MaD wrote:
I don't get it: Why on earth do so many people pull up and do a
circuit?

Because this gives me the opportunity to switch from "final glide" mode
to "landing mode" at a low airspeed. I can't imagine opening my dive
brakes at 140 knots!

There must be a difference in the US and the IGC definition of
the finish gate/line. Can someone explain? Why is it not normal (at
least judging from what I read here it isn't in the US) to land
straight in after the finishline?

At most competitions with a line, it is located near the middle of the
airport.

A pilot is expected to cross it above 50', then land. If below 50',
then the pilot must have announced a rolling finish and may roll or fly
through, but be in a "slow" landing configuration.

I use an arrival height of 700' in my glide computer. So if all is
perfect, I would cross the airport at this altitude at a normal
interthermal cruise speed. If I hit sink within a mile or so of the
line, I still have the margin to cross either high enough to make a
circuit or do a straight in. If I hit lift, then I speed up and as I
get within a mile or so, I ignore the computer and use my eyeballs as I
push to as fast as I consider safe for the conditions. But I plan on
entering the downwind leg at no less than about 400' and continually
reasess the situation as I fly the last couple of miles.

In a paper by John Cochrane (Safer Finishes) there's a list of
accidents. More than half of them have nothing to do with the finishing
procedure. They could have happened just the same with any other
procedure, some even without a contest, some did'nt even happen at the
airfield. All the others (6) are the pullup-stall-spin type. So again:
why pull up?

Because the pull up is done from a high speed I built up after
determining the altitude margin I had was good enough to make the dive
and pull up. This cuts a few seconds off my time - once I've realized
it is safe to do so. The accidents happen when the pilot is only
thinking of crossing the line and not planning ahead and makes the dive
with not enough energy. I have the option to fly a constant speed and
arrive at 6-700' over midfield, or to dive at the line, then pull up
and agin be at 6-700' on my downwind entry.

You propose I aim for the end of the runway and arrive with near zero
altitude and "some" energy. I don't like this as it puts me too low
and too slow over potentially unlandable terrain. I then am forced to
land straight ahead without the opportunity to get a good look at the
landing area. I also must put down the wheel, lower flaps and extend
the airbrakes while putting more and more runway behind me.

I like to fly a final approach with full flaps and nearly full
spoilers, with a plan to land somewhere convenient in the first 50% of
the runway. If an obstacle appears suddenly, I can close spoilers,
then flaps and float past, then set up another approach as far down the
runway as is safe. Or make an S turn to an adjacent landing area.

After flying dozens of finishes at international comps and many more in
various versions at national and regional comps I am absolutely
convinced that a finishline at ground level at the beginning of the
runway and then landing straight ahead is the safest method, especially
when many competitors arrive at the same time. I'd hate to be in a
situation with ten or more gliders all on circuit at the same time not
knowing who's going to turn when and where because everybody has his
own idea of where the pattern is.

At all competitions I have flown, the organizer or gatekeeper suggests
a pattern direction and everyone finishes, then pulls up to pattern
speed and flies the downwind leg (if possible). At this time, the
higher glider may orbit to let the lower one go ahead, or may extend
the downwind leg, etc. Some traffic marshalling occurs in the final
glide, but most of it occurs on the downwind leg while everyone is
operating at a nice leisurely pace compared to the fast final glide.

I have landed behind 8-10 or more sailplanes in this way without any
problem. We were all separated by about a towrope length while abeam
the midfield, all the way to final approach. No problems! Had we been
doing a straight in approach, the gliders would all be flying different
speeds over the threshold and the one behind would have no way to judge
the energy carried by the one in front.

I have also participated in dozens of competitions over the 30+ years I
have been soaring and all of the unsafe finish operations I have seen
involved a single pilot not showing good planning or judgement. I
can't think of any cases where multiple sailplanes were involved in a
(potential) incident, one always was able to take necessary action to
avoid the errant pilot and the possibility of a collision was averted
with plenty of time and room left over. (If you aren't constantly
averting a collision in a thermal, then I don't want to be anywhere
near you!)

I'm not trying to cop out with the "pilot error" excuse here, but it
really is a strong factor. So far most other suggestions for the
contest finish just move the error zone to a different location, but do
not eliminate or even reduce it. In another post it was mentioned that
Mr Knauff thinks we ALL need to learn how to fly better, and I agree.
We should strive to make every approach and landing be perfect at all
phases. We should strive to make our flying be predictable, so the
ones around us can anticipate our next move. Then, it won't matter if
the pattern entry was made from 10' and redline or 1000' and minimum
sink speed. After a couple days at a contest, I know which pilots I
can trust - too bad I can't trust everyone!

Consider the 2-lane highway. Cars pass head on at closing speeds
approaching 150 mph at a distance of less than 10'. It works very well
until some impaired person screws it all up. And if you'd show this to
a remote jungle dweller, he would think we were nuts.

-Tom
ASH-26E 5Z