US Competition Pilot Poll and Election

On Friday, October 21, 2016 at 6:56:52 AM UTC-4, Tango Eight wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2016 at 6:03:31 PM UTC-4, Papa3 wrote:
This is going to end up being a long post. But, I've thought about this stuff - a lot. The problem with these RAS debates is that a small number of people who have really strong opinions tend to create a lot of noise that gets in the way of real analysis.

Since very few people will read this whole post, I'm going to put the punch line first. Based on actual data collected from a reasonably large sample of potential racing pilots, it's pretty clear that the rules have nothing to do with keeping people out. Time is number one. Skill building is number two. Rules was way down on the list - in the bottom third.

Thanks Erik.

Same story in Region 1.

-Evan

P3 & T8:

In your research, where did "cost" fall in the spectrum of "other reasons"? It sounds like focusing on time issues and making the camp/competition experience a good one is of more value than trying to run an event on absolute minimum $$?

J9

The approach was a "rank each reason" in priority order from 1 - 9. 1 is most important. 9 is least. This type of question then gets a scoring based on how many times it ranks first, second, etc. Pollsters will tell you that the top 3-4 matter; after that the ranking is less important as people really don't know how to differentiate between lower priorities.

Making a long story short, Expense was right in the middle. Definitely not top 3 but not negligible. Clearly there are folks who want to participate with the absolute minimum of expense and others who show up with quarter million motor homes.

Since it might be hard to read understand the spreadsheet, I'll just list the inhibitors in ranking order:

1. Time (by a wide margin)
2. Something else
3. Skill (comfort in a contest/XC setting)
4. Safety/risk
5. Rainouts (which I basically equate to time as well)
6. Expense
7. Rules complexity
8. Glider (not competitive)
9. Avionics (not competitive or current).

FWIW, the Something Else answer was probably not a good test design. If you read the text, they basically fall within the above (competing priorities, job demands, family not willing to come to comps, etc.). There are a few people who just categorically don't want to ruin gliding with competition.. There are also age and health issues. Some folks are linchpins of their club as a CFI and don't feel able to get away. etc.

But again, for the purposes of this discussion, it's clear that Rules don't keep people out. They may end up frustrating some people, but the survey would have captured that since people who got out of racing would have showed up. That's not to say rules don't lead some people to move on. But with scarce resources, it's my sense that more focus on recruitment and innovative contest structures would be way more beneficial.

P3






On Friday, October 21, 2016 at 10:59:50 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2016 at 6:56:52 AM UTC-4, Tango Eight wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2016 at 6:03:31 PM UTC-4, Papa3 wrote:
This is going to end up being a long post. But, I've thought about this stuff - a lot. The problem with these RAS debates is that a small number of people who have really strong opinions tend to create a lot of noise that gets in the way of real analysis.

Since very few people will read this whole post, I'm going to put the punch line first. Based on actual data collected from a reasonably large sample of potential racing pilots, it's pretty clear that the rules have nothing to do with keeping people out. Time is number one. Skill building is number two. Rules was way down on the list - in the bottom third.

Thanks Erik.

Same story in Region 1.

-Evan

P3 & T8:

In your research, where did "cost" fall in the spectrum of "other reasons"? It sounds like focusing on time issues and making the camp/competition experience a good one is of more value than trying to run an event on absolute minimum $$?

J9

On Friday, October 21, 2016 at 10:59:50 AM UTC-4, wrote:

P3 & T8:

In your research, where did "cost" fall in the spectrum of "other reasons"? It sounds like focusing on time issues and making the camp/competition experience a good one is of more value than trying to run an event on absolute minimum $$?

J9

Hi J9,

There are only a couple of guys we know that complain in any serious way about entry fees. It's not a very defensible complaint. No one thinks for a moment that anyone is making any money off contest organizing.

T8

On Friday, October 21, 2016 at 10:48:30 AM UTC-5, Papa3 wrote:
The approach was a "rank each reason" in priority order from 1 - 9. 1 is most important. 9 is least. This type of question then gets a scoring based on how many times it ranks first, second, etc. Pollsters will tell you that the top 3-4 matter; after that the ranking is less important as people really don't know how to differentiate between lower priorities.

Making a long story short, Expense was right in the middle. Definitely not top 3 but not negligible. Clearly there are folks who want to participate with the absolute minimum of expense and others who show up with quarter million motor homes.

Since it might be hard to read understand the spreadsheet, I'll just list the inhibitors in ranking order:

1. Time (by a wide margin)
2. Something else
3. Skill (comfort in a contest/XC setting)
4. Safety/risk
5. Rainouts (which I basically equate to time as well)
6. Expense
7. Rules complexity
8. Glider (not competitive)
9. Avionics (not competitive or current).

FWIW, the Something Else answer was probably not a good test design. If you read the text, they basically fall within the above (competing priorities, job demands, family not willing to come to comps, etc.). There are a few people who just categorically don't want to ruin gliding with competition. There are also age and health issues. Some folks are linchpins of their club as a CFI and don't feel able to get away. etc.

But again, for the purposes of this discussion, it's clear that Rules don't keep people out. They may end up frustrating some people, but the survey would have captured that since people who got out of racing would have showed up. That's not to say rules don't lead some people to move on. But with scarce resources, it's my sense that more focus on recruitment and innovative contest structures would be way more beneficial.

P3






On Friday, October 21, 2016 at 10:59:50 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Friday, October 21, 2016 at 6:56:52 AM UTC-4, Tango Eight wrote:
On Thursday, October 20, 2016 at 6:03:31 PM UTC-4, Papa3 wrote:
This is going to end up being a long post. But, I've thought about this stuff - a lot. The problem with these RAS debates is that a small number of people who have really strong opinions tend to create a lot of noise that gets in the way of real analysis.

Since very few people will read this whole post, I'm going to put the punch line first. Based on actual data collected from a reasonably large sample of potential racing pilots, it's pretty clear that the rules have nothing to do with keeping people out. Time is number one. Skill building is number two. Rules was way down on the list - in the bottom third.

Thanks Erik.

Same story in Region 1.

-Evan

P3 & T8:

In your research, where did "cost" fall in the spectrum of "other reasons"? It sounds like focusing on time issues and making the camp/competition experience a good one is of more value than trying to run an event on absolute minimum $$?

J9

Erik, thanks for de-bunking Sean's and Wilbur's arguments so decisively. When John Cochrane came back from the World's in Hungary a couple of years back he did comment to us about not being familiar enough with all the rules but he also complained bitterly about parts of them that let competitors land short of the finish to get a higher score and the high spread of scores on low completion days. I feel for the few pilots that make it to international contests but let's not throw out what has evolved here in N.
America over many decades just because Sean (and Wilbur) say so.
Herb, J7

Herb,

I didn't want this to be an "us and them" discussion. I just think given scarce resources, time would be better spent on increasing the population of pilots from the bottom up rather than focusing energy on things that only really matter to a small number of people. I'm actually on the fence regarding rules (FAI vs.SSA) - I don't feel strongly enough to come down one way or the other.

Anyway, back to data. I took the time to extract the qualitative comments from the survey. They certainly make interesting reading. As stated up thread, there is definitely a strong element of "time" in many of these responses. Time off from work. Time away from family. Time sitting around not doing much while it rains. etc. Related to this theme is the "pressure" we get put under to have a racing day when you've been sitting in the rain for 3 days. The world is a different place than it was at the peak of racing in the 1960s, 70s, and 80s. While my wife and family support my racing, they're most definitely not gonna pile into the station wagon for a mad rush across the country a la Dick Schreder.

It really sounds to me like smaller (closer to home) weekend races with less overhead and even "pop-up" contests (i.e. when good weather is coming say 3 days advance notice) would help. Imagine a model where contests are weighted based on the quality of competition (using pilot ranking list for example) such that have some benchmark to make sure contests are "real". It would also behoove pilots to recruit their friends to get critical mass for desired classes (e.g. "hey rick, we need another 18 meter guy, how about you come down").

So, here are all of the comments from the referenced survey:

• Safety and cross-country education oriented introduction to the area and tasks. (ie Hank's "newbie contest pilot" talks at the beginning of R2N each year)
• I would LOVE to fly competitions. If there were babysitters for toddlers available on each flying day -- I'd be there!
• I have absolutely no interest in competing. It's not what I'm looking for, from soaring.
• More free time.
• Not going to happen in a 1-26. But having a 'novice' category might help.
• Have to find the time to to fly regularly and get proficient.
• Busy racing cars & sailboats as you know. Maybe get back into soaring in a few years. I don't fly enough now to feel safe flying a contest.
• I don't feel quite enough "at home" in anything other than a 1-26 to fly in a competition. I need to fly higher performance gliders more to be comfortable landing out, gaggling and to judge just what I can and can't do safely.
• Having had a touch of cancer a couple of years ago, priorities changed.
• i don't fly enough to feel prepared for the more difficult tasks. flying takes too much time from other things.
• The last several years have been a mess with work demands and dealing with affairs for an elderly parent with dementia with the result I didn't fly my ship at all in 2011. College visits and A two week vacation to Italy to celebrate my daughter's HS graduation took precedence this year with my somewhat reduced vacation time from my previous position. My esteemed partner went to Mifflin. With the vacation constraints, I think experimenting with different models other than a single week or quicker decisions regarding a no fly day at contests which would allow me to get work related stuff done and not use a vacation day - benefits of a job that allows for remote working. Late August contests like Dansville are to me riskier for weather than Mifflin in May. Never have thought about Fairfield much despite proximity. Soaring camps for newbie XC pilots prior to or in conjunction may help increase participation. Also, things like non-sanctioned contests like the Little Guys meets.
• I can't be bothered assembling the glider anymore, so contests are out of the question
• More vacation days
• I am too busy with glider flight instruction duties; when our other instructor goes to a contest, I do all club training flights.
• Just time to get better - but having weekend races and two seater races would be great and get me there quicker..
• I am not interested in competition. I'm interested in Badge flying
• I am most interested in getting back into weekly flying and XC (especially Gov Cup/OLC). I need to train up my skills since I've been away from weekly flying for most of 4 years. At this stage, I don't have the extended time for or interest in major competition flying outside of Gov Cup. But I never say never.
• Beginners Training
• More families at the meet, so that I can guarantee my wife it,ll be 'good' for the kids
• Time and money
• not much; just (quite a bit) in the future - i'm not there (yet, hopefully) in terms of ability.
• I need a large breasted 23 year old swedish nanny to travel with me.
• Good weather and mainly weekend flying. A little short on time off....
• XC flying is only one of my hobbies and they all benefit from the same weather. So contests of shorter duration would interest me more.
• At 73, I don't like the stress of competition flying and the prospect of sitting around or flying on days when the weather is bad or marginal. Therefore, I am unlikely to fly in competitions anymore. Your survey is a good idea.
• I've flown twice as a team in the 1-26 Championships, and we were going to fly last year in Indiana, but the weather put a stop to that idea.. 1-26 contests are fun. Might go for the Bus Class at Wurtsboro. I'm really not interested in going up against the big boys.
• Might consider one per year if there was a competitive class...13..5 might work.
• Eric: If I had had the time, I would have come to Wurtsboro and would love to go to Mifflin.
• I answered yes and am precluded from participating but for the record, weather is a BIG problem, and safety is right on it's heals - they are of course related. The rules are absurdly complicated.
• I'd be willing to crew at a regional event to gain first hand perspective on what goes on at the meets

I didn't see it mentioned, but aren't there some safety concerns with the types of finishes allowed in FAI rules VS SSA? I want to live to fly another day.

Second point; When discussing MATs, Sean seems to equate a pilot's opportunity to make strategic decisions with "luck". I like the MAT task because it draws on more skills and experience than just "how fast can you fly through the same air as the other guy?". Picking the best route for your skill level, the weather, and the performance of your ship in the day's conditions are strategic decisions that reflect the the skill and experience of one pilot over another. There may be a small level of chance involved, but even then, a pilot may choose to take a chance on a particular decision based on his particular standing in the contest so far.

Keep the MAT

Matt Herron

Matt Heron,

If safety is your top priority, then MAT's should be your least favorite task. The MAT is the most dangerous task possible. When you have a large group of aircraft flying in random directions back and forth over an area, not under air traffic control directions, you are setting up pilots for having a high chance of a mid air collision. An organized route drastically limits the chances of flying head to head with everyone going on a task (think FAI triangle IE).

Ask any air traffic controller how scary it would be for him to have 50 planes changing course, altitude, speed in a completely unpredictable manner and ask him how confidant he would be in the safety.

Even fly-in's for powered aircraft at Oshkosh or Sun n Fun have arrival and departure routes to fly to limit the chance of a mid air and keep it organized.

Perhaps you've never lost a friend to a mid air collision and know the reality that this is.

Folks we have two sets of rules in every country for soaring. First set of rules is the laws of the land, second set is the FAI competition rules. When we host a world championship here in America, we don't use the cockamamie rules of the SSA, we use FAR's and FAI, in that order. Don't forget that..

If you had a mid air and survived by bailing out. Even a good aviation lawyer could not defend you if you were violating FAR 91.13 "Careless or reckless operation.
(a) Aircraft operations for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.".....if you were participating in a MAT.

Even with AAT's and TAT's smart CD's will utilize a steering turnpoint.

MAT's are VERY careless and wreckless.

On Sunday, October 23, 2016 at 11:53:29 AM UTC-4, Matt Herron Jr. wrote:
I didn't see it mentioned, but aren't there some safety concerns with the types of finishes allowed in FAI rules VS SSA? I want to live to fly another day.

Second point; When discussing MATs, Sean seems to equate a pilot's opportunity to make strategic decisions with "luck". I like the MAT task because it draws on more skills and experience than just "how fast can you fly through the same air as the other guy?". Picking the best route for your skill level, the weather, and the performance of your ship in the day's conditions are strategic decisions that reflect the the skill and experience of one pilot over another. There may be a small level of chance involved, but even then, a pilot may choose to take a chance on a particular decision based on his particular standing in the contest so far.

Keep the MAT

Matt Herron

Matt, how is that different than OLC? The only good MAT is MAT that has more points than one can make in a day. A MAT with one turn point is simply fly around for points task. Since you can see too far forward it is pretty much a luck game.

If you look at score sheets, top pilots always end at the top, except when MAT with one turn point is involved. I am not going to bring up names here. I have heard enough swearing by these pilots right after MAT tasks.

Andrzej

On Sunday, October 23, 2016 at 12:31:19 PM UTC-4, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
On Sunday, October 23, 2016 at 11:53:29 AM UTC-4, Matt Herron Jr. wrote:
I didn't see it mentioned, but aren't there some safety concerns with the types of finishes allowed in FAI rules VS SSA? I want to live to fly another day.

Second point; When discussing MATs, Sean seems to equate a pilot's opportunity to make strategic decisions with "luck". I like the MAT task because it draws on more skills and experience than just "how fast can you fly through the same air as the other guy?". Picking the best route for your skill level, the weather, and the performance of your ship in the day's conditions are strategic decisions that reflect the the skill and experience of one pilot over another. There may be a small level of chance involved, but even then, a pilot may choose to take a chance on a particular decision based on his particular standing in the contest so far.

Keep the MAT

Matt Herron

Matt, how is that different than OLC? The only good MAT is MAT that has more points than one can make in a day. A MAT with one turn point is simply fly around for points task. Since you can see too far forward it is pretty much a luck game.

If you look at score sheets, top pilots always end at the top, except when MAT with one turn point is involved. I am not going to bring up names here. I have heard enough swearing by these pilots right after MAT tasks.



Typing too fast so let me correct the post.

Matt, how is that different from OLC? The only good MAT is a MAT that has more points than one can make in a day. A MAT with one turn point is simply fly around for points task. Since you can not see too far forward, it is pretty much a luck game.

If you look at score sheets, top pilots always end up at the top, except when a MAT with one turn point is involved. I am not going to bring up names here. I have heard enough swearing by these pilots right after MAT tasks.

Herb,

Erik didn't de-bunk anything. He's just found data to confirm the demise of sailplane racing and soaring for a variety of reasons. I also don't place much value in a survey using answers regarding sizes of breasts of younger women as a reason to withdraw from the sport. His research has confirmed that what our leadership has done has unfortunately been ineffective.

Are you suggesting that we keep things on the same path? Do you feel that the demise is simply "it is what is it"?

If you viewed this beloved sport in a way of your health, or a company you own, or anything that's valued, would you just keep doing the same thing and expect different results?