US SSA/SRA Contest Rules Poll

The annual pilot poll for the US contest rules is open at
http://adamsfive.com/survey/surveys.php

The poll is open to pilots on the SSA pilot ranking list and closes on Nov
14.

The Rules Committee relies heavily on the poll input to steer the Rules
making process, so please give us your input.

Ken Sorenson
SSA Contest Committee Chairman

What?! No question(s) about safety finishes??

Small potatoes. I appreciate the work on the survey, Ken.

~ted/2NO
Gollywomper II

On Oct 31, 3:08 pm, Tuno wrote:
What?! No question(s) about safety finishes??

It's on the RC agenda, clearly an important issue. After much
discussion, we couldn't find a way to ask a productive survey
question. State your experience and opinions in the boxes at the
bottom.

John Cochrane

On Oct 30, 7:43 pm, "Ken Sorenson" wrote:
The annual pilot poll for the US contest rules is open athttp://adamsfive.com/survey/surveys.php

The poll is open to pilots on the SSA pilot ranking list and closes on Nov
14.

The Rules Committee relies heavily on the poll input to steer the Rules
making process, so please give us your input.

Ken Sorenson
SSA Contest Committee Chairman

Ken,
Last year pilot pool results were ignored by Rules Committee.(what
gliders can fly for club class qualification)
Hank Nixon explained : you guys need more time .
Please ,clean your act if you want pilots to tread you seriosuly.
Ryszard Krolikowski (RW)

On Nov 1, 1:15 am, wrote:
On Oct 30, 7:43 pm, "Ken Sorenson" wrote:

The annual pilot poll for the US contest rules is open athttp://adamsfive.com/survey/surveys.php

The poll is open to pilots on the SSA pilot ranking list and closes on Nov
14.

The Rules Committee relies heavily on the poll input to steer the Rules
making process, so please give us your input.

Ken Sorenson
SSA Contest Committee Chairman

Ken,
Last year pilot pool results were ignored by Rules Committee.(what
gliders can fly for club class qualification)
Hank Nixon explained : you guys need more time .
Please ,clean your act if you want pilots to tread you seriosuly.
Ryszard Krolikowski (RW)

RW
You could not be more incorrect.
#1 US Team qualification process is determined by the US Team
Committee which uses the rules poll to gather input. Possibly this is
not
clear to you. Rules Committed does not determine this.
#2 Any such change is a major change and both committees use a cycle
of about 2 years so people are not caught by surprise.
#3 Recently announced changes limit team selection to a range of
gliders
consistent with the Club Class. See The US Team web site for more
info
on this.
You sat in on the presentation in Caesar Creek in which this process
was
explained and the pending changes were described. The USTC has
continued on course as described by Dan Cole.
For the RC and USTC
UH

Ryszard you could not be more wrong both in your comment and your
approach. Aside from the fact that Ken and Hank put in hundreds of
hours each year to make sure we actually have contests in this country
the idea that the Rules Committee ignores the annual poll results is
just wrong - plain and simple. As are you sir.

John Seaborn


On Oct 31, 11:15 pm, wrote:
On Oct 30, 7:43 pm, "Ken Sorenson" wrote:

The annual pilot poll for the US contest rules is open athttp://adamsfive.com/survey/surveys.php

The poll is open to pilots on the SSA pilot ranking list and closes on Nov
14.

The Rules Committee relies heavily on the poll input to steer the Rules
making process, so please give us your input.

Ken Sorenson
SSA Contest Committee Chairman

Ken,
Last year pilot pool results were ignored by Rules Committee.(what
gliders can fly for club class qualification)
Hank Nixon explained : you guys need more time .
Please ,clean your act if you want pilots to tread you seriosuly.
Ryszard Krolikowski (RW)

On the poll I was confused by the explanation of question 8[?]
regarding using the last exit position of the start cylinder as the
scored start point rather than the point closest to the first
turnpoint.

I understand the concept of the proposed rule change. The explanation
seemed poorly written and confusing to me.

The description said something about exiting out the back, then flying
through the gaggles in the start cylinder. I don't understand this
because if you did this then by definition you pass through the start
cylinder again and then have a restart on the 2nd exit right?
[start=last exit of start cylinder]


Why did we not have a choice to change the scored exit point to
anywhere on the front 180° of the start cylinder? That seems like the
best of both concepts with the fewest problems.

Chris

On the poll I was confused by the explanation of question 8[?]
regarding using the last exit position of the start cylinder as the
scored start point rather than the point closest to the first
turnpoint.

I understand the concept of the proposed rule change. The explanation
seemed poorly written and confusing to me.

The description said something about exiting out the back, then flying
through the gaggles in the start cylinder. I don't understand this
because if you did this then by definition you pass through the start
cylinder again and then have a restart on the 2nd exit right?
[start=last exit of start cylinder]

Why did we not have a choice to change the scored exit point to
anywhere on the front 180° of the start cylinder? That seems like the
best of both concepts with the fewest problems.

Chris

The intent of the poll question is just to see if people like the
principle of being scored from the exit point vs. being scored for
distance from the center minus radius. If the principle is accepted,
you can trust the RC to work through the exact details with a close
eye on traffic, fairness, operational, and other issues.

Clearly, we want to keep "on course" and "prestart" traffic separate
as much as possible. The "last exit" is one easy way to make sure that
people don't start then blaze through the cylinder. Restricting it to
the front 180 does even more, if anyone would ever be nuts enough to
exit out the back of the cylinder and then go all the way around it so
as not to go back in it. Other limits may be imposed as well.

The big issue here is how you feel about the flexibility of starting
anywhere without distance cost, vs. the possibility that the upwind
edge is too attractive in a strong wind. Let us know how you feel
about that.

John Cochrane

On Nov 1, 11:19 am, chris wrote:
On the poll I was confused by the explanation of question 8[?]
regarding using the last exit position of the start cylinder as the
scored start point rather than the point closest to the first
turnpoint.

I understand the concept of the proposed rule change. The explanation
seemed poorly written and confusing to me.

The description said something about exiting out the back, then flying
through the gaggles in the start cylinder. I don't understand this
because if you did this then by definition you pass through the start
cylinder again and then have a restart on the 2nd exit right?
[start=last exit of start cylinder]

Why did we not have a choice to change the scored exit point to
anywhere on the front 180° of the start cylinder? That seems like the
best of both concepts with the fewest problems.

Chris

If the principle of giving a pilot his best score is applied, and
speed achieved after
exiting the back and then flying across the cylinder (on a street of
through a "boomer")
at a speed that exceeds the rest of the on course speed for the
flight, a pilot can improve both
his speed and his score.
This is a significant safety concern and likely to happen. Where elso
do you have lift so well
marked as the prestart?
Limiting to the "front " 180 solves this but has computation issues
due to potentially significant
variations in the heading of the first leg.
Wanna take a swing at trying to write some language to deal with these
considerations?
This is a good example of something that seems very simple actually
not being so simple.
Thanks for you thoughts.
UH

" wrote in message
ups.com:

On Nov 1, 11:19 am, chris wrote:
On the poll I was confused by the explanation of question 8[?]
regarding using the last exit position of the start cylinder as the
scored start point rather than the point closest to the first
turnpoint.

I understand the concept of the proposed rule change. The explanation
seemed poorly written and confusing to me.

The description said something about exiting out the back, then flying
through the gaggles in the start cylinder. I don't understand this
because if you did this then by definition you pass through the start
cylinder again and then have a restart on the 2nd exit right?
[start=last exit of start cylinder]

Why did we not have a choice to change the scored exit point to
anywhere on the front 1800 of the start cylinder? That seems like the
best of both concepts with the fewest problems.

Chris

If the principle of giving a pilot his best score is applied, and
speed achieved after
exiting the back and then flying across the cylinder (on a street of
through a "boomer")
at a speed that exceeds the rest of the on course speed for the
flight, a pilot can improve both
his speed and his score.
This is a significant safety concern and likely to happen. Where elso
do you have lift so well
marked as the prestart?
Limiting to the "front " 180 solves this but has computation issues
due to potentially significant
variations in the heading of the first leg.
Wanna take a swing at trying to write some language to deal with these
considerations?
This is a good example of something that seems very simple actually
not being so simple.
Thanks for you thoughts.
UH





Hank,



I think it is simple.



Here is my language: "Your start is scored for distance and time when
and where you exit the start cylinder the last time"



It sounds like your example would still have the pilot who exited at the
back of the cylinder coming back through the cylinder again to use the
pre-start gaggles, hence getting scored when (s)he exits the cylinder at
the front with the rest of the gaggle. I think that if you get a valid
start and distance calculated from the last exit of the start cylinder,
wherever that may be, that seems to answer the questions of safety
because there would be _no_ advantage to taking a boomer toward the back
and bumping through the frontward start gaggles because then you would
be back inside the cylinder and be scored when and where you
subsequently exited the cylinder. Additionally, you would need to be
sure that you were below the start cylinder height for 2 minutes to get
a valid start.



I would submit three examples where my approach would improve safety.



1) Because I will get credit for distance flown, not the minimum
course line distance from the front of the cylinder, there is no
advantage for me to be at or near course line (which is currently the
_most_ advantageous place, and where most of us tend to congregate). I
can now be 5 miles left or right of course line, away from the rest of
the gaggles and know that I am in just as good a position as anyone else
because I get scored for distance and time when I leave the cylinder on
the side.

2) I see a 4 kt. boomer forming toward the back of the cylinder
that I estimate can take me a 1000' above the top of the cylinder. I
climb out of the top of the cylinder, 6 miles back, getting a start from
that location when I exit the top. I take it up appropriately based on
strength and head on course. The only thing I need to be aware of at
this point is that I do not slip back down into the cylinder (which is
where all the pre-start gaggles are milling around) so that my original
start time is busted. And I will certainly be flying a bit slower in
order to make sure that I do not penetrate the start cylinder again.

3) I see a good thermal toward the back of the cylinder. The
contest has seen numerous leechers. I decide to slip out the back of the
cylinder and go around the side and onto course. I have an incentive to
travel toward the back of the cylinder now because I get credit for the
distance from the last exit. This action puts me at least 5 miles to
the left or right of course line hence spreading out the pack.



This approach should be easy to score, easy to understand, and have the
original desired effect of spreading the field out before the start.





Larry Goddard

01 "zero one"