End of Season Sunset Warning for SSA-OLC Participants

Eric,

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
news:PdLLg.10359$YZ3.6807@trnddc03...
Yuliy Gerchikov wrote:

those who do NOT post tend to be the more experienced and wiser pilots.
See any connection?

No, I don't. This SSA "policing problem" you mention didn't exist until
recently, so that couldn't be the reason those pilots didn't post.

Wise pilots see the problems that exist, wiser pilots see the problems that
are coming.

Most of the flights posted don't exceed 18,000', don't enter restricted
airspace, and don't fly after sunset, so maybe these restrictions won't
deter most pilots.

See, here is an example of the problem that is coming. Yesterday it was
18,000. Today it is flying after sunset. What's tomorrow? How do we know if
tomorrow somebody won't start arbitrarily pulling some flights from OLC for
low passes or for ridge soaring, citing FAR Part 91 Sec. 91.119(c)? What's
next? Cloud clearance? Non-standard landing patterns?...

Some people just feel that they don't need to subject themselves to this
level of scrutiny -- and in today's world with today's attitudes I don't
blame them.
--
Yuliy

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.

Yuily, you need to move past the bargaining phase of the grieving
process, and accept that you must remove these flights from the OLC
because they make us look bad as a group. You could petition the SSA
Board to change the FAR policy, but you are not likely to get a warm
response. In fact, given the present situation, you are not likely to
get any response for some time.

As far as changing the rules, the sunset rule has been on the books for
longer than almost anyone can remember. The SSA did not make this rule,
they just decided not to ignore it. It is unfortunate that the SSA FAR
policy statement is not dated, but I received a copy of it on January
20, 2006 when I was researching my presentation for the Knauff & Grove
March Soaring Seminar in State College, PA. It is also covered in the
presentation slides which were posted to the OLC site on April 1. See:

http://www2.onlinecontest.org/olcphp...c=olc-i&spr=en

It is unfortunate that you did not see this information. But most
reasonable people find it intuitively obvious that you cannot get
credit for breaking the rules. And some of them have been complaining
about this as well. Is it reasonable to allow ignorace to become an
unfair advantage?


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.

Going back through the season and arbitrarily hand-picking "bad" flights
seems like huge waste of time -- yours and everybody else's.

More generally, I can't help but notice that OLC has become a much worse
place since SSA got involved. It started with a huge ugly STATIONARY banner
on top of SSA-OLC page that serves no good purpose but to generate
advertisement income for SSA at the expense of users' screen space. I
checked other national OLCs, and the ONLY three out of 29 that do this
tasteless disservice to their users are AT, FR and US.

Now this policing of the traces. OLC used to be an extremely valuable tool
for sharing and learning. I used to rave about it and promote it to all my
soaring friends. Still, I estimate that only about one-third of the pilots I
know post their flights. Which is a pity, because those who do NOT post tend
to be the more experienced and wiser pilots. See any connection?

You can count the "stages" in the "process", but I do not see how you can
count on the last one being acceptance. Many did not accept OLC to begin
with and still fewer will if the current trends with SSA-OLC continue. The
rate of participation will be further diminishing, as will be the value of
the OLC to the rest of us. Pity.

Once again, U.S.A. shows the way.

Thank you.
--
Yuliy Gerchikov


"Doug Haluza" wrote in message
oups.com...
This is cross posted from the SSA Home News & Information General
News:

As the days get shorter as the end of the soaring season nears, the
SSA-OLC Committee has been receiving complaints about flights after
sunset without required aircraft lighting. Although the requirements
for night flight begin at twilight for pilots in the US, the
requirements for aircraft lighting begin at sunset. Gliders without
approved lighting must land, and move clear of lighted runways and
taxiways before sunset.

IGC flight logs contain a GPS time stamp which is the most exact time
standard readily available. So, violations of this requirement are
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...Violations.pdf

The SSA-OLC Committee prefers that pilots voluntarily remove the
flights, rather than having them removed by an admin. We have contacted
a number of pilots to request this, and they are currently in various
stages of the 5-step grieving process (denial, anger, bargaining,
depression, and acceptance). You can avoid this emotional roller
coaster by planning and executing your flights to be complete before
sunset, unless you have approved night lighting.

You can't just duct tape a flashlight to the nose for night flight. The
requirements for navigation lights are very specific to color,
intensity and direction. If your aircraft is equipped with approved
night lighting, and it was used for flight after sunset, you must put a
note in the comments section of the OLC claim form explaining this.

We also have been advised of flight claims that show altitudes in the
log well above the 18,000' MSL limit for Class-A airspace in the US.
The IGC logger altitude is subject to a number of errors, which could
total to several hundred feet. We are currently reviewing with the
pilots a number of flights that appear to exceed even a reasonable
error budget.

Note that unless your flight reference altimeter has been properly
calibrated for IFR flight, and is set to a current ATC altimeter
setting, you will need to allow an extra buffer below 18,000' MSL
indicated altitude to account for possible errors. If you have an
encounter with an IFR aircraft with calibrated altitude references, the
calibrated references and ATC logs will be used to determine your
actual altitude in any subsequent investigation.

Again, if your flight log shows flight above 18,000 MSL, after
correcting for field elevation at takeoff, you will need to provide an
explanation in the comments section of the OLC claim form explaining
this. The same requirement applies to entering special use airspace.
This will immediately answer any questions that may concern other
competitors, or anyone else reviewing your flight log in the future.

Finally, if you note a flight that appears to be questionable, do not
speculate in public forums (like news://rec.avation.soaring). Contact
the pilot privately if you can. If the flight is in the US, contact the
SSA-OLC Committee by email at olcatssadotorg. Or use the complaint
tab on the OLC Web header to initiate a partner check.

Doug Haluza
SSA-OLC Admin

Doug, the sunset rule may have been on the books, but not on olc rules
until recently.
You decided to enforce it retroactively, which is unfair to say the
least. I guess this is one way to win a contest, when someone is
catching up - remove their flights...
simple fact is that OLC was great until SSA took over. It is simply a
shame the way it has been administered. You managed to upset your most
loyal promoters and contestants.
I propose a new rule for next season, each olc participants must be
checked for drugs after each flight.

Ramy

Doug Haluza wrote:
Yuily, you need to move past the bargaining phase of the grieving
process, and accept that you must remove these flights from the OLC
because they make us look bad as a group. You could petition the SSA
Board to change the FAR policy, but you are not likely to get a warm
response. In fact, given the present situation, you are not likely to
get any response for some time.

As far as changing the rules, the sunset rule has been on the books for
longer than almost anyone can remember. The SSA did not make this rule,
they just decided not to ignore it. It is unfortunate that the SSA FAR
policy statement is not dated, but I received a copy of it on January
20, 2006 when I was researching my presentation for the Knauff & Grove
March Soaring Seminar in State College, PA. It is also covered in the
presentation slides which were posted to the OLC site on April 1. See:

http://www2.onlinecontest.org/olcphp...c=olc-i&spr=en

It is unfortunate that you did not see this information. But most
reasonable people find it intuitively obvious that you cannot get
credit for breaking the rules. And some of them have been complaining
about this as well. Is it reasonable to allow ignorace to become an
unfair advantage?


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.

Going back through the season and arbitrarily hand-picking "bad" flights
seems like huge waste of time -- yours and everybody else's.

More generally, I can't help but notice that OLC has become a much worse
place since SSA got involved. It started with a huge ugly STATIONARY banner
on top of SSA-OLC page that serves no good purpose but to generate
advertisement income for SSA at the expense of users' screen space. I
checked other national OLCs, and the ONLY three out of 29 that do this
tasteless disservice to their users are AT, FR and US.

Now this policing of the traces. OLC used to be an extremely valuable tool
for sharing and learning. I used to rave about it and promote it to all my
soaring friends. Still, I estimate that only about one-third of the pilots I
know post their flights. Which is a pity, because those who do NOT post tend
to be the more experienced and wiser pilots. See any connection?

You can count the "stages" in the "process", but I do not see how you can
count on the last one being acceptance. Many did not accept OLC to begin
with and still fewer will if the current trends with SSA-OLC continue. The
rate of participation will be further diminishing, as will be the value of
the OLC to the rest of us. Pity.

Once again, U.S.A. shows the way.

Thank you.
--
Yuliy Gerchikov


"Doug Haluza" wrote in message
oups.com...
This is cross posted from the SSA Home News & Information General
News:

As the days get shorter as the end of the soaring season nears, the
SSA-OLC Committee has been receiving complaints about flights after
sunset without required aircraft lighting. Although the requirements
for night flight begin at twilight for pilots in the US, the
requirements for aircraft lighting begin at sunset. Gliders without
approved lighting must land, and move clear of lighted runways and
taxiways before sunset.

IGC flight logs contain a GPS time stamp which is the most exact time
standard readily available. So, violations of this requirement are
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...Violations.pdf

The SSA-OLC Committee prefers that pilots voluntarily remove the
flights, rather than having them removed by an admin. We have contacted
a number of pilots to request this, and they are currently in various
stages of the 5-step grieving process (denial, anger, bargaining,
depression, and acceptance). You can avoid this emotional roller
coaster by planning and executing your flights to be complete before
sunset, unless you have approved night lighting.

You can't just duct tape a flashlight to the nose for night flight. The
requirements for navigation lights are very specific to color,
intensity and direction. If your aircraft is equipped with approved
night lighting, and it was used for flight after sunset, you must put a
note in the comments section of the OLC claim form explaining this.

We also have been advised of flight claims that show altitudes in the
log well above the 18,000' MSL limit for Class-A airspace in the US.
The IGC logger altitude is subject to a number of errors, which could
total to several hundred feet. We are currently reviewing with the
pilots a number of flights that appear to exceed even a reasonable
error budget.

Note that unless your flight reference altimeter has been properly
calibrated for IFR flight, and is set to a current ATC altimeter
setting, you will need to allow an extra buffer below 18,000' MSL
indicated altitude to account for possible errors. If you have an
encounter with an IFR aircraft with calibrated altitude references, the
calibrated references and ATC logs will be used to determine your
actual altitude in any subsequent investigation.

Again, if your flight log shows flight above 18,000 MSL, after
correcting for field elevation at takeoff, you will need to provide an
explanation in the comments section of the OLC claim form explaining
this. The same requirement applies to entering special use airspace.
This will immediately answer any questions that may concern other
competitors, or anyone else reviewing your flight log in the future.

Finally, if you note a flight that appears to be questionable, do not
speculate in public forums (like news://rec.avation.soaring). Contact
the pilot privately if you can. If the flight is in the US, contact the
SSA-OLC Committee by email at olcatssadotorg. Or use the complaint
tab on the OLC Web header to initiate a partner check.

Doug Haluza
SSA-OLC Admin

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

Looking at the cover of the current Soaring, Eric M. is clearly
operating in violation of CFR 14 Section 45.25. If he's submitted any
flights to OLC this year, does he have to remove them all? 8^)

Marc

Marc Ramsey wrote:
Looking at the cover of the current Soaring, Eric M. is clearly
operating in violation of CFR 14 Section 45.25. If he's submitted any
flights to OLC this year, does he have to remove them all? 8^)

Marc

Well, actually you bring up a very good point with this, whether you
meant to or not. This is analgous to the problem we are dealing with in
the OLC. By publishing this photo, on the cover of Soaring no less, it
damages the group by reinforcing incorrect behavior. Not only does it
show non-glider pilots that we don't do the right thing (even when it's
just as easy to do it right), it also shows glider pilots the wrong
thing to do, which they may try to emulate.

Now as far as OLC goes, there is no sporting aspect to the N-number
placement. Putting N-numbers on the gear doors does not provide any
meaningful competitive advantage. And it does not show up in the flight
log. So we would not be concerned with this in the OLC.

But I would expect that if the pilot showed up at a contest with this,
and someone noted the problem, a reasonable pilot would correct the
problem immediately. I think it would be unreasonable to take the
position that since nobody specificaly told them in advance that they
must display proper N-numbers, that they don't have to fix it until
next year.

I can't be sure from the cover photo that there is not a set of
numbers placed on the fuselage, perhaps a little above the equator.

What interests me more is the question: has Eric just done a
ribbon-cut pass? There is SOMETHING hanging below the cockpit of his
Discus that looks like a ribbon draped over both sides of the nose.


Jack

---

Doug Haluza wrote:
Marc Ramsey wrote:
Looking at the cover of the current Soaring, Eric M. is clearly
operating in violation of CFR 14 Section 45.25. If he's submitted any
flights to OLC this year, does he have to remove them all? 8^)

Marc

Well, actually you bring up a very good point with this, whether you
meant to or not. This is analgous to the problem we are dealing with in
the OLC. By publishing this photo, on the cover of Soaring no less, it
damages the group by reinforcing incorrect behavior. Not only does it
show non-glider pilots that we don't do the right thing (even when it's
just as easy to do it right), it also shows glider pilots the wrong
thing to do, which they may try to emulate.

Now as far as OLC goes, there is no sporting aspect to the N-number
placement. Putting N-numbers on the gear doors does not provide any
meaningful competitive advantage. And it does not show up in the flight
log. So we would not be concerned with this in the OLC.

But I would expect that if the pilot showed up at a contest with this,
and someone noted the problem, a reasonable pilot would correct the
problem immediately. I think it would be unreasonable to take the
position that since nobody specificaly told them in advance that they
must display proper N-numbers, that they don't have to fix it until
next year.

588 wrote:
I can't be sure from the cover photo that there is not a set of numbers
placed on the fuselage, perhaps a little above the equator.

Yes, that must be it. Funny how you can see the Discus 2 lettering just
fine, though...

What interests me more is the question: has Eric just done a ribbon-cut
pass? There is SOMETHING hanging below the cockpit of his Discus that
looks like a ribbon draped over both sides of the nose.

Might be some sort of secret thermal detection gear...

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