In article ,
says...

My proposed rules change would force both type of competitors to make the SAME
soaring decisions. Lets say, Eric (ASH-26) and JJ (ASH-25) are over the last
turn point, some 30 miles from home. We both have about 2500 feet and its 6:00
If we don't get lucky, I must pick a
field and land, I have no choice. Eric may pick a field and land also. We will
both get distance points to our field, no difference. Eric has an option, he
can start his engine and fly home. My proposal deals with how do we fairly deal
with Eric's CHOICE to start his engine. The options a

1. Eric gets distance points to engine start ( present rule)

2. Eric gets distance points to the last turn point. I don't agree , because
there is no reason for Eric to NOT try this unsuccessful glide. Get a bump and
make it home, don't get a bump, and get scored at the last turn point anyway.
Why not give it a try?

3. Eric gets ZERO points for starting his engine. It was HIS decision to
attempt the glide, He had exactly the SAME DECISION that I had. He knew the
consequences of his intended act. In my humble opinion, My proposed rule change
makes BOTH of us EXACTLY the SAME, again.

JJ's post recognizes implicitly what we all know: the glider pilot that
is willing to land out has a competitive advantage over the pilot that
isn't willing to do that. He thinks it is unfair a motorized sailplane
can have this advantage without risking the inconvenience of landing. He
ignores the competitive disadvantages of having this option: a higher
wing loading in weak conditions (1.4 pounds extra for my glider), the
need to start the motor 500 feet higher than he would otherwise end a
"low save" attempt, and the extra 180 pounds (in the fuselage) to lug
out of a field if he lands (pilot's choice or failed engine start).

Let me suggest a fourth option:

4. Eric gets ZERO points for starting his engine, JJ gets ZERO points
for landing out. The pilots that landed at an airport (motorized or
motorless) get the usual points.

Besides making BOTH of us EXACTLY the SAME, again, this rule will appeal
to the many pilots that aren't willing to land out, suffering a
competitive disadvantage. This might actually increase participation in
our contests, as more pilots realize they don't have to take extra risks
just to have a chance of doing well in a contest.

In fact, this rule would continue what I believe is a trend to reduce
land outs in contests:

- about 30 years ago, we prohibited relights from a landing off the
contest airport

- about 15 years ago, we allowed aero retrieves from airports

- about 5 years ago, we began giving bonus points for landing at an
airport

My proposal is similar to substantially increasing the "airport bonus".
Potentially, it could increase contest safety as the "airport bonus" is
intended to; if it does, it will also reduce insurance claims, which
might reduce premiums.

--
-------
Eric Greenwell USA