A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Dehydration



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old March 29th 05, 08:43 PM
BB
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Here's the solution to the problem that someone might be tempted to
dive for the base of the finish cylinder and do a radical pull-up, as
well as the problem that someone might try to thermal at 300' to get up
to 500' and save himself the rolling-finish penalty:

There is a donut of airspace, from 1 mile radius to (say) 4 miles
radius, with top at 500 feet (or finish cylinder base, if higher). This
is forbidden airspace, marked in the sua file as such. One fix in that
airspace, and you've landed out. (Or, if you feel that's too much, it
gets you a 100 point penalty, plus any rolling finish penalty or time
addition.) Essentially, we create an airport located in a 1 mile radius
valley, surrounded by a plateu at 500 feet.

Now the optimum thing to do for a pilot who cares even zero about his
own safety is to fly about 90 kts (regular glide speed) to about the 2
mile radius and 501 feet, then let speed bleed off to the average speed
for the flight at the 1 mile mark. Of course, sensible people will
just fly 90 kts to the 550' 1 mile point, with trivial loss of points.

(It's not efficient to end up as slow as possible at the 1 mile mark.
To see why, imagine you could fly at 0 airspeed. Taking 10 minutes to
go the last 100 feet would not make sense. If you flew 60 mph average
for the flight, flying level at 59 mph slows you down, while flying
level at 61 mph increases your average speed. Thus, you want to cross
the line at the average speed for the flight, 60 mph in this case. 5-10
kts extra cost hundredths of a point.)

There is no incentive for low-altitude thermaling just outside the
cylinder. Once you're below 500 feet (or 1000, or whatever the top of
the donut) you landed out so you might as well glide home. (If it's 100
points plus the rolling finish penalty, you just got the rolling finish
penalty, so again you might as well stop screwing around and go land.)
If you're 5 miles out and you can't make it over the donut (about 1200
feet is the decision height here), you have every incentive to stop;
either thermal at a decent altitude or find a decent landing place.
It's just like not being able to cross the final ridge into the
airport.

There is no need for a rules change to do this. CDs may now designate
any airspace they want to as off limits. Just put the donut in the sua
file. Any CD or contest manager who wants to ensure really safe
finishes can put this into place now.

The donut can also be used with a conventional finish line. This will
ensure that pilots arrive at the airport with plenty of energy, or
already committed to rolling.

John Cochrane
BB

  #22  
Old March 29th 05, 10:15 PM
Andy Blackburn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

At 20:00 29 March 2005, Bb wrote:
Here's the solution to the problem that someone might
be tempted to
dive for the base of the finish cylinder and do a radical
pull-up, as
well as the problem that someone might try to thermal
at 300' to get up
to 500' and save himself the rolling-finish penalty:

There is a donut of airspace, from 1 mile radius to
(say) 4 miles
radius, with top at 500 feet


It's the Krispy Kreme finish!

It's appealing as a disincentive to cylinder antics
and has the additional virtue that it ensures adequate
energy for gate finishes since 500' gets most gliders
roughly to redline at 50' over the airport. Since the
main complaint about gate finishes is inadequate energy
for a pattern this basically forces a rolling finish
decision at 1 mile or more if you don't have the energy.

I'm assuming you don't get the penalty if you do a
rolling finish. I would also allow the CD some discretion
over penalties since 499' and 150 knots is not the
same as 499' at 40 knots.

Pretty interesting - I think this came up last year
didn't it?

9B



  #23  
Old March 30th 05, 01:26 AM
Steve Leonard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Or how about this for a solution. The start cylinder has a top, right?
It actually extends well beyond the boundary of the cylinder. If you
go above this top, you must come back below it and remain below it for
two minutes before you can get a start without incurring a penalty. We
all know the rule.

How about a similar, but inverted plane and system at the base of the
finish cylinder? One data point below the base of the finish cylinder,
and you cannot get a finish until you have been above it for two
minutes. Or, maybe make it five. Might as well go take your rolling
finish if you dip below it on final glide. It is much easier to apply
the same rule two different places than to try and come up with
something else, IMHO. Will certainly stop ballistic trajectories, but
not the level decel.

Don't get me wrong, John. I like donuts, but in the morning before the
Pilot's Meetings!

Steve Leonard
ZS

  #24  
Old March 30th 05, 02:59 PM
Bob Greenblatt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

If we were to have 4 cylinders (only one of which would be in use any given
day), such that the cylinder's edge was more or less down the centerline of
the runway (one on each side); or perpendicular to the runway (one at each
end), then, other than altitude, the spectator appeal is about the same as
with a line.

(We ought to change the subject of this thread.)


--
Bob
bobgreenblattATmsnDOTcom --fix this before responding


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.