2014 US Modern and US Club Class Nationals - Assigned Task calledtoday! FANTASTIC!

On Thursday, July 24, 2014 4:34:46 PM UTC-5, Dan Stroschine wrote:
I am also not a competition pilot, I'm barely even a pilot, so maybe this either a dumb idea or already available but is there a compromise of sorts.. Can a CD create a course that consists of some assigned tasks, in a specific order AND a 'free period' of sorts that could the turn area types?

Idea is already available, Dan. In the US, it is called the "Modified Assigned Task", or MAT. It can be used with up to 11 turn points, some or all can be defined by the task setter. If not all 11 are defiend by the task setter, it is up to the individual pilot to decide what additional turnpoints he will add. He does have to get within one mile of all turns, so it is not the larger areas for turning around available with the Turn Area Task (TAT), but if I pilot selects his direction of flight wisely, he can have multiple turnpoints available for his choice of when to turn around and go back through where he thought conditions were good.

Generally, the task is set to have a portion of it defined, then allow the racers to "pick their own points" for the rest of the task. I have also flown tasks where the task setter defined a course where you would be on course all day and then some if you tried to complete the entire task, and in that case, you got to chose when you wanted to end the task and come home. And you still got credit for completing a speed task. Interesting, but can be a controversial task to call in this manner.

The key thing is that on a Modified Assigned Task, the turn areas are limited to one mile radius, while on a Turn Area Task, the turn radius can be up to, I believe, 30 miles.

Steve Leonard

Yes.

It's available today and is called the Modified Assigned Task. The ratio of assigned to free flying is infinitely variable. The "no turn" form of the task gets used quite often when weather is very uncertain and is quite like OLC flying. Some feel contests should have only the no assigned turn form of task and some feel the opposite - that all turnpoints should be narrowly prescribed.

Depends what you think you're good at.

9B

*SIGH*

I'm going to have to finish the half-written article I've had for SOARING magazine for a long time.

I understand a lot of you _think_ the AT/AST is a better "race" - but its way way way more complicated than that. Here are a couple of highlights:

1) You're racing not in 3 dimensions, but in _4_ dimensions; you have to deal with the passage of time. Thermals are of limited duration so you have small inscrutable windows of time (which cannot be accurately forecasted 1-2 hours in advance when you go through the start-gate) whereupon thermals will be lined up with a direct course to your 1-mile turnpoint. Anyone who happens to hit those thermals at that moment gets a BIG advantage over anyone who has to deviate more than 10-20 degrees off-course to find a thermal in the same area when they fly through (possibly just a few minutes later).

By contrast, a well-called** TAT with limited cylinder sizes allows for thermal variations over the course of the day and doesn't penalize pilots nearly as harshly if they come through an area and just happen to time it so that they have to make a slightly larger deviation in course than "the other guy". The TAT judges the pilot more-closely on the speed he/she achieved over the ground they actually flew, and with the conditions they actually flew through at the time.

Additionally a TAT can provide a safety-margin around dangerous terrain, areas known for OD, or turnpoints that otherwise couldn't ever be used due to some local condition or effect. The AT/AST provides zero flexibility for any of these situations.

2) You really screw people with lower L/D if there isn't regularly-spaced lift. Blue-holes or large gaps between thermal/ridge/wave areas have a disproportionate effect on lower L/D ships in an AT/AST. That's because they give the pilot only two choices - both unappealing: either a probable landout or a long deviation around the area (for which they pay a huge penalty in an AT/AST). With a TAT or MAT, the pilot can fly a different course-line - deviating around the problem area - and still get credit for much of that distance. They are rewarded for making a good and safe decision, and are judged more-closely on the speed they actually fly through the air.

There are many more items I could raise; but fundamentally you need to understand what skills the AT/AST is measuring and what skills the TAT measures.. Each have their drawbacks and caveats, and which one you think is "better" should be based on what they really judge, not what you _think_ they do or which one makes you feel nostalgic, or warm & fuzzy, or speedy.

--Noel

**NOTE: There are a lot of poorly called TATs, which I think give people the impression that the task format itself is bad. News-flash: AT/ASTs can be mis-called, too! A TAT should provide cylinder sizes that are just large enough to either:
1) Accommodate the mix of gliders in a handicapped class with a wide variance in L/D (i.e. 10-15 mile cylinders), or
2) Accommodate small-scale fluctuations in thermal distribution throughout the day (i.e. 5-10 mile cylinders).
I completely agree that TATs with 20-30 mile cylinders are indicative of poor task-calling and perhaps a CD who wants "fun" more than he/she wants a "race". But if that's the case, get upset at the CD and _not_ the task format!

RANT: Soaring Contests are not like yacht racing. STOP WITH THAT COMPARISON.. Yacht racing has what we call "Grand Prix" starts. Yacht racing also has wind that tends to blow across a reasonable part of the course at the same time. Thermals are much smaller in size and duration. In sailing, its more important to jockey for position to cover your opponent and put them at a positional disadvantage so they get less wind; you cannot consistently position yourself to lessen the effect of thermals on your opponents... short of crowding them out of the thermal cores via dangerous maneuvering that will get you banned from contests. Oh, and when two yachts jockeying for position bump, it doesn't usually kill people or destroy the vessels and threaten folks on the ground (like a midair does). They may have some passing similarities; but they are very different animals: one deals with horizontal wind and a 2-dimensional water-surface, while the other deals with horizontal _and_ convective air currents and a 3-dimensional field.

Noel,

How about this for an idea! Let's write a point-counterpoint article. It would be fun to read that article!

My goal is not to "kill" the TAT. Again, I get it. It's a worthwhile tool in handicap events or when the weather is risky. That said, I believe that this task is used WAY TOO MUCH and for the wrong reasons. In fact it is almost the only task used in the US! It is a very complex, intimidating task type for beginners (something I believe that many here don't fully understand, keep in mind I have only been sailplane racing for a few years now, so I have a different perspective). I also strongly believe that the Turn Area Task introduces high degree of luck into the game.

My goal is to simply to revitalize the PURE AT TASK and increase the percentage of PURE AT TASKS flown in the US. If you run a statistical analysis of how many ATs vs TAT (and MAT) were flown in 2013, I think we would all be shocked. I'm going to work on this... I would like to see 33% at regionals and 50% at nationals. That's my goal.

FYI: The reason that I don't like MATs that much either is that they are also quite complex and are based on time (so not really a pure race).

I wrote my post yesterday from an iPhone in a cab. It was pretty poorly written. I'll write some more this weekend when I get a few minutes so sit down and focus.

Sean

Noel,

How about this for an idea? Let's write a point-counterpoint article together on AT/TAT. It would be fun article to write and better to read and hear the feedback on.

For the record, my goal is not to "kill" the TAT. Again, I get it. The TAT is a worthwhile tool for handicap events or when the weather is risky. That said, I believe that the TAT is used WAY TOO MUCH and for the wrong reasons. In fact it is almost the only task used in the US! We are only testing "that" skill. A big reason we struggle at the world championships as a country (US) for sure.

Most importantly, I believe that the TAT is a very complex, intimidating task type for beginner contest pilots. This is something I believe that many here don't fully understand, and that concerns me. Keep in mind I have only been sailplane racing for a few years now, so I have a different perspective. 3 years ago I flew my first contest (all TATs)! In addition to its strategic and functional complexity, I also strongly believe that the TAT introduces high degree of luck into the game.

My goal is to revitalize the use of PURE AT TASK and therefore increase the percentage of PURE AT TASKS flown in US contests. By PURE I mean no "ticky tacky" adding distance in the turns (US rules). More on that later...

If you run a statistical analysis of how many ATs vs TAT (and MAT) were flown in the US in 2013, I think we would all be shocked. Do we have this data out there? If not, I'm going to work on building this data point tonight on the beach with a beer! I will post it here as soon as I'm done.

Personally, I would like to see "roughly" 33% ATs at regionals and 50% ATs at nationals. That's my goal. Well to be perfectly honest, I would like to see 50-70% at regionals and 70-100% at nationals. This is because (as you now know) I believe that ATs are better measures of pilot skill. But, I know that will never happen in the US anytime soon so I will just be happy with any marginal improvement ;-).

Think about this for a moment. Should our sport be known as "sailplane racing" or as "sailplane time/distance calculator & weather guessing competition?" Talk about lining up those spectators! ;-). We need, at least, more balance in our tasking.

In regards to time/4th dimension, I fully agree with you Noel. That is probably why the US RC is working on introducing/experimenting with limited start (time) windows (say 30 minutes MAX). If we keep the starting rules "as is" we will be assured of continuing the VERY silly practice of allowing competitors to start hours apart (ensuring different conditions) and still calling it a fair race (no luck here)! My hope is that Grand Prix "like" starts will become the "norm" soon (say a 10 minute "window").

FYI: The reason that I don't like MATs that much either is that MATs are also quite complex (perhaps more complex that TATs when additional turns are required to fill in the allotted "time limit"). Again this task is a huge intimidation to new contest pilots or any pilot not familiar (knows them by heart) with the local turn points! Bring out those maps! Get those heads down in the cockpit pecking away on that fancy computer, guesstimating various time/distance/turn point/average speed scenarios... Not all that safe really and the task itself makes fancy computers pretty darn useful to have.

DISCLAIMER: I wrote my posts yesterday from an iPhone in a cab. I'm writing this one from the "gaggle" about to board a plane. I'm sure these are both pretty poor. I'll write some more this weekend from a laptop when I get a few minutes so sit down and focus.

Finally, I enjoy the debate here. It's a lot of fun and I think very good points are being made from many perspectives! Keep it coming. Your (no contest experience, little contest experience, lots of contest experience, spectator, etc) is valuable to this discussion! I think this a very healthy and worthwhile debate. Nobody is "wrong." Nobody is "right." Both tasks are useful. The question is only what is the right "mix!"

Sincerely,

Sean

On Thursday, July 24, 2014 2:46:21 PM UTC-7, Steve Leonard wrote:
On Thursday, July 24, 2014 4:34:46 PM UTC-5, Dan Stroschine wrote:

I am also not a competition pilot, I'm barely even a pilot, so maybe this either a dumb idea or already available but is there a compromise of sorts. Can a CD create a course that consists of some assigned tasks, in a specific order AND a 'free period' of sorts that could the turn area types?



Idea is already available, Dan. In the US, it is called the "Modified Assigned Task", or MAT. It can be used with up to 11 turn points, some or all can be defined by the task setter. If not all 11 are defiend by the task setter, it is up to the individual pilot to decide what additional turnpoints he will add. He does have to get within one mile of all turns, so it is not the larger areas for turning around available with the Turn Area Task (TAT), but if I pilot selects his direction of flight wisely, he can have multiple turnpoints available for his choice of when to turn around and go back through where he thought conditions were good.



Generally, the task is set to have a portion of it defined, then allow the racers to "pick their own points" for the rest of the task. I have also flown tasks where the task setter defined a course where you would be on course all day and then some if you tried to complete the entire task, and in that case, you got to chose when you wanted to end the task and come home. And you still got credit for completing a speed task. Interesting, but can be a controversial task to call in this manner.



The key thing is that on a Modified Assigned Task, the turn areas are limited to one mile radius, while on a Turn Area Task, the turn radius can be up to, I believe, 30 miles.



Steve Leonard

Thanks Steve. Just another example as to how much there still is the learn.

On Friday, July 25, 2014 2:14:09 PM UTC-5, Dan Stroschine wrote:
Thanks Steve. Just another example as to how much there still is the learn.

And there is still plenty for those of us to do these tasks to learn! The basics are simple. The strategy is some percentage of it. The real big part is the overall flying skill.

Steve

On Friday, July 25, 2014 7:11:33 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
Noel,



How about this for an idea? Let's write a point-counterpoint article together on AT/TAT. It would be fun article to write and better to read and hear the feedback on.

Sean - If you want to run a pro-AT article, I won't stop you. But I don't a point/counterpoint article because that implies either one of us is "wrong" or that one of the task types is "wrong". And neither is the point I'm trying to make.

I want to foster understanding - way too many glider pilots don't understand what the glider contest tasks are measuring; and that leads them to false conclusions on how they should fly tasks, what tasks are "bad", and what tasks they should call when they're running a contest.

--Noel

On Friday, July 25, 2014 9:11:33 AM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
Noel, How about this for an idea? Let's write a point-counterpoint article together on AT/TAT.

If you two did a point-counterpoint article, which one of you would be Dan and which one of you would be Jane? (Thinking back to the good old days of Saturday Night Live, for those who don't get the reference)

:-)

Steve

I strongly, strongly disagree that TAT's are a "better" measure of glider racing pilot skill vs. simple, pure AT's. In fact, I could not disagree more. That said Noel, you do appear to have it almost entirely "your way" now (TAT lovers rejoice) as only 3% of US tasks in 2013 were pure, Assigned Tasks. That's right. 3 percent.

We should start a new thread to discuss "what glider contest tasks are measuring!" That would be a great one. Who decided that TAT's (or OLC for that matter) is a better measure of pilot skill? Is there a book or article that I can read? When was this decision made? Are you claiming that this is a point of fact?

I think "what glider contest tasks are measuring" is highly, HIGHLY debatable topic.

Again, whoever is controlling/influencing US tasking is clearly doing a great job for those who like TAT's and MAT's vs. pure, simple and clean ATs. In fact, only 3% of tasks in the US in 2013 were pure Assigned Tasks. Many (perhaps MOST!) of the MAT's where one turn. Several (in a the Sports Class Nationals at Mifflin) were actually ZERO TURN. I find this almost disgraceful and very sad. Think about the advantage local pilots have over guests, at Mifflin, in a zero turn MAT!

Perhaps I just have an odd perspective on things. I have only been racing gliders for a few years now. Personally, I see the TAT and MAT (especially a 1 or zero turn MAT) as a waste of a good flying day (97% of all US tasks) in many cases. A TAT/MAT is a waste of a chance to truly and objectively measure a sailplane pilots racing skill in a simple (no timer or fancy computer required), RACE!

In fact, very rarely (perhaps never) have I flown a TAT in which I could not have easily completed an AT. Why are CDs and pilots so afraid of calling ATs? The questionable conditions that "justify" calling a TAT are rarely so specific that a wide turn area would mean a successful task and a 1 mile assigned area would mean a land out. Furthermore it is extremely rare that the task committee is able to call a TAT accurately enough to avoid unflyable condition precisely enough to make a difference. This viewpoint that AT's result in more land outs has become a highly overused theme (97%) in my opinion. How would we know anymore? We call so few of them now.

Regardless, the US has lost pure Assigned Tasking almost entirely now (3%, and likely falling). It seems that the campaign to reduce AT's in favor of TATs and MAT's has been too successful. In my opinion, this has all come at far too high a price on US sailplane racing quality. As someone stated earlier in this thread, TAT's test a different skill that ATs. At 97%, TAT appears to be the only skill we really "test!"

I look forward to a continued debate on your statement that "glider pilots don't understand what the glider contest tasks are measuring..." I think you have opened the right can of worms in that statement. Can you please expand on your understanding of who, what, where, why and how "what glider contest tasks are measuring" originated and was validated?

Oh and Steve, I'll be Jane for sure! --- https://screen.yahoo.com/point-count...000000157.html

Sincerely,

Sean





On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 2:15:51 AM UTC-4, noel.wade wrote:
On Friday, July 25, 2014 7:11:33 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:

Noel,







How about this for an idea? Let's write a point-counterpoint article together on AT/TAT. It would be fun article to write and better to read and hear the feedback on.



Sean - If you want to run a pro-AT article, I won't stop you. But I don't a point/counterpoint article because that implies either one of us is "wrong" or that one of the task types is "wrong". And neither is the point I'm trying to make.



I want to foster understanding - way too many glider pilots don't understand what the glider contest tasks are measuring; and that leads them to false conclusions on how they should fly tasks, what tasks are "bad", and what tasks they should call when they're running a contest.



--Noel