Sean F2, Evan T8, HELP! Current finish cylinder rule!

On Friday, May 24, 2013 1:28:37 PM UTC-6, Tom Kelley #711 wrote:
Now, this is the current rule, please read it:



10.9.2 Finish Cylinder

10.9.2.1 A task shall include a Finish Point not more than 2 miles from the home field and a Finish Radius not greater than 2 miles.



10.9.2.2 ‡ Minimum Finish Height

10.9.2.2.1 ‡ Each task shall include a Minimum Finish Height (MFH), set by the CD at least high enough that pilots who obtain

a valid finish can return to the home airfield for a normal pattern and landing.





The rules committee and the SSA BOD has established this as a RULE. It now requires the CD to set "AT LEAST HIGH ENOUGH" that .......for a ""NORMAL PATTERN"" and landing.



Sean Fiddler F2, or anyone else, after reading the above, is this a RULE as it reads or is it meant to be guidance as John C. says it is? It sure doesn't say guidance anywhere as I read it, but its a requirement!



Tom Kelley #711.

Thanks Sean,

I think we all agree that we aren't trying to be "hard" on the rules committee or the SSA BOD, sometimes what a person reads and what was meant by the poster can be several different things. But discussion is good as it helps with possible confusion later on when its really not wanted or needed.

I also read this as a rule, if its meant to be guidance only, then let it state so. As I am the current CD of Region 9 Moriarty, we need to have a clear understanding of this rule. With 2 runways, ever changing weather and wind directions, requiring the CD to set a MFH for a pilot to enter a normal pattern and landing puts one in a very difficult position.

I firmly believe its the PIC who should be responsible for this decision, not the CD, to "ensure" the arriving finisher/pilot to be able to fly a normal pattern and landing. What a normal pattern is for a new Sports Class pilot versus a well seasoned 15 or 18 Meter National winner could be very different. We can't have different altitudes for each pilot finishing.

If its meant as guidance, as John C. states, then let the change be made to read that way in the first place. Possibly a slight wording mistake has caused it to be read differently than intended.

3rd party liability is a major concern when attorneys start to place blame when something goes wrong.

Tom Kelley #711.