I must say I'm soundly against using any more than 3 turnpoints for
badge performances. If there is no min distance between turnpoints
and enough are used, one could claim thermalling as "distance."
I flew 520km one day (according to the GPS "totals") but it
was mostly just in a circle :P

I think the 3TP idea and rules as they stand are quite reasonable.
One can still fly an out-and-return or triangle closed course
concurrently, since start and finish are NOT considered turnpoints
in the rules (according to my understanding). Having them 10km apart
may even add a little to safety assuming several pilots are attempting
the same task and want to avoid hitting each other on the way
back...

Of course it's one more detail to check before attempting a task...and
that IS a tiny bit annoying...

In article ,
Ian Strachan wrote:
In article , Robert Danewid
writes

snip

When Ray Lynskey flew the first 2000K flight it was not recognized as a
world record, so consequently the SC was changed the following year to
allow 3 TP courses.

I do not think that was so, Tor Johannessen simply formulated more
flexible distance rules for badges, not at that time for world records.
In fact in the 1960s you could fly three legs for badge flights,
sometime later for reasons unknown this was restricted but is now back.

I have always thought that as long as a "straight downwind dash" is
allowed for distance and goal flights, some pretty versatile rules
should apply for flights with turn points, particularly those that start
and finish at the same place. In long thin countries like the UK and
others, the three turn point distance is particularly appropriate to
keep you away from sea effects and over good soaring terrain without
risking long retrieves if "sod's law" prevails and you land out at the
farthest extremity of the course. I recall a Lasham pilot declaring an
out-and-return to a lake (reservoir, actually) in farthest Wales, and
landing just below the lake in a remote Welsh valley. Perhaps his
retrieve car keys were in his pocket as well (I cannot recall), but that
sort of thing convinced me decades ago of the merit of motor gliders!

What DID happen, as I recall, was when the first 2000 km out-and-return
was flown in New Zealand, the photo evidence rule was that "the turn
point itself must appear on the photo". This was a hang-over from
competitions where such a rule was introduced for the convenience of
photo-assessing. But outside comps, the principle should always have
been "proof of presence in the appropriate Observation Zone". The 2000k
O&R was accepted after a delay "finding the turn point" on the photos,
but the case was used by me and others to point out the anomaly and the
requirement for the TP itself to be in the picture was dropped from the
Code. The increasing use of GPS recorders also helped. Principle won
over convenience, I am glad to say!

Ronalds flight is quite an achievement so why not use it as an argument
for a proposal to the IGC for the 2005 meeting? We will support it!

Glad you and I agree for once, Robert ! I am merely a Committee
chairman and could not make such a proposal to IGC, it is outside the
remit of my Committee. But you Aero Club delegates can. What about my
other points on declarations and free flights?

--
Ian Strachan

Bentworth Hall West
Tel: +44 1420 564 195 Bentworth, Alton
Fax: +44 1420 563 140 Hampshire GU34 5LA, ENGLAND





--

------------+
Mark Boyd
Avenal, California, USA