But actually you are achieving nothing other than alienating yourself from
your peers.

There is a risk with everything in life, and that is part of what makes it
fun.

Reading other posts on this thread its sounds like the organization of this
meet put on a very well run event, and in doing so mitigate a large portion
of that risk.....but not enough to stop it being darn good fun.

Out of interest...whats your stance on racing finishes?


Andy,
The 80 figure was given to me in good faith, and I repeated it as such.
Cou=
ld I have verified this number from a 2nd source? Sure, but the actual
numb=
er isn't the crux of the matter. Would you feel any different about the
Nep=
hi operation if the number WAS 80? I doubt it. Are my concerns alleviated
i=
f I knew the actual number was 65? No. Anyway, we all agree the true
number=
is 65. So let's JUST MOVE ON - this is beating a dead horse.

Bruce raised an interesting question: is a meet of 20 gliders inherently
da=
ngerous. The only meet that has no risk of a glider-glider mid-air is a
mee=
t of one. Raise it to two and now the risk is non-zero. Sound ridiculous?
H=
ardly, two gliders flying out of Arlington, WA, had a mid-air resulting
in
=
one fatality. So as the number of gliders flying in the same airspace
incre=
ases, so does the risk of a mid-air. That is just common sense that, I
thin=
k, we can all agree on. The point of contention is that risk acceptable
or
=
not. That gets down to a judgment issue. Some people think that just
becaus=
e nothing bad happened there was no, or little, risk. That is just,
simply,=
not true.=20

Bruce inspired me to do a little research. In my former life as a
research
=
engineer I always put a lot of effort into getting as much information on
a=
particular subject before trying fashion a solution. So I started
gatherin=
g data on glider-glider mid-airs (there are also a few glider-power
mid-air=
s, but this is a different problem). Part of the problem of gathering
this
=
data is it is a bit tedious. The FAA ASRS database found no such
incidents,=
so it is of no help whatsoever. The NTSB accident database is very
limited=
in finding such incidents because a mid-air is not a searchable
criteria.
=
You basically have to look at EVERY reported accident involving gliders.
I
=
did, however, find some glider mid-airs by going thru the fatal glider
acci=
dents (I quit after 2007 due to lack of time). I found more such
incidents
=
by doing a Google search ("glider mid-air accident"). I came up with 13
gli=
der-glider mid-airs (remember, this is not an exhaustive search) What was
g=
laring about what I found was a disproportionate number of mid-airs
involvi=
ng contest flying; 11 of the 13. Contests represent perhaps 5% of total
gli=
der hours flown, yet a majority of mid-airs occur during contests. The
Worl=
d gliding contest is particularly bad (5 out of 13). If you calculate the
n=
umber of mid-airs per 100,000 hours flown contest flying dwarfs other
types=
of events on a risk-based assessment.

I also went to the Soaring Safety Foundation for guidance. I was stunned
to=
find that the SSF has NO database whatsoever. This is a glaring
deficiency=
on their part. I propose that the SSF create a database of ALL glider
acci=
dents that is searchable by all phases of glider flying. The Albuquerque
So=
aring Club did an excellent analysis of glider accidents in New Mexico
(www=
..abqsoaring.org/misc_files/NM_Glider_Accidents.doc). This level of
analysis=
needs to be done on a national basis.

I feel strongly about safety and do not apologize for it. If I can
prevent
=
a SINGLE accident, fatal or otherwise, by my actions it is WORTH IT for
the=
abuse I have taken here (and make no mistake: some people here have been
e=
xtraordinary abusive, but I don't give a damn).

Best regards,
Tom