UO penalty @ Hobbs

Does anyone have first hand information on the nature of the Unsafe
Operations penalty assessed at the Region 9 contest?
Is there anything other pilots can learn from it?

I was at the contest in question but this is the first I've heard of a
UO penalty ...

2NO

For Example John Smith wrote:
Does anyone have first hand information on the nature of the Unsafe
Operations penalty assessed at the Region 9 contest?
Is there anything other pilots can learn from it?

A common UO penalty is going through the finish gate below min altitude
(i.e. 50 ft.) Charlie Minner is watching....

FM

wrote:
I was at the contest in question but this is the first I've heard of a
UO penalty ...

2NO

For Example John Smith wrote:

Does anyone have first hand information on the nature of the Unsafe
Operations penalty assessed at the Region 9 contest?
Is there anything other pilots can learn from it?

This one was just a case of a relatively low energy finish (gate, not
cylinder) upwind, followed by a gentle pull up onto a low downwind. He
then flew a long, low pattern, hit a little windshear on base to final
turn and touched the wingtip to the ramp just before the main wheel.
Result was a quick groundloop right in front of all the spectators with
remarkably little damage to anything except the pilots ego.

The pilot thought he had enough energy all the way around, but came up
just a tad short. Hobbs has lots of safer although less convenient
options in that situation.

-Dave Leonard


Fred Mueller wrote:
A common UO penalty is going through the finish gate below min altitude
(i.e. 50 ft.) Charlie Minner is watching....

FM

wrote:

I was at the contest in question but this is the first I've heard of a
UO penalty ...

2NO

For Example John Smith wrote:

Does anyone have first hand information on the nature of the Unsafe
Operations penalty assessed at the Region 9 contest?
Is there anything other pilots can learn from it?

David Leonard wrote:
This one was just a case of a relatively low energy finish (gate, not
cylinder) upwind, followed by a gentle pull up onto a low downwind. He
then flew a long, low pattern, hit a little windshear on base to final
turn and touched the wingtip to the ramp just before the main wheel.
Result was a quick groundloop right in front of all the spectators with
remarkably little damage to anything except the pilots ego.

The pilot thought he had enough energy all the way around, but came up
just a tad short. Hobbs has lots of safer although less convenient
options in that situation.

-Dave Leonard

I watched the finish as I was taking photos at the finish line. In my
opinion the finish was not low energy and the pull up was a normal
racing pull up (I have the photo). The situation was complicated
because he chose to follow the the previous pilot in a non standard
pattern, then there was a possible conflict on the downwind leg with a
finishing glider. After that I stopped watching and set up to
photograph that finisher. There was probably close to half a minute of
downwind leg that the incident pilot could has turned a safe base and
final. I have flown with him for years and have always regarded him as
safe and conservative. That he misjudged this situation is warning
that none of us is infallible. The strong gusty cross wind was a
contributing factor.

Andy