A fair opportunity to compete?

(US) rule 11.1.1 states; A valid competition day is one in which every
regular entrant is given a fair opportunity to compete. What is the
definition of fair? I can tell you what I have used as CD in 3
nationals and several regionals over the last 35 years. The launch
should go without interuption. All contestants should be towed to 2000
feet in the designated release area. That's it, you are on your own
after release! There is no guarantee that you will find lift.

On day 3 at parowan this year, the launch went without delay and all
were released in the designated area at 2000 feet. Several pilots
didn't find lift and landed back. Some took re-lights and one landed
on the dry lake in the release area. About half the class found that
all important first thermal, the gate was opened 15 minutes after the
last scheduled launch and most completed the assigned task. Data
loggers were evaluated, scores computed and day 3 was a valid contest
day, right?

Not so fast! Two pilots protested that they hadn't been given a fair
opportunity to compete. The competition committee met and threw out
day 3. Their ruling may seem fair to the 2 protesters, but it was
unfair to the remaining 25 pilots in the class. The CD even went so
far as to state; If one of the protesters had found lift, he would
have come in 3rd for the day! Unbelievable! Just how he determined
that remains a mystery? There was one contestant who did place 3rd on
that day, but his performance was ignored. I tried to talk to the CD
with no response other than; You have the right to protest my ruling.

If my 3rd place had counted, I would have been 5th overall and 19
points out of 4th. I withdrew from the contest in disgust! What has
our competition come to? Are we all guaranteed lift? Who is to decide
if the actions taken by the pilot after release were the correct
ones? If you don't find lift, simply land back and file a protest!

I will turn 75 next month and Pat and I have been asking ourselves
just how much longer all this will be considered fun? In the words of
an old country song; That just about does it, Don't it?

Pat & JJ Sinclair

Charlie's report on the ssa website says it was the last three pilots
to launch who could not stay up, which seems a significant detail. If
the first to launch can find lift, get away from the airport, and wait
to start, but there really is zero lift in the airport area when the
back half of the grid launches, then the decision seems reasonable --
from this very far distance. I take it you don't think there really
was zero lift, and it was possible for the back half of the grid to
stay up off tow.

John Cochrane BB

I was the weather guy and sniffer at Parowan and was airborne
observing launch conditions. Storm development near the airport
resulted in deteriorating conditions in the drop zone and the latest
pilots to launch were under heavy overcast with no lift. As noted,
several landed out. They did not "fail to find lift" as JJ alleges,
there wasn't any.

I was not involved in discussions about this with the CD or
competition committee, but, if asked, would have given my assessment
that the last aircraft to launch did not have a fair opportunity to
compete based on deteriorating weather conditions in all available
drop zones.

I might add that quite a few of the competitors who completed the task
were not thrilled with the decision to scrap the day, but at least
they exhibited good sportsmanship by accepting the decision in good
grace.

Mike

Mike, We all take our turn at the end of the line, don't we? Did the
protesters take their turn in "good grace"? No, they protested a 1000
point day and won an unprecedented protest. To my knowledge this has
never happened before. I remember Big Charlie asking the last launcher
in nationals (Al Lefler), how he was doing? Al replied, I'm in
rain!.............Charlis held the gate 5 minutes, then opened it.
JJ

I might add that quite a few of the competitors who completed the task
were not thrilled with the decision to scrap the day, but at least
they exhibited good sportsmanship by accepting the decision in good
grace.

Mike

John,
If the last of the grid is struggling, the gate opening should be
withheld. Once the gate is opened, the day results should never be
nullified. I would hope that words to that effect find their way into
the rules next year.
JJ

John Cochrane wrote:
Charlie's report on the ssa website says it was the last three pilots
to launch who could not stay up, which seems a significant detail. If
the first to launch can find lift, get away from the airport, and wait
to start, but there really is zero lift in the airport area when the
back half of the grid launches, then the decision seems reasonable --
from this very far distance. I take it you don't think there really
was zero lift, and it was possible for the back half of the grid to
stay up off tow.

John Cochrane BB

On Jul 5, 5:36*pm, JJ Sinclair wrote:
John,
If the last of the grid is struggling, the gate opening should be
withheld. Once the gate is opened, the day results should never be
nullified. I would hope that words to that effect find their way into
the rules next year.
JJ


"Never" is a long time. The CD usually does not talk to every single
pilot, only to the task advisers, so he may not know of trouble. The
"fair" "safe" and "force majeure" language in the rules allowing days
to be thrown out in extreme circumstances seem sensible in principle,
even if you disagree in their application in this case.

I recall a precedent, a world championship day that was protested and
canceled after the fact because a pilot had been towed away from the
usual drop zone, too far to make it back to the airport and landed
out.

I too am a long way away and not even thinking of second-guessing
decisions here. Thanks for posting the info so we can all think about
it.

John Cochrane BB

JJ:

I have to concede that the gate was opened before all contestants were
climbing out, which isn't optimal. But I understand the reason - the
CD was trying to get everyone away on a difficult day and with all the
various activities going on may have been having trouble tracking
everyone.

Things weren't perfect, but that's life, we just have to make the best
of events.

Mike

On 5 July, 19:40, John Cochrane
wrote:
Charlie's report on the ssa website says it was the last three pilots
to launch who could not stay up, which seems a significant detail. If
the first to launch can find lift, get away from the airport, and wait
to start, but there really is zero lift in the airport area when the
back half of the grid launches, then the decision seems reasonable --
from this very far distance.

Maybe use towplanes to get the gliders to lift, then, rather than
using winches?

Ian

On 5 July, 19:40, John Cochrane
wrote:
Charlie's report on the ssa website says it was the last three pilots
to launch who could not stay up, which seems a significant detail. If
the first to launch can find lift, get away from the airport, and wait
to start, but there really is zero lift in the airport area when the
back half of the grid launches, then the decision seems reasonable --
from this very far distance.

Something I do not understand here, why was the fact that 3 pilots could
not stay up a problem, that frequently happens in comps in the UK and the
competitors relight. There surely is not restriction on starting once the
gate is open. Our rules specify that once the gate is open and the
competition has started competitors may take a launch until 1800hrs so
they have ample opportunity to compete if they do not suceed at first. Any
CD in the UK who allowed the cancellation of a comp day that had been
completed by the majority of the competitors because 3 pilots could not
stay up would very likely suffer total humiliation not to mention serious
abuse, both of which would be richly deserved.

While a CD in the UK will listen to what competitors are saying they DO
NOT take formal advice on conditions from competitors. We do have a non
competitor sniffer who relays back the conditions and of course we listen
to comments on safety matters. Competitors should not be used as advisors
in a formal sense, except on matters of safety, there is a huge conflict
of interest and the system is open to allegations of abuse.

Something I do not understand here, why was the fact that 3 pilots could
not stay up a problem, that frequently happens in comps in the UK and the
competitors relight. There surely is not restriction on starting once the
gate is open.

The question is not about relights. The problem, especially with
Parowan, is that sometimes the lift is a long way from the airport.
You can get off aerotow and find yourself scratching into a hole only
to land out. As the thermal heights increase, the thermal spacings
increases more or less proportionally. Using the same 2000' tow height
that works well in a humid landscape at sea level as at 6000'
elevation with high base thunderstorms around is not exactly "working
with nature." At a past Parowan contest, two pilots I know, one a good
one, choose not to launch because the drop point was beyond a safe
glide back to the airport. They didn't protest. From my perspective,
this problem has been growing with little attention from the "big
boys" until this year when someone protests and screws up a bunch of
people's scores. I'm neither supporting or criticizing the protest,
only saying that Sport Class was this course and heading for a while,
so it is no surprise. After learning of more of the facts here, I am
inclined to be less critical of the contest staff, and more critical
of the rules (and the Guidelines for Competition Director).

4-Zulu
Chad