or only in hindsight, I don't know, nor do I know the
> >qualifications of the individual who gave that order.
>
> Most likely the person who gave the order had the only
> qualification that really matters in that situation: rank.
>
> >They're flying state-of-the-art gliders that are very
> >expensive--especially in terms of tax payers' dollars.
>
> But relative to the other tax payer financed machines
> that the AF flies (and occasionally wrecks) those gliders
> are practically free.
>
> No doubt the AF operates under restrictions we don't
> realize, and they won't tell us about. Avoiding damage
> of any kind is probably more of a Public Relations ploy
> than any consideration of expense. Also a CYA
> maneuver for whoever commands the glider program.
>
> Back in the day (not so long ago) when the AF cadets
> flew 1-26s, I flew in a 1-26 Championships hosted by
> the AF Academy in Colorado Springs. The cadets were
> hugely impressive guys. As I recall, their officers also
> flew some of the contest tasks. And none of them seemed
> averse to the occasional landout. Each of their 1-26s had
> a little row of emblems below the canopy rail, where a
> fighter of 65 years ago might have painted swastikas
> to tally shootdowns. In the case of the 1-26s, they were
> little Holstein cows. The implication was obvious.
>
> One of the real old-timers in 1-26 racing is Vern Hutchison,
> who was in submarines during WWII. I well remember one
> late afternoon after the flying when the keg was tapped
> and Vern was surrounded by a group of cadets, hanging
> on his every word as he told his tales of submarine
> combat.
>
> [BTW, that contest was one the rare, perhaps unique,
> glider meets that started with a low pass down the
> contest runway by a formation of four f-16s, just for
> us. We appreciated the gesture.]
>
> Jim Beckman

According to the Contest Manager at Region 11, Noelle Mayes, they had
a vehicle accident and withdrew. no one was hurt.

[Tuno]

The AFA still puts those little Holsteins on their gliders. But I
didn't see very many of them at PR9. Maybe one, on one of the Duos.

One of the great things about this sport is learning more about the
oldtimers like Vern. At 83, he was the oldest pilot at Parowan. I hope
he's at the next one, so I can listen to some of those stories!

I do want to chime in with 21. As a contest pilot (taking off the
scorer's hat), it was disappointing to see the AFA, an institution I
admire and support, disregard the contest task on 3 days, devaluing
one of them, including not turning in log files on the final day (a
violation of contest rules). The contest management worked hard to fit
them into the contest, doing things like moving the launch point on
the grid so they could launch from the end every day. It isn't asking
too much to expect them to take the contest seriously, and if they
want to do leadership training, they should find a different venue for
it and let those contest slots go to pilots who will be there to fly
the contest first.

~ted/2NO

[Frank Whiteley]

On Jul 5, 8:26*am, " >
wrote:
> On Jul 5, 4:27 am, Jim Beckman > wrote:
>
>
>
> > At 18:49 04 July 2008, wrote:
>
> > > The most frustrating--to me--
> > >event was where a cadet pilot was ordered to turn back and land at an
> > >airport along with a large number of non-finishers even though,
> > >apparently, he could have completed the task. Whether that was known
> > >at the time or only in hindsight, I don't know, nor do I know the
> > >qualifications of the individual who gave that order.
>
> > Most likely the person who gave the order had the only
> > qualification that really matters in that situation: *rank.
>
> > >They're flying state-of-the-art gliders that are very
> > >expensive--especially in terms of tax payers' dollars.
>
> > But relative to the other tax payer financed machines
> > that the AF flies (and occasionally wrecks) those gliders
> > are practically free.
>
> > No doubt the AF operates under restrictions we don't
> > realize, and they won't tell us about. *Avoiding damage
> > of any kind is probably more of a Public Relations ploy
> > than any consideration of expense. *Also a CYA
> > maneuver for whoever commands the glider program.
>
> > Back in the day (not so long ago) when the AF cadets
> > flew 1-26s, I flew in a 1-26 Championships hosted by
> > the AF Academy in Colorado Springs. *The cadets were
> > hugely impressive guys. *As I recall, their officers also
> > flew some of the contest tasks. *And none of them seemed
> > averse to the occasional landout. *Each of their 1-26s had
> > a little row of emblems below the canopy rail, where a
> > fighter of 65 years ago might have painted swastikas
> > to tally shootdowns. *In the case of the 1-26s, they were
> > little Holstein cows. *The implication was obvious.
>
> > One of the real old-timers in 1-26 racing is Vern Hutchison,
> > who was in submarines during WWII. *I well remember one
> > late afternoon after the flying when the keg was tapped
> > and Vern was surrounded by a group of cadets, hanging
> > on his every word as he told his tales of submarine
> > combat.
>
> > [BTW, that contest was one the rare, perhaps unique,
> > glider meets that started with a low pass down the
> > contest runway by a formation of four f-16s, just for
> > us. *We appreciated the gesture.]
>
> > Jim Beckman
>
> According to the Contest Manager at Region 11, Noelle Mayes, they had
> a vehicle accident and withdrew. *no one was hurt.

Nor was the D2 damaged, though the tow vehicle and trailer sustained
some.

[Orion Kingman]

<snip>
> I do want to chime in with 21. As a contest pilot (taking off the
> scorer's hat), it was disappointing to see the AFA, an institution I
> admire and support, disregard the contest task on 3 days, devaluing
> one of them, including not turning in log files on the final day (a
> violation of contest rules). The contest management worked hard to fit
> them into the contest, doing things like moving the launch point on
> the grid so they could launch from the end every day.<snip>
> ~ted/2NO

File a complaint with the Rule Committee.

[Tuno]

<snip> File a complaint with the Rule Committee. </snip>

Did that already.

Not a complaint as much as a request that if the AFA is going to take
slots at an over-subscribed contest, that they agree to abide by
contest rules.

[[email protected]]

On Jul 6, 10:54*am, Tuno > wrote:
> <snip> File a complaint with the Rule Committee. </snip>
>
> Did that already.
>
> Not a complaint as much as a request that if the AFA is going to take
> slots at an over-subscribed contest, that they agree to abide by
> contest rules.

I'm usually a lurker on this group, but I have to respond to this
thread. You guys are missing the whole point of the AFA soaring
program. It's to give some (lucky) cadets a headstart on their flying
careers, and begin to teach them the basics of flight. The program is
conducted in a specific way for several reasons. Most cadets are very
low-time pilots, so conservatism is in order. In addition, they are
flying taxpayer-financed gliders, and they have to be good custodians
of that public property. Finally, they are training to be military
pilots, which means they must fly with discipline and according to
their regulations. They must obey orders, because they are training
to be combat pilots, and that is what is necessary for them to be
effective in that environment. It's unfortunate that, for whatever
reason, they didn't comply with some contest rule on occasion, but the
fact is that they must comply with their own rules. Accusations of
CYA or lack of understanding of the sport are simply nonsense.

[Tuno]

Dave, the points you make about the AFA soaring program are well known
and no one disputes them, but those of us who were at Parowan heard
their commander explicitly state that their program was first and
foremost about leadership training.

Now, that's fine, I have no problem with that. But the Region 9
contest is a *soaring* contest; if they want to do leadership training
at Parowan they can set up an obstacle course in the groundhog paddock
and have at it, and not take contest slots away from pilots who have a
greater interest in taking it seriously.

Even better, they should organize and host a sanctioned contest
themselves, in Colorado (as they did once upon a time) or Hobbs, where
they don't have a problem with over-subscribed contests. That would be
an excellent demonstration of leadership skills.

~ted/2NO

[Mike the Strike]

So it's good leadership to join a contest, agree to abide by the rules
of the contest and then flout them? Is honoring agreements not part
of the military code?

What ****ed off the contest officials was not having to abide by their
special rules and accommodate some of their conservative flying
requirements , which we were happy to do, but their skipping the
contest and disappearing without apparently even telling anyone. In
my book, that's just plain rude. I certainly wouldn't bend over
backwards to accommodate rude guests and I don't expect SSA to either.

Mike

[[email protected]]

On Jul 6, 3:44*pm, Mike the Strike > wrote:
> So it's good leadership to join a contest, agree to abide by the rules
> of the contest and then flout them? * Is honoring agreements not part
> of the military code?
>
> What ****ed off the contest officials was not having to abide by their
> special rules and accommodate some of their conservative flying
> requirements , which we were happy to do, but their skipping the
> contest and disappearing without apparently even telling anyone. *In
> my book, that's just plain rude. *I certainly wouldn't bend over
> backwards to accommodate rude guests and I don't expect SSA to either.
>
> Mike

Valid points. And I understand better the AFA's objectives. I also
noted the "apparently" regarding whether they told anyone they were
leaving and why. So is there a dialogue with the AFA (with the
contest, SSA, the Rules Committee, etc.) to address this year's
problem and help determine how to handle the next request for AFA
slots at Parowan or anywhere else? If past rude behavior were a
criterion for contest entry, I know a few names, other than the AFA's,
who would be excluded in the future. :)

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
USA

[Tuno]

The AFA did not show up at Montague because they b0rke a vehicle on
the way there from Parowan, I'm told.

Should also note that while PR9 may have been over-subscribed a month
or two prior to the contest, that was not the case when it started;
the last person on the waiting list got in. So the AFA, in this case,
didn't "waste" any contest slots.

The CD and the SSA rules committee have a good dialogue with the AFA
that continues. Hopefully Charlie will chime in here with what he
knows, which is a lot more than me.

2NO

[Rick Culbertson]

Fellow soaring pilots,

Thanks to all for responding to my original post, I was very sorry to
hear of the AFA Soaring teams vehicle accident in route to R-11, but
we are all very relieved to hear no one was injured. It certainly
reminds us all of the very real dangers we face just hauling our ships
around the country, so let’s all be super vigilant in our travels.

I believe this series of RAS dialog in response to my original posting
was a healthy and educational one. I personally don’t believe the AFA
Commanders stated “Leadership Training Program” would need or should
be in conflict with the daily rigors of contest flying. Actually quite
the opposite, all the healthy and admirable qualities found in strong
leaders can be experienced, tested and instilled during the sometimes
marathon contest process.

I have attended four regional contests where the AFA Cadets were
scheduled to be in attendance, I belong to a soaring club In Colorado
that has a fairly close relationship with the AFA and its Cadets but
unfortunately not its XC Soaring Program. So I have some personal
experience with observing the Cadets contest program over the recent
years, more than the average pilot but I wouldn’t call it an insider’s
view.

It is my respectful hope that:
(1) The AFA Cadets will continue to participate and enjoy racing in
the Region 9 contests and benefit from this unique experience for many
years to come.
(2) The XC Soaring programs commander will perhaps consider the
structured and yet creative process of attending and operating within
the parameters of a civilian soaring contest can mesh quite well with
a Leadership Training Program.

Respectfully submitted,
Rick Culbertson
Colorado, USA

[Rick Culbertson]

Fellow soaring pilots,

Thanks to all for responding to my original post, I'm very sorry to
hear of the AFA Soaring teams vehicle accident in route to R-11, but
we are all very relieved to hear no one was injured. It certainly
reminds us all of the very real dangers we face just hauling our ships
around the country, so let’s all be super vigilant in our travels.

I believe this series of RAS dialog in response to my original posting
was a healthy and educational one. I personally don’t believe the AFA
Commanders stated “Leadership Training Program” would need or should
be in conflict with the daily rigors of contest flying. Actually quite
the opposite, all the healthy and admirable qualities found in strong
leaders can be experienced, tested and instilled during the sometimes
marathon like contest process.

I have attended four regional contests where the AFA Cadets were
scheduled to be in attendance, I belong to a soaring club In Colorado
that has a fairly close relationship with the AFA and its Cadets but
unfortunately not its XC Soaring Program. So I have some personal
experience with observing the Cadets contest program over the recent
years, more than the average pilot but I wouldn’t call it an insider’s
view.

It is my respectful hope that:
(1) The AFA Cadets will continue to enjoy racing in the Region 9
contests and benefit from this unique experience for many years to
come.
(2) The AFA XC Soaring programs commander will perhaps consider the
structured and yet creative process of attending and operating within
the parameters of a civilian soaring contest can and should mesh quite
well with a Leadership Training Program.

Respectfully submitted,
Rick Culbertson
Colorado, USA

[Mike the Strike]

We're all on the same wavelength.

I've seen the Air Force cadets at a bunch of Regionals and it's
inspiring to see a bunch of such young enthusiasts participate -
sometimes with their folks following along too. They have never
hesitated to help other pilots - I remember one bunch pulling a glider
out of a mud pit in a "dry" lake bed at Hobbs one year and at Parowan
this year they rushed to help Nick get his Twin Astir out of the ditch
and back onto the field.

No, it's not the cadets, or even their officers that are the problem,
but some of the strange rules they operate under - probably dreamed up
by some office-bound bureaucrat. Our mutterings here are aimed at
them, not the pilots.

Mike