Rearranging the Deck Chairs on the Titanic (was: US 2008 CompetitionFacts)

On Jan 21, 4:32 pm, P1 wrote:
In 2008 there we

354 pilots who flew at least one contest day at a sanctioned
contest. (In 2004 there were 408).

As usual, we're happily engaged in an AT vs. TAT brawl and completely
missing what, to me, is the most jarring statistic: U.S. contest
participation is down almost 14% in the past four years (.3.5%
compound rate). Now before we start arguing about whether this is a
statistically valid comparison [e.g., I don't know whether 2008 was
depressed because of the economy or 2004 was artificially high (THAT'S
depressing, at only 400 pilots) or what], I think we can all stipulate
that contest participation is not growing by leaps and bounds.

Money is certainly a factor. Again, I won't jump into the Sports vs.
Club vs. Std/15M/18M Class wars but it's more expensive, lots, to buy
a new glider. I bought my last one in 1992 and it will probably be my
last one. But I'm still flying and it's still competitive and the cost
of a contest hasn't gone out of sight, at least compared with a week
in DisneyWorld, so what's the problem?

There are probably many reasons. But the one I'm focusing on here is
the philosophical bent, so to speak, of the Rules Committee. Now this
is not a rant against these guys. I know and respect them all and, in
fact, we've had a lot of discussions about a couple of suggestions I
and others had last year and they've been willing to work with me on
it. But I still sense that when push comes to shove, their #1 and
maybe only priority is to insure the highest level of competition
through the legislative rules process. The impact this last time, in
my opinion, was (1) rules that were even more complex than before
(e.g., the new start cylinder "trust us, you can't tell where the arc
is before you start but it won't matter anyway") and (2) equipment
requirements that are more rigorous and expensive (i.e., the absolute
requirement, now, for two IGC-approved flight recorders rather than
one plus a cheap commercial off-the-shelf backup, as I have been
using ).

I can argue both sides. Rules are important (I've had a hand in
drafting several myself over the years). And I'm not in favor of using
the honor system even at a regionals, much less a nationals. I've seen
too many instances of wishful thinking if not downright cheating. But
I sense that our guys have become so caught up in the process of
making the Rules work exquisitely and precisely that they've lost
sight of what's happening. It's more difficult every year--even for
me, and I've been flying Nationals since 1976--to stay up with the
Rules; I'm thinking seriously of bringing my own copy of WinScore to
each contest this year and entering the logs every day because it's
the only way to see if any scoring errors occur (and there are LOTS of
opportunities for that), and that presumes the software is 100%
reliable.

And it's not; it's more difficult each year for WinScore to keep pace.
There's evidence that there may have been at least one bug in WinScore
in 2008 that affected the results on multiple days, and rules in this
area have changed yet again. I work in the IT/software industry and
seeing so many changes going into a small-market application that
cannot possibly be tested thoroughly each time makes me certain that
this is not the first time this has happened.

It looks like I'll have to fork over $1000 this spring for another IGC-
approved flight recorder. Fairly soon I expect I'll have to pay up for
more software or a ClearNav to depict the likely start cylinder
configuration. Etc.

The ship is sinking. The 18M Class is booming...for that tiny handful
of pilots who can afford to pay well into six figures for a new glider
or motorglider. Overall, however, contest flying is shrinking. Let's
shift our focus away from making it 100% certain that no one can cheat
no matter how much time and money they're willing to spend and
designing "perfect" Rules and think about how to make competitive
soaring just a little more accessible and affordable for those several
hundred pilots in this country who already fly the contests and the
several hundred more who, if they showed up, would evidence a 50%
growth rate!!!

My apologies to the Rules Committee. They've been very receptive to my
suggestions and requests over the years and especially the past two
years. Perhaps it's not their fault. Maybe what we need is a new
charter for them.

Constructively submitted,
Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
USA

Well Put Chip. Maybe the rules committee should consider going to a
large, commercially viable scoring program like SeeYou and bring our
rules into line with what the rest of the world does (mostly)? The
micromanagement of the rules for the best economic effect has been my
concern for years now. Maybe we should start thinking "big picture"
for macro effects like increased participation rather than managing a
thousand micro effects to perfect our current system.

Tim McAllister EY

On Jan 23, 9:51*am, Chip Bearden wrote:
On Jan 21, 4:32 pm, P1 wrote:

In 2008 there we

354 pilots who flew at least one contest day at a sanctioned
contest. (In 2004 there were 408).

As usual, we're happily engaged in an AT vs. TAT brawl and completely
missing what, to me, is the most jarring statistic: U.S. contest
participation is down almost 14% in the past four years (.3.5%
compound rate). Now before we start arguing about whether this is a
statistically valid comparison [e.g., I don't know whether 2008 was
depressed because of the economy or 2004 was artificially high (THAT'S
depressing, at only 400 pilots) or what], I think we can all stipulate
that contest participation is not growing by leaps and bounds.

Money is certainly a factor. Again, I won't jump into the Sports vs.
Club vs. Std/15M/18M Class wars but it's more expensive, lots, to buy
a new glider. I bought my last one in 1992 and it will probably be my
last one. But I'm still flying and it's still competitive and the cost
of a contest hasn't gone out of sight, at least compared with a week
in DisneyWorld, so what's the problem?

There are probably many reasons. But the one I'm focusing on here is
the philosophical bent, so to speak, of the Rules Committee. Now this
is not a rant against these guys. I know and respect them all and, in
fact, we've had a lot of discussions about a couple of suggestions I
and others had last year and they've been willing to work with me on
it. But I still sense that when push comes to shove, their #1 and
maybe only priority is to insure the highest level of competition
through the legislative rules process. The impact this last time, in
my opinion, was (1) rules that were even more complex than before
(e.g., the new start cylinder "trust us, you can't tell where the arc
is before you start but it won't matter anyway") and (2) equipment
requirements that are more rigorous and expensive (i.e., the absolute
requirement, now, for two IGC-approved flight recorders rather than
one plus a cheap commercial off-the-shelf backup, as I have been
using ).

I can argue both sides. Rules are important (I've had a hand in
drafting several myself over the years). And I'm not in favor of using
the honor system even at a regionals, much less a nationals. I've seen
too many instances of wishful thinking if not downright cheating. But
I sense that our guys have become so caught up in the process of
making the Rules work exquisitely and precisely that they've lost
sight of what's happening. It's more difficult every year--even for
me, and I've been flying Nationals since 1976--to stay up with the
Rules; I'm thinking seriously of bringing my own copy of WinScore to
each contest this year and entering the logs every day because it's
the only way to see if any scoring errors occur (and there are LOTS of
opportunities for that), and that presumes the software is 100%
reliable.

And it's not; it's more difficult each year for WinScore to keep pace.
There's evidence that there may have been at least one bug in WinScore
in 2008 that affected the results on multiple days, and rules in this
area have changed yet again. I work in the IT/software industry and
seeing so many changes going into a small-market application that
cannot possibly be tested thoroughly each time makes me certain that
this is not the first time this has happened.

It looks like I'll have to fork over $1000 this spring for another IGC-
approved flight recorder. Fairly soon I expect I'll have to pay up for
more software or a ClearNav to depict the likely start cylinder
configuration. Etc.

The ship is sinking. The 18M Class is booming...for that tiny handful
of pilots who can afford to pay well into six figures for a new glider
or motorglider. Overall, however, contest flying is shrinking. Let's
shift our focus away from making it 100% certain that no one can cheat
no matter how much time and money they're willing to spend and
designing "perfect" Rules and think about how to make competitive
soaring just a little more accessible and affordable for those several
hundred pilots in this country who already fly the contests and the
several hundred more who, if they showed up, would evidence a 50%
growth rate!!!

My apologies to the Rules Committee. They've been very receptive to my
suggestions and requests over the years and especially the past two
years. Perhaps it's not their fault. Maybe what we need is a new
charter for them.

Constructively submitted,
Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
USA

I think that the decline in contest flying has NOTHING to do with the
racing rules ! And no tinkering or restraint from tinkering will
change that decline.

It is simply mirroring the decline of soaring in general.

Todd Smith
3S

On Jan 23, 1:46*pm, toad wrote:
I think that the decline in contest flying has NOTHING to do with the
racing rules ! *And no tinkering or restraint from tinkering will
change that decline.

It is simply mirroring the decline of soaring in general.

Todd Smith
3S

You may be right, although my impression is that neither soaring in
general nor the SSA membership specifically has suffered a 14%+
decline in the past four years.

I'm reminded of an SSA director some years ago--a highly successful
and widely respected ex-military pilot with a slew of competition wins
and national/international records and awards to his credit, and a
genuinely great guy in every respect--who, at one board meeting I
attended, made an impassioned speech as to why SSA should oppose a new
fee levied by the NAA to process record claims. In his view, the extra
$50 fee (from memory) would discourage pilots from flying and filing
for records. Yet this same director argued just as passionately later
in the same board meeting that requiring pilots to purchase an IGC-
specific flight recorder to participate in national contests for well
in excess of $1,000 [this was about the time that flight recorders
were made mandatory over cameras] would have zero effect on
participation.

People believe what they want to believe. Including me. I'm sure the
economists on the Rules Committee would agree that the demand for
soaring competitions is not totally inelastic and that raising the
price of admission does have some effect. Measuring that effect in the
short term is difficult if not impossible. But here we have data over
four years that say, I think, that contest participation is declining
faster than is membership. If those fewer pilots are flying more
contests each, on average, we wouldn't see that trend emerge for a
while except in data such as were provided in P1's original posting.

I don't have the answers. I do think it's difficult to argue that
making it more difficult to understand and more expensive to
participate has NO effect on contest participation. The size of that
effect compared to the effects caused by other factors such as the
general economy, the stagnant-to-declining soaring activity in
general, etc., is certainly open to thoughtful and fact-based debate,
which I encourage.

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
USA

On Jan 23, 10:51*am, Chip Bearden wrote:
On Jan 21, 4:32 pm, P1 wrote:

In 2008 there we

354 pilots who flew at least one contest day at a sanctioned
contest. (In 2004 there were 408).

As usual, we're happily engaged in an AT vs. TAT brawl and completely
missing what, to me, is the most jarring statistic: U.S. contest
participation is down almost 14% in the past four years (.3.5%
compound rate). Now before we start arguing about whether this is a
statistically valid comparison [e.g., I don't know whether 2008 was
depressed because of the economy or 2004 was artificially high (THAT'S
depressing, at only 400 pilots) or what], I think we can all stipulate
that contest participation is not growing by leaps and bounds.

Money is certainly a factor. Again, I won't jump into the Sports vs.
Club vs. Std/15M/18M Class wars but it's more expensive, lots, to buy
a new glider. I bought my last one in 1992 and it will probably be my
last one. But I'm still flying and it's still competitive and the cost
of a contest hasn't gone out of sight, at least compared with a week
in DisneyWorld, so what's the problem?

There are probably many reasons. But the one I'm focusing on here is
the philosophical bent, so to speak, of the Rules Committee. Now this
is not a rant against these guys. I know and respect them all and, in
fact, we've had a lot of discussions about a couple of suggestions I
and others had last year and they've been willing to work with me on
it. But I still sense that when push comes to shove, their #1 and
maybe only priority is to insure the highest level of competition
through the legislative rules process. The impact this last time, in
my opinion, was (1) rules that were even more complex than before
(e.g., the new start cylinder "trust us, you can't tell where the arc
is before you start but it won't matter anyway") and (2) equipment
requirements that are more rigorous and expensive (i.e., the absolute
requirement, now, for two IGC-approved flight recorders rather than
one plus a cheap commercial off-the-shelf backup, as I have been
using ).

I can argue both sides. Rules are important (I've had a hand in
drafting several myself over the years). And I'm not in favor of using
the honor system even at a regionals, much less a nationals. I've seen
too many instances of wishful thinking if not downright cheating. But
I sense that our guys have become so caught up in the process of
making the Rules work exquisitely and precisely that they've lost
sight of what's happening. It's more difficult every year--even for
me, and I've been flying Nationals since 1976--to stay up with the
Rules; I'm thinking seriously of bringing my own copy of WinScore to
each contest this year and entering the logs every day because it's
the only way to see if any scoring errors occur (and there are LOTS of
opportunities for that), and that presumes the software is 100%
reliable.

And it's not; it's more difficult each year for WinScore to keep pace.
There's evidence that there may have been at least one bug in WinScore
in 2008 that affected the results on multiple days, and rules in this
area have changed yet again. I work in the IT/software industry and
seeing so many changes going into a small-market application that
cannot possibly be tested thoroughly each time makes me certain that
this is not the first time this has happened.

It looks like I'll have to fork over $1000 this spring for another IGC-
approved flight recorder. Fairly soon I expect I'll have to pay up for
more software or a ClearNav to depict the likely start cylinder
configuration. Etc.

The ship is sinking. The 18M Class is booming...for that tiny handful
of pilots who can afford to pay well into six figures for a new glider
or motorglider. Overall, however, contest flying is shrinking. Let's
shift our focus away from making it 100% certain that no one can cheat
no matter how much time and money they're willing to spend and
designing "perfect" Rules and think about how to make competitive
soaring just a little more accessible and affordable for those several
hundred pilots in this country who already fly the contests and the
several hundred more who, if they showed up, would evidence a 50%
growth rate!!!

My apologies to the Rules Committee. They've been very receptive to my
suggestions and requests over the years and especially the past two
years. Perhaps it's not their fault. Maybe what we need is a new
charter for them.

Constructively submitted,
Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
USA

You have apparently not read the rules changes submitted , and
approved ths morning. The addendum does permit COTS loggers, with
some limitations, for backup in National as well as a variety of lower
cost options for use in Regionals.
The more rigorous requirement you allude to would only apply in a case
of trying to make the US Team.
The impression you leave is that the RC is not responsive to your
suggestions on this topic. In fact, a great deal of time has been
spent on this while trying to find a reasonable balance between cost
to individuals and fairness to all.
You got your way, though maybe not 100% and you're still bitching.
Our guiding principles put safety first, fairness close behind, and
how any change affects participation right at the top of our list.
If you think we need a new charter- feel free to propose it with
concrete examples of how you would propose to accomplish such a
charter.
Sent as an individual member of the RC.
UH

wrote:
On Jan 23, 1:46 pm, toad wrote:
I think that the decline in contest flying has NOTHING to do with the
racing rules ! And no tinkering or restraint from tinkering will
change that decline.

It is simply mirroring the decline of soaring in general.

Todd Smith
3S

You may be right, although my impression is that neither soaring in
general nor the SSA membership specifically has suffered a 14%+
decline in the past four years.

snip

Here's some slightly different stats over previous years. The US
Competition Pilot Ranking list. Including some way back, pre-GPS, early
sports class years I found in my files. It gives the total number of
pilots that scored in an SSA sanctioned over the previous 3 years.
Smooths out some of the outlying good and bad years.

1990 - 620
1992 - 630
1995 - 550
2001 - 501
2002 - 551
2003 - 619*
2004 - 636
2005 - 636
2006 - 590
2007 - 592
2008 - 594

* The online list shows 900, hand removing obvious duplicates gives 619

Looks to me like the 20 year trend is remarkably flat. Bigger percentage
of SSA members today, but maybe not a different percentage of total
active glider pilots.

I'm sure the stats could be cooked to support any position you like. But
the sport has changed a lot since 1990. Went from suicide dive start
gate to GPS start circle. Turnpoint cameras to 1 mile GPS turn anywhere
turnpoints. From sports class scratch distance tasks, mostly assigned
tasks with a few PSTs to almost all min time TAT, rare MAT and AT. From
don't ask don't tell airspace limits to GPS checked 1000 pt penalties
for almost busting airspace limits. From carefully prepared then wadded
up in the cockpit sectionals, whiz wheel glide computers and damned
compasses to computer moving map glide computers. From no lower limit
finish gates to finish cylinders, safety finishes, and the rare 50 ft
min finish lines. The participants have changed with time, but
participation numbers have not.

I don't have the stats, but from my personal view, numbers of safety
incidents have also changed very little. Its still a pretty dangerous
sport. Stay down the middle and the risk is reasonable. But the edges
are sharp and the temptation to play close to the edges is real.

I still enjoy contests. Maybe the trade offs behind all the changes are
worth it. They all, or most of them, made sense at the time. Maybe my
memory of how it was 25 years ago is flawed as I started young. But I
feel some of the essence has been lost in the quest.

-Dave
ZL

I am not a competition pilot and probably have no right to enter this
discussion. I opted out of competition years ago after reading a letter
in Soaring from Paul Bickle. He observed that if one wants to compete
seriously one must realize that the glider is expendable. For me, that
would mean treating my relatively meager resources foolishly (my glider
and my neck).

Of course one can fly hors de concourse and have some fun, but is that
really competing, or just getting in the way? The following paragraph is
a quote from below.

"Its still a pretty dangerous sport. Stay down [in] the middle and the
risk is reasonable. But the edges are sharp and the temptation to play
close to the edges is real."





At 21:28 23 January 2009, ZL wrote:
wrote:
On Jan 23, 1:46 pm, toad wrote:
I think that the decline in contest flying has NOTHING to do with the
racing rules ! And no tinkering or restraint from tinkering will
change that decline.

It is simply mirroring the decline of soaring in general.

Todd Smith
3S

You may be right, although my impression is that neither soaring in
general nor the SSA membership specifically has suffered a 14%+
decline in the past four years.



Here's some slightly different stats over previous years. The US
Competition Pilot Ranking list. Including some way back, pre-GPS, early
sports class years I found in my files. It gives the total number of
pilots that scored in an SSA sanctioned over the previous 3 years.
Smooths out some of the outlying good and bad years.

1990 - 620
1992 - 630
1995 - 550
2001 - 501
2002 - 551
2003 - 619*
2004 - 636
2005 - 636
2006 - 590
2007 - 592
2008 - 594

* The online list shows 900, hand removing obvious duplicates gives 619

Looks to me like the 20 year trend is remarkably flat. Bigger percentage

of SSA members today, but maybe not a different percentage of total
active glider pilots.

I'm sure the stats could be cooked to support any position you like. But

the sport has changed a lot since 1990. Went from suicide dive start
gate to GPS start circle. Turnpoint cameras to 1 mile GPS turn anywhere
turnpoints. From sports class scratch distance tasks, mostly assigned
tasks with a few PSTs to almost all min time TAT, rare MAT and AT. From
don't ask don't tell airspace limits to GPS checked 1000 pt penalties
for almost busting airspace limits. From carefully prepared then wadded
up in the cockpit sectionals, whiz wheel glide computers and damned
compasses to computer moving map glide computers. From no lower limit
finish gates to finish cylinders, safety finishes, and the rare 50 ft
min finish lines. The participants have changed with time, but
participation numbers have not.

I don't have the stats, but from my personal view, numbers of safety
incidents have also changed very little. Its still a pretty dangerous
sport. Stay down the middle and the risk is reasonable. But the edges
are sharp and the temptation to play close to the edges is real.

I still enjoy contests. Maybe the trade offs behind all the changes are
worth it. They all, or most of them, made sense at the time. Maybe my
memory of how it was 25 years ago is flawed as I started young. But I
feel some of the essence has been lost in the quest.

-Dave
ZL

Some comments re the apparent decline in "Contest" flying :

Our club ( Central Indiana Soaring Society ) runs a year long contest
each season using rules based on a similar contest system run by the
Chicago Glider Club . No less than Seventeen
( 17 ) contest days were flown in 2008 . Of the Fifteen (15 ) pilots
that participated only 4 have flown sanctioned contests in the US
previously, and only one ( ZA ) still flies them each year .
Obviously no one is presently looking to make the US teams but all
enjoy " contest " flying, and it seems that within our club contest
flying is alive and well . In my opinion a number of these pilots
could do well in Regional contests .
If feedback is sought, perhaps someone ought to ask the folks in
Chicago and other clubs like ours why the pilots are happy to fly
contests "at home " but not at SSA sanctioned events .
The accent in our club is on keeping it very simple , and obviously
it's very inexpensive . A recorder is needed ( any kind that can be
downloaded ) and all gliders are scored using the SSA published
handicaps. I think these are some of the main factors that attract
the contestants.
While not all the participants seek to make the "big times" in soaring
I am convinced that every one of them have greatly improved their
flying skills learned from participating in the club contest and would
actually do quite well in Regional Contests , if they could be
attracted to enter .

Ron (ZA)

On Jan 23, 3:16*pm, " wrote:
Some comments re the apparent decline in *"Contest" *flying :

*Our club ( Central Indiana Soaring Society ) runs a year long contest
each season using rules based on a similar contest system run by the
Chicago Glider Club . No less than Seventeen
( 17 ) contest days were flown in 2008 . Of the Fifteen (15 ) *pilots
that participated only 4 have flown sanctioned contests in the US
previously, and only one ( ZA ) still flies them each year .
Obviously no one is presently looking to make the US teams but all
enjoy " contest " flying, and it seems that within our club contest
flying is alive and well . In my opinion a number of these pilots
could do well in Regional contests .
If *feedback is sought, perhaps someone ought to ask the folks in
Chicago and other clubs like ours why the pilots are happy to fly
contests *"at home " *but not at SSA *sanctioned events .
The accent in our club is on keeping it very simple , and obviously
it's very inexpensive . A recorder is needed ( any kind that can be
downloaded ) and all gliders are scored using the SSA published
handicaps. *I think these are some of the main factors that attract
the contestants.
While not all the participants seek to make the "big times" in soaring
I am convinced that every one of them have greatly improved their
flying skills learned from participating in the club contest and would
actually do quite well in *Regional Contests , if they could be
attracted to enter .

Ron (ZA)

Perhaps there may be a few more like me out there.

Back when I was in hang gliding (for 23 years), competition and record
setting were big deals for me, and I have some fond memories of the
experiences, and a few unsettling ones, and a number of awards and
records to look back on. I find it interesting that, now that I have
changed over to soaring (in 1996), all of my interest in competing has
disappeared. I have over 1500 hours in soaring, flights longer than
8 hours, flights over 500 miles, and have yet to even go for a bronze
badge. I do go to local competitions, and fly as a sniffer. So, I’m
out there, and have a good time, but am not one to be found on any SSA
contest list. There may well be a number of soaring pilots who look
down on me for my way. If so, so be it.

In hang gliding I lost a lot of friends to accidents… same in
soaring, including my two best friends in soaring (both on competition
flights). Perhaps age, or experience, or family needs, or Bruno
Gantenbrink (http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/safety-comes-first-e.html),
or all the above, have had an impact on me.

I thoroughly love X-C soaring. But, the beauty and thrill often
detour me, and I slow up to look at things, spend a little more time
in a thermal with a Red Tail, smell the roses, take photos. When I’m
out on course with the racers, and they push on low and over tiger
territory, I slow down, take light thermals, put my 80 ft /min sink
rate / 50:1 glide to work. I remember pushing the envelope and
winning in hang gliding… and a few times getting into situations where
luck came in handy so I can still be here to talk about it now.

Competition numbers, as well as overall pilot numbers in both hang
gliding and soaring seem static at best, and more likely tapering off
somewhat. Cost and family needs are certainly factors in each. Where
the contest experience has potential for stupendous rewards, such as
Region 9 – Parowan, there is certainly no lack of interest, or numbers
of contest entries. Perhaps a greater number of contests with such
potential rewards might increase participation numbers.

Like everything in life, if you want to really excel in anything, you
need to put a lot of time and money into it. As I used to tell my
students, yagottawannadoit! And, there are a lot of folks who are
very interested, but not willing to invest as much in the potential
trade-offs (time, money, safety, whatever). As I said at the start,
perhaps there may be a few more like me out there who may be affecting
the competition numbers. Regardless, for those who are very into
competition, go for it.

One last comment… When I was on the USHGA Board of Directors I
remember well all the haggling and arguing every year about
competition rules. Lots of intense feelings, lots of well intended
comments, and volunteers willing to take it all in and help the
organization and contests continue. I seems soaring has the same
involvements… and somehow, contests always seem to take place every
year.

Bob T.

On Jan 23, 6:29*pm, wrote:
On Jan 23, 3:16*pm, " wrote:





Some comments re the apparent decline in *"Contest" *flying :

*Our club ( Central Indiana Soaring Society ) runs a year long contest
each season using rules based on a similar contest system run by the
Chicago Glider Club . No less than Seventeen
( 17 ) contest days were flown in 2008 . Of the Fifteen (15 ) *pilots
that participated only 4 have flown sanctioned contests in the US
previously, and only one ( ZA ) still flies them each year .
Obviously no one is presently looking to make the US teams but all
enjoy " contest " flying, and it seems that within our club contest
flying is alive and well . In my opinion a number of these pilots
could do well in Regional contests .
If *feedback is sought, perhaps someone ought to ask the folks in
Chicago and other clubs like ours why the pilots are happy to fly
contests *"at home " *but not at SSA *sanctioned events .
The accent in our club is on keeping it very simple , and obviously
it's very inexpensive . A recorder is needed ( any kind that can be
downloaded ) and all gliders are scored using the SSA published
handicaps. *I think these are some of the main factors that attract
the contestants.
While not all the participants seek to make the "big times" in soaring
I am convinced that every one of them have greatly improved their
flying skills learned from participating in the club contest and would
actually do quite well in *Regional Contests , if they could be
attracted to enter .

Ron (ZA)

Perhaps there may be a few more like me out there.

Back when I was in hang gliding (for 23 years), competition and record
setting were big deals for me, and I have some fond memories of the
experiences, and a few unsettling ones, and a number of awards and
records to look back on. * I find it interesting that, now that I have
changed over to soaring (in 1996), all of my interest in competing has
disappeared. * I have over 1500 hours in soaring, flights longer than
8 hours, flights over 500 miles, and have yet to even go for a bronze
badge. *I do go to local competitions, and fly as a sniffer. *So, I’m
out there, and have a good time, but am not one to be found on any SSA
contest list. *There may well be a number of soaring pilots who look
down on me for my way. *If so, so be it.

In hang gliding I lost a lot of friends to accidents… *same in
soaring, including my two best friends in soaring (both on competition
flights). *Perhaps age, or experience, or family needs, or Bruno
Gantenbrink (http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/safety-comes-first-e.html),
or all the above, have had an impact on me.

I thoroughly love X-C soaring. *But, the beauty and thrill often
detour me, and I slow up to look at things, spend a little more time
in a thermal with a Red Tail, smell the roses, take photos. * When I’m
out on course with the racers, and they push on low and over tiger
territory, I slow down, take light thermals, put my 80 ft /min sink
rate / 50:1 glide to work. *I remember pushing the envelope and
winning in hang gliding… and a few times getting into situations where
luck came in handy so I can still be here to talk about it now.

Competition numbers, as well as overall pilot numbers in both hang
gliding and soaring seem static at best, and more likely tapering off
somewhat. *Cost and family needs are certainly factors in each. *Where
the contest experience has potential for stupendous rewards, such as
Region 9 – Parowan, there is certainly no lack of interest, or numbers
of contest entries. *Perhaps a greater number of contests with such
potential rewards might increase participation numbers.

Like everything in life, if you want to really excel in anything, you
need to put a lot of time and money into it. * As I used to tell my
students, yagottawannadoit! *And, there are a lot of folks who are
very interested, but not willing to invest as much in the potential
trade-offs (time, money, safety, whatever). *As I said at the start,
perhaps there may be a few more like me out there who may be affecting
the competition numbers. *Regardless, for those who are very into
competition, go for it.

One last comment… When I was on the USHGA Board of Directors I
remember well all the haggling and arguing every year about
competition rules. *Lots of intense feelings, lots of well intended
comments, and volunteers willing to take it all in and help the
organization and contests continue. *I seems soaring has the same
involvements… and somehow, contests always seem to take place every
year.

Bob T.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I flew numerous contests from 1965 to 1978. Then for 21 years I did
not fly gliders. For the past years I have flown numerous contests.
A few observations from this experience.

Life is more fun when you are flying and looking forward to soaring
contests.

In the USA and Australia the FAI classes seem to be declining. The
FAI classes are almost devoid of new pilots. The gliders are first
class and the pilots are very good or are very good followers.

The hanicapped contests attract more contestants and the pilots vary
more in experience. I personally had more fun at the hanicapped
contests.

The USA system of letting gliders from 1-26s to 22 meter open class
gliders fly the same task and compete on the same score sheet does
not really work very well. As time goes by less and less gliders of
lower performance show up at hanicapped contests. Maybe we should
break the hanicapped contests into three divisions?

In the 1970's most of the tasks were assigned speed tasks. Speeds
were posted on chalk board and you knew how you did before finishing
the first beer. Flying an assigned task that you could FINISH was
always fun to me. Trying to stay out for three hours with the help of
your computer never feels like a race to me. Devalued days - yuck.
Complex computer scoring - Yuck.

With all that said, I would like to thank those who work on the rules
and organize the contests. Regardless of the rules of the game I
appreciate those who make soaring contests possible and I am thankful
you let me play.

Bill Snead