Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit
Official report from who exactly? On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 12:27 AM, Gary Stevenson gstev...@bigpond.com wrote: Hi Paul, As I somewhat earlier said, we should wait for the official report, and full knowledge of the facts, before trying to draw ANY definitive conclusions. Given this, I therefore was NOT making any judgement *as such*, at all. Other than that, you are in general perfectly correct, and your further comments/conclusions are astute and bear thinking about. From what Jim choose to tell us, there is a difference between his final glide and that of the other two pilots who also outlanded close to home. Jim ended up in a situation where he had nowhere to go. In contrast, the other 2 pilots safely landed, without incident, in a suitable paddock, and I think that is the lesson here. They did indeed show greater wisdom. Hope that helps to clarify things for you. Kindest regards, Gary BTW let me correct one part my earlier email. *The Specialist* is an American – not Australian - work written many years ago by Charles Sale. However the parallels to the Australian experience are unmistakable. *From:* aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] *On Behalf Of *Paul Mander *Sent:* Thursday, 30 October 2014 1:54 PM *To:* 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' *Subject:* Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit I think you’ve been a bit quick to judge. You state that whilst “Jim chose to fly on”, two other pilots made quite routine outlandings 7km back on the track, implying a greater wisdom on their part. Those outlandings were not routine, if you study the traces. They were straight in landings just as was Jim’s. One of them makes a desperate last circle close to the ground then straightens up and lands. There is a striking similarity in all three traces, which paint a cautionary picture. All three picked up climbs just before their last turn, and then appear to consider themselves on final glide. Then they turn into a 20kt headwind from the SW, lose their final glide and start to search for lift. All three try to thermal again without success. All three glide on and the ground rises up to smite them; the other two are simply 7km further out when it does. There are undoubtedly lessons to be learnt from their experience, not the least being how quickly thermals die in Queensland and how quickly the trap can snap. But it’s not instructive, or fair, to make out that one was foolish where others were wise. *From:* aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] *On Behalf Of *Gary Stevenson *Sent:* Tuesday, 28 October 2014 10:45 PM *To:* 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' *Subject:* Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit Michael Texler in his post of the evening of 28 Oct, finally “Got It”. Tim has now amplified matters, so that to mis-quote one famous author, “even a schoolboy can understand”. Just a preamble: the point I* really* want to make is that on that last day when Jim choose to fly on, 2 pilots in Sports Class elected to make quite routine outlandings (into the same paddock apparently), just 7 km from home. As usual their traces are available on Soaring Spot. Names do not need to be mentioned – just look at Sports Class, and then check the outlandings and distances covered to pinpoint the two relevant traces. Tim , you are being a little bit shy in your use of the Oz vernacular. The “Municipal Dunny Man” filled a very valuable and quite unique place in servicing one the essential needs of communities prior to the development of reticulated sewerage systems. So to get the language straight, let me put “shed loads” back into its true blue and dinky di context: “shit-cart full loads”. Further ; For Australian Musical Researchers try Googling “Municipal Dunny Can”. . And of course do not overlook that Australian work of great literary worth titled “The Specialist”. For visual art buffs this work was no doubt part inspiration for the 2006 Oz movie “Kenny”. Cheers, Gary *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 *Tim Shirley *Sent:* Tuesday, 28 October 2014 8:39 PM *To:* Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. *Subject:* Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules... Hi all, Once again a disclaimer: I hold no relevant official position with the GFA. I do have considerable experience as a rulemaker, as a Contest Director, as a Scorer, and as a competition pilot. I speak only for myself. What follows is general clarification about competitions and rules, and is not intended as a comment on any specific incident. Back when I was involved in competition rulemaking, I
Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit
Gee Matthew, there is no ‘like’ tab. From: Matthew Scutter Sent: Friday, October 31, 2014 4:22 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit Official report from who exactly? On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 12:27 AM, Gary Stevenson gstev...@bigpond.com wrote: Hi Paul, As I somewhat earlier said, we should wait for the official report, and full knowledge of the facts, before trying to draw ANY definitive conclusions. Given this, I therefore was NOT making any judgement as such, at all. Other than that, you are in general perfectly correct, and your further comments/conclusions are astute and bear thinking about. From what Jim choose to tell us, there is a difference between his final glide and that of the other two pilots who also outlanded close to home. Jim ended up in a situation where he had nowhere to go. In contrast, the other 2 pilots safely landed, without incident, in a suitable paddock, and I think that is the lesson here. They did indeed show greater wisdom. Hope that helps to clarify things for you. Kindest regards, Gary BTW let me correct one part my earlier email. The Specialist is an American – not Australian - work written many years ago by Charles Sale. However the parallels to the Australian experience are unmistakable. From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Paul Mander Sent: Thursday, 30 October 2014 1:54 PM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit I think you’ve been a bit quick to judge. You state that whilst “Jim chose to fly on”, two other pilots made quite routine outlandings 7km back on the track, implying a greater wisdom on their part. Those outlandings were not routine, if you study the traces. They were straight in landings just as was Jim’s. One of them makes a desperate last circle close to the ground then straightens up and lands. There is a striking similarity in all three traces, which paint a cautionary picture. All three picked up climbs just before their last turn, and then appear to consider themselves on final glide. Then they turn into a 20kt headwind from the SW, lose their final glide and start to search for lift. All three try to thermal again without success. All three glide on and the ground rises up to smite them; the other two are simply 7km further out when it does. There are undoubtedly lessons to be learnt from their experience, not the least being how quickly thermals die in Queensland and how quickly the trap can snap. But it’s not instructive, or fair, to make out that one was foolish where others were wise. From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Gary Stevenson Sent: Tuesday, 28 October 2014 10:45 PM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit Michael Texler in his post of the evening of 28 Oct, finally “Got It”. Tim has now amplified matters, so that to mis-quote one famous author, “even a schoolboy can understand”. Just a preamble: the point I really want to make is that on that last day when Jim choose to fly on, 2 pilots in Sports Class elected to make quite routine outlandings (into the same paddock apparently), just 7 km from home. As usual their traces are available on Soaring Spot. Names do not need to be mentioned – just look at Sports Class, and then check the outlandings and distances covered to pinpoint the two relevant traces. Tim , you are being a little bit shy in your use of the Oz vernacular. The “Municipal Dunny Man” filled a very valuable and quite unique place in servicing one the essential needs of communities prior to the development of reticulated sewerage systems. So to get the language straight, let me put “shed loads” back into its true blue and dinky di context: “shit-cart full loads”. Further ; For Australian Musical Researchers try Googling “Municipal Dunny Can”. . And of course do not overlook that Australian work of great literary worth titled “The Specialist”. For visual art buffs this work was no doubt part inspiration for the 2006 Oz movie “Kenny”. Cheers, Gary From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Tim Shirley Sent: Tuesday, 28 October 2014 8:39 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules... Hi all, Once again a disclaimer: I hold no relevant official position with the GFA. I do have considerable experience as a rulemaker, as a Contest Director, as a Scorer, and as a competition pilot. I speak only for myself. What
Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit
Hi All, Sometimes pilots themselves are not the best judge of safety factors. Their own prejudices and desires can stand in the way of rational decisions. The Q’land Easter comps had a requirement to cross the 3km radius finish line at 500ft. Following objections from pilots wishing to fly straight in finals without height requirements, this condition was not enforced. All pilots have navigational equipment which allows for finishing at a predetermined height. We have in the past year had two serious accidents involving two gliders severely damaged, a fatality and a second very lucky pilot. As far as I am aware In each case there was not a minimum height for crossing a finish line. Certainly the recent Q’land accident would not have occurred if the pilot had allowed extra height for final glide to meet a minimum requirement. Can’t comment on the Narromine tragedy. 500 ft. 3 km from the centre of the airfield allows for a safe finish. If there is a substantial tail wind the circle can be intersected on the downwind leg resulting in a safe interwind landing. A penalty for crossing below the specified minimum height should not be such as to destroy a pilots flight or competition score. One point per foot too low with a 50 ft allowance for instrument error would be more than enough. Any penalty should take into account any pressure changes during the competition. Destroyed gliders result in higher insurance premiums for all and I doubt if we can put a price on a severely or fatally injured pilot. Those of us who get a testosterone rush from fast, low finishes should forgo them in the interest of overall safety or perhaps fly Grand Prix type contests. Harry Medlicott From: Paul Mander Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 1:53 PM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit I think you’ve been a bit quick to judge. You state that whilst “Jim chose to fly on”, two other pilots made quite routine outlandings 7km back on the track, implying a greater wisdom on their part. Those outlandings were not routine, if you study the traces. They were straight in landings just as was Jim’s. One of them makes a desperate last circle close to the ground then straightens up and lands. There is a striking similarity in all three traces, which paint a cautionary picture. All three picked up climbs just before their last turn, and then appear to consider themselves on final glide. Then they turn into a 20kt headwind from the SW, lose their final glide and start to search for lift. All three try to thermal again without success. All three glide on and the ground rises up to smite them; the other two are simply 7km further out when it does. There are undoubtedly lessons to be learnt from their experience, not the least being how quickly thermals die in Queensland and how quickly the trap can snap. But it’s not instructive, or fair, to make out that one was foolish where others were wise. From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Gary Stevenson Sent: Tuesday, 28 October 2014 10:45 PM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit Michael Texler in his post of the evening of 28 Oct, finally “Got It”. Tim has now amplified matters, so that to mis-quote one famous author, “even a schoolboy can understand”. Just a preamble: the point I really want to make is that on that last day when Jim choose to fly on, 2 pilots in Sports Class elected to make quite routine outlandings (into the same paddock apparently), just 7 km from home. As usual their traces are available on Soaring Spot. Names do not need to be mentioned – just look at Sports Class, and then check the outlandings and distances covered to pinpoint the two relevant traces. Tim , you are being a little bit shy in your use of the Oz vernacular. The “Municipal Dunny Man” filled a very valuable and quite unique place in servicing one the essential needs of communities prior to the development of reticulated sewerage systems. So to get the language straight, let me put “shed loads” back into its true blue and dinky di context: “shit-cart full loads”. Further ; For Australian Musical Researchers try Googling “Municipal Dunny Can”. . And of course do not overlook that Australian work of great literary worth titled “The Specialist”. For visual art buffs this work was no doubt part inspiration for the 2006 Oz movie “Kenny”. Cheers, Gary From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Tim Shirley Sent: Tuesday, 28 October 2014 8:39 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules... Hi all, Once again a disclaimer: I hold
Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit
Hi Paul, As I somewhat earlier said, we should wait for the official report, and full knowledge of the facts, before trying to draw ANY definitive conclusions. Given this, I therefore was NOT making any judgement as such, at all. Other than that, you are in general perfectly correct, and your further comments/conclusions are astute and bear thinking about. From what Jim choose to tell us, there is a difference between his final glide and that of the other two pilots who also outlanded close to home. Jim ended up in a situation where he had nowhere to go. In contrast, the other 2 pilots safely landed, without incident, in a suitable paddock, and I think that is the lesson here. They did indeed show greater wisdom. Hope that helps to clarify things for you. Kindest regards, Gary BTW let me correct one part my earlier email. The Specialist is an American not Australian - work written many years ago by Charles Sale. However the parallels to the Australian experience are unmistakable. From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Paul Mander Sent: Thursday, 30 October 2014 1:54 PM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit I think youve been a bit quick to judge. You state that whilst Jim chose to fly on, two other pilots made quite routine outlandings 7km back on the track, implying a greater wisdom on their part. Those outlandings were not routine, if you study the traces. They were straight in landings just as was Jims. One of them makes a desperate last circle close to the ground then straightens up and lands. There is a striking similarity in all three traces, which paint a cautionary picture. All three picked up climbs just before their last turn, and then appear to consider themselves on final glide. Then they turn into a 20kt headwind from the SW, lose their final glide and start to search for lift. All three try to thermal again without success. All three glide on and the ground rises up to smite them; the other two are simply 7km further out when it does. There are undoubtedly lessons to be learnt from their experience, not the least being how quickly thermals die in Queensland and how quickly the trap can snap. But its not instructive, or fair, to make out that one was foolish where others were wise. From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Gary Stevenson Sent: Tuesday, 28 October 2014 10:45 PM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit Michael Texler in his post of the evening of 28 Oct, finally Got It. Tim has now amplified matters, so that to mis-quote one famous author, even a schoolboy can understand. Just a preamble: the point I really want to make is that on that last day when Jim choose to fly on, 2 pilots in Sports Class elected to make quite routine outlandings (into the same paddock apparently), just 7 km from home. As usual their traces are available on Soaring Spot. Names do not need to be mentioned just look at Sports Class, and then check the outlandings and distances covered to pinpoint the two relevant traces. Tim , you are being a little bit shy in your use of the Oz vernacular. The Municipal Dunny Man filled a very valuable and quite unique place in servicing one the essential needs of communities prior to the development of reticulated sewerage systems. So to get the language straight, let me put shed loads back into its true blue and dinky di context: shit-cart full loads. Further ; For Australian Musical Researchers try Googling Municipal Dunny Can. . And of course do not overlook that Australian work of great literary worth titled The Specialist. For visual art buffs this work was no doubt part inspiration for the 2006 Oz movie Kenny. Cheers, Gary From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Tim Shirley Sent: Tuesday, 28 October 2014 8:39 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules... Hi all, Once again a disclaimer: I hold no relevant official position with the GFA. I do have considerable experience as a rulemaker, as a Contest Director, as a Scorer, and as a competition pilot. I speak only for myself. What follows is general clarification about competitions and rules, and is not intended as a comment on any specific incident. Back when I was involved in competition rulemaking, I remember we introduced some principles as a preamble to the rules and on checking I found that most of them are still there: At all times it remains the responsibility of pilots to operate in accordance with the GFA Manual of Standard Procedures and all applicable
Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit
As the only eye witness to the fatality at Narromine, I CAN comment on the Narromine tragedy. Unlike some, I have not seen the trace, however I could see that the pilot was low but travelling quickly and making good progress into the 20-25kt headwind. A couple of kilometres from the field he attempted to gain height in lift over landable paddocks, with no success. He then continued at a good groundspeed but very low on a straight in approach to the duty runway. Unfortunately for whatever reason he failed to notice the trees on his left, hitting his wing and rotating him in a flat spin onto the road. He was waving from the cockpit as I flew over, so needless to say I was devastated to hear he did not make it. I believe that the finish line encompassed the threshold of the runway. If the finish line had been larger, encompassing the fields on the other side of the river, perhaps this loss of life could have been avoided. I will certainly be advocating this at the next competition I enter… From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Harry Sent: Thursday, 30 October 2014 6:25 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit Hi All, Sometimes pilots themselves are not the best judge of safety factors. Their own prejudices and desires can stand in the way of rational decisions. The Q’land Easter comps had a requirement to cross the 3km radius finish line at 500ft. Following objections from pilots wishing to fly straight in finals without height requirements, this condition was not enforced. All pilots have navigational equipment which allows for finishing at a predetermined height. We have in the past year had two serious accidents involving two gliders severely damaged, a fatality and a second very lucky pilot. As far as I am aware In each case there was not a minimum height for crossing a finish line. Certainly the recent Q’land accident would not have occurred if the pilot had allowed extra height for final glide to meet a minimum requirement. Can’t comment on the Narromine tragedy. 500 ft. 3 km from the centre of the airfield allows for a safe finish. If there is a substantial tail wind the circle can be intersected on the downwind leg resulting in a safe interwind landing. A penalty for crossing below the specified minimum height should not be such as to destroy a pilots flight or competition score. One point per foot too low with a 50 ft allowance for instrument error would be more than enough. Any penalty should take into account any pressure changes during the competition. Destroyed gliders result in higher insurance premiums for all and I doubt if we can put a price on a severely or fatally injured pilot. Those of us who get a testosterone rush from fast, low finishes should forgo them in the interest of overall safety or perhaps fly Grand Prix type contests. Harry Medlicott From: Paul Mander mailto:p...@mander.net.au Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 1:53 PM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' mailto:aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit I think you’ve been a bit quick to judge. You state that whilst “Jim chose to fly on”, two other pilots made quite routine outlandings 7km back on the track, implying a greater wisdom on their part. Those outlandings were not routine, if you study the traces. They were straight in landings just as was Jim’s. One of them makes a desperate last circle close to the ground then straightens up and lands. There is a striking similarity in all three traces, which paint a cautionary picture. All three picked up climbs just before their last turn, and then appear to consider themselves on final glide. Then they turn into a 20kt headwind from the SW, lose their final glide and start to search for lift. All three try to thermal again without success. All three glide on and the ground rises up to smite them; the other two are simply 7km further out when it does. There are undoubtedly lessons to be learnt from their experience, not the least being how quickly thermals die in Queensland and how quickly the trap can snap. But it’s not instructive, or fair, to make out that one was foolish where others were wise. From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Gary Stevenson Sent: Tuesday, 28 October 2014 10:45 PM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit Michael Texler in his post of the evening of 28 Oct, finally “Got It”. Tim has now amplified matters, so that to mis-quote one famous author, “even a schoolboy can understand”. Just a preamble: the point I really want to make
Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit
I think youve been a bit quick to judge. You state that whilst Jim chose to fly on, two other pilots made quite routine outlandings 7km back on the track, implying a greater wisdom on their part. Those outlandings were not routine, if you study the traces. They were straight in landings just as was Jims. One of them makes a desperate last circle close to the ground then straightens up and lands. There is a striking similarity in all three traces, which paint a cautionary picture. All three picked up climbs just before their last turn, and then appear to consider themselves on final glide. Then they turn into a 20kt headwind from the SW, lose their final glide and start to search for lift. All three try to thermal again without success. All three glide on and the ground rises up to smite them; the other two are simply 7km further out when it does. There are undoubtedly lessons to be learnt from their experience, not the least being how quickly thermals die in Queensland and how quickly the trap can snap. But its not instructive, or fair, to make out that one was foolish where others were wise. From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Gary Stevenson Sent: Tuesday, 28 October 2014 10:45 PM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit Michael Texler in his post of the evening of 28 Oct, finally Got It. Tim has now amplified matters, so that to mis-quote one famous author, even a schoolboy can understand. Just a preamble: the point I really want to make is that on that last day when Jim choose to fly on, 2 pilots in Sports Class elected to make quite routine outlandings (into the same paddock apparently), just 7 km from home. As usual their traces are available on Soaring Spot. Names do not need to be mentioned just look at Sports Class, and then check the outlandings and distances covered to pinpoint the two relevant traces. Tim , you are being a little bit shy in your use of the Oz vernacular. The Municipal Dunny Man filled a very valuable and quite unique place in servicing one the essential needs of communities prior to the development of reticulated sewerage systems. So to get the language straight, let me put shed loads back into its true blue and dinky di context: shit-cart full loads. Further ; For Australian Musical Researchers try Googling Municipal Dunny Can. . And of course do not overlook that Australian work of great literary worth titled The Specialist. For visual art buffs this work was no doubt part inspiration for the 2006 Oz movie Kenny. Cheers, Gary From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Tim Shirley Sent: Tuesday, 28 October 2014 8:39 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules... Hi all, Once again a disclaimer: I hold no relevant official position with the GFA. I do have considerable experience as a rulemaker, as a Contest Director, as a Scorer, and as a competition pilot. I speak only for myself. What follows is general clarification about competitions and rules, and is not intended as a comment on any specific incident. Back when I was involved in competition rulemaking, I remember we introduced some principles as a preamble to the rules and on checking I found that most of them are still there: At all times it remains the responsibility of pilots to operate in accordance with the GFA Manual of Standard Procedures and all applicable laws and regulations. Pilots are expected to conduct themselves at all times in the spirit of these rules and in accordance with the practice of good sportsmanship. Safety is at all times the primary consideration. If at any time a pilot feels that the requirements of these rules compromises the safety of their flight then they should take whatever actions are required to ensure the safety of themselves and of other air users. This may include withdrawing from the task or from the competition. Pilots are required to conduct themselves in a manner that will not bring disrepute on the Organisers, the hosting club or the GFA. There is nothing in the competition rules that suspends any laws. There are no exemptions. Pilots flying in a competition are just pilots, and must obey every requirement of the law. They remain fully responsible as Pilots in Command for the conduct of the flight. If they choose to disobey the law or good practice then that is entirely their responsibility. The competition is a game. Flying is not. No one wants to break their glider or themselves, and the rules of the game clearly discourage that by the simple fact that most of the time there is another race tomorrow. You won't get any points from
Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit
To some extent, there are two separate threads here. This post addresses one aspect only and that is finish rules which encourage high-speed low-level finishes, how ever much fun they are. But it’s not instructive, or fair, to make out that one was foolish where others were wise. Right. But are we all foolish to continue with what is a demonstrably risky process. Who knows the stats… In the last two years, how many high-speed low-level finishes and how many accidents and fatalities have we had locally? My guess is something in the region of: 1000 landings 2 accidents 1 fatality. Is that foolish or wise? ___ 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
Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit
Michael Texler in his post of the evening of 28 Oct, finally Got It. Tim has now amplified matters, so that to mis-quote one famous author, even a schoolboy can understand. Just a preamble: the point I really want to make is that on that last day when Jim choose to fly on, 2 pilots in Sports Class elected to make quite routine outlandings (into the same paddock apparently), just 7 km from home. As usual their traces are available on Soaring Spot. Names do not need to be mentioned just look at Sports Class, and then check the outlandings and distances covered to pinpoint the two relevant traces. Tim , you are being a little bit shy in your use of the Oz vernacular. The Municipal Dunny Man filled a very valuable and quite unique place in servicing one the essential needs of communities prior to the development of reticulated sewerage systems. So to get the language straight, let me put shed loads back into its true blue and dinky di context: shit-cart full loads. Further ; For Australian Musical Researchers try Googling Municipal Dunny Can. . And of course do not overlook that Australian work of great literary worth titled The Specialist. For visual art buffs this work was no doubt part inspiration for the 2006 Oz movie Kenny. Cheers, Gary From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Tim Shirley Sent: Tuesday, 28 October 2014 8:39 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules... Hi all, Once again a disclaimer: I hold no relevant official position with the GFA. I do have considerable experience as a rulemaker, as a Contest Director, as a Scorer, and as a competition pilot. I speak only for myself. What follows is general clarification about competitions and rules, and is not intended as a comment on any specific incident. Back when I was involved in competition rulemaking, I remember we introduced some principles as a preamble to the rules and on checking I found that most of them are still there: At all times it remains the responsibility of pilots to operate in accordance with the GFA Manual of Standard Procedures and all applicable laws and regulations. Pilots are expected to conduct themselves at all times in the spirit of these rules and in accordance with the practice of good sportsmanship. Safety is at all times the primary consideration. If at any time a pilot feels that the requirements of these rules compromises the safety of their flight then they should take whatever actions are required to ensure the safety of themselves and of other air users. This may include withdrawing from the task or from the competition. Pilots are required to conduct themselves in a manner that will not bring disrepute on the Organisers, the hosting club or the GFA. There is nothing in the competition rules that suspends any laws. There are no exemptions. Pilots flying in a competition are just pilots, and must obey every requirement of the law. They remain fully responsible as Pilots in Command for the conduct of the flight. If they choose to disobey the law or good practice then that is entirely their responsibility. The competition is a game. Flying is not. No one wants to break their glider or themselves, and the rules of the game clearly discourage that by the simple fact that most of the time there is another race tomorrow. You won't get any points from a hospital bed or if your glider is in bits. On the last day, well if there was a million dollars at stake I could imagine that the risk of rolling yourself into a ball might be worth taking for some - but in our game why would anyone break a $100K glider for a bottle of cheap wine and a round of applause? Or even for the opportunity to spend shed loads of their own money representing Australia? If you want to know who is responsible for the safety of a flight where you are the Pilot in Command, take a good look in a mirror. And be very sure of what you see. Cheers Tim Shirley tra dire é fare c' é mezzo il mare On 28/10/2014 2:06 PM, Texler, Michael wrote: The caveat should be in place that the crash was a result of your own poor decision making. Now what constitutes poor decision making is a matter of opinion. Surely competition rules should be in place to discourage crashing: i.e. you crash, you are out of the comp. You pack up and go home. I'll leave it to others more experienced in these matters to give reasons why. ___ 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:
Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit
You lost me Gary. I'm following this from a comfortable position on the couch. I wasn't there, and don't even know the pilot. But there seems to be an issue with the rules to me. A wise man* once told me that to win, you must be able to fly the next day. Seems pretty clear for all but the last day given that points are on offer. It is not unreasonable to think that this should apply on the last day too - in my opinion. This might be controversial, but I am aware of a pilot winning the last day of a 15m class nationals, and the nationals themselves, after a midair that they flew away from (raced away from as I was told) whilst the other pilot abandoned. I can also recall some pretty optimistic flying by several pilots into the biggest storm I've ever seen at Narromine in about 2001, and ended up in extremely difficult retrieve situations due to 125-200mm of rain in the paddocks. Several were in no position to fly the next day even though a task was possible. The comp director (RIP), faced with a revolt from those who weren't ready to fly, did not set a task for three classes, but did for 18m. (Shinzo entered his D2 in 18m in protest as I recall). Another example of a last day skewed by poor airmanship? Those results stand. So does the Goondiwindi result. But for the future, should similar situations be allowed to be repeated? Why not have a rule that says that after landing/finishing on the last day, all gliders must be able to pass a daily inspection? As tempting as it is, I'm not going to comment on the finish arrangements, as I'm not familiar with the detail. Cheers Bruce *PS-I attribute the quote to Terry C (to my best recollection) On 28 Oct 2014, at 10:45 pm, Gary Stevenson gstev...@bigpond.com wrote: Michael Texler in his post of the evening of 28 Oct, finally “Got It”. Tim has now amplified matters, so that to mis-quote one famous author, “even a schoolboy can understand”. Just a preamble: the point I really want to make is that on that last day when Jim choose to fly on, 2 pilots in Sports Class elected to make quite routine outlandings (into the same paddock apparently), just 7 km from home. As usual their traces are available on Soaring Spot. Names do not need to be mentioned – just look at Sports Class, and then check the outlandings and distances covered to pinpoint the two relevant traces. Tim , you are being a little bit shy in your use of the Oz vernacular. The “Municipal Dunny Man” filled a very valuable and quite unique place in servicing one the essential needs of communities prior to the development of reticulated sewerage systems. So to get the language straight, let me put “shed loads” back into its true blue and dinky di context: “shit-cart full loads”. Further ; For Australian Musical Researchers try Googling “Municipal Dunny Can”. . And of course do not overlook that Australian work of great literary worth titled “The Specialist”. For visual art buffs this work was no doubt part inspiration for the 2006 Oz movie “Kenny”. Cheers, Gary From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Tim Shirley Sent: Tuesday, 28 October 2014 8:39 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules... Hi all, Once again a disclaimer: I hold no relevant official position with the GFA. I do have considerable experience as a rulemaker, as a Contest Director, as a Scorer, and as a competition pilot. I speak only for myself. What follows is general clarification about competitions and rules, and is not intended as a comment on any specific incident. Back when I was involved in competition rulemaking, I remember we introduced some principles as a preamble to the rules and on checking I found that most of them are still there: At all times it remains the responsibility of pilots to operate in accordance with the GFA Manual of Standard Procedures and all applicable laws and regulations. Pilots are expected to conduct themselves at all times in the spirit of these rules and in accordance with the practice of good sportsmanship. Safety is at all times the primary consideration. If at any time a pilot feels that the requirements of these rules compromises the safety of their flight then they should take whatever actions are required to ensure the safety of themselves and of other air users. This may include withdrawing from the task or from the competition. Pilots are required to conduct themselves in a manner that will not bring disrepute on the Organisers, the hosting club or the GFA. There is nothing in the competition rules that suspends any laws. There are no exemptions. Pilots flying in a competition are just pilots, and must obey every requirement of the law. They remain fully responsible as Pilots in Command for the
Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit
Tanya I could have loved you forever In spite of the bad beginning we had but you have no compassion , no empathy you don't want to compromise. You just want is a govt backed pension because you think it gives you security. In ten years the pension won't even buy you an ice cream. On 28 Oct 2014, at 21:24, Bruce Home Email discusdri...@gmail.com wrote: You lost me Gary. I'm following this from a comfortable position on the couch. I wasn't there, and don't even know the pilot. But there seems to be an issue with the rules to me. A wise man* once told me that to win, you must be able to fly the next day. Seems pretty clear for all but the last day given that points are on offer. It is not unreasonable to think that this should apply on the last day too - in my opinion. This might be controversial, but I am aware of a pilot winning the last day of a 15m class nationals, and the nationals themselves, after a midair that they flew away from (raced away from as I was told) whilst the other pilot abandoned. I can also recall some pretty optimistic flying by several pilots into the biggest storm I've ever seen at Narromine in about 2001, and ended up in extremely difficult retrieve situations due to 125-200mm of rain in the paddocks. Several were in no position to fly the next day even though a task was possible. The comp director (RIP), faced with a revolt from those who weren't ready to fly, did not set a task for three classes, but did for 18m. (Shinzo entered his D2 in 18m in protest as I recall). Another example of a last day skewed by poor airmanship? Those results stand. So does the Goondiwindi result. But for the future, should similar situations be allowed to be repeated? Why not have a rule that says that after landing/finishing on the last day, all gliders must be able to pass a daily inspection? As tempting as it is, I'm not going to comment on the finish arrangements, as I'm not familiar with the detail. Cheers Bruce *PS-I attribute the quote to Terry C (to my best recollection) On 28 Oct 2014, at 10:45 pm, Gary Stevenson gstev...@bigpond.com wrote: Michael Texler in his post of the evening of 28 Oct, finally “Got It”. Tim has now amplified matters, so that to mis-quote one famous author, “even a schoolboy can understand”. Just a preamble: the point I really want to make is that on that last day when Jim choose to fly on, 2 pilots in Sports Class elected to make quite routine outlandings (into the same paddock apparently), just 7 km from home. As usual their traces are available on Soaring Spot. Names do not need to be mentioned – just look at Sports Class, and then check the outlandings and distances covered to pinpoint the two relevant traces. Tim , you are being a little bit shy in your use of the Oz vernacular. The “Municipal Dunny Man” filled a very valuable and quite unique place in servicing one the essential needs of communities prior to the development of reticulated sewerage systems. So to get the language straight, let me put “shed loads” back into its true blue and dinky di context: “shit-cart full loads”. Further ; For Australian Musical Researchers try Googling “Municipal Dunny Can”. . And of course do not overlook that Australian work of great literary worth titled “The Specialist”. For visual art buffs this work was no doubt part inspiration for the 2006 Oz movie “Kenny”. Cheers, Gary From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Tim Shirley Sent: Tuesday, 28 October 2014 8:39 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules... Hi all, Once again a disclaimer: I hold no relevant official position with the GFA. I do have considerable experience as a rulemaker, as a Contest Director, as a Scorer, and as a competition pilot. I speak only for myself. What follows is general clarification about competitions and rules, and is not intended as a comment on any specific incident. Back when I was involved in competition rulemaking, I remember we introduced some principles as a preamble to the rules and on checking I found that most of them are still there: At all times it remains the responsibility of pilots to operate in accordance with the GFA Manual of Standard Procedures and all applicable laws and regulations. Pilots are expected to conduct themselves at all times in the spirit of these rules and in accordance with the practice of good sportsmanship. Safety is at all times the primary consideration. If at any time a pilot feels that the requirements of these rules compromises the safety of their flight then they should take whatever actions are required to ensure the safety of themselves and of other air users. This may include withdrawing from the task or from the
Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules - in the shit
Er Ron I think you pressed the wrong button old chap.. Stay safe today we want you around. Sent from my iPad On 29 Oct 2014, at 05:49, Ron resand...@gmail.com wrote: Tanya I could have loved you forever In spite of the bad beginning we had but you have no compassion , no empathy you don't want to compromise. You just want is a govt backed pension because you think it gives you security. In ten years the pension won't even buy you an ice cream. On 28 Oct 2014, at 21:24, Bruce Home Email discusdri...@gmail.com wrote: You lost me Gary. I'm following this from a comfortable position on the couch. I wasn't there, and don't even know the pilot. But there seems to be an issue with the rules to me. A wise man* once told me that to win, you must be able to fly the next day. Seems pretty clear for all but the last day given that points are on offer. It is not unreasonable to think that this should apply on the last day too - in my opinion. This might be controversial, but I am aware of a pilot winning the last day of a 15m class nationals, and the nationals themselves, after a midair that they flew away from (raced away from as I was told) whilst the other pilot abandoned. I can also recall some pretty optimistic flying by several pilots into the biggest storm I've ever seen at Narromine in about 2001, and ended up in extremely difficult retrieve situations due to 125-200mm of rain in the paddocks. Several were in no position to fly the next day even though a task was possible. The comp director (RIP), faced with a revolt from those who weren't ready to fly, did not set a task for three classes, but did for 18m. (Shinzo entered his D2 in 18m in protest as I recall). Another example of a last day skewed by poor airmanship? Those results stand. So does the Goondiwindi result. But for the future, should similar situations be allowed to be repeated? Why not have a rule that says that after landing/finishing on the last day, all gliders must be able to pass a daily inspection? As tempting as it is, I'm not going to comment on the finish arrangements, as I'm not familiar with the detail. Cheers Bruce *PS-I attribute the quote to Terry C (to my best recollection) On 28 Oct 2014, at 10:45 pm, Gary Stevenson gstev...@bigpond.com wrote: Michael Texler in his post of the evening of 28 Oct, finally “Got It”. Tim has now amplified matters, so that to mis-quote one famous author, “even a schoolboy can understand”. Just a preamble: the point I really want to make is that on that last day when Jim choose to fly on, 2 pilots in Sports Class elected to make quite routine outlandings (into the same paddock apparently), just 7 km from home. As usual their traces are available on Soaring Spot. Names do not need to be mentioned – just look at Sports Class, and then check the outlandings and distances covered to pinpoint the two relevant traces. Tim , you are being a little bit shy in your use of the Oz vernacular. The “Municipal Dunny Man” filled a very valuable and quite unique place in servicing one the essential needs of communities prior to the development of reticulated sewerage systems. So to get the language straight, let me put “shed loads” back into its true blue and dinky di context: “shit-cart full loads”. Further ; For Australian Musical Researchers try Googling “Municipal Dunny Can”. . And of course do not overlook that Australian work of great literary worth titled “The Specialist”. For visual art buffs this work was no doubt part inspiration for the 2006 Oz movie “Kenny”. Cheers, Gary From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Tim Shirley Sent: Tuesday, 28 October 2014 8:39 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Bizarre Comp Rules... Hi all, Once again a disclaimer: I hold no relevant official position with the GFA. I do have considerable experience as a rulemaker, as a Contest Director, as a Scorer, and as a competition pilot. I speak only for myself. What follows is general clarification about competitions and rules, and is not intended as a comment on any specific incident. Back when I was involved in competition rulemaking, I remember we introduced some principles as a preamble to the rules and on checking I found that most of them are still there: At all times it remains the responsibility of pilots to operate in accordance with the GFA Manual of Standard Procedures and all applicable laws and regulations. Pilots are expected to conduct themselves at all times in the spirit of these rules and in accordance with the practice of good sportsmanship. Safety is at all times the primary consideration. If at any time a pilot feels that the requirements of these rules compromises the safety of
