On Wednesday, March 6, 2013 8:38:37 PM UTC-6, Dave Springford wrote:
I guess that's the problem - assumptions based on rumours, or incorrect information. The accident happened substantially further away than 1 mile and the pilot was never above glide slope to make the field at Macready zero.

Dave:

I talked to a number of pilots about this, and did my best to collect the available information. Please see the review on the 2012 contest safety report here

http://www.ssa.org/files/member/2012...y%20Review.pdf

If any of that is inaccurate, please let me know. The coordinates I was given put the crash 1.5 miles from the finish ring, and my understanding of Canadian rules at the time is that one gets speed points by landing out just inside the ring -- as IGC rules encourage as well (See Rick Sheppe's posts from Argentina)

Monitoring contest crashes and getting at least some sense of where we actually have problems is an important part of the RC's job. It's just as important to monitor so that we know where we don't have problems! There are lots of safety theories that just do not show up in the statistics.

When the trace becomes available, it will matter to that monitoring whether this was in fact an outlanding gone bad -- starting from a sensible pattern at 600 feet -- or whether it was a last-minute blown-final-glide affair. Neither is good. We have many crashes from outlandings and low thermaling, and these bear thought. But they are indeed a different category for us all to consider how to fly safer.

We have had lots and lots of crashes involving final glides that end a mile or two short of the airport. Please see "contest safety" for numbers and "safer finishes" for analysis, both here

http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john...m#safety_rules

Whether the tragedy at Canadian nationals adds to that or to another category of (alas quite frequent) accidents, the numbers over decades bear out that managing MacCready zero plus or minus 300 feet over the ground is a very tricky affair

John Cochrane