500 foot rule and pilot opinion poll

Cliff Hilty wrote:

Exactly my point, Pilot E makes a decision to go straight
in and land. Excepting the fact that he will lose points
to the slowest finisher but also not pushing a bad
situation. and landing at a good airfeild. I would
reward this not penalize it! Pilot D instead is hoping
for a break in the storm and risks losing points to
pilot E with the hope of a payoff by making it home
and pushing pilot E's score down. Seems to me that
its a competetive pilots decision to make.

Wow! I am absolutely astounded that you could conclude that pilot E
deserves more points than pilot D in the scenario that I presented in my
previous post. Is there anyone else out there in RAS-land that agrees
with Cliff?

I just don't see
the need to have a single landout eliminate you from
having a chance to win a contest!

You obviously think that it is unfair for the landout to be penalized so
severely, but have you considered that reducing or eliminating the
landout penalty might be unfair to the pilots who do whatever it takes
to finish the task? And doing "whatever it takes" usually does not mean
risk-taking, but the antithesis of risk-taking: get high stay high, go
around the blue hole, take a few extra turns in the last thermal, keep a
large altitude margin throughout the final glide, etc.

How many contests
have you been to that after the first or second day
a few competitors have dropped out because of landouts
and knowing that they will not have a chance to place
even in the top three?

I don't think that's any reason to change the scoring system; I'd say
those competitors need to change their attitudes. They are obviously
placing too much importance on the ego-trip of winning, and not placing
enough importance on taking advantage of a golden opportunity to improve
and refine their cross-country soaring skills.

When a pilot falls out of contention early in a contest, that's a great
time for him to start experimenting with changes in his racing strategy,
such as reducing his aggressiveness in the selection of thermals, or
increasing his aggressiveness in making off-course excursions to seek
out the best lift. A pilot who is leading or in contention cannot afford
to indulge in such experimentation; he should be conservative and keep
on doing whatever he's been doing.

Gary Ittner P7
"Have glider, will race"

I got to agree with Marc, on this one. We are seeing a lot of MAT tasks and
about 3 hours after the gate opens, the sky is full of gliders coming from all
directions. They hit the 1 mile, 500 foot gate, pull up, slow up, get in the
pattern and start acting like gentlemen again. I flew 4 contests (one a
nationals) that used the 500 foot, 1 mile gate this year, I like it and its
much safer. At Montague the pilots were asked to get the winds form AWOS at 10
miles out and then switch over to gate frequency and LISTEN for finishers in
front of them. I knew who was finishing and where to look. Its a damned safe
way to run things. Any head-on traffic is seperated by 2 miles. I remember a
finish line at Minden nationals a few years back.I finished at 50 feet, pulled
up and banked over for a landing on 30. As I was turning final at 200 feet, I
saw 3 other ships, already on final for 30, so I slid over to 30 taxiway, just
before touch-down, someone slid in, right in front of me, on MY taxiway. When
we finish at 50 feet, we have given up most of our options, any conflict may
become a disaster.
JJ Sinclair

(Chip Bearden) wrote in message

I agree with Dale (below). I was waiting for someone to voice the
"hey, it's fun" rationale for traditional high-speed finishes and it's
amazing that it took nearly 50 postings:

1. On a purely emotional level, I miss (and I'm sure the spectators
do too) the 50 foot speed pass finish line.
SNIP
Dale Kramer

This is addressed in my very first post on the subject (go back to the
top and read the FAQs) The donut may be followed by a traditional
finish over a line at high speed. If you cross the donut at 500 feet
and 70-80 kts, you will have plenty of margin to cross the finish line
at 50 feet and no more than 120 knots. Try it; it takes 500 feet just
to build up the speed. Maybe louder will help: THE 500 FOOT RULE DOES
NOT ELMINIATE THE FUN LOW FAST FINISH.

As for your need for some physical risk to keep soaring interesting
(as opposed to the constant risk of landout inconvenience, and the
risk of losing the race) ... well, we'll just have to disagree.

I'm interested by the large number of posters on this thread who claim
they personally would never ever finish lower than 500 or 1000 feet,
yet feel putting this in a rule is a terrible idea.

John Cochrane

We fly 20 contest days per year here in Arizona Marc and every single one of
them ends with a one mile cylinder. That means that I have finished over 40
times in our ASA series in the past 2 years with the cylinder that you
described so I doubt that you have any more experience than I do with the
system.

The problem is that you may do your "non-adrenaline junky easy pullup" but
most of the pilots that fly contests will NOT be doing that either at one
mile, two miles or fifty miles. So the scenario that you described of
having someone come under you and pull up has exactly equal potential in
your cylinder finish. In fact I would go further and argue that it has MORE
potential since some pilots may continue to push fast toward home (you know
we dangerous, arrogant, hedonistic types) inside the cylinder then pull with
you now wafting around in your extended approach. The rules say nothing
about how you are to enter the pattern or when to pull up. But then silly
me.....I'm sure that's going to be on the table soon too!

This also gets back to the crowd pleasing end as well. Frankly it would
suck to sit out in the heat all day only to have your pilot finish by
entering the pattern. Might as well go down to the local community airport
and watch the Pipers land.

Casey Lenox
KC
Phoenix

My closest near-miss
resulted from a high finish (I like having a cushion, I haven't finished a
contest below 500 feet AGL in 10 years) and a normal pattern, then having
someone make a redline pass less than 100 feet below me just before my base to
final turn. He made the 4 mile call without specifying a direction, and never
saw me. Now, when I'm in the pattern, whether at a contest, or not, I'm
watching the runway, the windsock, etc., not for adrenaline junkies on the deck.

Marc

You raise a good point; the situation you described (below) can be
very dangerous. But the solution doesn't have to involve steering
turnpoints (which won't help as much if the landing direction doesn't
coincide with the finish direction) or throwing away the old finish
line. The pilot you described was at fault for not specifying a
direction if there was any doubt (the direction can vary even in ASTs
if the final leg involves a deviation for terrain or weather). But if
I hear someone four miles out when I'm in the pattern and I don't see
them right away, I go into frantic "look" mode and call out my
position (e.g., JB turning left base). This is on top of the normal
lookout for other traffic in the pattern.

I will also radio the other pilot(s), as I did last week at New Castle
when three of us were finishing (as it turned out) less than ten
seconds apart from two different directions and three different
altitudes/energies. It took 30 seconds on the way in to establish
beyond a doubt that we had each other in sight and there was
sufficient separation. Otherwise one or more of us would have pulled
up and finished high. As with everything else in soaring involving
other pilots (e.g., gaggles), I don't take anything for granted, even
with ASTs, steering turns, OR finish cylinders. I'm not saying you
did, but it sounds like there was more than one way to avoid the
problem you recounted.

Another solution is the displaced (to one side) finish line used at
Elmira. Rolling finishes are still OK but flying finishes are parallel
to but 1/4 mile away from the runway.

Chip Bearden

"Kilo Charlie" wrote...
The problem is that you may do your "non-adrenaline junky easy pullup" but
most of the pilots that fly contests will NOT be doing that either at one
mile, two miles or fifty miles. So the scenario that you described of
having someone come under you and pull up has exactly equal potential in
your cylinder finish. In fact I would go further and argue that it has MORE
potential since some pilots may continue to push fast toward home (you know
we dangerous, arrogant, hedonistic types) inside the cylinder then pull with
you now wafting around in your extended approach. The rules say nothing
about how you are to enter the pattern or when to pull up. But then silly
me.....I'm sure that's going to be on the table soon too!

We had a problem with this at the Tonopah regionals in 2001. The center of the
1 mile cylinder was at the exact center of the airport, which placed the edge of
the cylinder within the airport boundaries. Also many people (myself include)
did not trust their computers, or weren't clear on the fact that the finish
occurred at the edge of the cylinder, so they wouldn't pull up until they
reached the airport center.

By the 2002 regionals up here, everyone had pretty much figured how the finish
cylinders worked, the CDs were using 2 mile cylinders when appropriate, and the
pilots were all pulling up at the edge of the cylinder. Works a lot better.
Maybe you guys are just slow learners down there.

This also gets back to the crowd pleasing end as well. Frankly it would
suck to sit out in the heat all day only to have your pilot finish by
entering the pattern. Might as well go down to the local community airport
and watch the Pipers land.

I don't have a crew very often, but when I do, my wife and daughter are happy to
see me safely on the ground. They could care less about worm burning
finishes...

Marc

I'm with you Casey.

I have continued to do speed passes on all my cylinder finishes when
practical.

I believe this can be accomplished much more safely than a finish line that
is 3000 feet wide, it can also be more dangerous if everyone does it from
many directions.

All the CD has to say is that all speed passes must be down the runway on
one side or the other and the pull up must be at mid field.

Pilots failing to do this can be penalized for unsafe flying, no more rules
are necessary.

This way, everyone, including me knows what to expect and where.

Dale Kramer
K1





"Kilo Charlie" wrote in message news:J8geb.4528$hp5.3072@fed1read04...
We fly 20 contest days per year here in Arizona Marc and every single one of
them ends with a one mile cylinder. That means that I have finished over 40
times in our ASA series in the past 2 years with the cylinder that you
described so I doubt that you have any more experience than I do with the
system.

The problem is that you may do your "non-adrenaline junky easy pullup" but
most of the pilots that fly contests will NOT be doing that either at one
mile, two miles or fifty miles. So the scenario that you described of
having someone come under you and pull up has exactly equal potential in
your cylinder finish. In fact I would go further and argue that it has MORE
potential since some pilots may continue to push fast toward home (you know
we dangerous, arrogant, hedonistic types) inside the cylinder then pull with
you now wafting around in your extended approach. The rules say nothing
about how you are to enter the pattern or when to pull up. But then silly
me.....I'm sure that's going to be on the table soon too!

This also gets back to the crowd pleasing end as well. Frankly it would
suck to sit out in the heat all day only to have your pilot finish by
entering the pattern. Might as well go down to the local community airport
and watch the Pipers land.

Casey Lenox
KC
Phoenix

At 05:54 30 September 2003, Gary Ittner wrote:

You obviously think that it is unfair for the landout
to be penalized so severely, but have you considered
that reducing or eliminating the landout penalty might
be unfair to the pilots who do whatever it takes to
finish the task? And doing 'whatever it takes' usually
does not mean risk-taking, but the antithesis of risk-taking

Gary, Yes I think it is unfair to penalize the landout
so severely. but doing 'whatever it takes' is exactly
that 'What ever it takes takes' and inherently will
be as much dangerous as it will be throttle back and
go around. And nothing in the way of rules will change
that. But the question then is. Is that unfair to
those pilots? I don't think so! It still becomes a
pilots choice to do either. They will still score more
than those that don't think that way. However. consider
this if making it back is as important as you seem
to feel it is, in terms of competing, then why aren't
the rules written so that NO score is given for a landout?
Why? Because until recently it was almost impossible
to score fairly for the distance AND time. With the
flight loggers and computers available now this could
become a reality. I realize that you will never be
happy with that, and maybe nobody else will be either.
And in that case it probably won't happen. But I for
one would like to try it!

I do agree with you about having the right attitude
about learning after being out of contention in a contest.
And learning from that experiance. No changes in scoring
would change that. 'Attitude is everything' and 'Change
is inevitable' One of these you can do something about
the other you can't!

Cliff Hilty Ventus B

In article ,
(John Cochrane) wrote:

I'm interested by the large number of posters on this thread who claim
they personally would never ever finish lower than 500 or 1000 feet,
yet feel putting this in a rule is a terrible idea.

I haven't previously spoken up, but I'm one of them, in so far as I
would never finish with insufficient energy to get to 500 ft at pattern
speed. I've only been to a couple of local/regional contests, and only
in a glider (PW5) that isn't well suited to a high speed and low finish,
but I wouldn't rule out coming in low and fast as long as I was
comfortable with getting back to 500 ft for the pattern. I would (and
have) land out 3 miles short when I think I'm going to get to the field
boundary at 50 knots and 100 ft.

As for the rule being a terrible idea, I agree. I'm also against rules
(laws) banning drugs, guns, and prostitution even though I don't partake
of any of those things, so perhaps you'll discount my opinion on that
one.

-- Bruce

Marc...I hope that you don't feel that you're being picked on since your
posts always seem to be well thought out and to the point. I wanted to say
that I agree with Chip again re the fact that it was the fault of the pilot
that flew under you/near you. It is very bad policy to intentionally fly at
redline (or any other speed for that matter) through the landing pattern,
esp the base or final areas.

This season we were actually asked to do this at the Region 9
contest.....they insisted (in spite of protests) that we finish to the west
(90 degrees to the active runway), then pullup and turn hard left crossing
the runway again and enter a left hand pattern. This resulted in landing
pilots on downwind with the later finishers coming at at redline 90 degrees
to their path and even worse with their back to them on base leg. Now THAT
was dangerous! The point I want to make is that there was a lot of talk on
the radio between finishers and landing pilots re position and altitude. I
would not want to do it again but it did work out with everyone
communicating well.

Casey