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. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
FAI turnpoint Question
Trying to find the following information and an FAI Sporting Code
reference for the following: 1) The minimum separation between turnpoints on a 3-turn task 2) Maximum distance between start and finish on a closed circuit FAI task (O&R or Triangle) Thanks! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Mark Grubb" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
om... Trying to find the following information and an FAI Sporting Code reference for the following: 1) The minimum separation between turnpoints on a 3-turn task 2) Maximum distance between start and finish on a closed circuit FAI task (O&R or Triangle) Thanks! Hello Mark, take a look to http://www.fai.org/general_aviation/documents/ best regards Thorsten |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
1 - simple - 10km 1.4.3 - c Free distance using up to 3 TP's
2 - not so simple - A closed course is defined in 1.1.15 as 'A flight where the glider is required to return to the START POINT at the finish of the SOARING PERFORMANCE.' If you have to return to the start then a 'remote finish' ( a term not actually defined in the code ) is of no benefit. 'Closed course' implies that the start point is both the start and end of the soaring performance. You can however declare a closed 1000 triangle, fall down at the 750 point and claim a 750 free distance. ( in the UK ) On a free distance flight there is apparently no limit to the seperation of start and finish. Ian "Mark Grubb" wrote in message om... Trying to find the following information and an FAI Sporting Code reference for the following: 1) The minimum separation between turnpoints on a 3-turn task 2) Maximum distance between start and finish on a closed circuit FAI task (O&R or Triangle) Thanks! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Mark Grubb wrote:
Trying to find the following information and an FAI Sporting Code reference for the following: 1) The minimum separation between turnpoints on a 3-turn task 2) Maximum distance between start and finish on a closed circuit FAI task (O&R or Triangle) Thanks! I read through some of this stuff, and came to an interesting result: It seemed that one could design a 3-TP course, where the start was "release" and the finish was "landing" and with three turnpoints which are all 10km away from each other. If one recorded "release" by a GPS circle, and landed in the OZ of this "release" it would be a closed circuit task. As far as I know, one could then select any legal combination of these points to qualify as a declared O&R, Triangle, 3-TP and free distance. For O&R, use the start/finish/release/landing and the furthest turnpoint. For triangle, use the start and the furthest two qualifying triangle points. I'm not sure if these qualify only as Free O&R/Free Triangle, or pre-declared... All of this because the start/finish are NOT considered turnpoints (check the FAI definition of "turnpoint"). I haven't tried this but my reading of the sporting code seems to support this interpretation, to the best I can tell. I intend to do this for the 300km Gold distance, and think this will allow me to complete the task without ever flying more than 50km from the start/finish. It also means, if I land out, my aero-retrieve will cost under $100. Anyone who has submitted a claim like this and had it denied, please tell us why... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
I don't get it, can you elaborate? Post a sample task!
Ian |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Declare your airport as the start and finish. Then:
The first turn is 50 km to the north. Second turn is 50 km to the south. Total is now 150 km Third turn is 50 km to the north, but 10 km away from 1st turn. Total is now 250 km. And a return back to the airport yields 300 km. -Tom (Mark James Boyd) wrote in message news:4028777b$1@darkstar... I haven't tried this but my reading of the sporting code seems to support this interpretation, to the best I can tell. I intend to do this for the 300km Gold distance, and think this will allow me to complete the task without ever flying more than 50km from the start/finish. It also means, if I land out, my aero-retrieve will cost under $100. Anyone who has submitted a claim like this and had it denied, please tell us why... |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
tango4 wrote: I don't get it, can you elaborate? Post a sample task! Ian OK, assume you have your gliderport: LaNeva (no relation to Avenal). You tow directly above the runway in use, release, and do an immediate 360. Then you fly north to a pre-declared turnpoint 50km north. Then you fly directly south to a predeclared turnpoint 100km away. Then you fly 100km mostly north to a predeclared turnpoint which is 10km east of the first turnpoint. Then you fly mostly south back to LaNeva and during the landing rollout you stop in the OZ of the initial 360. Diagram of LaNeva, and turnpoints 1,2,3: 1 3 L 2 The course seems to allow a LOT of flexibility. It should qualify as a closed course, since the start and finish point are the "same." The turnpoints are all 10km+ away from each other. I even think it qualifies for an O&R of 100km (not just free O&R) but I'm not sure. I intend to fly a course like this for the gold distance. The advantage being I'll never be more than about 50km from LaNeva, so retrieves are cheap. Anyone try something like this before? The reason to not just declare the start or finish as "LaNeva" is twofold. If the release and 360 were slightly off point, one can fix this by landing on a different runway or at a different point. Second (and more important), if the thermals are still cookin' at the end of the task, one can abandon the closed course options and just keep flying South until the total distance is 500km (gold AND diamond distance), and then land. It seems someone could also use this technique to fly the Gold distance too without ever being more than 84km from the home field. I welcome comments. This is a slightly complicated subject for me...and the silver distance took me six tries, so advice is encouraged |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
In article 4029b339$1@darkstar, Mark James Boyd wrote:
It seems someone could also use this technique to fly the Gold distance too without ever being more than 84km from the home field. Ooops, I meant to say one could fly the 500km Diamond distance without ever being more than 84km from the home field... I welcome comments. This is a slightly complicated subject for me...and the silver distance took me six tries, so advice is encouraged |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, silly me! I read .....
three turnpoints which are all 10km away from each other. Which implies 3 turnpoints in a tight little isoscelese triangle, he didn't say 2 turnpoints 10km apart from each other and another 100km away from either of those two points! The format would work as a 3 TP declared free distance but would not constitute an FAI triangle. If you made an isoscelese with each tp 100km apart, one being the start finish and the triangle centred on the home airfield you could do a 300km FAI triangle and only get 66km from home. You'd have to fly 432km to acheive the task though. Home, start at one apex, fly the triangle and then home. Pull the same trick with the 3 tp's a mere 116 km apart , do the start finish at the home airfield and you've got your 500 km diamond without getting more than 76.5 km from home and you only fly the 500 km. What's more you might be able to claim both diamonds off this task. But why not try doing it the real way? 300km - Straight out 500 km - O/R or at least a full FAI triangle with home as one apex. Thermic diamond height - can be done in Namibia :-) Ian |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
tango4 wrote: Oh, silly me! I read ..... three turnpoints which are all 10km away from each other. Ooops...I should have wrote "at LEAST 10km away from each other..." Sorry... Which implies 3 turnpoints in a tight little isoscelese triangle, he didn't say 2 turnpoints 10km apart from each other and another 100km away from either of those two points! Glad I drew a picture...saves on typing The format would work as a 3 TP declared free distance but would not constitute an FAI triangle. Agreed... If you made an isoscelese with each tp 100km apart, one being the start finish and the triangle centred on the home airfield you could do a 300km FAI triangle and only get 66km from home. You'd have to fly 432km to acheive the task though. Home, start at one apex, fly the triangle and then home. Or, after reaching the home airport at the end, continue flying straight on for another 68+ km and then land for the 500km. After all, who wants to do a 500k without any landout at all? I suppose since it would be the end of the day, I'd want to make my last leg of any of these downwind... Pull the same trick with the 3 tp's a mere 116 km apart , do the start finish at the home airfield and you've got your 500 km diamond without getting more than 76.5 km from home and you only fly the 500 km. What's more you might be able to claim both diamonds off this task. Yep. I think the triangles are MUCH harder than an O&R, however. All the different types of updrafts seem to be best along (mostly) linear ground features most of the time. Sure, sure, there are exceptions, but a nice long ridge is responsible for a lot of world records...and I'm not aware of any world triangle records that exceed their O&R counterparts (although for US records that Knauff guy and some of his cronies in PA destroy this otherwise tidy generalization). But why not try doing it the real way? 300km - Straight out 500 km - O/R or at least a full FAI triangle with home as one apex. Thermic diamond height - can be done in Namibia As I point out in my up and coming book "The Budget Soarer" (NOT!) I'm trying to minimize the retrieve and cost. It's also really fun to get to know thoroughly all of the area right near my home gliderport...travelling to Namibia doesn't really fit into my goals personally... :-) :-) Ian Mark |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
GPT (Gulfport MS) ILS 14 question | A Lieberman | Instrument Flight Rules | 18 | January 30th 05 04:51 PM |
VOR/DME Approach Question | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 47 | August 29th 04 05:03 AM |
Legal question - Pilot liability and possible involvement with a crime | John | Piloting | 5 | November 20th 03 09:40 PM |
Question about Question 4488 | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | October 27th 03 01:26 AM |
Special Flight Setup Question (COF) | Dudley Henriques | Simulators | 4 | October 11th 03 12:14 AM |