Discipline
All
What do we want ?
For me the most critical about competitions is, that we always set a task whenever flying is possible. Often in conditions, nobody would go for free flying.
Why does this happen?
- there is pressure on the organisers to archiev score
- the task commitees consist of pilots who want to improve their score/result
On the other hand results in bad wheather conditions are often luck and do not really help to find the best pilot.
Why does this happen?
- there is pressure on the organisers to archiev score
- the task commitees consist of pilots who want to improve their score/result
On the other hand results in bad wheather conditions are often luck and do not really help to find the best pilot.
How do we achieve that ?
What we already have:
CAT1 events last for about 2 weeks - No need to take every shitty day.
What we need:
No score in bad, unsave days.
Possibilties (to bei discussed):
- Minimum cloudbase (at least 300m over Take Off)?
- Minimum tasklength of 100km (in CAT1)?
- No score if GPS track analyses detect more than 30km/h wind below 300m
over takeoff
- No score if 10% of pilots don't reach 2nd waypoint?
- ...
CAT1 events last for about 2 weeks - No need to take every shitty day.
What we need:
No score in bad, unsave days.
Possibilties (to bei discussed):
- Minimum cloudbase (at least 300m over Take Off)?
- Minimum tasklength of 100km (in CAT1)?
- No score if GPS track analyses detect more than 30km/h wind below 300m
over takeoff
- No score if 10% of pilots don't reach 2nd waypoint?
- ...
Comments
I like the idea of enforcing more standards to what should be a "racing" day. We can agree to distinct taskable from flyable but we never detailed actual criterias for that. Good catch.
It is a conflictive proposal in the sense that it implies we do not trust MD in stopping a task when it should be stopped.
We cannot create rules assuming someone is doing bad his job.
And if the task was OK safetywise for a couple of hours, but it was challenging sportivewise, so that many pilots are on the ground or way behind the leaders when the unsafe conditions arise, then it is not fair for the pilots that were doing good to get the task cancelled. If the task is stopped at the right moment, then the scoring of stopped tasks works OK.
In reply to It is a conflictive proposal… by eduardosanchezgranel
The motivation for changing the scoring system is that the task commitees do not even set a task in doubtful conditions, because the chance of scoring is very low.
My experience is, that tasks are only stopped in thunderstroms, and not because of any other risks.
The scoring formula already contains a measure of "validity" based on how "sporting" it is, using criteria like how many pilots took off, how long they flew for, how many made goal.
What it does not account for is how many decided not to continue with the task because they considered it unsafe.
If there is was a way for a pilot to declare a "withdrawal" from the task, then given enough pilots thinking the same way the task would be devalued.
One way of declaring a withdrawal might be through your instrument, like declaring a "level 3".
BUT, there are lots of flaws in this simplistic description, this comment is intended to generate discussion on what might work.