"10km / only once" amendment

Hi Ian,

I would vote in favor also for abolishing the "10 km / only once" rule, but I think it has no chance at the next IGC meeting.
I agree with KISS; the current rules are much to complicated and moreover rules for badges and records are different and mixed up. What a mess. Very easy to fall in a trap as we did.

B.t.w. do you understand why the 1.4.5.b. rule at its end says "This course must be declared" while the rule says "in any sequence or not at all". I just don't understand (another trap?).

P.s. Our amendment will probably go for :

1.4.5. Distance performance for badges only
b. Distance using up to three turnpoints:
A flight from a startpoint via up to three declared turnpoints to a finishpoint . If the finishpoint is the landing place it need not be declared. In any sequence, no more then three visits to declared turnpoints may be claimed for the performance.

Would like your opinion on that Ian (apart from abolishing the rule)

Regards,

Karel, NL



"Ian Strachan" schreef in bericht ...
In article , Todd Pattist
writes

I'd be in favor of just abolishing the 10 km rule.

Quite. The KISS principle applies.

--
Ian Strachan
Lasham Gliding Centre, UK

"K.P. Termaat" wrote in message ...
Hi Ian,

I would vote in favor also for abolishing the "10 km / only once" rule,
but I think it has no chance at the next IGC meeting.
I agree with KISS; the current rules are much to complicated and
moreover rules for badges and records are different and mixed up. What a
mess. Very easy to fall in a trap as we did.

The only major difference between badge and record flight is that for
badges, a triangle doesn't need to meet the min/max leg length, and
that one may use the turnpoint options that I expand on below. For
records, one must declare the exact task to be flown, unless going for
free distance, and that makes sense as that is part of the planning
process for the flight.

I'd like to see this change just a little so one could declare any
time before start instead of before takeoff. But that's for another
thread.

B.t.w. do you understand why the 1.4.5.b. rule at its end says "This
course must be declared" while the rule says "in any sequence or not at
all". I just don't understand (another trap?).

I quote the key sentence in 1.4.5.b:

"The TURNPOINTS must be at least 10 km apart and may be claimed once,
in any sequence, or not at all."

Instead of "visit" the FAI says "claim". Your amendment is exactly
the same as the current rulle exept for the "10 km" part.

For a badge flight this 3 TP task lets the pilot declare 3 different
O&R flights or up to 3 triangles that may meet the badge requirement.
Then, once airborne the pilot can choose one of these tasks or may
just do a straight out. This is a valuable tool for the badge seeker
flying in an area where the weather makes it difficult to choose the
'right' task early in the day. It still requires the badge seeker to
declare the turnpoints to be used, requiring a bit more planning skill
thatn a totally free 3TP flight.

I agree the 10 km rule really should be eliminated as others have
mentioned how it doesn't have any aobvious justification. HOWEVER,
anyone who has even glanced at the rules, should be able to see this
limitation. The task is described in 3 sentences and the 10 km rule
is one of these.

P.s. Our amendment will probably go for :

1.4.5. Distance performance for badges only
b. Distance using up to three turnpoints:
A flight from a startpoint via up to three declared turnpoints to a
finishpoint . If the finishpoint is the landing place it need not be
declared. In any sequence, no more then three visits to declared
turnpoints may be claimed for the performance.

Tom Serkowski

Hello Tom,

My reply in your text below.

Karel, NL

"Tom Serkowski" schreef in bericht om...
"K.P. Termaat" wrote in message ...
Hi Ian,

I would vote in favor also for abolishing the "10 km / only once" rule,
but I think it has no chance at the next IGC meeting.
I agree with KISS; the current rules are much to complicated and
moreover rules for badges and records are different and mixed up. What a
mess. Very easy to fall in a trap as we did.

The only major difference between badge and record flight is that for
badges, a triangle doesn't need to meet the min/max leg length,
This was so until last year I guess. AL4 applies now (see 1.4.6.b. referring to 1.4.3.d.) (Sorry, but I have started the study to be a lawyer in order to be able to read the Code (;-))

and
that one may use the turnpoint options that I expand on below. For
records, one must declare the exact task to be flown, unless going for
free distance, and that makes sense as that is part of the planning
process for the flight.
Correct, only the proud owner of a 1000 km distance badge has the option of using a free finishpoint. The pilots that goes for a ditance record must declare also the finishpoint.

I'd like to see this change just a little so one could declare any
time before start instead of before takeoff. But that's for another
thread.

B.t.w. do you understand why the 1.4.5.b. rule at its end says "This
course must be declared" while the rule says "in any sequence or not at
all". I just don't understand (another trap?).

I quote the key sentence in 1.4.5.b:

"The TURNPOINTS must be at least 10 km apart and may be claimed once,
in any sequence, or not at all."

Instead of "visit" the FAI says "claim". Your amendment is exactly
the same as the current rulle exept for the "10 km" part.

For a badge flight this 3 TP task lets the pilot declare 3 different
O&R flights or up to 3 triangles that may meet the badge requirement.
Then, once airborne the pilot can choose one of these tasks or may
just do a straight out. This is a valuable tool for the badge seeker
flying in an area where the weather makes it difficult to choose the
'right' task early in the day. It still requires the badge seeker to
declare the turnpoints to be used, requiring a bit more planning skill
thatn a totally free 3TP flight.

My amendment will not change that; gives in fact more options such as an out and return as part of a larger task. So nothing wrong with that.

I agree the 10 km rule really should be eliminated as others have
mentioned how it doesn't have any aobvious justification. HOWEVER,
anyone who has even glanced at the rules, should be able to see this
limitation. The task is described in 3 sentences and the 10 km rule
is one of these.
This is correct, however I am not very sensitive to rules from the past which have no meaning any more in our days of GPS where a spot on the ground (not even a tree) can be declared as a turnpoint. The "10 km / only once" rule doesn't serve any purpose these days except of being a trap for long sportif distance flights. That there should be a rule though in the Code to avoid "yo-yoing" (the reason for the current rule in the Code focussed on mountain ridges, clear markings on the ground and photo cameras).


P.s. Our amendment will probably go for :

1.4.5. Distance performance for badges only
b. Distance using up to three turnpoints:
A flight from a startpoint via up to three declared turnpoints to a
finishpoint . If the finishpoint is the landing place it need not be
declared. In any sequence, no more then three visits to declared
turnpoints may be claimed for the performance.

Due to interesting discussions like this one our current amendment looks like:

1.4.5. Distance performance for badges only
b. Distance using up to three turnpoints:
A flight from a START POINT via up to three declared TURN POINTS to a free FINISH POINT. For the performance no more than three visits to TURNPOINTS may be claimed in any sequence or not at all.

I think this proposal has many options to pilots for making sportif long x-country flight and be rewarded with a FAI badge and it excludes the possibility of "yo-yoing" without doubt.

Karel


Tom Serkowski