Racing airspace "violation" question

A question for you racing rules makers out the

Does the closed airspace rule (loss of all points plus 100 pt penalty)
apply if, following a task abort on course (with enough distance on
task to score for the day), a pilot then overflies class C airspace
(legally, and in contact with approach, etc), enroute to a safe
recovery back at the home base?

The question really boils down to: Are you still "on task" after you
make a decision to abandon the declared task for reasons of safety -
say weather blocking other routes - or to avoid a landout, or both,
then legally overfly airspace on the way home? Since the task scoring
ends where you abandon the task and assuming you abort outside closed
airspace, one could argue that the return flight is the same as an
aero retrieve, where the penalty wouldn't apply, since it's perfectly
legal and easy to overfly lots of airspace out here in the west.

As currently interpreted, this rule makes you potentially fly a
riskier and/or longer route when you are probably trying to get home
late in the day, which seems counter productive and potentially
unsafe. And there is precedent in the airfield landout bonus for
rewarding a safer decision over "pushing on regardless".

I have no objection to the closed airspace rule while still on task,
although the 500 ft minor and 100 ft major violation vertical
distances seem a bit draconian and encourage "clock watching" a bit
too much - not a good idea if everyone is blasting along under a
cloudstreet at 17499'. Perhaps we should look at the FAI rules and
see how they handle it?

Anyway, enough sniveling...

Cheers,

Kirk
66

On Sep 7, 10:22*am, "kirk.stant" wrote:
A question for you racing rules makers out the

Does the closed airspace rule (loss of all points plus 100 pt penalty)
apply if, following a task abort on course (with enough distance on
task to score for the day), a pilot then overflies class C airspace
(legally, and in contact with approach, etc), enroute to a safe
recovery back at the home base?


I really don't understand why US has to have a different set of
contest rules from the rest of the world. The FAI rules seem far more
sensible when it comes to handling airspace.

Andy

"Andy" wrote in message
:

On Sep 7, 10:22*am, "kirk.stant" wrote:
A question for you racing rules makers out the

Does the closed airspace rule (loss of all points plus 100 pt penalty)
apply if, following a task abort on course (with enough distance on
task to score for the day), a pilot then overflies class C airspace
(legally, and in contact with approach, etc), enroute to a safe
recovery back at the home base?


I really don't understand why US has to have a different set of
contest rules from the rest of the world. The FAI rules seem far more
sensible when it comes to handling airspace.

Andy

OTOH, I don't know why the FAI has to use a different set of contest
rules from the US... But that's just me I guess...

Larry
"01" USA

On Sep 7, 11:28*am, "Larry Goddard" wrote:
"Andy" wrote in message

:

On Sep 7, 10:22*am, "kirk.stant" wrote:
A question for you racing rules makers out the

Does the closed airspace rule (loss of all points plus 100 pt penalty)
apply if, following a task abort on course (with enough distance on
task to score for the day), a pilot then overflies class C airspace
(legally, and in contact with approach, etc), enroute to a safe
recovery back at the home base?

I really don't understand why US has to have a different set of
contest rules from the rest of the world. The FAI rules seem far more
sensible when it comes to handling airspace.

Andy

OTOH, I don't know why the FAI has to use a different set of contest
rules from the US... *But that's just me I guess...

Larry
"01" USA

The CD and scorer's interpretation of the rules was that if a
contestant had taken a legal start and flown on course, the whole
flight must be conducted under contest rules, even after you have
abandoned the task.

I agree with Kirk, flying legally above closed airspace should not be
penalized after the task is abandoned.

Mike

On Sep 7, 11:28*am, "Larry Goddard" wrote:
"Andy" wrote in message

:

On Sep 7, 10:22*am, "kirk.stant" wrote:
A question for you racing rules makers out the

Does the closed airspace rule (loss of all points plus 100 pt penalty)
apply if, following a task abort on course (with enough distance on
task to score for the day), a pilot then overflies class C airspace
(legally, and in contact with approach, etc), enroute to a safe
recovery back at the home base?

I really don't understand why US has to have a different set of
contest rules from the rest of the world. The FAI rules seem far more
sensible when it comes to handling airspace.

Andy

OTOH, I don't know why the FAI has to use a different set of contest
rules from the US... *But that's just me I guess...

Larry
"01" USA

Perhaps looking at the number of participant in each area would give
you a clue? Perhaps looking a what rules are applied when a World
Championship is held in USA would provide another?

Andy

On Sep 7, 2:58*pm, Mike the Strike wrote:
On Sep 7, 11:28*am, "Larry Goddard" wrote:



"Andy" wrote in message

:

On Sep 7, 10:22*am, "kirk.stant" wrote:
A question for you racing rules makers out the

Does the closed airspace rule (loss of all points plus 100 pt penalty)
apply if, following a task abort on course (with enough distance on
task to score for the day), a pilot then overflies class C airspace
(legally, and in contact with approach, etc), enroute to a safe
recovery back at the home base?

I really don't understand why US has to have a different set of
contest rules from the rest of the world. The FAI rules seem far more
sensible when it comes to handling airspace.

Andy

OTOH, I don't know why the FAI has to use a different set of contest
rules from the US... *But that's just me I guess...

Larry
"01" USA

The CD and scorer's interpretation of the rules was that if a
contestant had taken a legal start and flown on course, the whole
flight must be conducted under contest rules, even after you have
abandoned the task.

I agree with Kirk, flying legally above closed airspace should not be
penalized after the task is abandoned.

Mike

For any flight for which you must turn in a log (i.e. any launch taken
from the contest site after grid time and before the day is canceled)
you may not enter closed airspace. You can violate closed airspace
and incur the penalty whether you start or not and whether the day is
canceled or not.

The SSA rationale is simple - great emphasis is placed on avoiding any
(even inadvertent) B, C, P, R violations within the context of a
sanctioned SSA contest. Although this was implemented before I was
elected to the Rules Committee, I understand that the thinking was to
avoid drawing FAA actions as a result of SSA sanctioned activities.
Others before me can provide additional background.

Another consideration here is that scorers already have enough work to
do without arbitrating "was the task clearly abandoned and when."

On Sep 7, 5:50*pm, "John Godfrey (QT)" wrote:

For any flight for which you must turn in a log (i.e. any launch taken
from the contest site after grid time and before the day is canceled)
you may not enter closed airspace. *You can violate closed airspace
and incur the penalty whether you start or not and whether the day is
canceled or not.

No doubt that this is what SSA rules require but the rules really need
a review and I'd suggest bringing the airspace violation rules in line
with FAI.

In this case the FAI rules would have scored 66 (the OP) to the point
of furthest progress and there would have been no penalty.

The stupidity of the situation is that 66 would be 100 points better
off if he had a logger failure than if he announced his intention to
abandon the task, made a completely legal class C overflight, and
then turned in his log.

I hope 66 was not depending on the prize money to buy groceries this
week.

Andy (the scorer in this instance)

I think QT is right, though it took some puzzling over the rules for
me to see it.

Actually, I think that having a mysterious flight log failure will not
get you out of trouble. A valid log has to show takeoff, path of
flight and landing (see below), and if there are any gaps, the cd is
supposed to assume you went real fast right to the prohibited space.
That says "path of flight and landing" not just "task."

Now should we change it? The event -- you abandon the task, want to
fly home, and the only way to do it safely is go over a class C, and
you have a radio and transponder -- seems pretty remote. Was it
really unsafe to go around, or was it just extra gas for a
motorglider?

10.5.2 Flight Log requirements
10.5.2.1 A valid Flight Log is one that:
• Was produced by a Flight Recorder that meets the provisions of Rule
6.7.4
• Shows the takeoff, the path of the flight, and the landing.
• Has a typical interval between fixes of 15 seconds or less.
• Between takeoff and landing, shows no interval between fixes
exceeding 15 minutes (See Rule 6.3.3.2 for motorized sailplanes
constraint).

10.12.5 Gaps in a Flight Log longer than one minute shall be
interpreted unfavorably to the pilot. During each such gap:
• the closest horizontal approach to or from the nearest closed
airspace shall be calculated assuming a speed of 100 mph
• if in the judgment of the CD there was any realistic possibility of
a vertical airspace violation, the closest vertical approach to the
nearest closed airspace shall be calculated based on a climb rate of
1000 feet per minute


John Cochrane

On Sep 7, 10:29*pm, Andy wrote:
On Sep 7, 5:50*pm, "John Godfrey (QT)" wrote:

For any flight for which you must turn in a log (i.e. any launch taken
from the contest site after grid time and before the day is canceled)
you may not enter closed airspace. *You can violate closed airspace
and incur the penalty whether you start or not and whether the day is
canceled or not.

No doubt that this is what SSA rules require but the rules really need
a review and I'd suggest bringing the airspace violation rules in line
with FAI.

In this case the FAI rules would have scored 66 (the OP) to the point
of furthest progress and there would have been no penalty.

The stupidity of the situation is that 66 would be 100 points better
off if he had a logger failure than if he announced his intention to
abandon the task, made a completely legal class C overflight, *and
then turned in his log.

I hope 66 was not depending on the prize money to buy groceries this
week.

Andy (the scorer in this instance)

Even more stupidly, if a contestant turns in a log with an inadvertent
airspace violation, and elects to withdraw his flight log for the day,
he/she STILL gets a zero for the day plus a 100 pt penalty the next
day. How bizarre is that?! The rule that says a contestant must be
offered the opportunity to withdraw his/her flight log was intended to
avoid having a record of an airspace violation hanging around where
someone from our friendly government might see it (can you say
"airline pilot career-ending"?). However, with the present rule
interpretation, a zero on day X combined with a 100pt penalty on day X
+1 is no less incriminating than the original flight log, especially
when the score becomes 'official'.

Ya gotta love the guys who think these things up - going one way and
then the other on the same issue. We now have the best scoring system
in the world. It is so good that you have to consult with two
lawyers, three accountants, and a convicted felon (only the felon
really understands the system) before turning in the day's flight log

TA

On Sep 7, 11:02*pm, Frank wrote:
On Sep 7, 10:29*pm, Andy wrote:



On Sep 7, 5:50*pm, "John Godfrey (QT)" wrote:

For any flight for which you must turn in a log (i.e. any launch taken
from the contest site after grid time and before the day is canceled)
you may not enter closed airspace. *You can violate closed airspace
and incur the penalty whether you start or not and whether the day is
canceled or not.

No doubt that this is what SSA rules require but the rules really need
a review and I'd suggest bringing the airspace violation rules in line
with FAI.

In this case the FAI rules would have scored 66 (the OP) to the point
of furthest progress and there would have been no penalty.

The stupidity of the situation is that 66 would be 100 points better
off if he had a logger failure than if he announced his intention to
abandon the task, made a completely legal class C overflight, *and
then turned in his log.

I hope 66 was not depending on the prize money to buy groceries this
week.

Andy (the scorer in this instance)

Even more stupidly, if a contestant turns in a log with an inadvertent
airspace violation, and elects to withdraw his flight log for the day,
he/she STILL gets a zero for the day plus a 100 pt penalty the next
day. *How bizarre is that?! *The rule that says a contestant must be
offered the opportunity to withdraw his/her flight log was intended to
avoid having a record of an airspace violation hanging around where
someone from our friendly government might see it (can you say
"airline pilot career-ending"?). *However, with the present rule
interpretation, a zero on day X combined with a 100pt penalty on day X
+1 is no less incriminating than the original flight log, especially
when the score becomes 'official'.

Ya gotta love the guys who think these things up - going one way and
then the other on the same issue. *We now have the best scoring system
in the world. *It is so good that you have to consult with two
lawyers, three accountants, and a convicted felon (only the felon
really understands the system) before turning in the day's flight log

TA

Frank,

That is exactly the intent. It allows a log to be withdrawn to avoid
documenting the infraction, but intentionally you get no relief on the
penalty in that case. The option to withdraw the log is a courtesy to
the affected pilot.

Why make the rules more complicated? It is a simple, easy to
understand rule (never go there., -100 points for the day if you do).
The "turn in a log" is also simple and requires no arbitration -
always turn one in.

The only reason you need the two lawyers, three accountants and the
felon (me? have you been in the post office recently?) it to try and
find some wiggle room around a simple, clearly stated (and explained
in the rules appendix) rule.