SENIORS CONTEST

At 16:30 18 March 2005, wrote:
Using your rational we could safely raise the nations
highway speed to 100.

I'm sure you remember when the limits across sparsely
populated highway stretches in many western states
were posted 'reasonable and proper' - no more. The
only demonstrably 100% safe highway speed is one where
all passengers can survive a head-on collision or one
into a bridge abutment. I'd put that at around 15 mph.
What speed would you call safe enough? I for one
was happy when the limit on Interstate highways went
from 55 to 75 mph - sounds like maybe you thought it
was a bad idea.

I know of 5 accidents associated
with the finish line and we just had a near-miss at
the line.......10
or 15 feet..............Wow.

I think the linkage between using a gate and these
accidents has been questioned previously. Nevertheless,
we should try to learn from these and other piloting
mistakes as it is serious business. We also should
try to avoid overreacting so we don't sap all the fun
out of racing over time.

'A maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircrafts
attitude..................not neccesary for normal
flight' Not to be
initiated below 1500 feet

I'm thinking this means that thermalling below 1500'
is also against the FARs because the entry is an abrupt
change in attitude and circling involves 'aerobatic'
bank angles.

9B

Stewart,

I think you've lit on something. The difference between glider pilots
and racers. Yes, there is a difference. If I am not improving my skills
in some meaningful, measurable way, I lose interest in a sport very,
very quickly. It is ALL about the skills. I know Kilo Charlie well. I
know he gets this. So do many other pilots. It doesn't make us better
or worse. It simply means we operate under a different set of
priorities. Safety is one of them. But I think we're willing to put a
lot more effort into developing the skills necessary to be safe in more
varied and dynamic enivornments than many other pilots.

A decade ago, the sport lost one of chiefest skills: navigation. More
recently it has been peleton tactics. Some changes have been well
received: I didn't mind discarding the skills I'd learned in managing
the high speed start gate, by far the most dangerous environment we
faced. But recent attempts to use "safety" as a rubric for
ill-considered changes in rules and practices have increasingly "dumbed
down" the sport without really improving its safety. Seems safer. But
seems ain't is.

OC

OK, I've been lurking on this topic long enough.

I regullarly make low-pass finnish at the end of the majority of my
soaring flights, and know when and where to expect other aircraft in
the traffic pattern. I plan and adjust my actions acrodingly. In
addition to my experience flying gliders I also have over 600 hours of
instruction given in the Southern California airspace (flying powered
aircraft), along with over 500 hours of flying a Beech Bonanza
corporatly into the majority of class Bravo airports through out the
country. With all of my experiences the closest that I have come to
being in a mid-air is not finnishing at the gliderport, but flying VFR
traffic patterns with students at untowered fields. This is by far the
closest resemblience to a finish cylinder that the majority of pilots
encounter during their flying carrier. Even though there are
recomended procedures to enter a VFR pattern pilots will choose to
otherwise depending on their situation. Conversely, flying an ILS
approach most closely resembles a finish gate senario: all the traffic
is flying the same direction, for the same destination (how i miss
AST's). When a pilot reports the final approach fix on an ILS (or for
any instrument appraoch) you know exactly where he is at, the same
holds true for finnish gate procedures with a common final turnpoint,
four miles is going to be four miles! My concern has never been that I
am going to climb into someone (or that some one is going to climb into
me), but that we are going to converge on each other. The only mid-air
collision that I have personal knowledge of, that occured in the
traffic pattern, happend when two of my colleuges were turning from
cross-wind to down-wind, in a Duchess, when a Mooney struck them after
making an improper postion report, and this was at a towered field!
(See http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...27X05234&key=2 NTSB
Report:LAX02FA288B)

SO.... I contend that the finish cylinder is not going to provide
safety at a contest. I conceed that there are locations where a finish
cylinder does provide a better finishing enviroment, considering other
airport operations. Ideally by providing an established finishing
routine (I like the ideas of mandatory final turns) we as pilots can
provide better position reports facilitating our communications with
each other over the radio - the best tool that we have to avoid
mid-airs and make the finish area (gate or otherwise) a safer
environment.


Orion Kingman
DV8
Phoenix

It turns out the numbers are easier than I thought. 30-degree arc at
one mile is about 2700 feet of arc on the face of the cylinder. That's
almost 700 feet narrower than the finish gate. So the fleet is coming
in 15 degrees either side of the nominal courseline at speeds between
60 knots and 140 knots - separation of traffic not intended nor
required. Eyes on the panel. No regulation of traffic approaching,
piercing, or pulling up in the cylinder. I'm not quite getting how this
is safer, other than the fact that we're 450 feet higher (which is
still not high enough to bail out) but plenty high enough to lead to
all sorts of interesting pattern decisions.

Placebo safety. I feel safer, therefore I am safe. Doh! The notion that
this is safer is a bawd. Neaderthals, despite their thick brows and
tendency to druel (with sinful pride), at least know how to measure and
reduce risk. The Wusses though seem content to soar in ignorant bliss.
I treat the cylinder with as much or more respect as I do the finish
line. Problem is, I'm not quite sure what to do after I enter since I
have absolutely no clue what anyone else will be doing. LCD. If
everyone is ignorant, it's a no fault proposition, right?

Tell you what. For the sake of ongoing discussion, let's just say the
finish line is too dangerous for the majority of soaring pilots and
should be abolished. Let's also assume the assumption that a cylinder
finish is safe, as it is currently construed, is little more than an
exercise in optimism, but without foundation. So, how do we finish
safely, so that the majority of pilots needn't get too close to the
ground, fly too fast, nor risk impaling themselves on a competing brand
of glider?

wrote in message
oups.com...
It turns out the numbers are easier than I thought. 30-degree arc at
one mile is about 2700 feet of arc on the face of the cylinder. That's
almost 700 feet narrower than the finish gate. So the fleet is coming
in 15 degrees either side of the nominal courseline at speeds between
60 knots and 140 knots - separation of traffic not intended nor
required. Eyes on the panel. No regulation of traffic approaching,
piercing, or pulling up in the cylinder. I'm not quite getting how this
is safer, other than the fact that we're 450 feet higher (which is
still not high enough to bail out) but plenty high enough to lead to
all sorts of interesting pattern decisions.

Placebo safety. I feel safer, therefore I am safe. Doh! The notion that
this is safer is a bawd. Neaderthals, despite their thick brows and
tendency to druel (with sinful pride), at least know how to measure and
reduce risk. The Wusses though seem content to soar in ignorant bliss.
I treat the cylinder with as much or more respect as I do the finish
line. Problem is, I'm not quite sure what to do after I enter since I
have absolutely no clue what anyone else will be doing. LCD. If
everyone is ignorant, it's a no fault proposition, right?

Tell you what. For the sake of ongoing discussion, let's just say the
finish line is too dangerous for the majority of soaring pilots and
should be abolished. Let's also assume the assumption that a cylinder
finish is safe, as it is currently construed, is little more than an
exercise in optimism, but without foundation. So, how do we finish
safely, so that the majority of pilots needn't get too close to the
ground, fly too fast, nor risk impaling themselves on a competing brand
of glider?


Good post, fiveniner.

How about a rookie system? Any rookie competition pilot would have to prove
that he/she could fly a finish safely in pre-contest trails that might also
include tests of other required skills such as gaggle flying.

Performance would be judged by a panel of veteran competition pilots viewing
both the actual finish and the logger files. Successful completion of the
pre-contest trials would result in the issuance of a "competition license".

I feel pretty strongly that all true safety is pilot skill based. Safety by
regulation that attempts to compensate for lacking pilot skills is mostly
futile and adds unnecessary burdens on skillful pilots. Setting skill
standards for competition pilots would probably do more for safety than
anything else.

Bill Daniels

Bill Daniels

wrote:
snip
exercise in optimism, but without foundation. So, how do we finish
safely, so that the majority of pilots needn't get too close to the
ground, fly too fast, nor risk impaling themselves on a competing
brand
of glider?

What would you think about a finish gate at 1000 ft agl, 1 mile abeam
the landing runway. Everybody hits that gate, turns toward the middle
of the runway, then enters downwind for the favored runway ?

Or just the exact same gate finish as the old days, at 1000 ft agl ?

Todd
3S

Gordon Schubert" wrote in message
...
Two gliderscoming in to the finish directly over the
runway. One at about 100 ft and the other at 150 ft.
The one at 150 ft is going about 30 knots faster than
the lower and flies over it just as the lower glider
is pulling up. Lower glider misses the one above by
approx. 5-10 ft. This happened directly in front of
me and probably 10 other people. It was mentioned by
Charlie Spratt at the pilots meeting.
GORDY


I believe that I am the pilot of the higher sailplane during the finish
incident described. If so the "facts" stated are not anywhere near
correct. Therefore much of the discussion in this thread do not apply to
the incident.

Duane

Been tried, Todd. Problem is some saw the advantage
to be gained by coming in fast and low, then declaring
a rolling finish. That lead to the 5 minute penalty
for a rolling finish.
JJ


At 01:00 19 March 2005, Toad wrote:

wrote:

exercise in optimism, but without foundation. So,
how do we finish
safely, so that the majority of pilots needn't get
too close to the
ground, fly too fast, nor risk impaling themselves
on a competing
brand
of glider?

What would you think about a finish gate at 1000 ft
agl, 1 mile abeam
the landing runway. Everybody hits that gate, turns
toward the middle
of the runway, then enters downwind for the favored
runway ?

Or just the exact same gate finish as the old days,
at 1000 ft agl ?

Todd
3S

John Sinclair wrote:
Been tried, Todd. Problem is some saw the advantage
to be gained by coming in fast and low, then declaring
a rolling finish. That lead to the 5 minute penalty
for a rolling finish.
JJ

Needs a bigger penalty. Wasn't there any thought to refining a high
finish, or did the finish gate advocates say "See, didn't work." (for
example)?

Shawn

At 01:00 19 March 2005, Toad wrote:

wrote:


exercise in optimism, but without foundation. So,
how do we finish
safely, so that the majority of pilots needn't get
too close to the
ground, fly too fast, nor risk impaling themselves
on a competing

brand

of glider?

What would you think about a finish gate at 1000 ft
agl, 1 mile abeam
the landing runway. Everybody hits that gate, turns
toward the middle
of the runway, then enters downwind for the favored
runway ?

Or just the exact same gate finish as the old days,
at 1000 ft agl ?

Todd
3S

Needs a bigger penalty. Wasn't there any thought to
refining a high
finish,

You don't want to make the penalty for a rolling finish,
too high because the guy that really needs to make
one will foolishly try to make the finish line (avoiding
the penalty) and we all know how that may end up.
JJ