When is too many at a glider meet

On Monday, July 13, 2015 at 12:46:46 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:

Tom,

I'm trying to help you out here, but it's gotten down to a level of hair-splitting that is really not very productive (I'm reminded of the famous "it depends on what your definition of the word 'is' is"). Name-calling aside, the basic problem people had is that there was an assertion made as to the number of gliders at an event and the likely implications of that number. Both assertions were wrong - both in concept and in fact - and the tone was inflammatory.

First, the number was wrong. You represented the number then set aside your own responsibility for spreading bad info - even though the correct info was readily available in writing. That's your bad. If you'd just accepted the correction you'd have been fine, but you felt compelled to follow up with the "feel good" post which really came across as condescending and sour grapes.

Second, most people saw the use of the phrase "until there is a fatality" as an assertion of the likely outcome (why else would you write it?) - in my book that's a form of prediction and most everyone else saw it the same way. That's really inflammatory and accusatory in tone.

Third, you now have explained that you made a connection between bad outcomes at a Nationals 31 years ago and an XC event - based on the absolute number of gliders flying - but with little knowledge of the operations or the circumstances that might actually lead to some sort of bad outcome at Nephi. It's still not clear what specific risk scenario you were referring to, but several candidates have been alluded to (and some subsequently disavowed).. You initially referred to "chaos" resulting from bad weather and the fleet returning to the field - that sounds a lot like a relight/landing space concern, which was addressed. You later raised a concern about enroute collision potential (you paraphrased my comment on the subject), but the Flarm-mandatory provision of the event makes a dramatic difference here as well as when thermalling in the initial climb out, which I believe you raised in some post about launching into "small space".

The simple fact of the matter (and as has been demonstrated at countless glider events before and after the Ephrata Nationals), there is no single absolute number of gliders that represents an upper limit for safe operations across all locations under all conditions - it varies by side and due to different operational circumstances. Asserting a number for Nephi with little or no operational knowledge of the event really comes across as unreasonable.

Fourth, (this is the olive branch part) I don't think anyone has a problem with asking a question about the operations of an event and safety. It's good and healthy to discuss specifics of safety and safe operational practices. If you want to get down to real risk scenarios you get into a set of questions that need to be evaluated for a specific site, for the equipment being used (especially towplanes), for each phase of flight, in combination with all sorts of weather and other risk factors and with consideration for operational procedures that are designed to mitigate the risk. People want to fly at these great locations and we want to accommodate them within the bounds of safety and in ways that are economically reasonable for organizers.. That takes a careful assessment of the risk scenarios, not broad generalizations.

The problem people had with your post is not with whether organizers and participants should do the work to figure the risks out - we all want these things to be thought through in detail. The problem was the implication in your post that the Nephi guys hadn't done their homework or were ignoring good sense and that bad things were likely ("bad feeling") to happen as a result. It was pretty insulting and condescending in tone and as it turns out, wrong on the facts - both the numbers and in terms of being able to point to any specific risk that had not been considered and addressed. Your "bad feeling" was unfounded - both in terms of actual outcomes and in terms of any discernible operational issues related to having 60-plus gliders fly at Nephi. Yet you persisted, without reference to a consistent set of specific concerns. "Too many gliders" is not a specific concern. It is vague and unactionable operationally.

Honestly, you could have put it in much more constructive and less inflammatory terms - in the form of an actual question and some disclaimer that you didn't really know what operational steps had been taken to handle the capacity. You could have also been a lot more thoughtful in terms of handling the responses that made good-faith attempts to address your "bad feeling" - rather than dismiss them out of hand as "feel good" comments.

It's not an attempt to vilify you personally (the name-calling part is always a bit unfortunate), it's a response to the tone and content of what you wrote - initially and in follow-up.

That's all the energy I can put into this one. I've tried to be constructive and specific and not make it personal, despite some frustration.

All the best to anyone with the patience to read through all of this.

Andy
9B