2019 SSA Contest Rules Pilot Opinion Poll Now Open

On Tuesday, October 15, 2019 at 6:27:47 PM UTC-6, Ken Sorenson wrote:
On Wednesday, October 2, 2019 at 6:40:59 PM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
US contest pilots.

The 2019 SSA Contest Rules Pilot Opinion Poll is now open and will remain open through October 20, 2019. You must be on the SSA Pilot Ranking List to participate. We look forward to your input.

You can access the poll online at: http://www.adamsfive.com/a5soaring/survey/surveys.php

Rich Owen is running unopposed for re-election to the Rules Committee. Consequently, Rich will return to his RC seat for a four-year term. Congratulations Rich!

For the SSA Contest Rules Committee
Andy Blackburn, Chair
9B


A strict adoption of the IGC rules would result in some very significant changes in US racing:
No Sports Class
No FAI Combined Class
No handicapping in the Standard Class
IGC club class handicaps rather than US handicaps
Different handicap approach to weights
No task changes in the air
No Modified Assigned Task
Ground-up communications allowed
Team flying (air-air communication) allowed
Different start system (line allowed, different or no start height limitations)
Different Assigned (Racing) Task turnpoint scoring (nick and go)
No safety finish
No airport landing bonus
More Assigned (Racing ) Tasks (at least 1/3, which is more than typical in US racing)
More gaggling likely
Different penalties and penalty system (some US penalties and pilot disqualifications are missing)
Different scoring philosophy re landouts and lone-wolf flying
Different scoring program maybe/probably? (SeeYou-competition vs Winscore)

Some of these changes could be neutralized by Local Procedures. Of course if enough of the changes are neutralized, what’s the point in making the switch?

The push toward FAI rules appears to be driven most strongly by our top US racers. Their primary goal seems to be to make US racing a better training and US-team selection format for FAI racing. This is a reasonable goal and our change to FAI racing would probably help. However, our success at the WGCs will depend not just upon US pilots becoming more familiar with FAI rules and procedures, but more importantly getting better at tactical gaggling, flying Assigned Tasks, and flying more aggressive tasks. Personally, I think these three factors are far more important than FAI vs US rules. It’s worth noting that US Rules currently allow a CD to set more Assigned Tasks and to set more aggressive tasks. A change to FAI rules is not required to do this. This is a matter for the CDs, not for the rules-makers..

Many of the changes associated with the adoption of FAI rules may negatively impact participation in US racing. Allowing team flying and ground-up communications may reduce participation by requiring additional levels of preparation and sophistication in order to compete effectively (you must now have team mates and a ground support system in order to place well?). More Assigned Tasks and more aggressive tasking will result in more landouts, which is desirable for FAI race training, but may drive crewless pilots away from racing toward other alternatives (Regional contests or OLC camps). There are some (many?) current Nationals pilots who have little interest in flying contests with mostly Assigned Tasks, lots of gaggling, and significantly more aggressive tasking. Nationals won’t have the big gaggles needed for FAI training if participation shrinks.


This issue is certainly not a simple one. And it could have major implications for US racers for years to come. It will be important for US racers who are not intending to fly in FAI/WGC races to speak up and let the Rules Committee know your thoughts. It will also be important for those US racers who are interested in switching to FAI racing to take a careful look at all the (perhaps unintended) consequences of a change to FAI rules. It won’t do much good to switch to FAI rules if participation in our contests drops significantly and our contests shrink even further. It is also worth noting that the FAI rules are slowly moving closer to US rules.

It would indeed be better for our WGC oriented pilots to train with FAI rules and tasking. But will this be better for the overall US racing community?

Please take the time to complete the Rules Committee Poll

Ken Sorenson “KM�

As a newly minted soaring pilot, I've been following this thread with interest. I have never flown in a race before and I don't have a race ID on my glider, but would like to try it one day. As such, I haven't been allowed to respond to the survey.

My personal opinion in this matter though, would tend to reflect much of what you say the top pilots are pushing for--an adoption of FAI rules. I doubt I'll ever get to compete in an international competition and be competitive at that level, but from my perspective (from the bottom), it only makes sense to fly by the rules of the international community. If I ever get to fly in a contest, it will likely be the Club Class (my glider is a Phoebus). Having FAI rules that benefit "team flying" will not discourage me from contest flying. In fact, it may motivate me to find a fellow team member that I can strategize with. I would be able to learn a lot from that experience. I don't see FAI rules discouraging ME from contest flying. If I were able to vote, I'd vote for adopting FAI rules.

On Thursday, October 17, 2019 at 6:01:18 PM UTC-4, John Foster wrote:
On Tuesday, October 15, 2019 at 6:27:47 PM UTC-6, Ken Sorenson wrote:
On Wednesday, October 2, 2019 at 6:40:59 PM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
US contest pilots.

The 2019 SSA Contest Rules Pilot Opinion Poll is now open and will remain open through October 20, 2019. You must be on the SSA Pilot Ranking List to participate. We look forward to your input.

You can access the poll online at: http://www.adamsfive.com/a5soaring/survey/surveys.php

Rich Owen is running unopposed for re-election to the Rules Committee.. Consequently, Rich will return to his RC seat for a four-year term. Congratulations Rich!

For the SSA Contest Rules Committee
Andy Blackburn, Chair
9B


A strict adoption of the IGC rules would result in some very significant changes in US racing:
No Sports Class
No FAI Combined Class
No handicapping in the Standard Class
IGC club class handicaps rather than US handicaps
Different handicap approach to weights
No task changes in the air
No Modified Assigned Task
Ground-up communications allowed
Team flying (air-air communication) allowed
Different start system (line allowed, different or no start height limitations)
Different Assigned (Racing) Task turnpoint scoring (nick and go)
No safety finish
No airport landing bonus
More Assigned (Racing ) Tasks (at least 1/3, which is more than typical in US racing)
More gaggling likely
Different penalties and penalty system (some US penalties and pilot disqualifications are missing)
Different scoring philosophy re landouts and lone-wolf flying
Different scoring program maybe/probably? (SeeYou-competition vs Winscore)

Some of these changes could be neutralized by Local Procedures. Of course if enough of the changes are neutralized, what’s the point in making the switch?

The push toward FAI rules appears to be driven most strongly by our top US racers. Their primary goal seems to be to make US racing a better training and US-team selection format for FAI racing. This is a reasonable goal and our change to FAI racing would probably help. However, our success at the WGCs will depend not just upon US pilots becoming more familiar with FAI rules and procedures, but more importantly getting better at tactical gaggling, flying Assigned Tasks, and flying more aggressive tasks. Personally, I think these three factors are far more important than FAI vs US rules. It’s worth noting that US Rules currently allow a CD to set more Assigned Tasks and to set more aggressive tasks. A change to FAI rules is not required to do this. This is a matter for the CDs, not for the rules-makers..

Many of the changes associated with the adoption of FAI rules may negatively impact participation in US racing. Allowing team flying and ground-up communications may reduce participation by requiring additional levels of preparation and sophistication in order to compete effectively (you must now have team mates and a ground support system in order to place well?). More Assigned Tasks and more aggressive tasking will result in more landouts, which is desirable for FAI race training, but may drive crewless pilots away from racing toward other alternatives (Regional contests or OLC camps). There are some (many?) current Nationals pilots who have little interest in flying contests with mostly Assigned Tasks, lots of gaggling, and significantly more aggressive tasking. Nationals won’t have the big gaggles needed for FAI training if participation shrinks.


This issue is certainly not a simple one. And it could have major implications for US racers for years to come. It will be important for US racers who are not intending to fly in FAI/WGC races to speak up and let the Rules Committee know your thoughts. It will also be important for those US racers who are interested in switching to FAI racing to take a careful look at all the (perhaps unintended) consequences of a change to FAI rules. It won’t do much good to switch to FAI rules if participation in our contests drops significantly and our contests shrink even further. It is also worth noting that the FAI rules are slowly moving closer to US rules.

It would indeed be better for our WGC oriented pilots to train with FAI rules and tasking. But will this be better for the overall US racing community?

Please take the time to complete the Rules Committee Poll

Ken Sorenson “KM�

As a newly minted soaring pilot, I've been following this thread with interest. I have never flown in a race before and I don't have a race ID on my glider, but would like to try it one day. As such, I haven't been allowed to respond to the survey.

My personal opinion in this matter though, would tend to reflect much of what you say the top pilots are pushing for--an adoption of FAI rules. I doubt I'll ever get to compete in an international competition and be competitive at that level, but from my perspective (from the bottom), it only makes sense to fly by the rules of the international community. If I ever get to fly in a contest, it will likely be the Club Class (my glider is a Phoebus). Having FAI rules that benefit "team flying" will not discourage me from contest flying. In fact, it may motivate me to find a fellow team member that I can strategize with. I would be able to learn a lot from that experience. I don't see FAI rules discouraging ME from contest flying. If I were able to vote, I'd vote for adopting FAI rules.

Sounds reasonable, but let me point out a couple of things that would affect you(a beginner)if these rules were adopted for all US contests(not currently contemplated, but far from impossible).
You likely, sooner or later, would be assigned a "Racing Task", what we call an assigned task, that would challenge the pilots in your class but may well be beyond your ability as a newbie. You become destined to land out. Not a tragedy, maybe an adventure, but at the least, inconvenient and not so much fun. The option, not available under IGC/FAI rules, would be the US "modified assigned task. With this task, you could cut your flight somewhat shorter, come home safely, maybe a bit early, get a lower score, but get speed points. Your shorter flight would get you a suitable lower score, but you can be home for supper.
If we were to go whole hog and adopt all the IGC elements, your Club class Phoebus would be handicapped a bit more poorly than under the US system because the latest version of the IGC Club class list has had handicaps shifted to favor newer gliders like the ASW-20, rather than the "pure" adoption of relative glider performance.
In the regional, you could team fly, but you can do that now under US rules.. It is an opportunity not commonly taken advantage of.
When you get ready, jump in, no matter what the rules situation is. We have a lot of fun when were not hassling over rules stuff.

On Thursday, October 17, 2019 at 6:01:18 PM UTC-4, John Foster wrote:
On Tuesday, October 15, 2019 at 6:27:47 PM UTC-6, Ken Sorenson wrote:
On Wednesday, October 2, 2019 at 6:40:59 PM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
US contest pilots.

The 2019 SSA Contest Rules Pilot Opinion Poll is now open and will remain open through October 20, 2019. You must be on the SSA Pilot Ranking List to participate. We look forward to your input.

You can access the poll online at: http://www.adamsfive.com/a5soaring/survey/surveys.php

Rich Owen is running unopposed for re-election to the Rules Committee.. Consequently, Rich will return to his RC seat for a four-year term. Congratulations Rich!

For the SSA Contest Rules Committee
Andy Blackburn, Chair
9B


A strict adoption of the IGC rules would result in some very significant changes in US racing:
No Sports Class
No FAI Combined Class
No handicapping in the Standard Class
IGC club class handicaps rather than US handicaps
Different handicap approach to weights
No task changes in the air
No Modified Assigned Task
Ground-up communications allowed
Team flying (air-air communication) allowed
Different start system (line allowed, different or no start height limitations)
Different Assigned (Racing) Task turnpoint scoring (nick and go)
No safety finish
No airport landing bonus
More Assigned (Racing ) Tasks (at least 1/3, which is more than typical in US racing)
More gaggling likely
Different penalties and penalty system (some US penalties and pilot disqualifications are missing)
Different scoring philosophy re landouts and lone-wolf flying
Different scoring program maybe/probably? (SeeYou-competition vs Winscore)

Some of these changes could be neutralized by Local Procedures. Of course if enough of the changes are neutralized, what’s the point in making the switch?

The push toward FAI rules appears to be driven most strongly by our top US racers. Their primary goal seems to be to make US racing a better training and US-team selection format for FAI racing. This is a reasonable goal and our change to FAI racing would probably help. However, our success at the WGCs will depend not just upon US pilots becoming more familiar with FAI rules and procedures, but more importantly getting better at tactical gaggling, flying Assigned Tasks, and flying more aggressive tasks. Personally, I think these three factors are far more important than FAI vs US rules. It’s worth noting that US Rules currently allow a CD to set more Assigned Tasks and to set more aggressive tasks. A change to FAI rules is not required to do this. This is a matter for the CDs, not for the rules-makers..

Many of the changes associated with the adoption of FAI rules may negatively impact participation in US racing. Allowing team flying and ground-up communications may reduce participation by requiring additional levels of preparation and sophistication in order to compete effectively (you must now have team mates and a ground support system in order to place well?). More Assigned Tasks and more aggressive tasking will result in more landouts, which is desirable for FAI race training, but may drive crewless pilots away from racing toward other alternatives (Regional contests or OLC camps). There are some (many?) current Nationals pilots who have little interest in flying contests with mostly Assigned Tasks, lots of gaggling, and significantly more aggressive tasking. Nationals won’t have the big gaggles needed for FAI training if participation shrinks.


This issue is certainly not a simple one. And it could have major implications for US racers for years to come. It will be important for US racers who are not intending to fly in FAI/WGC races to speak up and let the Rules Committee know your thoughts. It will also be important for those US racers who are interested in switching to FAI racing to take a careful look at all the (perhaps unintended) consequences of a change to FAI rules. It won’t do much good to switch to FAI rules if participation in our contests drops significantly and our contests shrink even further. It is also worth noting that the FAI rules are slowly moving closer to US rules.

It would indeed be better for our WGC oriented pilots to train with FAI rules and tasking. But will this be better for the overall US racing community?

Please take the time to complete the Rules Committee Poll

Ken Sorenson “KM�

As a newly minted soaring pilot, I've been following this thread with interest. I have never flown in a race before and I don't have a race ID on my glider, but would like to try it one day. As such, I haven't been allowed to respond to the survey.

My personal opinion in this matter though, would tend to reflect much of what you say the top pilots are pushing for--an adoption of FAI rules. I doubt I'll ever get to compete in an international competition and be competitive at that level, but from my perspective (from the bottom), it only makes sense to fly by the rules of the international community. If I ever get to fly in a contest, it will likely be the Club Class (my glider is a Phoebus). Having FAI rules that benefit "team flying" will not discourage me from contest flying. In fact, it may motivate me to find a fellow team member that I can strategize with. I would be able to learn a lot from that experience. I don't see FAI rules discouraging ME from contest flying. If I were able to vote, I'd vote for adopting FAI rules.

The fact that your Phoebus doesn't have a competition "home" under FAI rules might be slightly discouraging (it's not a club class glider)... but don't fret, Sports Class isn't going away anytime soon and you and your Phoebus will be welcome to join the fun. One small example where the US rules are better (participation matters, every new pilot counts).

The annual rules "Oktoberfest" on r.a.s. is as predictable as frost in NH.

Keep in mind that 95% of the noise comes from 5% of the participants.

The Europeans do indeed play this game differently. The rules have some influence on the tactical environment, of course. However, the primary determinants of the competition environment are the venue (latitude, time of year, terrain), weather, task setter and who shows up.

I try to be less fussed about rules (one does need to read and understand them though!), keep my focus on flying.

best,
Evan Ludeman "T8"

Ken, et al,

Just a thought but why not just adopt FAI Rules at National Contests only in actual FAI Classes (where racing tasks should be more vigorous and contests should contain a higher % of AT). I see no need to adopt the rules in Regional Contests and I share your concern that we need to encourage greater participation in sailplane racing, which might not happen if the SSA were to strictly adopt all FAI rules.

- Chris Schrader "CN"

Isn't that exactly the proposal?

How many people are actually staying out of racing because they don't Like the rules? Very few I think.

On Monday, October 21, 2019 at 10:11:01 AM UTC-7, Tony wrote:
Isn't that exactly the proposal?

How many people are actually staying out of racing because they don't Like the rules? Very few I think.

Lots of people stay out of racing because they perceive it to be dangerous, citing gaggles and midair risk; because they don't want to land out a lot; because they don't have or want to bring a crew.

The main resistance to lots of AST tasking and current IGC scoring formulas is the feeling that it makes all three worse. All three are definitely worse in IGC events, and countries that follow IGC rules.

The other big objection I hear is from the OLC crowd who doesn't want to waste a lot of the day. If AST tasking leads to shorter tasks, to get everyone home, then the top pilots will be flying in even smaller slices of the day.

There is a decline in racing interest around the world. Many pilots perceive it to be a dangerous specialized tactical game that sort of involves gliders.

This isn't all about rules, but rules contribute to things that definitely discourage pilots from attending contests.

John Cochrane

On Friday, October 25, 2019 at 11:56:21 AM UTC-6, John Cochrane wrote:
On Monday, October 21, 2019 at 10:11:01 AM UTC-7, Tony wrote:
Isn't that exactly the proposal?

How many people are actually staying out of racing because they don't Like the rules? Very few I think.

Lots of people stay out of racing because they perceive it to be dangerous, citing gaggles and midair risk; because they don't want to land out a lot; because they don't have or want to bring a crew.

The main resistance to lots of AST tasking and current IGC scoring formulas is the feeling that it makes all three worse. All three are definitely worse in IGC events, and countries that follow IGC rules.

The other big objection I hear is from the OLC crowd who doesn't want to waste a lot of the day. If AST tasking leads to shorter tasks, to get everyone home, then the top pilots will be flying in even smaller slices of the day.

There is a decline in racing interest around the world. Many pilots perceive it to be a dangerous specialized tactical game that sort of involves gliders.

This isn't all about rules, but rules contribute to things that definitely discourage pilots from attending contests.

John Cochrane

John,

I am not a contest pilot. I enjoy flying OLC. It requires less dedication as far a time and other resources.

Any idea how many of the accidents in the USA in the past few years happened at contests due to gaggles or other "contest environment" issues? Also, when comparing accidents in World Competition, how many accidents were there as far as percentage differences when compared to our National Contests? If IGC rules are potentially more dangerous it should show up statistically.

Thank you.

Mike Carris

On Friday, October 25, 2019 at 10:56:21 AM UTC-7, John Cochrane wrote:
On Monday, October 21, 2019 at 10:11:01 AM UTC-7, Tony wrote:
Isn't that exactly the proposal?

How many people are actually staying out of racing because they don't Like the rules? Very few I think.

Lots of people stay out of racing because they perceive it to be dangerous, citing gaggles and midair risk; because they don't want to land out a lot; because they don't have or want to bring a crew.

The main resistance to lots of AST tasking and current IGC scoring formulas is the feeling that it makes all three worse. All three are definitely worse in IGC events, and countries that follow IGC rules.

The other big objection I hear is from the OLC crowd who doesn't want to waste a lot of the day. If AST tasking leads to shorter tasks, to get everyone home, then the top pilots will be flying in even smaller slices of the day.

There is a decline in racing interest around the world. Many pilots perceive it to be a dangerous specialized tactical game that sort of involves gliders.

This isn't all about rules, but rules contribute to things that definitely discourage pilots from attending contests.

John Cochrane

Isn't the justification of racing to promote the sport and push technology? So if we (US soaring pilots) want to see our sport grow in this country why would we be adopting IGC rules and the perceived baggage, and resulting further decline in partisipation ? If memory serves right didn't the US get away from IGC due to insurance issues for contests? Thanks to all those on race and contention committees!

On Friday, October 25, 2019 at 1:56:21 PM UTC-4, John Cochrane wrote:
Lots of people stay out of racing because they perceive it to be dangerous, citing gaggles and midair risk; because they don't want to land out a lot; because they don't have or want to bring a crew.

Thanks, John.

I was researching a contest I flew back in 1980 (yeah, almost 40 years ago).. Many of the gliders are still competing as are a few of the pilots. Technology has changed--navigation was via map/compass and TP verification was by photo. Your choice of final glide calculators was cardboard or plastic.

The big difference: there were over 90 entries for 67 spots. So when I read about "big" contests here with 25 gliders per class, I just want to laugh out loud. Many of you have no idea (no offense to JJ, UH, KS, KM, SZ, and others who were around then).

What happened? As with Amelia Earhart, no one really knows, but class proliferation has gotta be one reason. That's competition classes, not--never mind. We had 3 classes then. Now there are 7 (excluding 1-26). Maybe more; we keep adding to the list.

The retirement of a generation of pilots who were military trained during WWII and got into soaring afterward probably contributed.

Costs have gone up, for sure. Median household income in 1980 was $18,684, about what we had in our LS-3 at the time. The same figure now is $68,000+. That's household income, not the cost of a new state-of-the-art sailplane. I guess I didn't have to explain that. It would be interesting to engage the IRS/FBI to investigate actual pilots from 1980 and 2019 to determine their household incomes. Maybe we can get Elizabeth Warren on that one if she's elected. But I suspect 1980 skewed somewhat more to the middle class than current rosters do. Soaring has never been cheap; it's just more expensive now.

And speaking of demand that declines with higher prices, I listened to the experts who predicted that mandating GPS data loggers would increase contest participation. Right. So I'm similarly cynical that participation declines from increasing landouts will be more than offset by a national upsurge in soaring popularity from one of our own winning the Worlds. We didn't see it the last 4 times an American was World Champion but, hey, this Internet thing means the old rules don't apply, and I'm not referring to competition rules.

The U.S. Rules (for competition) weren't simple then, but they're arguably more complex now, although I applaud the Rules Committee for their work to streamline them. I don't hear anyone saying that FAI Rules are simpler, however. So even if rules complexity were an aggravating factor in declining participation, it apparently wouldn't favor adopting FAI Rules.

In fact, I'd agree with John that if FAI Rules lead to more landouts and, by implication, fewer crewless pilots, then adopting them wholesale would hurt contest participation.

I suspect Tim Taylor and others are correct in saying that moving to FAI Rules would improve the chances of U.S. pilots making it onto the podium. But if that comes at the cost of even a handful of pilots dropping out of competition, that's too high a price, IMO, in an environment where more than one class is worried about having the minimum number of competitors show up for a Nationals. I've been crewless for most of the past 13 years. I've flown my class nationals (Standard) the past 5 years and landed out 3 times, 2 of those at airports for an aero retrieve. Being crewless may or may not affect the way I fly but for sure being able to do so affects whether I show up. The same is true for tasks that result in more landouts: e.g., ASTs, especially in uncertain weather. I actually like flying ASTs and knowing we're competing on the same course, but TATs and MATs definitely get us home more often than in the old days, and I'm not even talking about distance tasks (look it up).

One of my concerns is abdicating responsibility for rules governance to another organization. We have enough complaints now (mostly undeserved) about our own Rules Committee--and we can lobby those folks any time we want. With FAI Rules, how much further removed will be the IGC Plenary or whomever makes the decisions? Many think the U.S. Rules have been arguably better in certain ways over the years (I definitely like the flexibility the current start cylinder provides to tailor one's start to the conditions and course).. How much noise will we make when we can no longer control our own destiny, so to speak? Fast forward to 2022: "I'm tired of trying to work from within to make change in the IGC; it's time for the U.S. to go our own way!")

I know, I know, we can deal with these conflicts with local procedures. But isn't FAI Rules with enough local procedures to accommodate our preferences essentially the same as U.S. Rules that combine the best of FAI and U.S.?

Just for grins, how about two sets of rules at the same contest? I'm not sure it's still true but for a while we had two different standards for GPS flight recorders (Appendix B seems to have been omitted from the Rules in 2019). If you wanted to be considered for the U.S. Team, you needed a higher-standard flight recorder than did the masses (all 5 or 6 of them). So why not score the Nationals using FAI and US formulae and only the FAI scores count for U.S. Team selection? Or assign ASTs but allow 5 or 10 mile circles and score them both ways, with only the 500m circle flights counting for U.S. Team selection. Sure, that means you could win the Nationals but be excluded for Team selection (which could have happened with the flight recorder rule). But if changing the world order by pushing American pilots up the ranks is that important, so be it.

I'm confident the Rules Committee will do the right thing as long as they continue to pay attention to shrinking contest rolls and trying to address that.

Chip Bearden
JB

I should have added -- the perceived risk of landout damage is also significant in many people's reluctance to race. And it is a real factor. While I was keeping statistics, there was an event, usually a landout, with significant damage in about one out of every two contests.

Glider damage is less severe than people damage, and we are fortunate that the ratio of people damaged glide damage is so low. But any event with glider damage risks people damage, and people don't like to damage their gliders even if they personally are not at risk.

Needless to say, more long IGC style ASTs will mean more landouts, especially among the newer pilots. If you like gaggle racing, we really should keep the MAT with the option for "long MAT". It's just an AST with a time limit rather than a distance limit.

John Cochrane