![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
16.0 “Start Anywhere” Cylinder
Present rules for start cylinders measure start time from your exit point, but measure distance from the point on the cylinder’s perimeter closest to your first turnpoint. 16.1 Would you prefer that both start time and distance be measured from your cylinder exit point? Consider the negative implications of starting out the top of the back of the cylinder and then bumping the pre-start gaggles for more speed. This would mix racing traffic with non racing traffic, and high speed straight line traffic with thermalling traffic. Yes, I know this happens already while on course, but it's not safe there either. Why propose a rule just because the scoring program can score it? The same logic was partly behind the 1 mile turn cylinder (read between the lines of the poll). Starting anywhere sure adds some new variables to "start gate roulette". So you say we will all figure out the new optimum place to start, go there, and the point is moot? NOT. There has been an optimum place to start for years with the current rules, but I observe 20% of pilots have not caught on. That won't change with a new rule. Why so many rules proposals, anyway? The rules were not that broken until a committee broke them, while squawking "safety" among other things, and now there are increasing efforts to protect us from ourselves. I propose a new rule: 3 year rules stability. Allow discussions, polls, and regional testing, but National level changes only on a three year cycle. - Mark Navarre ASW-20 OD California, USA - |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
How about no new rules at all.......please!
Mark Navarre wrote: 16.0 “Start Anywhere” Cylinder Present rules for start cylinders measure start time from your exit point, but measure distance from the point on the cylinder’s perimeter closest to your first turnpoint. 16.1 Would you prefer that both start time and distance be measured from your cylinder exit point? Consider the negative implications of starting out the top of the back of the cylinder and then bumping the pre-start gaggles for more speed. This would mix racing traffic with non racing traffic, and high speed straight line traffic with thermalling traffic. Yes, I know this happens already while on course, but it's not safe there either. Why propose a rule just because the scoring program can score it? The same logic was partly behind the 1 mile turn cylinder (read between the lines of the poll). Starting anywhere sure adds some new variables to "start gate roulette". So you say we will all figure out the new optimum place to start, go there, and the point is moot? NOT. There has been an optimum place to start for years with the current rules, but I observe 20% of pilots have not caught on. That won't change with a new rule. Why so many rules proposals, anyway? The rules were not that broken until a committee broke them, while squawking "safety" among other things, and now there are increasing efforts to protect us from ourselves. I propose a new rule: 3 year rules stability. Allow discussions, polls, and regional testing, but National level changes only on a three year cycle. - Mark Navarre ASW-20 OD California, USA - |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
C'mon Mark, read and think before you blow up. The rule says "exit the
cylinder." You can't bump the start gaggles in the cylinder if you have exited the cylinder. And give the RC a little credit for intelligence. They've thought about this problem. I believe the precise rule the RC is working on insists on taking your last exit from the cylinder precisely to avoid traffic problems. They have thought about only allowing starts from the "front half" of the circle. I know they decided against "best fix in the start area" precisely to avoid this traffic problem. They have thought hard about it, and any rule they end up with will address this obvious problem. They're not dumb, you know. Here's the advantage of taking distance from the exit point. In the current system a single point is optimal -- the point of the circle closest to the first turn. This focuses traffic and gives rise to the huge pre start gaggle we all know and love. If you get credit for the extra distance that you achieve, starting say 1/4 of the way around the start circle, then you can avoid the huge gaggle with no penalty. You can also start directly from a good thermal, or start at the point closest to the cloudstreet out on course, without worrying about losing the 2-3 miles relative to the optimal point. How relaxing. It becomes just like starting from a line -- there is no single optimal point. Every start point is "just as close" to the first turn. Lots of people want a line for this reason -- Dave Mockler campaigned for RC precisely on this. With this little change you get all the benefits of starting on a line, and none of the disadvantages: everyone is within 5 miles of the home airport, and there is no upwind end. This change also reduces the amount of calculation and figuring you have to do. With the current rule, the optimal start point also depends on wind. I know the secret formula for that, do you? If the last thermal is far from the optimal point, you have to figure out whether it's better to glide to the front of the circle, losing altitude, or leave where you are, losing distance. I know that formula too. Do you? All of this disappears in this nice new idea. If something is better, why in the world tie yourself to not using it for 3 years? I notice few pilots insisting on 3 year moratoriums for new varios or new gliders! John Cochrane |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
This seems sensible on initial inspection.
First, I don't believe that it is valuable to test as a racing skill the ability to find the one thermal that is closest to the optimal exit point. Finding the best path to start out on course seems more consistent with the idea of a start cylinder. Second, I have frequently deviated several miles to make a start that minimizes distance to the first turn, but given up altitude in the process - as John points out this is just a math problem to solve, but I think racing should not rely too much on solving trigonometry problems in the cockpit. Third, there does often appear to be significant gaggling near the optimal exit point, which gets particularly dense at the top of lift or MSH. I can't prove that this would go down under the alternative (leaching might be too big a lure), but I don't see any way that it would increase gaggling. Some counterpoints to consider: 1) If there is a front-side rule, pilots will need to be aware of where the 90-degree off-courseline points on the cylinder are and the rules will have to account for pilots who exit the back side. Not sure why anyone would do this - but I'm sure someone would do it. 2) If the start cylinder is large we will introduce more variability in distance flown across pilots, which further dilutes the intuitive appeal of 'shortest time wins' in ASTs. That is, it will be hard to compare performance until the scoring program has processed everyone's flight logs, which in my mind is a major downside of the variable distance tasks - and bigger turnpoint cylinders. 9B At 15:00 18 September 2003, Chris Ocallaghan wrote: Mark, The prestart gaggle is a dangerous place... especially at nationals. You have three types of traffic in this gaggle. The guys waiting at the top flying circles at 80 knots, the guys below who are climbing for all they're worth afraid they might lose the guys at the top, and the guys coming in from all points on the compass and altitudes to see who is in the prestart gaggle. This rule may just may be useful in reducing that density. On many occassions I have wished that I could get credit for a start 45 or 90 degrees around the circle (where there was better lift and a better cloud field on course), but have been forced into the gaggle because I couldn't justify the 4 or 5 minutes I'd be giving away. The two start cylinders at Tonopah reduced the anxiety level. Giving us the rest of the space, without penalizing our using it, would improve things even more. This time, I think the committee is addressing a real problem with an effective solution. Problem is, we've has so much smoke blowing in the name of safety that it's wiser to be suspecious of its motives. Just like the 1m turnpoint, the 1m finish cylinder, and even the 10m AAT cylinder, there is only one best place to be at a given time. And if there are 50 gliders in the neighborhood, that's where they'll wind up. I was almost hit twice at Hobbs this year in the prestart gaggle. God only knows who I scared as I slammed the controls full stop to avoid the guys who didn't see me. (Mark Navarre) wrote in message news:... 16.0 “Start Anywhere” Cylinder Present rules for start cylinders measure start time from your exit point, but measure distance from the point on the cylinder’s perimeter closest to your first turnpoint. 16.1 Would you prefer that both start time and distance be measured from your cylinder exit point? Consider the negative implications of starting out the top of the back of the cylinder and then bumping the pre-start gaggles for more speed. This would mix racing traffic with non racing traffic, and high speed straight line traffic with thermalling traffic. Yes, I know this happens already while on course, but it's not safe there either. Why propose a rule just because the scoring program can score it? The same logic was partly behind the 1 mile turn cylinder (read between the lines of the poll). Starting anywhere sure adds some new variables to 'start gate roulette'. So you say we will all figure out the new optimum place to start, go there, and the point is moot? NOT. There has been an optimum place to start for years with the current rules, but I observe 20% of pilots have not caught on. That won't change with a new rule. Why so many rules proposals, anyway? The rules were not that broken until a committee broke them, while squawking 'safety' among other things, and now there are increasing efforts to protect us from ourselves. I propose a new rule: 3 year rules stability. Allow discussions, polls, and regional testing, but National level changes only on a three year cycle. - Mark Navarre ASW-20 OD California, USA - |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
C'mon Mark, read and think before you blow up. The rule says "exit the
cylinder." You can't bump the start gaggles in the cylinder if you have exited the cylinder. Then the poll question needs to be rewritten with clarity and completeness in mind. I spoke with P7 during region 12 and was left with the understanding that the rule would allow scoring from the most favorable start point, just as the most favorable turn points in the turn cylinders are scored. The poll question does not provide enough info about the proposed new rule for one to give an educated answer. This can be said about several of the other questions, btw. - Mark Navarre ASW-20 OD California, USA - |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mark Navarre wrote:
Then the poll question needs to be rewritten with clarity and completeness in mind. Here again is the complete text of question 16 from the poll: 16. Start Anywhere Cylinder Present rules for start cylinders measure start time from your exit point, but measure distance from the point on the cylinders perimeter closest to your first turnpoint. 16.1 Would you prefer that both start time and distance be measured from your cylinder exit point? ___ Yes ___ No Mark, it is unclear to me exactly what you find unclear about the above question. I spoke with P7 during region 12 and was left with the understanding that the rule would allow scoring from the most favorable start point, just as the most favorable turn points in the turn cylinders are scored. I can't imagine what I might have said to leave you with that understanding (are you sure you weren't talking to someone else?) It is true that the Rules Committee has considered an "area start" proposal in the past, but rejected it for several reasons, as you can see in item 33 of the 2001 Rules Committee Meeting Minutes: 33 Area start "Sounds simple but has several potential problems. Needs more thought. There would be a tendency to start at the back of the cylinder and fly through the pre-start gaggles on course. This could present a safety problem. Disadvantage in pilot not knowing when they started. Likely requires graphical display to not be disadvantaged. With multipoint start option, prestart congestion will be reduced. Resolution: No action at this time - table for future consideration." BTW, past Rules Committee minutes are archived at: http://www.serve.com/BSA/sra.htm The poll question does not provide enough info about the proposed new rule for one to give an educated answer. Is it the purpose of an opinion poll to educate everyone thoroughly on every aspect of a rules issue, so they can form an opinion? Or is the purpose to allow people to provide input on those rules issues about which they have an opinion? It is true that I included more "pro & con" in last year's poll, but that also generated some criticism. You can't please everyone, I guess. Some people thought it was just ducky that I listed arguments supporting their viewpoint on an issue, but were livid that I also listed arguments supporting the opposing viewpoint. I do believe that it is important to keep a poll as brief as possible, if you want people to wade through it. Last week I received a "Client Satisfaction Survey" from my long-time stockbroker. It was 8 pages long. I didn't want to spend the time, so I chucked it in the trash. Gary Ittner P7 SSA Contest Rules Committee |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
A slight clarification to Gary's post: As I read it, the proposal in
the survey is NOT the same as the "area start" that the RC considered and wisely rejected. The area start let you start from any point IN the start circle. This one lets you start at any cylinder EXIT point. The reason for the difference is exactly to separate people who have started from the pre-start gaggle. (Well, at least as much as in current rules. Often the prestart gaggle is outside the gate, so people start and return to bump the gaggle.) John Cochrane ..... 16.1 Would you prefer that both start time and distance be measured from your cylinder exit point? ___ Yes ___ No ..... item 33 of the 2001 Rules Committee Meeting Minutes: 33 Area start "Sounds simple but has several potential problems. Needs more thought. There would be a tendency to start at the back of the cylinder and fly through the pre-start gaggles on course. This could present a safety problem. Disadvantage in pilot not knowing when they started. Likely requires graphical display to not be disadvantaged. With multipoint start option, prestart congestion will be reduced. Resolution: No action at this time - table for future consideration." |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
P7 replies:
Then the poll question needs to be rewritten with clarity and completeness in mind. Here again is the complete text of question 16 from the poll: 16. “Start Anywhere” Cylinder Present rules for start cylinders measure start time from your exit point, but measure distance from the point on the cylinder’s perimeter closest to your first turnpoint. 16.1 Would you prefer that both start time and distance be measured from your cylinder exit point? ___ Yes ___ No Mark, it is unclear to me exactly what you find unclear about the above question. The text of the current rule reads: 10.8.5.3 A start occurs each time a sailplane exits a Start Cylinder (either through the side or the top); at least one fix must lie within the cylinder. One would think that the definition of "exit" in the poll question is the same as in the rules. The question could have said: "16.1 Would you prefer that both start time and distance be measured from your cylinder exit point on the perimeter of the start cylinder?" Thanks for the clarification, I will now edit my poll. I suppose I could have asked one of the rules committee members, but then my 2 or 3 fellow nitpickers would still be in the dark. - Mark Navarre ASW-20 OD California, USA - |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Now I'm confused. If I exit through the back top, that's an exit. If
I then descend into the cylinder and bump all the pre-start thermals, my subsequent exit invalidates the previous start out the top? If so, then what keeps my trip through the start cylinder on the fifth leg from invalidating my race to that point? Intentions? Jonathan Gary Ittner wrote in message ... Mark Navarre wrote: Then the poll question needs to be rewritten with clarity and completeness in mind. Here again is the complete text of question 16 from the poll: 16. ?Start Anywhere? Cylinder Present rules for start cylinders measure start time from your exit point, but measure distance from the point on the cylinder?s perimeter closest to your first turnpoint. 16.1 Would you prefer that both start time and distance be measured from your cylinder exit point? ___ Yes ___ No Mark, it is unclear to me exactly what you find unclear about the above question. I spoke with P7 during region 12 and was left with the understanding that the rule would allow scoring from the most favorable start point, just as the most favorable turn points in the turn cylinders are scored. I can't imagine what I might have said to leave you with that understanding (are you sure you weren't talking to someone else?) It is true that the Rules Committee has considered an "area start" proposal in the past, but rejected it for several reasons, as you can see in item 33 of the 2001 Rules Committee Meeting Minutes: 33 Area start "Sounds simple but has several potential problems. Needs more thought. There would be a tendency to start at the back of the cylinder and fly through the pre-start gaggles on course. This could present a safety problem. Disadvantage in pilot not knowing when they started. Likely requires graphical display to not be disadvantaged. With multipoint start option, prestart congestion will be reduced. Resolution: No action at this time - table for future consideration." BTW, past Rules Committee minutes are archived at: http://www.serve.com/BSA/sra.htm The poll question does not provide enough info about the proposed new rule for one to give an educated answer. Is it the purpose of an opinion poll to educate everyone thoroughly on every aspect of a rules issue, so they can form an opinion? Or is the purpose to allow people to provide input on those rules issues about which they have an opinion? It is true that I included more "pro & con" in last year's poll, but that also generated some criticism. You can't please everyone, I guess. Some people thought it was just ducky that I listed arguments supporting their viewpoint on an issue, but were livid that I also listed arguments supporting the opposing viewpoint. I do believe that it is important to keep a poll as brief as possible, if you want people to wade through it. Last week I received a "Client Satisfaction Survey" from my long-time stockbroker. It was 8 pages long. I didn't want to spend the time, so I chucked it in the trash. Gary Ittner P7 SSA Contest Rules Committee |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Turbine air start -- too cold? | Juan Jimenez | Home Built | 97 | March 14th 05 06:51 PM |
Rules on what can be in a hangar | Brett Justus | Owning | 13 | February 27th 04 05:35 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |
Best Software and Hardware for Turn Area Task? | Snead1 | Soaring | 29 | August 13th 03 04:12 PM |
Re-Engine B-52 proposal. (I love this debate) | CFA3 | Military Aviation | 17 | July 13th 03 08:53 PM |