Hear-ye, Hear-ye, Hear-ye,
Court is now in session, the honorable Chuck U Farley preciding.
CD, you ar accused of not holding the gate and thereby creating an
injustice for the last 3 launchers in sports class. You are further
accused of gross injustice to the finishers by expunging the results
of day 3 to correct the original injustice (see indictment no.1).
How do you plead....................................?

Chad wrote:
Just catching up with the discussion here and reading JJ's post. I was
also just thinking of the situation 2 years ago at Parowan he
mentions. I got bit by that situation- I was the second last to be
towed to the dead spot, landed back, and was last to relight only to
be towed to dying lift at a second drop zone opposite the field. I
worked 0.5 knot lift and landed out 11 miles from the field on course,
in the rain, with minor but unflyable damage. Everyone in front of me
made it on course. Everyone behind me (the re- relights) fell out. I
didn't think to protest and glad I didn't, but I sure thought the CD
was too cavalier about opening the gate. There should be some printed
guidance for CDs on how to deal with these situations to avoid
protests and pitting sportsmanship against fairness.

A few observations-
1) This idea that all gliders need to be towed to the same launch spot
is silly. We need to all be given roughly equal chances to contact
lift, and towpilots are as impartial as they come. If the lift zone
shifts, don't keep dropping ships off under virga! Ultimately, you end
up with more relights and a longer launch cue which only increases the
chance of not giving the field a sporting chance.

2) The 2000' is a standard tow height, just like there is a standard
minimum task time. It can AND SHOULD be changed by the CD given the
conditions and the input of his advisors. Dropping ships off at the
southern end of Little Salt Lake 6 miles from Parowan airport is
unsafe for low performance sports class ships. Why do we require high
energy finishes to be at 500-800' altitude, while we expect "fall
outs" to come back low energy at 500' or less??? We need some guidance
on safe glide cones after tow release while allowing for a modicum of
searching for lift. A suggestion- take a 35:1 glider, derate its glide
by 33%, yielding 4.5 statute miles per thousand feet. Then allow for a
1000' pattern. Thus, a 2000' drop can only be made out 4.5 statue
miles. If a greater distance is anticipated, then the tow height
should be raised. This is not unreasonable given the entries in sports
class, and would still be sporting if not a little unsafe still. This
would also prevent the too high problem-- If you towplane encounters
lift early on tow, or your sailplane is light, you end up hitting
2000' ceiling well before the thermal that everyone is circling in 5
miles from the field. Then you must release and lose altitude before
getting to the gaggle/lift zone/etc, putting you at a double
disadvantage- you lost altitude plus you probably don't have the
airport in safe glide anymore. You Duo Discus guys don't know what I'm
talking about here I know... I must stress that while pilots are
responsible for their safety on course and should evaluate contest
goals against aircraft and personal safety, the tow phase of flight
has few options for improving safety. This is a built-in unsafe
procedure we have in contests for moderate performance aircraft. This
is also at the root of a fairness issue.

3) Advisors should be spaced throughout the launch order, so there is
always someone near the back and front. Yes, this may mean more
advisors for a larger contest. Suggest 2 advisors or 20% of field,
whichever is greater.

4) The decision to open the gate, even with contestants having trouble
staying up, should be based on some key questions: Are the conditions
deteriorating to the degree that the task or pre-task period is
becoming clearly unsafe? Were all contestants given a "fighting
chance" to gain altitude and reach the start gate? Would an
experienced pilot/ viable competitor not be able to start given the
conditions?

5) The gate opening decision is critical, and as evidenced here is the
most important decision a CD can make. There should be a go-no go
decision tree, just like a takeoff roll and climbout, leading up to
it. Not just a perfunctory "gate will open in 15 minutes" call.

I think we can definitely go overboard trying to make it fair, and we
should not try to take the advantage of launch order out of the
equation. Sometimes luck plays a factor, and that is part of the
sport. I hope my fellow pilots would not classify me as a whiner in my
years of taking a 34:1 sailplane to regional and national sport class
contests, but we need to fix this problem. Both Parowan and this CD
have had repeated issues with similar scenarios. The SRA and soaring
community should provide guidance as to how we want the CDs to fix
this. Those are my suggestions.