I was afraid we might go a whole year without a finish
height debate - Wheee!

9B

At 05:30 11 March 2005, Marc Ramsey wrote:
Kilo Charlie wrote:
Every single one of these is a stall spin accident.
They are examples of
poor judgement and are not different than any other
stall spin
accident....e.g. from base to final. To suggest that
this is not related to
judgement but to the gate is a huge stretch. Some
are not even contest
flights and are therefore unrelated to finish gates
at all.

So, stalling and spinning moments after what are clearly,
in several
cases (including the most recent), botched gate finishes
(i.e.,
insufficient energy) has absolutely nothing to do with
the use of a
gate, while stalling and spinning at 600 feet while
trying to sneak over
the edge of a finish cylinder, proves that cylinder
finishes are
dangerous?

An example of an accident that is related to the finish
gate is if there
were a midair at the gate.

You've got it! I can choose not to finish at 50 feet,
but I have no
control over the potential for a midair. I have had
trouble several
times with having to land between gliders crossing
my base leg low and
fast on their way to the finish gate. There was also
the time someone
cut me off at the gate, by hooking it 100 feet in front
of me. Maybe I
missed the finish calls, or maybe they didn't make
them, it really
doesn't matter. Poor judgment and bad luck may well
equal two dead
contest pilots one of these days.

The bottom line is this, whoever is fastest with a
50 foot gate, is also
going to be fastest with a 500 foot cylinder. So,
why do some insist
upon trying to force use of a 'fun' finish procedure
that quite a few of
us find dangerous? As far as I'm concerned, if even
one participant
objects, a gate shouldn't be used (and, yes, I have
objected, and have
been overruled). If everyone agrees, have a good time...

So it brings back to attempting to legislate good
judgement.

Yeah, what a silly thing to do...

Marc