Proposed 2005 Rules On SRA Site

http://sailplane-racing.org/

Ken Kochanski
SRA Secretary

Would someone please tell me - without rancor and name calling - how
the rule requiring ELT's for all SSA events in 2006 came to be. If I
read the 2004 poll correctly, 58% of the respondents did not want ELT's
required at all and only about 22% wanted them by 2006. If the polls
are not going to have a bearing in the rules then why do them?

Tom
Idaho
Ken Kochanski (KK) wrote:
http://sailplane-racing.org/

Ken Kochanski
SRA Secretary

wrote:
Would someone please tell me - without rancor and name calling - how
the rule requiring ELT's for all SSA events in 2006 came to be. If I
read the 2004 poll correctly, 58% of the respondents did not want
ELT's
required at all and only about 22% wanted them by 2006. If the polls
are not going to have a bearing in the rules then why do them?

Tom
Idaho
Ken Kochanski (KK) wrote:
http://sailplane-racing.org/

Ken Kochanski
SRA Secretary


Reply
Mandatory use of ELT's is a major change which must be proposed a year
in advance in accordance with the SSA Contest Rules process. This is
done, in part to avoid surprise rules and permit pilots to plan
accordingly.
It also permits a comment period.
The reason the proposed rules are published in advance is so that
comments and exchanges like this can occur.
It is also understood that some decisions may,at times, not reflect
majority positions, This is rare and not done without considerable
thought.
Please feel free to have your director aware of your position. If
enough pilots oppose, and directors agree, this will not go into effect
next year.
Please understand, no voting on this rule occurs this year. The only
change related to this is to formally permit organizers to require
ELT's without getting the waiver previously required.
As to the reasoning behind the proposed '06 rule: Having been involved
in the search for one live pilot lost in the trees and onother killed
on a mountain, it is easy to see why they are needed. If your wife,
significant other, or whoever was the one that had to wait for you to
be found, possibly for months if you are dead , how do you think they
would feel?
Thanks for your input and for not calling anybody and idiot!
Hank Nixon UH
SSA Contest Rules Committee Chair

Cost of entering the "Competition Ranks" is a major consideration to those
of us who are relativity new to the sport. To some the cost of an
"inexpensive" $300 ELT is of no consequence. To others it is an additional
investment, not required by the FAA, that stands in the way of entering
their first "Sports Class" competition. The requirement also establishes,
with the FAA, the precedence that the soaring community considers the ELT as
an essential piece of safety equipment.

The cost will jump to around $2,000 with the ELT move to the 406 MHz. At
that point it will be a definite roadblock to entering into the competition
ranks.

My personal resources which I can dedicate to the sport are somewhat
limited. ($300 can buy quite a few tows - $2,000 even more.)

Respectfully,
Wayne
http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder


wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
Would someone please tell me - without rancor and name calling - how
the rule requiring ELT's for all SSA events in 2006 came to be. If I
read the 2004 poll correctly, 58% of the respondents did not want
ELT's
required at all and only about 22% wanted them by 2006. If the polls
are not going to have a bearing in the rules then why do them?

Tom
Idaho
Ken Kochanski (KK) wrote:
http://sailplane-racing.org/

Ken Kochanski
SRA Secretary


Reply
Mandatory use of ELT's is a major change which must be proposed a year
in advance in accordance with the SSA Contest Rules process. This is
done, in part to avoid surprise rules and permit pilots to plan
accordingly.
It also permits a comment period.
The reason the proposed rules are published in advance is so that
comments and exchanges like this can occur.
It is also understood that some decisions may,at times, not reflect
majority positions, This is rare and not done without considerable
thought.
Please feel free to have your director aware of your position. If
enough pilots oppose, and directors agree, this will not go into effect
next year.
Please understand, no voting on this rule occurs this year. The only
change related to this is to formally permit organizers to require
ELT's without getting the waiver previously required.
As to the reasoning behind the proposed '06 rule: Having been involved
in the search for one live pilot lost in the trees and onother killed
on a mountain, it is easy to see why they are needed. If your wife,
significant other, or whoever was the one that had to wait for you to
be found, possibly for months if you are dead , how do you think they
would feel?
Thanks for your input and for not calling anybody and idiot!
Hank Nixon UH
SSA Contest Rules Committee Chair

wrote:

Reply
Mandatory use of ELT's is a major change which must be proposed a year
in advance in accordance with the SSA Contest Rules process. This is
done, in part to avoid surprise rules and permit pilots to plan
accordingly.

I've had an ELT (EBC-102a) installed for about 5 years now, including
several contests. I got one because it's small size and self-contained
antenna made it much easier to mount. I know several other pilots that
use these, also.

It's TSO C91, not C91a as the proposed rules require, and I'm not keen
on paying another $200-$300 to replace a fairly new, working unit.

Can you tell me why C91 isn't adequate for contest purposes, or if these
units can be accepted specifically? It's not like pilots will rush out
to buy these to save a few bucks, because they cost about $200 more than
a number of C91a units.


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

The rule should be amended (in my opinion) to allow continued use of
TSO C91 units that are currently installed. Granted they are not as
accurrate as the C91a units, but at least they are installed. A C91 ELT
may be adequate for contest purposes in someone's estimation, but in no
case may they be used for a new installation (FAR), so there's no
chance of installing the C91 units if you don't already have it
installed.

A 406 mHz unit would be best, but I'd MUCH prefer to spend the money on
a transponder - if I had to spend the money. At least with a
transponder I could get a FL 180 waiver.

My portable, parachute-mounted ELT does not comply with the proposed
contest rule.

This new contest rule means that all 1-26's participating in the
Nationals in 2006 shall require an approved ELT installation. I'm
thinking lead balloon on this one.

Jim

jphoenix wrote:
The rule should be amended (in my opinion) to allow continued use of
TSO C91 units that are currently installed. Granted they are not as
accurrate as the C91a units, but at least they are installed. A C91 ELT
may be adequate for contest purposes in someone's estimation, but in no
case may they be used for a new installation (FAR), so there's no
chance of installing the C91 units if you don't already have it
installed.

Can experimentally licensed aircraft (like my glider) legally install
C91 units? I'm not clear on that, but there are plenty of places selling
EBC-102a ELTs, so somebody must be able to use them.

I'd certainly like to stick with my current C91 unit until the new,
improved ELTs are cheaper!

This new contest rule means that all 1-26's participating in the
Nationals in 2006 shall require an approved ELT installation. I'm
thinking lead balloon on this one.

Don't they use their own rules, not the SSA rules? I'm assuming you mean
the 1-26 Nationals. Or did you mean the Sports Class Nationals?


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

Tom,

without rancor or name calling, I think the committee probably decided
that ELTs mitigate the potential strain put on race organizers in the
event a pilot does not return at the end of the day. In this case, the
opinions of pilots are less sound than the experiences of contest staff
who have been left with the task of organizing search efforts. The loss
of Peter Masak this past summer further highlighted this. Peter was ELT
equipped. Thus, the search was completed in about 18 hours. It might
have been much, much longer.

Ken,

the site looks great and I appreciate the way you presented the rules
changes. thanks!

OC

I looked over the 2004 opinion poll again because I remembered that there
was a fairly strong mandate to change our Scoring formulas.

quote:
8.0 WGC-style Scoring

8.1 Should SSA contests adopt the scoring and devaluation formulas used
at the World Gliding Championships?
Yes 104 61%
No 54 32%


Twice as many people agreed as disagreed, so why was no action taken on
this?

I personally feel that we should move in the direction of the WGC scoring
formulas. Possibly adopt the WGC formulas 100%, or possibly a blend of our
current system and the WGC system.

I think adopting it will help us select and breed pilots so the US be more
competitive in the world championships.

As a negative side effect of the WGC system there seems to be such a
stronger bias toward speed that middle of the score sheet pilots such as
myself used to scoring 750-900 points per day would likely be discouraged by
scoring much lower [300-600points?]. This could cause frustration and
pilots more likely to drop out of competition flying. However I'm in favor
of moving toward the WGC formulas at least partially.

Chris