Proposed 2005 Rules On SRA Site

Reply comments inserted below by H Nixon SSA Contest Rules Committee
Chair.

Mark James Boyd wrote:
From the rule change summary, the mandatory installation of ELTs
in all gliders at all SSA competitions is considered a
"minor" change to the rules.

The Sailplane Racing Association, eh?

Reply:SRA is volunteer organization to promote and support sailplane
racing.
The most visible activity is archiving and publishingcontest related
items such as rules activity.

Not a terribly astute bunch of folks. Citing a
2003 accident that doesn't exist as their primary
justification for mandatory installed ELTs.
It seems pretty clear this issue didn't even recieve enough
attention or bother that anyone double checked the date
before putting out their "reasoning."

Reply: 2003 date was a typo and corrected- we'll try to do better in
the future.

And a closer look at the poll says:

Do you have a portable (user activated) ELT in your glider?

Followed by:

Should ELTs be made mandatory for all participants in all
SSA contests? 42% yes.

---Notice this DIDN'T say "installed" ELTs---

If yes, should ELTs be made mandatory in:
2005: 26%
2006: 22%

They certainly didn't agree with the 78% of the polled pilots
who thought ELTs should NOT be made mandatory in 2006.

Reply: with 42% favoring requirement for mandatory ELT's, it should be
obvious that dropping numbers related to future implementation time
indicate sooner rather than later is indicated. Fully expect you will
choose to interpret in your own way. I am explaining the RC
interpretation.
It should be noted also that the Pilot Poll is one input used in these
decisions. Contest organizer input as well as addional polling during
meetings at contests and direct communication with RC members all are
used in this decision making process.



From the ELT FAQ:
"80% of those present at the SRA meeting during the
Standard Class Nationals favored mandatory ELTs"

So two months after Peter Masak died, among those who
mourned him and were close to him, 80% favored mandatory ELTs.
Notice not a SINGLE person voted for mandatory glider
installed ELT. Just ELTs in general.

Reply: Question was not worded as specifically as you might have
wished. From the viewpoint of the RC ELT means impact activated device
equivalent to those installed in airplanes.

80% sounds a lot like 4 out of 5 SRA rules members to me.
Maybe these 4 already have installed ELTs and would prefer
less competition?

Reply: 5 of 5 agreed on this. There is no motivation on the part of
this group to try to knock out the little guys. We expect to beat them
with skills, not tricks. Any action that has the potential to reduce
participation is seriously considered. Lack of action that could result
in some contest organizers deciding not to continue to run contests is
also a consideration.

And they seem to have been very creative while interpreting the
poll to mean those who DID want mandatory ELTs meant that they
wanted the kind that require installation in the glider
instead of the portable kind.

Reply: No trickery is involved. The RC simply does not believe personal
mounted non impact devices meet the need. You obviously do not agree. I
can tell you that if a contesy organizer were to ask for a waiver after
this approved( and if it is approved inn Feb'06)that would permit
personal mounted devices for use in their contest, I'm confident that
the contest committee would consider such a waiver.

What do you call a committee that makes recommendations
which are directly against the desires of a strong majority
of competition pilots? I'd call them disconnected from
the desires of their constituents, at best. At worst,
I'm sure some of you have some more colorful ideas...

Reply: I respectfully submit that 42 to 56 does not constitute the
strong majority that you interpret. RC is connected to more inputs than
you may be aware.
As to the "colorful ideas" you project- insult noted and dismissed.

Who does this recommendation go to? Who do we contact to
have this recommendation sent back to the committee for
indefinite review, without implementation?

Reply: Take a few minutes and read the processes. In accordance with
the process for major, non emergency rule changes, this is being
announced as a future pending major change on year in advance. If it
required testing, this would be done in regionals or under waiver.
This rule will become a proposal for adoption by the SSA Board of
directors at the Feb '06 Board meeting.
By announcing this in advance, there is plenty of time for comment and
any revisions that may be appropriate.

How do we replace the committee members who supported this
rule? Is a 78% vote good enough to replace them after thanking them
for their service?

Reply: Feel free to ask your director to nominate a candidate you think
can serve the contest community well. The process for this is also
published. It should be noted that no member of the committee has ever
been voted in-or out on a single issue.

Hank Nixon SSA Contest Rules Committee Chair

--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd