End of Season Sunset Warning for SSA-OLC Participants

Stewart,

You missed the point. Enforcement is not the issue here -- consistency is.

If you insist on enforcing certain rules, then (a) state them clearly, and
(b) enforce them all the time and not just on a whim. Checking flights at
the time of claim and rejecting those in violation might be OK. Going back
and pulling flights retroactively is not OK. Going back and pulling flights
*selectively* -- some but not the others with similar "violations" -- is
....I am gasping for words here, and "disgusting" is the RC1 so far. I don't
want to even get close to the question how, when and why they decide to pull
any given flight and not the next one -- I am afraid that would undermine
the last of my respect for humanity .
--
Yuliy


"Stewart Kissel" wrote in
message ...
12. Airspace Violations
The OLC organizers have to assume that the participants
in the contest will not violate restricted airspace
during their flights. ATC clearances are necessary
to enter certain airspace. The OLC team will not check
if a pilot has obtained the necessary clearance to
enter airspace which needs ATC clearance. This is not
within our competences and responsibilities. However,
if we get to know that there has been an obvious violation
of airspace then we reserve the right to carry out
special actions against that pilot and his participation
in the OLC. Of course every pilot is allowed to contact
other pilots in case of a potential airspace violation.

What rules are they changing? Is busting FAR's okay
if they do not specify not to? Will your insurance
pay a claim if you get hit at FL200 or flying after
sunset? If we as a group knowingly allow cheating
to occur, are we liable as well? If pilots want to
fly illegally, they don't need to post logs for the
rest of us to see.

I wish pilots flew in accordance to the *privilege*
of the license...then this discussion would be moot.
Calling enforcement an issue is a weak argument.




At 01:06 07 September 2006, Yuliy Gerchikov wrote:
Doug,

May I make some suggestions? (1) Do not change OLC
rules mid-season. (2) If
you insist on checking all traces for certain violations,
do it at the time
of claim -- automatically -- and reject those that
do not pass, there and
then.

If only the SSA devoted a fraction of the effort they spend monitoring
their members, to monitoring their financial officers...


Yuliy Gerchikov wrote:
Stewart,

You missed the point. Enforcement is not the issue here -- consistency is.

If you insist on enforcing certain rules, then (a) state them clearly, and
(b) enforce them all the time and not just on a whim. Checking flights at
the time of claim and rejecting those in violation might be OK. Going back
and pulling flights retroactively is not OK. Going back and pulling flights
*selectively* -- some but not the others with similar "violations" -- is
...I am gasping for words here, and "disgusting" is the RC1 so far. I don't
want to even get close to the question how, when and why they decide to pull
any given flight and not the next one -- I am afraid that would undermine
the last of my respect for humanity .
--
Yuliy


"Stewart Kissel" wrote in
message ...
12. Airspace Violations
The OLC organizers have to assume that the participants
in the contest will not violate restricted airspace
during their flights. ATC clearances are necessary
to enter certain airspace. The OLC team will not check
if a pilot has obtained the necessary clearance to
enter airspace which needs ATC clearance. This is not
within our competences and responsibilities. However,
if we get to know that there has been an obvious violation
of airspace then we reserve the right to carry out
special actions against that pilot and his participation
in the OLC. Of course every pilot is allowed to contact
other pilots in case of a potential airspace violation.

What rules are they changing? Is busting FAR's okay
if they do not specify not to? Will your insurance
pay a claim if you get hit at FL200 or flying after
sunset? If we as a group knowingly allow cheating
to occur, are we liable as well? If pilots want to
fly illegally, they don't need to post logs for the
rest of us to see.

I wish pilots flew in accordance to the *privilege*
of the license...then this discussion would be moot.
Calling enforcement an issue is a weak argument.




At 01:06 07 September 2006, Yuliy Gerchikov wrote:
Doug,

May I make some suggestions? (1) Do not change OLC
rules mid-season. (2) If
you insist on checking all traces for certain violations,
do it at the time
of claim -- automatically -- and reject those that
do not pass, there and
then.

wrote:
If only the SSA devoted a fraction of the effort they spend monitoring
their members, to monitoring their financial officers...

"The SSA" is you, me, and all the other members. The OLC monitoring is
being done by volunteer effort aimed at making the OLC a fair and
balanced competition. This is not a staff position, and very little if
any of our dues go to supporting the OLC effort.

Are you volunteering to monitor our financial officers? If not, then
don't complain that there's nobody to watch them. We pay our dues to
hire a handful of employees to run our organization's most critical
areas. The rest is done by VOLUNTEERS.

Doug has decided to volunteer to manage the US portion of the OLC. He
did not volunteer to monitor the SSA's financial position. That is
being done by others in our organization. If it's not being done well,
then someone with the time and experience needs to step up and do it.
I doubt that such a volunteer would be turned back.

As for the OLC, it's now apparent that many sailplane pilots are not
aware of ALL the regulations they fly under. The OLC is uncovering
this "problem", and the managers are making a reasonable effort to
educate the individuals by asking them to withdraw or explain their
claims.


-Tom

I was told by Doug "the Board has directed us to look at Sunset and
Class-A" so it is indeed the board effort to monitor their members olc
flights instead of monitoring their financial officers...

5Z wrote:
wrote:
If only the SSA devoted a fraction of the effort they spend monitoring
their members, to monitoring their financial officers...

"The SSA" is you, me, and all the other members. The OLC monitoring is
being done by volunteer effort aimed at making the OLC a fair and
balanced competition. This is not a staff position, and very little if
any of our dues go to supporting the OLC effort.

Are you volunteering to monitor our financial officers? If not, then
don't complain that there's nobody to watch them. We pay our dues to
hire a handful of employees to run our organization's most critical
areas. The rest is done by VOLUNTEERS.

Doug has decided to volunteer to manage the US portion of the OLC. He
did not volunteer to monitor the SSA's financial position. That is
being done by others in our organization. If it's not being done well,
then someone with the time and experience needs to step up and do it.
I doubt that such a volunteer would be turned back.

As for the OLC, it's now apparent that many sailplane pilots are not
aware of ALL the regulations they fly under. The OLC is uncovering
this "problem", and the managers are making a reasonable effort to
educate the individuals by asking them to withdraw or explain their
claims.


-Tom

Wow. I agree with Yuliy. Luckily I fly in UK.
I think the SSA is acting beyond its jurisdiction.
I hope you dont touch flights submitted by foreign
visitors.

Surprised you still have members to pay the bills.

Rory

At 11:00 02 September 2006, Doug Haluza wrote:
quite plain to see in these logs. The SSA Board was
concerned about
flight logs with obvious violations damaging the sport
if they were
posted in the public record of the OLC. So the board
adopted a policy
disqualifying such flights from the OLC, as well as
FAI awards such as
badges and records. See:

http://www.ssa.org/download/SSA%20Po...20Violations.p
df

The vast majority of U.S. OLC competitors make
a conscientious effort to comply with FAR's. They
have every right to expect all competitors to be
sportsmanlike, which means playing by and being
scored by the same rules.

The rest of us have little empathy for the minority
who think they are above the law by going above
18k without a clearance, crossing unauthorized
airspace or landing after sunset without required
lighting. It would probably be a step in the right
direction if the OLC software could be modified to
immediately pick out these irregularities when a
flight is submitted. Then flag the flight until an
acceptable explanation is supplied by the pilot.

Would it surprise anyone to know that in spite of all
this discussion on RAS, just this past weekend one
of these vocal few submitted a flight with a landing
after sunset.

We should be commending the OLC committee for
weeding out the renegade few who insist that they
should be scored for flights that violated regulations.

M Eiler

The vast majority of U.S. OLC competitors make
a conscientious effort to comply with FAR's. They
have every right to expect all competitors to be
sportsmanlike, which means playing by and being
scored by the same rules.

The rest of us have little empathy for the minority
who think they are above the law by going above
18k without a clearance, crossing unauthorized
airspace or landing after sunset without required
lighting. It would probably be a step in the right
direction if the OLC software could be modified to
immediately pick out these irregularities when a
flight is submitted. Then flag the flight until an
acceptable explanation is supplied by the pilot.

Would it surprise anyone to know that in spite of all
this discussion on RAS, just this past weekend one
of these vocal few submitted a flight with a landing
after sunset.

We should be commending the OLC committee for
weeding out the renegade few who insist that they
should be scored for flights that violated regulations.

M Eiler

Martin Eiler wrote:

We should be commending the OLC committee for
weeding out the renegade few who insist that they
should be scored for flights that violated regulations.


It is an unreasonable penalty to completely eliminate a 10 hour flight
that landed 1 minute after sunset. To avoid this penalty a pilot may
have to give up soaring an hour early to be sure of getting home in
time, or should he landout a minute from home to save the points.

As has been pointed out landing shortly before sunset on a westerly
runway can be hazardous.

May I suggest that the end of soaring flight be determined by landing,
engine start, airspace violation, or sunset time. Points earned before
end of soaring flight should be scored as usual.

Perhaps the same scrutiny should be applied to sunrise. I hear some
ridge flights start quite early.


Andy

Andy wrote:
It is an unreasonable penalty to completely eliminate a 10 hour flight
that landed 1 minute after sunset.

Could you be talking about a flight that ended thirty one minutes after
sunset? This would put it into the FAA definition of NIGHT flying.
That is different than the FAR about aircraft lighting after sunset.

I think we all can agree that there is some slack being provided for
"marginal" violations to the OLC. There's always altimeter error and
occasionally a race with the sun to get on the ground. In a sanctioned
contest, errors such as this are typically punished quite brutally on
the scoresheet.

As I said in another response, it is up to ALL of us to conduct
ourselves in a sportsmanlike fashion. If there is any doubt about the
propriety of posting a flight, then DON'T DO IT.

In the western US it's very easy to get involved in a 10+ knot climb
and suddenl realize that the altimeter has already passed 17,500'
indicated. Sometimes, by the time one rolls out and presses on, it
comes darned close to 18K. Then at the end of the day, detailed
analysis with data from a nearby ground station slows you have busted
18K by 100'. I rationalize this on the OLC as a reasonable "glitch".
But if I see a trace - mine or someone else's - that indicates still
circling at 18K, I'll call it into question.

Landing one minute after official sunset, especially if there's some
evidence in the log of trying to get it on the ground is anothercase
that I would probably not challenge.

The whole point of what Doug is doing is not to remove the flights
himself. He is asking the offender to do this, or to add a comment
explaining the discrepancy. We should ALL follow his example,
especially to our immediate fellow pilots. It may mean a worse club
score, but is just the proper way to conduct a sporting event. We
don't want to get into the mess of the Olympics or Tour de France with
their various doping and possible cheating scandals.

-Tom

5Z wrote:

Could you be talking about a flight that ended thirty one minutes after
sunset? This would put it into the FAA definition of NIGHT flying.
That is different than the FAR about aircraft lighting after sunset.

No, I meant 1 minute after sunset, a violation of 91.207 a) 1


Andy