A fair opportunity to compete?

Your (US-centric) problem is introducing a subjective word 'fair' into
rules which humans have to apply (I am even willing to concede here that
lawyers are human).

What contitutes fairness? - exactly equal gliders and instruments (and
crew, etc, but you are not borrowing my wife), now that's fair. Or not,
depending on how you argue it.

In UK the siuation in question is simple. The gate opens, not at the
CD's whim, but with max height at 3,000ft AGL it opens 10 minutes after
the last glider in the class starts to be towed. For every 200ft added to
max height, add 1 minute. No ifs, no buts. The only thing the CD can do
after that is cancel the task and have a rebrief before the gate opens if
it is UNSAFE to continue.

Nobody pretended that gliding was fair when I was a boy in the Nationals.
The winner was the pilot with most points after the last day, however it
panned out.

At 07:30 06 July 2009, Peter Purdie wrote:
Your (US-centric) problem is introducing a subjective word 'fair' into
rules which humans have to apply (I am even willing to concede here that
lawyers are human).

What contitutes fairness? - exactly equal gliders and instruments (and
crew, etc, but you are not borrowing my wife), now that's fair. Or not,
depending on how you argue it.

In UK the siuation in question is simple. The gate opens, not at the
CD's whim, but with max height at 3,000ft AGL it opens 10 minutes after
the last glider in the class starts to be towed. For every 200ft added
to
max height, add 1 minute. No ifs, no buts. The only thing the CD can
do
after that is cancel the task and have a rebrief before the gate opens
if
it is UNSAFE to continue.

Nobody pretended that gliding was fair when I was a boy in the
Nationals.
The winner was the pilot with most points after the last day, however it
panned out.

With 20/20 hindsight everything is clear, unfortunately that is not, by
definition, available at the time a problem occurs.
Peter has described the UK position accurately except the Director can
also cancel a task for sporting reasons as well as safety reasons and may
also change the location of the drop zone. In the case described the
director could have cancelled launching, recalled the field and wither
scrubbed or rebriefed. If the gate had been opened then the result would
have stood. Once the gate is opened there can only be a retask if ALL
competitors land back.
Under UK rules it is not permitted to cancel a competition day if a
competitor finishes the task and in the case described above the day could
not have been cancelled. I have to say I have great sympathy with JJ in
this case as he, and the other competitors have been subjected to gross
unfairness. It is not their fault that the problem arose. The jury have
acted unfairly to many in an attempt to be fair to a few. I suggest you
need to look at your rules.
I know soccer is not the most popular game in the US but if after a game
it was discovered, and it frequently is, that a winning goal has been
allowed which was either not a goal or the result of a foul the result of
the match still stands.

My sympathies are entirely with John Sinclair. If all competitors are given
a launch before the start line opens, but a few of them fail to soar and
land out or land back, that is their problem.
It has happened to me to me on a couple of occasions, when I fell down and
was then unable to get away from a relight due to deteriorating conditions.
Tough t*tty.

I think this decision sets a dangerous precedent. If a competitor was
leading with one day to go, he could deliberately land out, then claim
that he wasn't given a fair opportunity to compete and get the day
scrubbed to the detriment of his closest competitors.

Derek Copeland

On Jul 4, 11:48*pm, JJ Sinclair wrote:
(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

FWIW
This is a good example of where use of the advisors is invaluable.
They are in the air and can
afdvise whether the day meets the "fair and safe" criteria. If it does
not, they are obligated to say
so and advise either holding the opening or not opening the task. If
the task is opened, they day should go on,
unless the CD cancels they day due to safety concerns, which he is
permitted and encouraged to do under the
rules.
All that said, don't quit JJ. We like having your grumpy self around
to make us laugh and keep us honest.
UH

Tuno wrote:
snip What is the definition of fair?/snip

JJ:

There is a jury at the contest appointed to make that determination.
They met, deliberated, and rendered a decision, not once, but twice.
If the system was completely objective, we would have computers do
every bit of the work, and we agree to work within those subjective
parameters when we take one of those limited Parowan contest slots.

ted/2NO

Here's a little more background from someone that was in the air then
but has no dog in this fight.

The drop point was non-standard due to a storm shadowing the entire
airport valley except the drop point. It was downwind 5 to 8 miles from
the airport depending on the towplane you drew. Lift was 8 miles or more
away on a ridge still in the sun for early launchers. Release was
limited to 2000 ft above the airport. The storm was slowly moving to
shadow the drop point and the rest of the valley during the launch. The
drop point did not allow searching other areas for lift without risking
a pre-start landout in the desert. With the headwind, virga and sink
back to the airport a direct return from the most distant drop point
without climbing was not possible.

There were no relights in the Std Class (11) or the first 20+ Sports
class launches. The last 3 Sports class launches (except the pull backs,
which never flew) landed out or returned to the airport. The ridge that
had been generating thermals for the early launchers had been in shadow
for quite awhile by then and finally quit producing lift.

The 18 meter class launched next. All 4 landed back or landed out
without contacting lift to climb in.

The 15 meter class then launched the first 3 ships. I was one of these.
All returned to the airport. One straight in quite low. The launch was
stopped when the chief tow pilot recommended stopping due to extreme
turbulence in the pattern from the slowly expanding storm.

I maintained altitude off tow until the 0 quit, but the virga at least
moved out of the direct path back to the airport so I got back with
little drama. But encountered no lift to climb in.

10 for 10 landed back indicating the storm had for practical purposes
killed any chance of climbing from launch given the drop point in use.

By the way, the Std and Sports advisors launched early and had no
problem climbing away and were not in the area at the time. Cloudbase
was 11-12000 ft above the airport with a 6000 ft start height. Sun was
still on the ground at the farthest edge of the start cylinder, 10+
miles away, on the other side of the ridge. There was no 18 m class
advisor. The 15 m advisor was on the ground next in line for a launch
when it was halted.

-Dave

ZL wrote:
Tuno wrote:
snip What is the definition of fair?/snip

JJ:

There is a jury at the contest appointed to make that determination.
They met, deliberated, and rendered a decision, not once, but twice.
If the system was completely objective, we would have computers do
every bit of the work, and we agree to work within those subjective
parameters when we take one of those limited Parowan contest slots.

ted/2NO

Here's a little more background from someone that was in the air then
but has no dog in this fight.

The drop point was non-standard due to a storm shadowing the entire
airport valley except the drop point. It was downwind 5 to 8 miles from
the airport depending on the towplane you drew. Lift was 8 miles or more
away on a ridge still in the sun for early launchers. Release was
limited to 2000 ft above the airport. The storm was slowly moving to
shadow the drop point and the rest of the valley during the launch. The
drop point did not allow searching other areas for lift without risking
a pre-start landout in the desert. With the headwind, virga and sink
back to the airport a direct return from the most distant drop point
without climbing was not possible.

There were no relights in the Std Class (11) or the first 20+ Sports
class launches. The last 3 Sports class launches (except the pull backs,
which never flew) landed out or returned to the airport. The ridge that
had been generating thermals for the early launchers had been in shadow
for quite awhile by then and finally quit producing lift.

The 18 meter class launched next. All 4 landed back or landed out
without contacting lift to climb in.

The 15 meter class then launched the first 3 ships. I was one of these.
All returned to the airport. One straight in quite low. The launch was
stopped when the chief tow pilot recommended stopping due to extreme
turbulence in the pattern from the slowly expanding storm.

I maintained altitude off tow until the 0 quit, but the virga at least
moved out of the direct path back to the airport so I got back with
little drama. But encountered no lift to climb in.

10 for 10 landed back indicating the storm had for practical purposes
killed any chance of climbing from launch given the drop point in use.

By the way, the Std and Sports advisors launched early and had no
problem climbing away and were not in the area at the time. Cloudbase
was 11-12000 ft above the airport with a 6000 ft start height. Sun was
still on the ground at the farthest edge of the start cylinder, 10+
miles away, on the other side of the ridge. There was no 18 m class
advisor. The 15 m advisor was on the ground next in line for a launch
when it was halted.

-Dave


The launch was slowed by the remote drop point. A bit over an hour for
the first 2/3 of the field. It felt longer as the last hope for lift
dwindled with the storm growing while waiting for a launch. And the day
never recycled in the valley, staying overcast and cool the rest of the day.

On Jul 6, 6:50*am, ZL wrote:
ZL wrote:
Tuno wrote:
snip What is the definition of fair?/snip

JJ:

There is a jury at the contest appointed to make that determination.
They met, deliberated, and rendered a decision, not once, but twice.
If the system was completely objective, we would have computers do
every bit of the work, and we agree to work within those subjective
parameters when we take one of those limited Parowan contest slots.

ted/2NO

Here's a little more background from someone that was in the air then
but has no dog in this fight.

The drop point was non-standard due to a storm shadowing the entire
airport valley except the drop point. It was downwind *5 to 8 miles from
the airport depending on the towplane you drew. Lift was 8 miles or more
away on a ridge still in the sun for early launchers. Release was
limited to 2000 ft above the airport. The storm was slowly moving to
shadow the drop point and the rest of the valley during the launch. The
drop point did not allow searching other areas for lift without risking
a pre-start landout in the desert. With the headwind, virga and sink
back to the airport a direct return from the most distant drop point
without climbing was not possible.

There were no relights in the Std Class (11) or the first 20+ Sports
class launches. The last 3 Sports class launches (except the pull backs,
which never flew) landed out or returned to the airport. The ridge that
had been generating thermals for the early launchers had been in shadow
for quite awhile by then and finally quit producing lift.

The 18 meter class launched next. All 4 landed back or landed out
without contacting lift to climb in.

The 15 meter class then launched the first 3 ships. I was one of these.
All returned to the airport. One straight in quite low. The launch was
stopped when the chief tow pilot recommended stopping due to extreme
turbulence in the pattern from the slowly expanding storm.

I maintained altitude off tow until the 0 quit, but the virga at least
moved out of the direct path back to the airport so I got back with
little drama. But encountered no lift to climb in.

10 for 10 landed back indicating the storm had for practical purposes
killed any chance of climbing from launch given the drop point in use.

By the way, the Std and Sports advisors launched early and had no
problem climbing away and were not in the area at the time. Cloudbase
was 11-12000 ft above the airport with a 6000 ft start height. Sun was
still on the ground at the farthest edge of the start cylinder, 10+
miles away, on the other side of the ridge. There was no 18 m class
advisor. The 15 m advisor was on the ground next in line for a launch
when it was halted.

-Dave

The launch was slowed by the remote drop point. A bit over an hour for
the first 2/3 of the field. It felt longer as the last hope for lift
dwindled with the storm growing while waiting for a launch. And the day
never recycled in the valley, staying overcast and cool the rest of the day.

I wish to echo ZL's comments. I, also, was not affected by the
decision so these are my unbiased observations. I was one of the 18m
ships who launched after conditions had shut down. I worked zero sink
and at times about +/- 0.5 kt for as long as possible and had explored
all reachable areas within reasonable glide and had no chance to get
away. Much of the time I was out of glide range back to the airport.
After struggling up a couple of hundred feet with Dave I was able to
get back to the field low with a straight in right base. Anyone who
launched after a certain point was not going to get away. The last of
the Sports Class did not have an opportunity to compete and this was
not due to pilot skill but rather conditions which had shut down
completely. There is no question in my mind as to this fact.

Bob

I was toward the front of the 15M group that was last in the grid. I
watched the last sports class guys struggle mightily, while the three
15M gliders who got launched all landed back within ten minutes.
Looking at the conditions, I was most thankful that the CD stopped the
launch!

JJ I too hope to see you back. At some point somewhere a similar
protest will end up working in your favor!

-ted/2NO

The big mistake was in opening the gate, if the last of the class is/
was struggling the CD should call them and then hold the opening of
the gate .................and never open it, if in his mind all didn't
get a fair opportunity to compete. Once the gate is opened the race
should be on and nothing should reverse that. Two years ago the last
10 sports were launched into shadow that had been on the ridge for a
good 30 minutes. I suggested to Charlie that he move the drop zone to
no avail. We all came right back and got in line for a re-light as the
rest of the class took a start and headed north. Guess we should have
protested, but I have never done that and I'm not about to start now.
JJ

Tuno wrote:
I was toward the front of the 15M group that was last in the grid. I
watched the last sports class guys struggle mightily, while the three
15M gliders who got launched all landed back within ten minutes.
Looking at the conditions, I was most thankful that the CD stopped the
launch!

JJ I too hope to see you back. At some point somewhere a similar
protest will end up working in your favor!

-ted/2NO

Just catching up with the discussion here and reading JJ's post. I was
also just thinking of the situation 2 years ago at Parowan he
mentions. I got bit by that situation- I was the second last to be
towed to the dead spot, landed back, and was last to relight only to
be towed to dying lift at a second drop zone opposite the field. I
worked 0.5 knot lift and landed out 11 miles from the field on course,
in the rain, with minor but unflyable damage. Everyone in front of me
made it on course. Everyone behind me (the re- relights) fell out. I
didn't think to protest and glad I didn't, but I sure thought the CD
was too cavalier about opening the gate. There should be some printed
guidance for CDs on how to deal with these situations to avoid
protests and pitting sportsmanship against fairness.

A few observations-
1) This idea that all gliders need to be towed to the same launch spot
is silly. We need to all be given roughly equal chances to contact
lift, and towpilots are as impartial as they come. If the lift zone
shifts, don't keep dropping ships off under virga! Ultimately, you end
up with more relights and a longer launch cue which only increases the
chance of not giving the field a sporting chance.

2) The 2000' is a standard tow height, just like there is a standard
minimum task time. It can AND SHOULD be changed by the CD given the
conditions and the input of his advisors. Dropping ships off at the
southern end of Little Salt Lake 6 miles from Parowan airport is
unsafe for low performance sports class ships. Why do we require high
energy finishes to be at 500-800' altitude, while we expect "fall
outs" to come back low energy at 500' or less??? We need some guidance
on safe glide cones after tow release while allowing for a modicum of
searching for lift. A suggestion- take a 35:1 glider, derate its glide
by 33%, yielding 4.5 statute miles per thousand feet. Then allow for a
1000' pattern. Thus, a 2000' drop can only be made out 4.5 statue
miles. If a greater distance is anticipated, then the tow height
should be raised. This is not unreasonable given the entries in sports
class, and would still be sporting if not a little unsafe still. This
would also prevent the too high problem-- If you towplane encounters
lift early on tow, or your sailplane is light, you end up hitting
2000' ceiling well before the thermal that everyone is circling in 5
miles from the field. Then you must release and lose altitude before
getting to the gaggle/lift zone/etc, putting you at a double
disadvantage- you lost altitude plus you probably don't have the
airport in safe glide anymore. You Duo Discus guys don't know what I'm
talking about here I know... I must stress that while pilots are
responsible for their safety on course and should evaluate contest
goals against aircraft and personal safety, the tow phase of flight
has few options for improving safety. This is a built-in unsafe
procedure we have in contests for moderate performance aircraft. This
is also at the root of a fairness issue.

3) Advisors should be spaced throughout the launch order, so there is
always someone near the back and front. Yes, this may mean more
advisors for a larger contest. Suggest 2 advisors or 20% of field,
whichever is greater.

4) The decision to open the gate, even with contestants having trouble
staying up, should be based on some key questions: Are the conditions
deteriorating to the degree that the task or pre-task period is
becoming clearly unsafe? Were all contestants given a "fighting
chance" to gain altitude and reach the start gate? Would an
experienced pilot/ viable competitor not be able to start given the
conditions?

5) The gate opening decision is critical, and as evidenced here is the
most important decision a CD can make. There should be a go-no go
decision tree, just like a takeoff roll and climbout, leading up to
it. Not just a perfunctory "gate will open in 15 minutes" call.

I think we can definitely go overboard trying to make it fair, and we
should not try to take the advantage of launch order out of the
equation. Sometimes luck plays a factor, and that is part of the
sport. I hope my fellow pilots would not classify me as a whiner in my
years of taking a 34:1 sailplane to regional and national sport class
contests, but we need to fix this problem. Both Parowan and this CD
have had repeated issues with similar scenarios. The SRA and soaring
community should provide guidance as to how we want the CDs to fix
this. Those are my suggestions.