I agree about the danger of Gaggles before the start. You don't have to participate but you will miss the opportunity to fly with the group if you do not. I do not like them and prefer to make my own start.
Also agree with the idea of a finish line with a safety height eg 1000 or 1500 ft above ground. That is possible now with the sophisticated loggers that we have, Peter Champness On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Mike Borgelt < mborg...@borgeltinstruments.com> wrote: > > > Hi Ross, > > Nice logical analysis. > > There are more 15 m gliders than that if you count Mosquito, PIK 20 and > Mini Nimbus. The performance difference is not great anyway and with > handicapping it doesn't matter. Not that Ventus A and B's are unbeatable > without handicaps for mini Nimbii :-).(Waikerie Nationals 1981) > > If water ballast makes Sports Class "just for fun" the solution is > obvious. Water is a pain anyway. > > The Wil Schuemann article Jim linked to bears a little more scrutiny. > Ballast was originally intended to make gliders go better on really good > days - to break records. It is a stupid arms race when used in contests. > > If you are going to ballast just use it to bring everyone to the same > flying weight in the limited span classes. The heaviest pilot+ glider sets > the weight. As Wil mentions there are lots of advantages to flying > lighter. Availability of suitable tugs is just one. > > Wil didn't mention one thing though - if you ban water the next generation > of gliders will have really high aspect ratio wings and have high wing > loadings - like a heavier Duckhawk. This may not be all bad. > > > Adam, you really, really don't want 80 to 90 glider contests. I've flown > in a few and a 65 glider one class (US Nationals 15m Uvalde 1986) They are > frightening. Risk of midairs goes up as the SQUARE of the number of gliders > and Flarm won't help. The risk is in crowded gaggles especially before the > start. That's apart from the launching issues etc. > > Apart from a couple of exciting occasions where the pack arrived back all > at once, once on track there were few problems. > > Which brings me to: why was the finish line at the recent Waikerie Club > and Sports Nationals at 3km radius AT THE GROUND? One glider got badly > damaged where this was a likely contributor. One suggestion I heard was > 500m over the top of the airfield would be good. 1500 feet would be good > also. Some spectator interest then too. > > I haven't thought of any problems with this. > > Mike > > > > > > At 06:26 PM 2/02/2014, you wrote: > > Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0027_01CF2044.4B5FFAC0" > Content-Language: en-au > > > Hi Adam > Firstly, congratulations on asking the hard questions. You have clearly > put some thought into it and you are passionate about your sport. I will > be very interested to hear/see other pilots point of view on your > suggestions. My opinion differs from yours however, but nothing in this > email should be construed as criticism of or disagreement with your ideas > but simply as my personal point of view and I strongly encourage you to > continue thinking outside the box on these ideas. > > As a current Standard Class Nationals competitor and former Chair of the > NCC, I have grappled with a number of the points you raise and have > discussed a number of the solutions you propose with both the NCC and > Sports Committee members during my past tenure and so I hope to be able to > clearly express an informed view for you. > > Just to get some perspective on how the GFA funding should be spent. > First thing to say is that the GFA exists to serve the entire gliding > community in Australia. It is this broad community who pay the bulk of the > money that funds the GFA. Of this broad community there are a minority who > choose to participate in Gliding Competitions. These competitors pay an > additional levy to GFA (part of the competition fee) which goes to support > the International Competitors and usually there is an additional cost to > competitors to pay for enough tugs to arrive to run the comp effectively. > Of this minority of gliding competitors there is quite a small group that > are eligible/interested/able to compete Internationally. Of the entire GFA > community there are only about ten or 12 competitors selected to compete > internationally. > > National Gliding Competitions and International Teams Selection: > The National Gliding Competitions are held each year in order to establish > who are the best **competition glider pilots** in the country. These > competitions have nothing at all to do with International Team Selection. > Coincidentally, at the moment the ITC does however use the results from > these competitions as a convenient benchmark to assist in selecting the > International Teams. > > "Gliding in Australia is oversubscribed with competitions": > Hooray!! It is no coincidence that the competition scene has grown from > being almost non-existent a few short years ago, to now being almost > oversubscribed (a very healthy and good situation). The introduction of > handicaps and the honing of the rules to eliminate inequities and set a > level playing field, along with a strong push for formal Cross Country > Coaching and encouraging the Junior Gliding movement, has resulted in the > current very healthy competition scene. > > Pair Flying at National Championships: > The idea of implementing rules and processes into the National > Competitions that are focussed solely on team selection or pair flying > training has been discussed for many years and is not supported at all by > the greater competition pilot community and rightly so. Of the 52 weeks of > each year there are only two weeks that do not allow pair flying, they are > the two weeks of National Competition. The competitions do not exist to > serve the needs of the dozen or so elite International Competitors and nor > should they. > > Combining Classes: > The 15m Racing Class and the Open Class have long been the least well > represented classes. I personally think this is a great shame and don't > really understand why that is the case. When competition organisers are > forced to combine 15m and Standard and 18m and Open, nobody is really happy > about it. It is not a solution which will see those two classes grow in > their own right. In fact quite the opposite. The 15m flapped guys don't > like being whipped by unflapped LS8's as occurred at the Kingaroy > MultiClass Nationals and the Open Class guys hate getting whipped by the > 18m gliders, but it is the inevitable outcome when you combine these > classes in Australia. There are two ways in which the current situation > can be changed for the better. One is expensive and requires Australian > competitors go out and buy more competitive and state of the art gliders. > (Diana, ASG29-15m, EB29, Quintus etc). > The second and better way is that we devise a solution that encourages > more 15m flapped and Open Class gliders to turn up to a National Comp so > they can have their own class. > There is no shortage of 15m Flapped gliders in Australia already (88 > total):- > 15m Racing Class (Flapped): > · 24 x ASW-20 > · 20 x ASW-27 > · 11 x LS-6 > · 11 x 15m Ventus (A/B) > · 22 x LS3 > Similarly there are 32 Open Class gliders in Australia currently:- > Open Class: > · 3 x JS1 C > · 1 x Quintus > · 6 x ASH-25 > · 4 x ASH-31 > · 15 x Nimbus 3/4 (all types) > · 3 ASW-22 > > Having just one Big Nationals: > The only people that need more than 2 weeks a year to compete are those > that compete in more than one national competition. This is again back to > the minority ruling the majority. Not required. > The vast majority of Club Class competitors only compete at Club Class. > There is a small minority who fly ASW-20 or similar machines that also > compete in Multi Class. No-one else can do it. Sports Class is an > Australian anachronism, (that we all love!!) but is not really a valid > competition and is even worse now that it is ballasted. That is, a JS1-C or > an ASG-29 fully ballasted will eat everything else alive no matter how you > handicap them, so it is now more just for fun than anything else really. > The extra stretch in the logistics required to run a competition with 80 > or more competitors is quite significant. Talk to any recent Comps Director > and organising committee and listen to their responses. > > Thanks for reading this far. > Cheers, ROSS > _________________________________________________________________________________________ > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net > [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net<aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net>] > On Behalf Of Adam Woolley > Sent: Sunday, 2 February 2014 10:44 AM > To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. > Subject: [Aus-soaring] The nationals: a proposal > > G'day All, > > What do you think of the below? > > Keen to hear from those who aren't going for team selection, would you > still turn up to the team selection years (or to the nationals that allowed > pair flying every other year)? > > Also from non-comp pilots, how would you feel about the GFA spending money > on the tug ferry fees? > > & from people who are generally in the organisation of comps, would this > be better or worse for you or your club? > > What are other advantages & disadvantages that I've forgotten about? Or > points I've made, but over looked or got incorrect? > > Other? > > > Cheers, > WPP > > > > As you're all aware, gliding in Australia is oversubscribed with > competitions, as well as the team selection process being far to onerous. I > have a simple solution to all this. > > At the recent Waikerie Club & Sports Class Nationals, it was seen that > it's easily possible & safe to task wet & dry gliders together - using > start lines. > > I propose that we hold one nationals every biannual year, which will house > all classes - except 20m class. Run using the GFA national rules as it is > now. > > I propose we combine STD & 15m class together & run a '15m performance' > class, then award the highest placed STD & Racing class glider/pilot as the > national champion - for history sake. Why run it as a combined class? It's > not as much fun flying against 7 other competitors, when you could be > challenging yourself against 30 plus others! > > The same could be said for 18m & Open Class, combine them (as they often > are) as an 'Open' Class. The only difference here, the 18m gliders/pilots > would have to declare what class they were going for the national champion > title in. > > Alternatively, have the 18m & Open Class separate - & only combine them > should the Open entries be not enough to make its own class outright. Again > though, is competing against 7 other gliders that much fun? > > Club would be run as it is now. Simple. > > How many competitors would this attract at a site? Probably 80-90 odd > gliders. That's crazy I hear you say. Not really, in years gone past they > used to get those numbers (& more!) & managed. > > Gliding is shrinking. The only clubs that are running nationals now are > big clubs, & are all at sites where they can handle such numbers. So the > site isn't the issue. > > The tugs are an issue. Or are they? Simple solution. If GFA want to see > their sport & population grow, they'll put their money where their mouth > is! Pay at least 2/3's of the tug ferry costs for the competitors. Done. > It'd be no different to what it is now in SA where we have to pay large tug > levies. > > This idea/proposal. Run it every biannual year, with every other year > running as a team selection competition, let's call it the 'open' comp for > now. This 'Open' comp would be run exactly as the nationals is, except > 'pair' flying would be allowed. > > Note! I didn't say team flying, team flying to me could result with > multiple gliders flying around in a 6 ship gaggle every day to improve > their chances of winning. So only pairs would be allowed, teams would be > extremely frowned upon. > > Note! If & when a solo pilot wins the 'Open' comp - they'd still be > eligible to make the team. Though I'll leave the team selection guidelines > to the ITC in this proposal. > > Would the people still turn up to this 'Open' comp if they're not > interested in team selection? I think so. As it's still an organised 2wk > gliding event to go flying with their mates. Maybe more would turn up than > normal, as they'd be able to fly alongside their 'pair' flying mate - & not > get shot down as they would now! > > Alternatively. Run a nationals every year, however only every other year > will be used for selection - & this particular year, 'pair' flying would be > allowed. Easy. > > Why leave 20m class out? We want this class to grow. It wouldn't grow as > fast as it could if it were included at the nats/open comp. Just run it at > a State champs every year, with only the team selection year as the one > that counts. > > > Advantages of having only one big 2wk competition a year... > * It's only 2wks out of your precious 4wks a year annual leave. > * Only one lot of organisation people get put out every year. Clubs & the > organisation less likely to get burnt out. > * State comps, regattas & coaching events will grow: as people will have > an extra 2wks a year to spend how ever they choose. > * If you're only after team selection, then in the 'off' years, the pilot > could go to the European Gliding Championships, or other European nationals > to get vital experience in helping AUS become a world leader in gliding. > * More people in towns. Greater support from councils. Greater chance of > major sponsorship (GFA should pay for a dedicated sponsorship & advertiser > of the event - leaving this up to clubs is never going to work, as it > hasn't up to now. Ultimately we don't know what we're doing, & we just > don't have the man power or time to do it now). Greater exposure for > gliding in general. > * Potentially attract more international competitors due to the amount of > numbers & likely better competition in each class. Which as a result will > make our pilots better. We could advertise it like the 'World Cup' that the > paragliders have. Advertisers & media can spin up & promote it! > * God forbid, pilots could spend their other 2wks a year having a regular > holiday with their family or friends!! > > > Disadvantages... > * It's a risk to try it, due unknown amount of competitors that would turn > up. I think, what we're doing now isn't working (for AUS international > results), why not try something new! WA State comps saw great success with > numbers growing once they combined into one big class (Don Woodward said he > 'raced' one other competitor in 15m class one year before they changed the > format, that's definitely no fun!). > * Tugs. This can be fixed if GFA put their hand into their pockets to help > their/our sport grow. > > > Regards, > Adam Woolley > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > *Borgelt Instruments* - > *design & manufacture of quality soaring instrumentation since 1978 * > www.borgeltinstruments.com > tel: 07 4635 5784 overseas: int+61-7-4635 5784 > mob: 042835 5784 : int+61-42835 5784 > P O Box 4607, Toowoomba East, QLD 4350, Australia > > _______________________________________________ > 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
