Hi,
From my observations, the most vocal opponents of using start line are
the pilots who still use instruments that do not allow visualisation
of the start line (i.e. Garmins, Cambridge 20 etc.) but only show the
distance to the centre point of the line.
Also, consider what has to happens if the pilot changes her / his
decision with regard to the one of the allocated points before the
start. How many clicks / touches within the navigation program are
required to switch from one point to another and where are the pilot
eyes while she / he performing this operation... certainly not
outside maintaining good lookout.
With the WinPilot, it is just one click between the two pre-nominated
start points, but if I want to change to the third one, I need to do
no less than 5 clicks and navigate through 3 different screens, you do
not get such problems with the start line.
Regards
Jarek
----- Original Message -----
From: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
To:"Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
Cc:
Sent:Fri, 14 Feb 2014 13:29:27 +1100
Subject:Re: [Aus-soaring] The nationals: a proposal
Hi All,
Some interesting comments from Matthew.
His comment in the first paragraph re Tocumwal, is actually a very
good reason supporting the use of allocated start points. With
2/3rds of the points out, what we have is 1/3 usable. EVERY pilot
still has one start point available in the soarable part of the start
area. This is adequate. Contrast this to the hypothetical situation
where the one and only (per class) start line has been set up in the
unsoarable part of the sky.
In the nature of the beast, it is somewhat unlikely that increasing
the length of a start line from 10k to 20 k is going to improve safety
very much, if at all.
Multiple class pre-start gaggling can be minimized with well set
tasks, in which it is essential (if the task is to be completed), for
each class to get going soon after the opening of their gate. The
trend to under-set tasks at Australian competitions continues.
Comments in the last two paragraphs are noted.
HERE IS AN IDEA THAT TO MY KNOWLEDGE HAS NOT BEEN THROWN INTO THE
RING TO DATE. THE IDEA IS TO USE ALLOCATED MULTIPLE START LINES,
WITH A POSSIBLE LENGTH OF SAY 2-5K. I HAVE NOT REALLY THOUGHT ABOUT
ALL THE POSSIBLE RAMIFICATIONS, AND WHETHER OR NOT IT WOULD ACTUALLY
ACHIEVE ANYTHING POSITIVE, BUT PERHAPS IT IS AT LEAST WORTH
CONSIDERING.
Gary
FROM: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] ON BEHALF OF
Matthew Scutter
SENT: Friday, 14 February 2014 12:06 AM
TO: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
SUBJECT: Re: [Aus-soaring] The nationals: a proposal
A few points:
Despite popular belief, team flying is disallowed or doesn't happen
in most European national competitions.
I've heard of multiple start points being tried in some places
(WGC2010?) but it hasn't stuck. It seems it only takes one day where
pilots on one set of start points are disadvantaged and everyone is up
in arms and wants start lines back - like after the nationals at
Tocumwal with essentially unsoarable weather covering 2/3rds of the
start points.
I'm not convinced that multiple start points are safer than start
lines - with multiple start points I found myself thermalling with
vastly different span/wing loading gliders prestart, whereaa with
distinctly separate start lines such as those set at Kingaroy and
Waikerie it'd be with comparable gliders with similar circling speeds
and diameters - if at all, on a 10km start line there were usually
multiple potentially optimal locations. If we want to reduce gaggling
we could even increase the line length - some european comps fly with
20k.
I agree that gaggles are a high risk sitdayson but I remain
unconvinced that the formation is any less frequent with start points
than start lines - I remember the balls of glass forming on the blue
days just as readily at Benalla (last nationals with multiple points)
as Waikerie/Kingaroy. There'd be an enormous prestart gaggle, everyone
would leave on diverging headings for their start points then
reconvene in the first thermal on track. It was essentially the same
as we have now but with a randomly selected group of pilots being
forced to start a bit lower than everyone else each day. I welcome
comments from those who've flown many more competitions than I with
both start systems.
The reality of the situation is that in weak and inconsistent
conditions, it's much slower/riskier to fly alone than with a gaggle
and unless you find a way to change the incentives that drive this, on
the low, weak, blue days there will be gaggling. All of the ways that
I can think of (everybody has a different task, everybody has a
different start time) have a substantial impact on fairness such that
the day would better be cancelled.
On 13 Feb 2014 22:11, "Gary Stevenson" wrote:
Hi All,
Harry has given us some good information here, which should be of
special interest to newer competition pilots.
I am somewhat at loss as to why Harry made comment in his last
paragraph on team flying. Team flying is OUT in Australian National
Competitions, and Ross McLean in a very recent post on this site
explained exactly why.
Harry gave a brief comment on Start Line (as currently used), as
opposed to Start Circle, and as I see it, voted for the start circle.
Perhaps Harry might like add some extra comment here?
From my now EXTENSIVE experience of using a start line, I can say
that the reality is that it would seem that in a majority of
circumstances the actual start method does not really matter that
much. However note my use of the words “SEEM” & “MAJORITY”. As
Harry pointed out, there are exceptions, and there is not the
slightest doubt, that safety is compromised, in these exceptions.
The Europeans love start lines ( despite all its potential
hazards), because European pilots mostly team fly, and using a start
line makes the start easier for a team.
It is my understanding that Australia pioneered the use of allocated
Start Circles. In Harry’s paragraph 6, he talks about Start
Point Circle layout geometry. The competition guide lines
unambiguously set all this out: Very safe, and very fair. {I use
“fair” as some pilots seem to think (argue), that having a choice
of ONLY three start points is very inhibiting, and very unfair.] My
comment – GET REAL!
Basically THERE ARE MINIMAL HAZZARDS associated with start circles.
If you don’t quite “get it’ yet, I STRONGLY ADVOCATE THAT IN
AUSTRALIA WE EXCLUSIVELY USE START CIRCLES. They tend to inhibit a
team flying approach, and they tend to inhabit a start gaggle, which
is of course why the Europeans have not adopted the idea.
Gary Stevenson
FROM: [email protected] [2]
[mailto:[email protected] [3]] ON BEHALF OF
Harry
SENT: Thursday, 13 February 2014 3:39 PM
TO: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.
SUBJECT: Re: [Aus-soaring] The nationals: a proposal
Hi All,
These notes may be of interest,
Having a background of flying competitions for over 20years, being
coordinator of the National Pilots Safety Committee and being involved
in a midair in which I was hit from behind by a following glider and
only just opening my parachute in time, maybe these comments may have
some value.
Over the period 1988 to 1999, national multiclass competitions mid
air collisions resulted in 2 fatal mid airs, several pilots just
opening their parachutes just in time, 5 gliders destroyed, as well as
other mid airs where the damage did not result in loss of control. A
number of pilots gave up flying competitions. One in ten of the
pilots who flew National multiclass competitions during that period
was involved in a mid air collision. The number of competitors during
that period substantially reduced.
By way of comparison the very popular national club class
competitions which used an optional turn point tasking system, did
not, to my memory, have a single mid air accident. The tasking system
used resulted in very little gaggling.
The National Pilots Safety Committee was formed to research these
accidents and to suggest ways of preventing them. Changes made,
Largely as a result of the Committees efforts included. Assigned
start points to reduce gaggles, mandatory frequencies, mandatory
safety briefings including providing extensive notes to pilots and
Assigned Area Tasks particularly for use on difficult days.
Suggestions for task setters included avoiding out and return
situations, Having an included angle of no less than 30 degrees
between legs and setting tasks which avoided all classes coming home
together at about the same time over a long leg.
Some care is needed when applying these recommendations. As an
example, assigned start points, usually in three groups of three,
should be within about 40 degrees of right angles to the most common
first legs. This ensures pilots go straight on track and not cruise
through other start points after starting themselves.
Surely it is not a coincidence that since these changes were
introduced mid air accidents have virtually ceased and the number of
pilots flying competitions has increased? We now have Flarms which are
a benefit but cannot by itself explain the improvement. The major
circumstance where midair collisions occur is in or when a glider is
joining a thermal. Statistically you can build a pyramid starting with
the number of times a glider joins another or a group thermalling. The
next line is when a less than optimum but not immediately dangerous
situation occurs, then a highly dangerous situation and at the top of
the pyramid an actual midair. By training we can reduce the
progression but there is always a correlation. The more times
gliders join a turning glider, the more accidents at the top of the
pyramid.
Accidents when gliders are following the same track or cross each
others path as can occur in an AAT are extremely rare and a
circumstance where Flarms are particularly effective
For these reasons it is very concerning that some pilots are
advocating and consideration is being given to returning to conditions
which obtained during the years when we had an epidemic of accidents
Start lines result in pilots starting together and gaggling is far
worse, particularly on blue days, just as occurred years ago with
unallocated start points I understand that some pilots like to fly
as a team or a pair. Not sure that the silent majority are happy when
our best pilots, perhaps hoping or training for international team
selection , fly as a pair. The advantages of pair or team flying are
such that when the best pilots do it, not much chance for the rest. It
may well be GFA policy to encourage pair flying by using start lines
but I hope they are aware of the potential risks.
Having safe competitions must be our first priority.
Harry Medlicott
FROM: rolf a. buelter [4]
SENT: Sunday, February 02, 2014 2:45 PM
TO: aus soaring [5]
SUBJECT: Re: [Aus-soaring] The nationals: a proposal
As comp pilot permission of team flying will be a disincentive. Would
not prevent me to come but together with other factors make it less
likely.
As GFA member I would not welcome to subsidise towing cost for comp
pilots, including myself.
Rgds - Rolf
> From: [email protected] [6]
> Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2014 10:43:35 +1000
> To: [email protected] [7]
> 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
> [email protected] [8]
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring [9]
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected] [10]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring [11]
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected] [12]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring [13]
-------------------------
Email sent using Optus Webmail
Links:
------
[1] mailto:[email protected]
[2] mailto:[email protected]
[3] mailto:[email protected]
[4] mailto:[email protected]
[5] mailto:[email protected]
[6] mailto:[email protected]
[7] mailto:[email protected]
[8] mailto:[email protected]
[9] http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
[10] mailto:[email protected]
[11] http://lists.internodeon.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
[12] mailto:[email protected]
[13] http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
