SENIORS CONTEST

Disagree JJ. The exact same scenario is possible - even more likely in
the finish cylinder. One of the more recent weaknesses of the finish
line was introduced by GPS. The rules now state that the finish is
based on your trace and not whether or not you turned inside a physical
feature. To my mind, this is proof positive that our rules makers
aren't thinking their decisions through carefully, but are acting based
on technological possibility and ground crew convenience. I, for one,
don't check the panel for anything but airspeed once I've committed to
a gate finish. I can judge my altitude well enough, and I'm much more
interested in traffic than which way the nav arrow is pointing. Not the
case in the cylinder. I've flown through the latter enough now to know
I'm not comfortable with the amount of panel time I need to plan
execute my finish.

BTW, here's one of the hazards of flying empty. You are much more
visible with your comet tail in the finish gate/cylinder.

Gosh, as all the legends get older, this sport sure is getting prissy.
I'm all for safe... but sterile? ;-)

Gosh, as all the legends get older, this sport sure
is getting prissy.
I'm all for safe... but sterile? ;-)


I get tired of the low-finish proponents talking about
being braver, more skilled or less prissy.

If these things are so important to u....why not finish
every flight this way? I still manage to go to the
airport without being 'worried or scared' and fly without
doing the damn things.

U guys are coming dangerously close to appearing to
push a macho-man agenda to justify this manuever

"Stewart Kissel" wrote in
message ...


If these things are so important to u....why not finish
every flight this way?

Maybe it will scare you just thinking about it but we DO finish every flight
this way in Arizona! In fact on a day that none of us could get over tow
release height I saw one of my esteemed colleagues do a pass down the runway
at about 50 feet. He was having fun and we all enjoyed watching it since it
was pretty much the highlight of the day. It is nothing less than a
precision manuever and if it bothers you and you don't have the skills to
perform it then by no means are any of us pushing you to do it but please do
not criticize those of us that enjoy it and do it well.

Casey Lenox
KC
Phoenix

U and I are not going to agree on this...just give
the 'skills to do this' nonsense a rest.

What we choose to do is not linked to skills....

U wanna do this every flight...be my guest




At 02:30 18 March 2005, Kilo Charlie wrote:

'Stewart Kissel' wrote in
message ...


If these things are so important to u....why not finish
every flight this way?

Maybe it will scare you just thinking about it but
we DO finish every flight
this way in Arizona! In fact on a day that none of
us could get over tow
release height I saw one of my esteemed colleagues
do a pass down the runway
at about 50 feet. He was having fun and we all enjoyed
watching it since it
was pretty much the highlight of the day. It is nothing
less than a
precision manuever and if it bothers you and you don't
have the skills to
perform it then by no means are any of us pushing you
to do it but please do
not criticize those of us that enjoy it and do it well.

Casey Lenox
KC
Phoenix

"Stewart Kissel" wrote in
message .

What we choose to do is not linked to skills....


Maybe this explains some things..... ;-)

KC

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

At 02:30 18 March 2005, Kilo Charlie wrote:

'Stewart Kissel' wrote in
message ...


If these things are so important to u....why not finish
every flight this way?

Maybe it will scare you just thinking about it but
we DO finish every flight
this way in Arizona!

Yup, consistent with local conditions and safety considerations
- like anything you do in flying.

Maybe we should have contest tasks that are restricted
to gliding distance from the home field and only allow
one competitor on the course at a time - that would
help safety a lot.

:-)

9B

At 02:00 18 March 2005, Stewart Kissel wrote:
I get tired of the low-finish proponents talking about
being braver, more skilled or less prissy.

If these things are so important to u....why not finish
every flight this way? I still manage to go to the
airport without being 'worried or scared' and fly without
doing the damn things.

U guys are coming dangerously close to appearing to
push a macho-man agenda to justify this manuever


I agree - since this is about personal preference and
not safety, we should not ascribe wuss status to those
who prefer not fly a particular way, or macho status
to those who do. By the same token, it's equally unjust
to call something unsafe simply because it's not within
a particular individual's personal preference.

Everyone should fly within their personal comfort zone
- but we shouldn't legislate to the most restrictive
preference. If you don't like finishing below 1, 2
or 3,000', don't, but let's not write the rules that
way - otherwise someone will want us to ban cross-country
flying altogether.

9B

I disagree, Andy. Using your rational we could safely raise the nations
highway speed to 100. If you feel confident and know your abilities, go
ahead and drive 100. If not, don't do that. Problem is, not all us
incompetent folks know we're incompetent. Rules must be written to
protect the new / incompetent pilot. 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.
Think about that folks, one more liability suit and we might not be
able to find an insurance company to cover what we're doing. That would
solve this finish gate controversy, once and for all. No more contests!

Another troubling issue with me is our flirting with the FAR's. I can't
remember a site where I wasn't below 500 feet over people, places or
things as I made my dive through the finish line. Even at Hobbs, which
has got to be the most wide open place in the world, I was close to the
limit as I crossed the highway, finishing from the east, then I flew
over the golf course and over the tie-downs, before hitting the line at
50 feet. The feds don't enforce all the rules, they can't, but just
have an accident and watch the rule book come out.

Anybody want to talk about our pull-up being called acrobatic? "A
maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircrafts
attitude..................not neccesary for normal flight" Not to be
initiated below 1500 feet, how about 50 feet? and with spectators "open
air assembly of persons".

There is a better way,
JJ Sinclair

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