2009 Proposed US Contest Rules Changes

On Jan 8, 11:20*am, MarkHawke7 wrote:
You really think it sounds better? *From the sound of it, about the
only way to know for sure that you get a good start is going to be IF
the PDA software developers (I'm one of them) make some fairly MAJOR
enhancements to their software to depict this arc on the start
cylinder for you to see.

That's not true. The discussion is about getting "full credit" for
distance flown, not about whether or not you get a valid start.

On Jan 8, 11:08*am, Andy wrote:
On Jan 8, 8:45*am, wrote:

Even in the worst case presented, the new rule is still a significant
improvement.

Sorry, I don't agree.

If the intent of the rule change is to prevent starts from the back
half there are better ways to do it.

The rule should define the "front half" as the semicircle of the start
cylinder that has its diameter normal to the line between the start
point and the first turn point. *A valid start would only be given for
an exit from the front half.

The valid start area is then fixed for all contestants regardless of
where they turn in the first area. *This valid start area is easily
visualized by the contestant without needing any special computer
software.

Andy

Yes, I do think it's an improvement. Your version is even better in
its simplicity.

I've never seen anyone start from the back of the circle, either,
though I've only flown a couple of regionals since start anywhere was
adopted. However I can think of a few contest numbers that I would
expect to see trying this, sooner or later. I'd rather *not* fly this
way myself, but probably *would* if it was necessary to be
competitive. I rather we had a rule that took away any incentive to
do this.

-T8

On Jan 8, 9:26*am, MarkHawke7 wrote:
Yes, that seems to make more sense. *But just to be explicit, you mean
the line between the center of the start cylinder and the center of
the first turnpoint, right?

Yes.

Andy

On Jan 8, 11:39*am, wrote:

To the extent that a rule affects pilot actual decision-making it's
not a strawman issue.

True enough.

However... I just don't see a) a CD calling an AAT that looks like
Frosty the Snowman and b) the day some CD *does*, I don't see the
pilot who manages to fly into the "penalty" scenario doing extremely
well but for losing a mile or so of distance. In that sense, it looks
like a strawman to me. As Mr. Eastwood once pointed out, everyone's
got an opinion :-).

On typical AATs, say a 40SM center to center first leg and 5SM turn
radius the risk of losing distance points is very small.

But I'd be okay with Andy's proposal too, unless there's some
unintended consequence that isn't immediately obvious. For "normal"
AATs, there's no difference to speak of.

And if it's point spread your after... c'mon out East :-). Doesn't
always feel like racing, but I always learn a few things.

-T8

On Jan 8, 9:57*am, wrote:
On Jan 8, 11:08*am, Andy wrote:





On Jan 8, 8:45*am, wrote:

Even in the worst case presented, the new rule is still a significant
improvement.

Sorry, I don't agree.

If the intent of the rule change is to prevent starts from the back
half there are better ways to do it.

The rule should define the "front half" as the semicircle of the start
cylinder that has its diameter normal to the line between the start
point and the first turn point. *A valid start would only be given for
an exit from the front half.

The valid start area is then fixed for all contestants regardless of
where they turn in the first area. *This valid start area is easily
visualized by the contestant without needing any special computer
software.

Andy

Yes, I do think it's an improvement. *Your version is even better in
its simplicity.

I've never seen anyone start from the back of the circle, either,
though I've only flown a couple of regionals since start anywhere was
adopted. *However I can think of a few contest numbers that I would
expect to see trying this, sooner or later. *I'd rather *not* fly this
way myself, but probably *would* if it was necessary to be
competitive. *I rather we had a rule that took away any incentive to
do this.

-T8

Evan,

I'm not sure what you mean by "rather *not* fly this way". Is this in
reference to starting near the back of the cylinder or something else?

I have flown at several sites that I could easily see starting near
the back of the cylinder. I nearly did it a few years ago even with
the 10 mile penalty back then because I could climb 7,000 feet higher
near the back than the front at Air Sailing when we had tasks to the
south.

At Parowan, Minden Logan, and Air Sailing depending on the start
cylinder and the location of the first turn point, there can be a
great reason to go to the back of the cylinder and climb on the higher
ground.

The proposed rules seems to add nothing but confusion and complexity
to a very simple idea. Start anywhere in the cylinder or out the top.
Score the distance from the startpoint to the turnpoint.

The start anywhere is a vast improvement over the old system. At
Uvalde with the top of the cylinder above cloud base you had one or
two thermals on the closest edge of the cylinder with pilots pushing
into the wisps and the usual gaggle compression at the top. I will
take Start Anywhere over that anytime.

TT

On Jan 8, 10:07*am, Andy wrote:
On Jan 8, 9:26*am, MarkHawke7 wrote:

Yes, that seems to make more sense. *But just to be explicit, you mean
the line between the center of the start cylinder and the center of
the first turnpoint, right?

Yes.

I had to go back and check the rules to see if I had used incorrect or
ambiguous terminology in my proposed rule. I don't think I did.

10.3.2.3 Turn Area Task (TAT) - Speed over a course through one or
more turn areas, with a finish
at the contest site.
10.3.2.3.1 Turn areas are turnpoints with a designated radius defining
a cylinder.
10.3.2.3.2 The CD shall designate a minimum flight time, a sequence of
one or more turnpoints
and a radius for each which shall be an integral number of miles not
greater than 30.

10.8.6 The distance of the first task leg shall be taken as the
distance from the Start Point to the
control fix at the first turnpoint, minus the Start Radius. (2008
rule)

The turnpoint is defined by the CD. The optimized point that defines
the start each pilot's second task leg is a control fix.

It was all a lot easier to understand when we just took photos.

Andy

On Jan 8, 10:17*am, wrote:

On typical AATs, say a 40SM center to center first leg and 5SM turn
radius the risk of losing distance points is very small.

For sports class tasks which have to cater for a huge range of
sailplane handicap it is not unreasonable to set a task with large
first turn area and a minimum first leg distance, particularly if the
conditions are unpredictable.

Andy

On Jan 8, 12:22*pm, Tim Taylor wrote:
On Jan 8, 9:57*am, wrote:



On Jan 8, 11:08*am, Andy wrote:

On Jan 8, 8:45*am, wrote:

Even in the worst case presented, the new rule is still a significant
improvement.

Sorry, I don't agree.

If the intent of the rule change is to prevent starts from the back
half there are better ways to do it.

The rule should define the "front half" as the semicircle of the start
cylinder that has its diameter normal to the line between the start
point and the first turn point. *A valid start would only be given for
an exit from the front half.

The valid start area is then fixed for all contestants regardless of
where they turn in the first area. *This valid start area is easily
visualized by the contestant without needing any special computer
software.

Andy

Yes, I do think it's an improvement. *Your version is even better in
its simplicity.

I've never seen anyone start from the back of the circle, either,
though I've only flown a couple of regionals since start anywhere was
adopted. *However I can think of a few contest numbers that I would
expect to see trying this, sooner or later. *I'd rather *not* fly this
way myself, but probably *would* if it was necessary to be
competitive. *I rather we had a rule that took away any incentive to
do this.

-T8

Evan,

I'm not sure what you mean by "rather *not* fly this way". *Is this in
reference to starting near the back of the cylinder or something else?

I have flown at several sites that I could easily see starting near
the back of the cylinder. *I nearly did it a few years ago even with
the 10 mile penalty back then because I could climb 7,000 feet higher
near the back than the front at Air Sailing when we had tasks to the
south.

At Parowan, Minden Logan, and Air Sailing depending on the start
cylinder and the location of the first turn point, there can be a
great reason to go to the back of the cylinder and climb on the higher
ground.

The proposed rules seems to add nothing but confusion and complexity
to a very simple idea. Start anywhere in the cylinder or out the top.
Score the distance from the startpoint to the turnpoint.

The start anywhere is a vast improvement over the old system. *At
Uvalde with the top of the cylinder above cloud base you had one or
two thermals on the closest edge of the cylinder with pilots pushing
into the wisps and the usual gaggle compression at the top. *I will
take Start Anywhere over that anytime.

TT

Hi Tim,

Long time since Albert Lea, eh?

Starting through the top of the cylinder (and staying on top) doesn't
bother me a bit. I just never seem to get the opportunity to do it.
Both regionals I flew this year (R1, R4S) had gates with tops well
above cloud base and in one case the cloud bases were extremely
variable just to spice things up. In no case did I see anyone do
anything dumb or even remotely ungentlemanly in the gate. But at
times it did feel a bit crowded close to cloud, er, cloud clearance
minimums.

What I was referring to was the (so far, largely theoretical) practice
of starting at the back and then flying through the cylinder below max
altitude. The theory is that you'd make good time by using all the
pre-start gaggles. The proposed rule is an attempt to head off that
temptation before it becomes troublesome.

-T8

On Jan 8, 11:00*am, wrote:
On Jan 8, 12:22*pm, Tim Taylor wrote:





On Jan 8, 9:57*am, wrote:

On Jan 8, 11:08*am, Andy wrote:

On Jan 8, 8:45*am, wrote:

Even in the worst case presented, the new rule is still a significant
improvement.

Sorry, I don't agree.

If the intent of the rule change is to prevent starts from the back
half there are better ways to do it.

The rule should define the "front half" as the semicircle of the start
cylinder that has its diameter normal to the line between the start
point and the first turn point. *A valid start would only be given for
an exit from the front half.

The valid start area is then fixed for all contestants regardless of
where they turn in the first area. *This valid start area is easily
visualized by the contestant without needing any special computer
software.

Andy

Yes, I do think it's an improvement. *Your version is even better in
its simplicity.

I've never seen anyone start from the back of the circle, either,
though I've only flown a couple of regionals since start anywhere was
adopted. *However I can think of a few contest numbers that I would
expect to see trying this, sooner or later. *I'd rather *not* fly this
way myself, but probably *would* if it was necessary to be
competitive. *I rather we had a rule that took away any incentive to
do this.

-T8

Evan,

I'm not sure what you mean by "rather *not* fly this way". *Is this in
reference to starting near the back of the cylinder or something else?

I have flown at several sites that I could easily see starting near
the back of the cylinder. *I nearly did it a few years ago even with
the 10 mile penalty back then because I could climb 7,000 feet higher
near the back than the front at Air Sailing when we had tasks to the
south.

At Parowan, Minden Logan, and Air Sailing depending on the start
cylinder and the location of the first turn point, there can be a
great reason to go to the back of the cylinder and climb on the higher
ground.

The proposed rules seems to add nothing but confusion and complexity
to a very simple idea. Start anywhere in the cylinder or out the top.
Score the distance from the startpoint to the turnpoint.

The start anywhere is a vast improvement over the old system. *At
Uvalde with the top of the cylinder above cloud base you had one or
two thermals on the closest edge of the cylinder with pilots pushing
into the wisps and the usual gaggle compression at the top. *I will
take Start Anywhere over that anytime.

TT

Hi Tim,

Long time since Albert Lea, eh?

Starting through the top of the cylinder (and staying on top) doesn't
bother me a bit. *I just never seem to get the opportunity to do it.
Both regionals I flew this year (R1, R4S) had gates with tops well
above cloud base and in one case the cloud bases were extremely
variable just to spice things up. *In no case did I see anyone do
anything dumb or even remotely ungentlemanly in the gate. *But at
times it did feel a bit crowded close to cloud, er, cloud clearance
minimums.

What I was referring to was the (so far, largely theoretical) practice
of starting at the back and then flying through the cylinder below max
altitude. *The theory is that you'd make good time by using all the
pre-start gaggles. *The proposed rule is an attempt to head off that
temptation before it becomes troublesome.

-T8

Evan,

Thanks for the explanation. Yes, many years since Albert Lea, HP-18's
and Std Cirri. What you describe can still happen with the new rules
so I guess I don't see the point in trying to make the rule more
complex. I can climb up right at the center of the cylinder and dive
through the gaggle five miles ahead as long as I don't stay in the
cylinder longer than 2 minutes. Maybe we need to shorten that time to
1 minute so they are likely to get a new start time and make the whole
idea of hitting the front edge worthless.

I like the Start Anywhere because it uses real distance so I can go
over 80 degrees off course line between the center of the start
cylinder and the first turnpoint and start out the side. The
proposed change will have everyone starting in a very narrow range on
the front edge to ensure we get all the distance and we are all back
in the same gaggle again.

Hope you drag your ship out west and run some ridges with us in UT,

Tim (TT)

On Jan 8, 10:41*am, Tim Taylor wrote:
*What you describe can still happen with the new rules
so I guess I don't see the point in trying to make the rule more
complex. *I can climb up right at the center of the cylinder and dive
through the gaggle five miles ahead as long as I don't stay in the
cylinder longer than 2 minutes. *Maybe we need to shorten that time to
1 minute so they are likely to get a new start time and make the whole
idea of hitting the front edge worthless.


Good points Tim. It feels like an attempt to solve a problem that
doesn't happen much and in doing so negates some of the benefits of
the original rule change while only halfway meeting the objective of
making the "bump and run" strategy hard to pull off when it is an
option.

Andy's suggestion of a fixed front half should work - with the
understanding that under the worst case scenario a pilot could
technically line up a course line that ran for 10 miles along the
straight edge of the half-cylinder - just the way the angles work out.
Would it happen very often? Who the heck knows? It would be simpler to
understand.

The other possible approach would be to make the start cylinder
smaller (like 3 miles) - no software re-programming required. I like
the bigger cylinder, but it would be an easier experiment to run in
2009.

9B