US Racing Pilots.

Due to a low initial response rate the US Racing Pilot Poll has been extended to October 31, 2023. If you are an active racing pilot who has participated in a sanctioned contest in the US in the past four years the Rules and Competition Committees would like to hear from you before Halloween.

The poll can be found online at:

https://bit.ly/ssarules

For the Rules Committee,

Andy Blackburn
Chair

On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 11:46:44 AM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> US Racing Pilots.
>
> Due to a low initial response rate the US Racing Pilot Poll has been extended to October 31, 2023. If you are an active racing pilot who has participated in a sanctioned contest in the US in the past four years the Rules and Competition Committees would like to hear from you before Halloween.
>
> The poll can be found online at:
>
> https://bit.ly/ssarules
>
> For the Rules Committee,
>
> Andy Blackburn
> Chair
Shouldn’t the SSA be collecting feedback from the entire membership instead of just recent contest pilots? If one of the goals is to look for opportunities to improve the rules to make contests more attractive and grow participation, we shouldn’t just be polling the same few pilots each year. If you want to capture new ideas you need reach out to new respondents. Maybe all members should be allowed to respond and have a qualifying poll question such that you can compare responses from contest pilots vs non-contest pilots. I suspect that would generate some interesting data for the team to analyze.

On 10/24/2023 4:06 PM, Robert S wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 11:46:44 AM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
>> US Racing Pilots.
>>
>> Due to a low initial response rate the US Racing Pilot Poll has been extended to October 31, 2023. If you are an active racing pilot who has participated in a sanctioned contest in the US in the past four years the Rules and Competition Committees would like to hear from you before Halloween.
>>
>> The poll can be found online at:
>>
>> https://bit.ly/ssarules
>>
>> For the Rules Committee,
>>
>> Andy Blackburn
>> Chair
> Shouldn’t the SSA be collecting feedback from the entire membership instead of just recent contest pilots? If one of the goals is to look for opportunities to improve the rules to make contests more attractive and grow participation, we shouldn’t just be polling the same few pilots each year. If you want to capture new ideas you need reach out to new respondents. Maybe all members should be allowed to respond and have a qualifying poll question such that you can compare responses from contest pilots vs non-contest pilots. I suspect that would generate some interesting data for the team to analyze.
>

For example, I got the email invitation to the poll, but am not allowed
to actually respond to the poll, presumably because the last contest I
participated in was in 2018. Our region's contest has not been held
since then, due to COVID.

On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 4:06:09 PM UTC-4, Robert S wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 11:46:44 AM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> > US Racing Pilots.
> >
> > Due to a low initial response rate the US Racing Pilot Poll has been extended to October 31, 2023. If you are an active racing pilot who has participated in a sanctioned contest in the US in the past four years the Rules and Competition Committees would like to hear from you before Halloween.
> >
> > The poll can be found online at:
> >
> > https://bit.ly/ssarules
> >
> > For the Rules Committee,
> >
> > Andy Blackburn
> > Chair
> Shouldn’t the SSA be collecting feedback from the entire membership instead of just recent contest pilots? If one of the goals is to look for opportunities to improve the rules to make contests more attractive and grow participation, we shouldn’t just be polling the same few pilots each year. If you want to capture new ideas you need reach out to new respondents. Maybe all members should be allowed to respond and have a qualifying poll question such that you can compare responses from contest pilots vs non-contest pilots. I suspect that would generate some interesting data for the team to analyze.

This might be a good forum to provide some of your insights about contest soaring. I know that members of the Rules Subcommittee read this site.
They are also open to comments from anyone.
UH - Former RC member and chair

On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 5:55:25 PM UTC-5, Hank Nixon wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 4:06:09 PM UTC-4, Robert S wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 11:46:44 AM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> > > US Racing Pilots.
> > >
> > > Due to a low initial response rate the US Racing Pilot Poll has been extended to October 31, 2023. If you are an active racing pilot who has participated in a sanctioned contest in the US in the past four years the Rules and Competition Committees would like to hear from you before Halloween.
> > >
> > > The poll can be found online at:
> > >
> > > https://bit.ly/ssarules
> > >
> > > For the Rules Committee,
> > >
> > > Andy Blackburn
> > > Chair
> > Shouldn’t the SSA be collecting feedback from the entire membership instead of just recent contest pilots? If one of the goals is to look for opportunities to improve the rules to make contests more attractive and grow participation, we shouldn’t just be polling the same few pilots each year. If you want to capture new ideas you need reach out to new respondents. Maybe all members should be allowed to respond and have a qualifying poll question such that you can compare responses from contest pilots vs non-contest pilots. I suspect that would generate some interesting data for the team to analyze.
> This might be a good forum to provide some of your insights about contest soaring. I know that members of the Rules Subcommittee read this site.
> They are also open to comments from anyone.
> UH - Former RC member and chair

On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 5:55:25 PM UTC-5, Hank Nixon wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 4:06:09 PM UTC-4, Robert S wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 11:46:44 AM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> > > US Racing Pilots.
> > >
> > > Due to a low initial response rate the US Racing Pilot Poll has been extended to October 31, 2023. If you are an active racing pilot who has participated in a sanctioned contest in the US in the past four years the Rules and Competition Committees would like to hear from you before Halloween.
> > >
> > > The poll can be found online at:
> > >
> > > https://bit.ly/ssarules
> > >
> > > For the Rules Committee,
> > >
> > > Andy Blackburn
> > > Chair
> > Shouldn’t the SSA be collecting feedback from the entire membership instead of just recent contest pilots? If one of the goals is to look for opportunities to improve the rules to make contests more attractive and grow participation, we shouldn’t just be polling the same few pilots each year. If you want to capture new ideas you need reach out to new respondents. Maybe all members should be allowed to respond and have a qualifying poll question such that you can compare responses from contest pilots vs non-contest pilots. I suspect that would generate some interesting data for the team to analyze.
> This might be a good forum to provide some of your insights about contest soaring. I know that members of the Rules Subcommittee read this site.
> They are also open to comments from anyone.
> UH - Former RC member and chair

A little strange that the system is smart enough to know I'm noit eligible to respond to the poll, but not smart enough to know that it's not necessary to send me an invitation. Earlier this year there was a fair amount of empahsis on inreasing contest particiaption in Soaring magazine. Might be a good idea to collect input from anyone willing to respond to the poll if particaption in the poll and in contests is waning.

Yes absolutely - we got that feedback and acted on it.

We are conducting multiple polls this year on Racing and Cross-Country flying with the general membership focused on why pilots do or don't choose to pursue those particular forms of glider flying. The poll mentioned above is focused on the the specific details of the rules we use for SSA Sanctioned Regional and National contests. Those questions tend to benefit from not only pilots having read those rules, but also having flown under them so that opinions formed are somewhat informed by direct personal experience. The other polls include general questions about the rules among other topics that might motivate or demotivate pilots to try racing or stick with it.

The SSA members site includes all rules polls and a summary of responses - under the section titled "Racing Rules and Process". Feel free to take a look at the topics covered and PM me with thoughts on those specific questions or broader topics related to racing rules - or racing in general. Or post here if you prefer.

As many of you know the SSA in embarking on multiple programs to expand support for local cross-country and competition flying. There's also a new Condor racing night on Tuesdays and Thursdays - my gaming PC and VR goggles just showed up today so I'm going to give it a go this winter.

All input is welcome.

Andy Blackburn - 9B
Chair, SSA Contest Rules Committee

On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 1:06:09 PM UTC-7, Robert S wrote:

> Shouldn’t the SSA be collecting feedback from the entire membership instead of just recent contest pilots? If one of the goals is to look for opportunities to improve the rules to make contests more attractive and grow participation, we shouldn’t just be polling the same few pilots each year. If you want to capture new ideas you need reach out to new respondents. Maybe all members should be allowed to respond and have a qualifying poll question such that you can compare responses from contest pilots vs non-contest pilots. I suspect that would generate some interesting data for the team to analyze.

Hmmmm. Should be the exact same list. Though I am constantly amazed at the number of ways it is possible to mess up what would seem to be a simple list of names and email addresses. I took me a week this summer to help one person get registered on OGN - his spam blocker keep eating the confirmations.

PM me and we'll follow up.

Andy

On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 5:38:21 PM UTC-7, 3C wrote:

> A little strange that the system is smart enough to know I'm noit eligible to respond to the poll, but not smart enough to know that it's not necessary to send me an invitation. Earlier this year there was a fair amount of empahsis on inreasing contest particiaption in Soaring magazine. Might be a good idea to collect input from anyone willing to respond to the poll if particaption in the poll and in contests is waning.

On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 11:25:39 AM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 4:31:35 AM UTC-7, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 6:55:25 PM UTC-4, Hank Nixon wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 4:06:09 PM UTC-4, Robert S wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 11:46:44 AM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> > > > > US Racing Pilots.
> > > > >
> > > > > Due to a low initial response rate the US Racing Pilot Poll has been extended to October 31, 2023. If you are an active racing pilot who has participated in a sanctioned contest in the US in the past four years the Rules and Competition Committees would like to hear from you before Halloween.
> > > > >
> > > > > The poll can be found online at:
> > > > >
> > > > > https://bit.ly/ssarules
> > > > >
> > > > > For the Rules Committee,
> > > > >
> > > > > Andy Blackburn
> > > > > Chair
> > > > Shouldn’t the SSA be collecting feedback from the entire membership instead of just recent contest pilots? If one of the goals is to look for opportunities to improve the rules to make contests more attractive and grow participation, we shouldn’t just be polling the same few pilots each year. If you want to capture new ideas you need reach out to new respondents. Maybe all members should be allowed to respond and have a qualifying poll question such that you can compare responses from contest pilots vs non-contest pilots. I suspect that would generate some interesting data for the team to analyze.
> > > This might be a good forum to provide some of your insights about contest soaring. I know that members of the Rules Subcommittee read this site.
> > > They are also open to comments from anyone.
> > > UH - Former RC member and chair
> > UH thanks for opening the door, I choose not to do the contest thing but for those that do that is a good thing for them. The effect of contest soaring on other than the contest site is something that needs to be examined and changed. I will only speak of how this has impacted our soaring site and others in Florida. SLGP which host the Seniors , AKA, Geritol Classic, has had pilot's violate airspace that has created alarm within the FAA FSDO that has prompted phone calls asking for information about such violators. Violation of Class B is a serious violation and with all that is going on with NMAC's even as recent as last Saturday, 10-21-23, which is under investigation by the NTSB and FAA.
> > Over the years there have been repeated violations of class B in Orlando and Tampa airspace, in some instances pilots have omitted turning in their required trace just to take the penalty and continue to participate, and when the contest is finished they pack up their gliders and go home , not to worry about it again. So why does the contest committee not take a more serious approach to such a violation. The gliders in question are fitted with instrumentation that notes airspace and altitude, yet this repeatedly happens almost each year. If the rules committee were governed more seriously these violations would be and should be handled differently, yet when inmates are running the asylum it becomes just a slap on the wrist. Old Bob, The Purist
> I believe the violations are unintended, probably because the pilots are unfamiliar with the area; after all, you are guaranteed to place poorly in the contest if you enter a restricted area, because (at minimum) you lose all the points for the day and get penalty points, too. Airspace violation is not a contest strategy, but the Seniors contest does attract a lot of pilots from out of the area. My suggestion is education: more remarks/warning in the documents sent to entrants and task specific warnings at each day's pilot meeting. Finally, remind the pilots that their flight tracks show up on OGN, and that track will be used to determine airspace violations if they do not turn in a flight log.

In my analysis of airspace violations I see two types: "nicks" and "brain dead." Not sure that education will help much.

On a day when multiple pilots violate the same airspace, one has to question the proficiency of the task setter. IMHO.

On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 8:47:46 AM UTC-7, John Godfrey wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 11:25:39 AM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 4:31:35 AM UTC-7, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 6:55:25 PM UTC-4, Hank Nixon wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 4:06:09 PM UTC-4, Robert S wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 11:46:44 AM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> > > > > > US Racing Pilots.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Due to a low initial response rate the US Racing Pilot Poll has been extended to October 31, 2023. If you are an active racing pilot who has participated in a sanctioned contest in the US in the past four years the Rules and Competition Committees would like to hear from you before Halloween.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The poll can be found online at:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://bit.ly/ssarules
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For the Rules Committee,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Andy Blackburn
> > > > > > Chair
> > > > > Shouldn’t the SSA be collecting feedback from the entire membership instead of just recent contest pilots? If one of the goals is to look for opportunities to improve the rules to make contests more attractive and grow participation, we shouldn’t just be polling the same few pilots each year. If you want to capture new ideas you need reach out to new respondents. Maybe all members should be allowed to respond and have a qualifying poll question such that you can compare responses from contest pilots vs non-contest pilots. I suspect that would generate some interesting data for the team to analyze.
> > > > This might be a good forum to provide some of your insights about contest soaring. I know that members of the Rules Subcommittee read this site.
> > > > They are also open to comments from anyone.
> > > > UH - Former RC member and chair
> > > UH thanks for opening the door, I choose not to do the contest thing but for those that do that is a good thing for them. The effect of contest soaring on other than the contest site is something that needs to be examined and changed. I will only speak of how this has impacted our soaring site and others in Florida. SLGP which host the Seniors , AKA, Geritol Classic, has had pilot's violate airspace that has created alarm within the FAA FSDO that has prompted phone calls asking for information about such violators.. Violation of Class B is a serious violation and with all that is going on with NMAC's even as recent as last Saturday, 10-21-23, which is under investigation by the NTSB and FAA.
> > > Over the years there have been repeated violations of class B in Orlando and Tampa airspace, in some instances pilots have omitted turning in their required trace just to take the penalty and continue to participate, and when the contest is finished they pack up their gliders and go home , not to worry about it again. So why does the contest committee not take a more serious approach to such a violation. The gliders in question are fitted with instrumentation that notes airspace and altitude, yet this repeatedly happens almost each year. If the rules committee were governed more seriously these violations would be and should be handled differently, yet when inmates are running the asylum it becomes just a slap on the wrist. Old Bob, The Purist
> > I believe the violations are unintended, probably because the pilots are unfamiliar with the area; after all, you are guaranteed to place poorly in the contest if you enter a restricted area, because (at minimum) you lose all the points for the day and get penalty points, too. Airspace violation is not a contest strategy, but the Seniors contest does attract a lot of pilots from out of the area. My suggestion is education: more remarks/warning in the documents sent to entrants and task specific warnings at each day's pilot meeting. Finally, remind the pilots that their flight tracks show up on OGN, and that track will be used to determine airspace violations if they do not turn in a flight log.
> In my analysis of airspace violations I see two types: "nicks" and "brain dead." Not sure that education will help much.
>
> On a day when multiple pilots violate the same airspace, one has to question the proficiency of the task setter. IMHO.
Like using a "steering" turnpoint to get pilots around a restricted area. instead of task with a direct path through the airspace? I do wonder how these pilots ignore the excited voice from their flight computer. Mine goes hyper if I'm on a course into it, or even just flying close to it.

On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 2:52:53 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 8:47:46 AM UTC-7, John Godfrey wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 11:25:39 AM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 4:31:35 AM UTC-7, youngbl....@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 6:55:25 PM UTC-4, Hank Nixon wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 4:06:09 PM UTC-4, Robert S wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 11:46:44 AM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> > > > > > > US Racing Pilots.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Due to a low initial response rate the US Racing Pilot Poll has been extended to October 31, 2023. If you are an active racing pilot who has participated in a sanctioned contest in the US in the past four years the Rules and Competition Committees would like to hear from you before Halloween.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The poll can be found online at:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://bit.ly/ssarules
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For the Rules Committee,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Andy Blackburn
> > > > > > > Chair
> > > > > > Shouldn’t the SSA be collecting feedback from the entire membership instead of just recent contest pilots? If one of the goals is to look for opportunities to improve the rules to make contests more attractive and grow participation, we shouldn’t just be polling the same few pilots each year. If you want to capture new ideas you need reach out to new respondents. Maybe all members should be allowed to respond and have a qualifying poll question such that you can compare responses from contest pilots vs non-contest pilots. I suspect that would generate some interesting data for the team to analyze.
> > > > > This might be a good forum to provide some of your insights about contest soaring. I know that members of the Rules Subcommittee read this site.
> > > > > They are also open to comments from anyone.
> > > > > UH - Former RC member and chair
> > > > UH thanks for opening the door, I choose not to do the contest thing but for those that do that is a good thing for them. The effect of contest soaring on other than the contest site is something that needs to be examined and changed. I will only speak of how this has impacted our soaring site and others in Florida. SLGP which host the Seniors , AKA, Geritol Classic, has had pilot's violate airspace that has created alarm within the FAA FSDO that has prompted phone calls asking for information about such violators. Violation of Class B is a serious violation and with all that is going on with NMAC's even as recent as last Saturday, 10-21-23, which is under investigation by the NTSB and FAA.
> > > > Over the years there have been repeated violations of class B in Orlando and Tampa airspace, in some instances pilots have omitted turning in their required trace just to take the penalty and continue to participate, and when the contest is finished they pack up their gliders and go home , not to worry about it again. So why does the contest committee not take a more serious approach to such a violation. The gliders in question are fitted with instrumentation that notes airspace and altitude, yet this repeatedly happens almost each year. If the rules committee were governed more seriously these violations would be and should be handled differently, yet when inmates are running the asylum it becomes just a slap on the wrist. Old Bob, The Purist
> > > I believe the violations are unintended, probably because the pilots are unfamiliar with the area; after all, you are guaranteed to place poorly in the contest if you enter a restricted area, because (at minimum) you lose all the points for the day and get penalty points, too. Airspace violation is not a contest strategy, but the Seniors contest does attract a lot of pilots from out of the area. My suggestion is education: more remarks/warning in the documents sent to entrants and task specific warnings at each day's pilot meeting. Finally, remind the pilots that their flight tracks show up on OGN, and that track will be used to determine airspace violations if they do not turn in a flight log.
> > In my analysis of airspace violations I see two types: "nicks" and "brain dead." Not sure that education will help much.
> >
> > On a day when multiple pilots violate the same airspace, one has to question the proficiency of the task setter. IMHO.
> Like using a "steering" turnpoint to get pilots around a restricted area. instead of task with a direct path through the airspace? I do wonder how these pilots ignore the excited voice from their flight computer. Mine goes hyper if I'm on a course into it, or even just flying close to it.
In reality, none of us who act as CDs or task advisors bat 1000, but staying alert to situations were mistakes are easily made is time well spent. The Orlando Class B e.g. has a floor of 6000' MSL in an area where we fly all the time, but it drops to 4000. MSL just a little further on. It's easy to mistake an alert from your computer that you can't ignore for one you can.

> Like using a "steering" turnpoint to get pilots around a restricted area. instead of task with a direct path through the airspace? I do wonder how these pilots ignore the excited voice from their flight computer. Mine goes hyper if I'm on a course into it, or even just flying close to it.

1. I'm running TopHat on a Kobo e-reader: no sound. The screen alerts me but I miss the audio warning provided by my now-ancient Glide Navigator II running on a Compaq 1550 (go see it in a museum, kids).
2. Years ago at the Std. Class Nationals at Caesar Creek, I was on a long task. Spotting Columbus off my left wing, I thought, "gee, I must be pretty close to that airspace." When I zoomed out to see how far, I blanched when I realized my moving map had NO airspace boundaries on it. That morning, I had forgotten to retrieve my CompactFlash card (see it in the same museum) from the scorer, which was the way I submitted my flight trace, and replace it in the Compaq 1550. That CF card also had the waypoint and special use airspaces files! The waypoints were still loaded in the GPS-NAV so I didn't notice anything amiss for a while. But the SUA file had to be loaded each day--and that was missing. I avoided that incursion by a few miles but later in the flight, as the day ran out, the last solid cus were up against the Dayton/Wright-Patterson AFB airspace. With no way to assure I could stay in the clear, I had to pass them by...ultimately landing a few miles short. I added "install memory card" to my lengthy checklist. If I hadn't noticed the absence of the airspace borders, I might have been one of those "brain dead" incursions John mentions.
3. I've flown many contests out of the Mid-Atlantic Soaring Association's airport in Fairfield, PA--a few miles from P-40 surrounding Camp David. In the past, I've occasionally thermaled up slowly to final glide over the ridge near High Rock, with the prevailing wind pushing me back closer and closer to P-40, to the point where I had to open up my circle upwind to stay out of it each time I came around. That was stupid. In recent years, I've given P-40 a wider berth. But if I had been careless, I might have been one of those "nicks" John mentions.

Chip Bearden
"JB"

On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 3:50:18 PM UTC-7, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 10:28:35 AM UTC-4, John Godfrey wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 7:31:35 AM UTC-4, youngbl...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 6:55:25 PM UTC-4, Hank Nixon wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 4:06:09 PM UTC-4, Robert S wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 11:46:44 AM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> > > > > > US Racing Pilots.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Due to a low initial response rate the US Racing Pilot Poll has been extended to October 31, 2023. If you are an active racing pilot who has participated in a sanctioned contest in the US in the past four years the Rules and Competition Committees would like to hear from you before Halloween.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The poll can be found online at:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://bit.ly/ssarules
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For the Rules Committee,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Andy Blackburn
> > > > > > Chair
> > > > > Shouldn’t the SSA be collecting feedback from the entire membership instead of just recent contest pilots? If one of the goals is to look for opportunities to improve the rules to make contests more attractive and grow participation, we shouldn’t just be polling the same few pilots each year. If you want to capture new ideas you need reach out to new respondents. Maybe all members should be allowed to respond and have a qualifying poll question such that you can compare responses from contest pilots vs non-contest pilots. I suspect that would generate some interesting data for the team to analyze.
> > > > This might be a good forum to provide some of your insights about contest soaring. I know that members of the Rules Subcommittee read this site.
> > > > They are also open to comments from anyone.
> > > > UH - Former RC member and chair
> > > UH thanks for opening the door, I choose not to do the contest thing but for those that do that is a good thing for them. The effect of contest soaring on other than the contest site is something that needs to be examined and changed. I will only speak of how this has impacted our soaring site and others in Florida. SLGP which host the Seniors , AKA, Geritol Classic, has had pilot's violate airspace that has created alarm within the FAA FSDO that has prompted phone calls asking for information about such violators.. Violation of Class B is a serious violation and with all that is going on with NMAC's even as recent as last Saturday, 10-21-23, which is under investigation by the NTSB and FAA.
> > > Over the years there have been repeated violations of class B in Orlando and Tampa airspace, in some instances pilots have omitted turning in their required trace just to take the penalty and continue to participate, and when the contest is finished they pack up their gliders and go home , not to worry about it again. So why does the contest committee not take a more serious approach to such a violation. The gliders in question are fitted with instrumentation that notes airspace and altitude, yet this repeatedly happens almost each year. If the rules committee were governed more seriously these violations would be and should be handled differently, yet when inmates are running the asylum it becomes just a slap on the wrist. Old Bob, The Purist
> > I do not dispute that the airpsace violations that have occurred in FL are very problematic. However, OBTP shows a fundamental lack of knowledge about what the current rules say (and have said for a LONG time).
> >
> > 1. If you violate airspace OR choose to not turn in a flight log, you are disqualified for the day and get an additional penalty. (Rule 12.2.5.5 and 12.2.5.6)
> >
> > 2. If it happens a second time (in any combination) you are sent home (Rule 11.2.2.8.3)
> >
> > While I know of instances where multiple pilots have violated airspace on a single day, I don't recall an instance of a second occurrance getting someone sent home.
> John, I am fully cognizant of the penalty for the violations, you and I had a nice discussion about this problem last year when you were in Vero Beach, looks like you may have forgotten. Now we are discussing Nicks, Task Managers and laying blame on everything except the culprit pilot. There is no reason for the violation of the Restricted areas or Class B, I fly around them all the time and I am always aware of my position in reference to any controlled airspace or Restricted Area. With the technology that we have today there is redundancy in almost every cockpit that shows and notifies of critical airspace.
> This is not like the days of past when all we had was a TCA to worry about and could only carry a folded sectional. This is a very serious issue that affects more than just contest pilots, which make up a very small overall population of the soaring community.
> The situation that we have in Florida has had increased frequency during the past few years, and if there is nothing more than a slap on the wrist it will continue and the rest of us will pay the price. Old Bob, The Purist
How many are repeat violators? If it's a small %, say less than 15%, perhaps the "slap on the wrist" is working. With OGN, the penalty (official and unofficial) goes to at least "two slaps on the wrist", as everyone can check the OGN flight traces for pilots who must be shunned by the rest of us (or, at least an expression of disappointment).

On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 1:58:21 PM UTC-7, John Godfrey wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 2:52:53 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 8:47:46 AM UTC-7, John Godfrey wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 11:25:39 AM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 4:31:35 AM UTC-7, youngbl....@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 6:55:25 PM UTC-4, Hank Nixon wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 4:06:09 PM UTC-4, Robert S wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 11:46:44 AM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> > > > > > > > US Racing Pilots.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Due to a low initial response rate the US Racing Pilot Poll has been extended to October 31, 2023. If you are an active racing pilot who has participated in a sanctioned contest in the US in the past four years the Rules and Competition Committees would like to hear from you before Halloween.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The poll can be found online at:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > https://bit.ly/ssarules
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > For the Rules Committee,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Andy Blackburn
> > > > > > > > Chair
> > > > > > > Shouldn’t the SSA be collecting feedback from the entire membership instead of just recent contest pilots? If one of the goals is to look for opportunities to improve the rules to make contests more attractive and grow participation, we shouldn’t just be polling the same few pilots each year. If you want to capture new ideas you need reach out to new respondents. Maybe all members should be allowed to respond and have a qualifying poll question such that you can compare responses from contest pilots vs non-contest pilots. I suspect that would generate some interesting data for the team to analyze.
> > > > > > This might be a good forum to provide some of your insights about contest soaring. I know that members of the Rules Subcommittee read this site.
> > > > > > They are also open to comments from anyone.
> > > > > > UH - Former RC member and chair
> > > > > UH thanks for opening the door, I choose not to do the contest thing but for those that do that is a good thing for them. The effect of contest soaring on other than the contest site is something that needs to be examined and changed. I will only speak of how this has impacted our soaring site and others in Florida. SLGP which host the Seniors , AKA, Geritol Classic, has had pilot's violate airspace that has created alarm within the FAA FSDO that has prompted phone calls asking for information about such violators. Violation of Class B is a serious violation and with all that is going on with NMAC's even as recent as last Saturday, 10-21-23, which is under investigation by the NTSB and FAA.
> > > > > Over the years there have been repeated violations of class B in Orlando and Tampa airspace, in some instances pilots have omitted turning in their required trace just to take the penalty and continue to participate, and when the contest is finished they pack up their gliders and go home , not to worry about it again. So why does the contest committee not take a more serious approach to such a violation. The gliders in question are fitted with instrumentation that notes airspace and altitude, yet this repeatedly happens almost each year. If the rules committee were governed more seriously these violations would be and should be handled differently, yet when inmates are running the asylum it becomes just a slap on the wrist. Old Bob, The Purist
> > > > I believe the violations are unintended, probably because the pilots are unfamiliar with the area; after all, you are guaranteed to place poorly in the contest if you enter a restricted area, because (at minimum) you lose all the points for the day and get penalty points, too. Airspace violation is not a contest strategy, but the Seniors contest does attract a lot of pilots from out of the area. My suggestion is education: more remarks/warning in the documents sent to entrants and task specific warnings at each day's pilot meeting. Finally, remind the pilots that their flight tracks show up on OGN, and that track will be used to determine airspace violations if they do not turn in a flight log.
> > > In my analysis of airspace violations I see two types: "nicks" and "brain dead." Not sure that education will help much.
> > >
> > > On a day when multiple pilots violate the same airspace, one has to question the proficiency of the task setter. IMHO.
> > Like using a "steering" turnpoint to get pilots around a restricted area. instead of task with a direct path through the airspace? I do wonder how these pilots ignore the excited voice from their flight computer. Mine goes hyper if I'm on a course into it, or even just flying close to it.
> In reality, none of us who act as CDs or task advisors bat 1000, but staying alert to situations were mistakes are easily made is time well spent. The Orlando Class B e.g. has a floor of 6000' MSL in an area where we fly all the time, but it drops to 4000. MSL just a little further on. It's easy to mistake an alert from your computer that you can't ignore for one you can..
I don't know what would work; possibly, encourage every contestant to fly some tasks near that airspace on a Condor simulator, so they can interact with the airspace before they do it in the air. A simulator could be made available at SLGP for that purpose for those that don't have access to Condor elsewhere. It wouldn't have to tasks, just "flying" around the airspace might be enough experience, it'd eliminate most of the violations.

On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 1:58:21 PM UTC-7, John Godfrey wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 2:52:53 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 8:47:46 AM UTC-7, John Godfrey wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 11:25:39 AM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 4:31:35 AM UTC-7, youngbl....@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 6:55:25 PM UTC-4, Hank Nixon wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 4:06:09 PM UTC-4, Robert S wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 11:46:44 AM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> > > > > > > > US Racing Pilots.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Due to a low initial response rate the US Racing Pilot Poll has been extended to October 31, 2023. If you are an active racing pilot who has participated in a sanctioned contest in the US in the past four years the Rules and Competition Committees would like to hear from you before Halloween.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The poll can be found online at:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > https://bit.ly/ssarules
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > For the Rules Committee,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Andy Blackburn
> > > > > > > > Chair
> > > > > > > Shouldn’t the SSA be collecting feedback from the entire membership instead of just recent contest pilots? If one of the goals is to look for opportunities to improve the rules to make contests more attractive and grow participation, we shouldn’t just be polling the same few pilots each year. If you want to capture new ideas you need reach out to new respondents. Maybe all members should be allowed to respond and have a qualifying poll question such that you can compare responses from contest pilots vs non-contest pilots. I suspect that would generate some interesting data for the team to analyze.
> > > > > > This might be a good forum to provide some of your insights about contest soaring. I know that members of the Rules Subcommittee read this site.
> > > > > > They are also open to comments from anyone.
> > > > > > UH - Former RC member and chair
> > > > > UH thanks for opening the door, I choose not to do the contest thing but for those that do that is a good thing for them. The effect of contest soaring on other than the contest site is something that needs to be examined and changed. I will only speak of how this has impacted our soaring site and others in Florida. SLGP which host the Seniors , AKA, Geritol Classic, has had pilot's violate airspace that has created alarm within the FAA FSDO that has prompted phone calls asking for information about such violators. Violation of Class B is a serious violation and with all that is going on with NMAC's even as recent as last Saturday, 10-21-23, which is under investigation by the NTSB and FAA.
> > > > > Over the years there have been repeated violations of class B in Orlando and Tampa airspace, in some instances pilots have omitted turning in their required trace just to take the penalty and continue to participate, and when the contest is finished they pack up their gliders and go home , not to worry about it again. So why does the contest committee not take a more serious approach to such a violation. The gliders in question are fitted with instrumentation that notes airspace and altitude, yet this repeatedly happens almost each year. If the rules committee were governed more seriously these violations would be and should be handled differently, yet when inmates are running the asylum it becomes just a slap on the wrist. Old Bob, The Purist
> > > > I believe the violations are unintended, probably because the pilots are unfamiliar with the area; after all, you are guaranteed to place poorly in the contest if you enter a restricted area, because (at minimum) you lose all the points for the day and get penalty points, too. Airspace violation is not a contest strategy, but the Seniors contest does attract a lot of pilots from out of the area. My suggestion is education: more remarks/warning in the documents sent to entrants and task specific warnings at each day's pilot meeting. Finally, remind the pilots that their flight tracks show up on OGN, and that track will be used to determine airspace violations if they do not turn in a flight log.
> > > In my analysis of airspace violations I see two types: "nicks" and "brain dead." Not sure that education will help much.
> > >
> > > On a day when multiple pilots violate the same airspace, one has to question the proficiency of the task setter. IMHO.
> > Like using a "steering" turnpoint to get pilots around a restricted area. instead of task with a direct path through the airspace? I do wonder how these pilots ignore the excited voice from their flight computer. Mine goes hyper if I'm on a course into it, or even just flying close to it.
> In reality, none of us who act as CDs or task advisors bat 1000, but staying alert to situations were mistakes are easily made is time well spent. The Orlando Class B e.g. has a floor of 6000' MSL in an area where we fly all the time, but it drops to 4000. MSL just a little further on. It's easy to mistake an alert from your computer that you can't ignore for one you can..
How about a 2nm horizontal buffer zone and a 500' vertical buffer zone for all the restricted airspaces? At least, the
"nicks" would not be violations, and maybe it would help with the "brain dead" violations.

Another way nicks can occur is by having a small waring buffer. I have almost been caught by this, because where I fly at home, the down wind leg to the airport is very close to airspace, but then once away there is very little to worry about. I have warnings very tight, but if I don't remember to adjust this before a contest, then you can find yourself working a weak low thermal save while drifting closer towards airspace than you like.

Kevin
92

On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 1:21:06 PM UTC-4, kevin anderson wrote:
> Another way nicks can occur is by having a small waring buffer. I have almost been caught by this, because where I fly at home, the down wind leg to the airport is very close to airspace, but then once away there is very little to worry about. I have warnings very tight, but if I don't remember to adjust this before a contest, then you can find yourself working a weak low thermal save while drifting closer towards airspace than you like.
>
> Kevin
> 92
The question I neglected to pose to OBTP is: "What do you advocate the rule to be?"

On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 5:25:06 PM UTC-4, John Godfrey wrote:
> On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 1:21:06 PM UTC-4, kevin anderson wrote:
> > Another way nicks can occur is by having a small waring buffer. I have almost been caught by this, because where I fly at home, the down wind leg to the airport is very close to airspace, but then once away there is very little to worry about. I have warnings very tight, but if I don't remember to adjust this before a contest, then you can find yourself working a weak low thermal save while drifting closer towards airspace than you like.
> >
> > Kevin
> > 92
> The question I neglected to pose to OBTP is: "What do you advocate the rule to be?"

On the phone Bob advocated ejection on the first offense.
Harsh- But-------
Maybe it could have an effect.
UH

On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 2:43:26 PM UTC-7, Hank Nixon wrote:
> On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 5:25:06 PM UTC-4, John Godfrey wrote:
> > On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 1:21:06 PM UTC-4, kevin anderson wrote:
> > > Another way nicks can occur is by having a small waring buffer. I have almost been caught by this, because where I fly at home, the down wind leg to the airport is very close to airspace, but then once away there is very little to worry about. I have warnings very tight, but if I don't remember to adjust this before a contest, then you can find yourself working a weak low thermal save while drifting closer towards airspace than you like.
> > >
> > > Kevin
> > > 92
> > The question I neglected to pose to OBTP is: "What do you advocate the rule to be?"
> On the phone Bob advocated ejection on the first offense.
> Harsh- But-------
> Maybe it could have an effect.
> UH
Has anyone asked the violators what would have kept them from entering restricted airspace? If we don't know the answer to that question, we may spend years fixing the problem.

On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 12:46:44 PM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> US Racing Pilots.
>
> Due to a low initial response rate the US Racing Pilot Poll has been extended to October 31, 2023. If you are an active racing pilot who has participated in a sanctioned contest in the US in the past four years the Rules and Competition Committees would like to hear from you before Halloween.
>
> The poll can be found online at:
>
> https://bit.ly/ssarules
>
> For the Rules Committee,
>
> Andy Blackburn
> Chair

I didn't see results posted for the poll, did I miss them?

Oh, and bump something meaningful to the top.

On Monday, November 20, 2023 at 9:35:10 AM UTC-5, Charlie M. (UH, Pi & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 12:46:44 PM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> > US Racing Pilots.
> >
> > Due to a low initial response rate the US Racing Pilot Poll has been extended to October 31, 2023. If you are an active racing pilot who has participated in a sanctioned contest in the US in the past four years the Rules and Competition Committees would like to hear from you before Halloween.
> >
> > The poll can be found online at:
> >
> > https://bit.ly/ssarules
> >
> > For the Rules Committee,
> >
> > Andy Blackburn
> > Chair
> I didn't see results posted for the poll, did I miss them?
>
> Oh, and bump something meaningful to the top.
End of the year coming up, poll info should be up soon.