Pretty sure my first GFA logbook (circa 1974) had the rules of the air, I'll have to dig it out of storage to check. My second and third (current) GFA log books have the rules of the air on the last page.
Perhaps someone with older GFA logbooks would like to comment? Probably a good argument to standardise on the GFA book rather than getting other club based ones printed which seems to be a waste of resources. John Parncutt -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Peter Creswick Sent: Tuesday, 21 June 2005 8:38 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] What do I do? Not in mine John. It's a SCGC Camden log book, probably produced in the early 70's, at the latest, (fist logged flight 2/12/75) probably before the "GFA" log book even existed, perhaps ? Inside back cover is History / Ratings, but opposite page does have "General Information" which includes checks, Chaotic, Chob, Fust and Hhellt, and rules of the air (4) - head on, converging, overtaking and landing, AND rules in thermals (3) highest, first and joining. No 200 feet there either !!! John Parncutt wrote: > By the way, anybody who hasn't seen the rules of the air, including > the 200 ft rule might like to look at the back inside page of a GFA > logbook, its all there! > > John Parncutt > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > *Terry Neumann > *Sent:* Tuesday, 21 June 2005 2:25 PM > *To:* Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. > *Subject:* Re: [Aus-soaring] What do I do? > > > It is written: > >>One could surmise that the author hadn't heard of the 200 foot rule either. >>LOL! >> >> > One could, but one would probably also be wrong.... > > Mike Valentine, being the practical and thinking person he was, > probably foresaw that to lay great stress on an arbitrary figure > would possible cause most people to miss the point entirely - > something which many of the well intentioned contributors to this > discussion have demonstrated with exceptional skill. > > This 200 foot rule is a classic example of the old adage that > "Rules are made for the guidance of wise men, and the obedience of > fools". > > Wombat and a couple of others in this discussion, notably Kevin > Roden, have more correctly pointed out that notwithstanding the > 200 foot rule, sensible, and therefore safe flying in shared > thermals is essentially a product of airmanship. Indeed I will > suggest that it is one of the most crucial and important aspects > of true airmanship. If your technique in sharing thermals keeps > you at all times no closer that 200 feet and six inches from > others, but causes those in other gliders concern, fear, or sheer > terror, you have a long way to go in this area. > > Leigh touched on a very interesting point when he reflected on the > thermalling parameters of his Super Grunau. Allow me to expand. > How should everyone behave in a thermal which contains (say) > his Grunau, Bernard's ASH-25, and a club ASK-21 on passenger > flight, all with different flying speeds and pilot aspirations? > This is quite possible at my home club. The only thing which we > might not expect is someone in a hang glider to be part of the > equation. Lets throw one of those in too. Suddenly the magic > 200 foot rule gets pretty low on the list of priorities does it > not? > > Which is where it should have been right at the start. There is > much more to safe and considerate thermal sharing than a > concentration on an an arbitrary measure of distance dreamed up > somewhere by a doubtless well intentioned committee. For mine, > the concept of "see and _be seen_" carries much more weight. > > Finally, since the name of Mike Valentine has been mentioned in > this discussion, perhaps I can relate a story which he told me > once about the judging of distance. > > Mike, in one of his earlier lives was enjoying the more > pleasurable aspects of his then job as a supervisor training air > traffic controllers. At the time he was flying circuits at an > airfield somewhere in (probably) some superannuated military jet > with an Indian co-pilot (It would be wouldn't it). Mike > commented at the time on the fact that his Indian friend seemed to > judge his round out and landings very well. The reply? (In > Mike's best Indian accent) "Oh yes - my instructor always told me > to start the round out when at the height of two elephants!" > > Which raises the question as to whether Indian glider pilots might > measure their separation in thermals by "x" elephants? > > I hope not. A thermal filled with imaginary elephants is not a > comfortable thought. > > Regards, > Terry ;-) > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Aus-soaring mailing list >Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net >To check or change subscription details, visit: >http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring > -- Peter Creswick E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Land Line 02 9718 4841 Mobile/SMS 0401 758 025 _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
