It was a bold move by our intrepid Australian to enter the club's Duo in the Nationals.
For a while it looked like no-one would, I was certainly much too timid to take the risk, and everyone else was either busy, intimidated by the risk, missing the required ratings (X-country, engine starting, tail wheel use, Oudie etc etc), or where frightened by the cost.
So what happened??
Well he had a couple of outstanding days...135kph and second on the ridge day was an excellent result.
However I suspect the engine issue raised it's head a few times...when to start it?? 1500ft AGL which was one of the very early suggestions from other club motorglider pilots...or 1200ft, or 1000ft, or not at all??? Or do you dis-regard the motor and accept the land-out risk?
From my own experience during the contest if I'd applied a 1000ft cut-off I would have flamed up on 3 occasions and ended my day...i.e. I managed a get a thermal between ground-level and 1000ft. On 2 other occasions I landed out...Mangakino and the Spud Patch. To be fair, on the day that the contest was cancelled mid-task, the Duo was with me at Mangakino (albeit 1000ft higher), he motored home and I visited a farmer.
How do we handle this...I understand the desire to make the right decision (re when to give away the day and fire up) and to be on the conservative side (although quite what constitutes a conservative height is open to question - 5000ft might be questionable in the Landsbough) but it's an extra strain on the PIC.
Equally, who is in charge...do the 2nd seat pilots do any flying or decision making? Should they be current and up to date with the glider, contest flying and X-country flying? If they are not would it be best to treat them as a passenger? If that happens then the learning experience might be reduced. I know that 2nd seat flying with one Sth Is pilot allowed for no input on my behalf...
The cost?? Because we charge it out at a higher rate than the all the other gliders, and it's insured with an excess of $2500 (whereas the other club gliders are self insured), how does the PIC deal with this. And the glider suffered a small crack in the canopy due to a series of unfortunate events...so who should pay?? The rules say one thing...I'm less than convinced that in this case it is fully fair and reasonable. However I guess if I damage my own glider I'm up for $5000. However that's solely my choice and covers the whole year.
Which beings me back the first question...are we sure the actual costs of flying, plus the insurance excess risk, the second guessing of when to start the motor, and the hassle, will encourage anyone to enter the glider in a contest with the actual desire to win...as opposed to loitering around at the back of the grid providing training exercises??? Maybe that's what members want???
Some thought is required. Contests provide a great avenue for X-country training and flying. On 3 of the 7 days we flew the weather was marginal (isn't it always at contests)...and yet due to the persistence of the contest director, we set a task, launched, and pilots got around (unless the day was cancelled mid-task...but that's another matter). If it was a normal club day people would have ambled off claiming it was un-flyable.
So what's the main aim?
To win or provide training?
Maybe we should talk to Auckland and how they handle their Duo GDX. It flew in the contest, with a variety of pilots at the controls, however it has flown at other contests with 1 pilot always PIC, and with 2 pilots sharing the days.
No comments:
Post a Comment