Flytec
Wills Wing

Oz Report

Volume 7, Number 211
7 pm, Thursday, August 7 2003

https://OzReport.com
"Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore."

to Table of Contentsto next topic Brazilian Nationals – Betinho on fire

Thu, Aug 7 2003, 2:00:01 pm EDT
the Brazilian Nationals

Betinho Schmitz|Brazilian Nationals 2012|Leonardo Dabbur|Mike Barber|Wills Wing

Aeros Combat|Betinho Schmitz|Brazilian Nationals 2012|Leonardo Dabbur|Mike Barber|Wills Wing

Aeros Combat|Betinho Schmitz|Brazilian Nationals 2012|Brett Hazlett|Leonardo Dabbur|Mike Barber|Wills Wing

Aeros Combat|Betinho Schmitz|Brazilian Nationals 2012|Brett Hazlett|Gerolf Heinrichs|Leonardo Dabbur|Mike Barber|Wills Wing

Marcelo R. Zanetti «marcelo» sends this URL for the Brazilian Nationals:

http://www.jlv.com.br/brasilia (both HTML!!! and PDF). Thanks so much for putting in HTML, this is super!

Peter I. Volf «pivolf» writes:

The Brazilian National's results are also available at http://www.fpvl.com.br/campeonatos.php in "2003 - Brasileiro de Asa Delta"

(PDF only – boo!). But the latest results!

Bulletins about the Brazilian Nations in Portuguese at http://www.fpvl.com.br

If you look at the daily results you’ll see that the Brazilian Nationals really is a race, a very tight and fast race.  Not only does everyone start at the same time, but they fly very fast and come in only seconds apart.  For example, day two:

1

Guillen, Bruno, 109

Moyes Litespeed

15:58:57

2

Mario Alonzi, Mario Alonzi, 114

Aeros Combat 2

15:59:00

3

Carlos Schmitz, Betinho Schmitz

Moyes Litespeed 4

15:59:14

4

Konrad Heilman, Konrado, 14

Moyes Litespeed

15:59:55

5

Leonardo Dabbur, Maskara, 12

Wills Wing Talon

16:03:57

6

Mike Barber, Mike Barber, 126

Moyes Litespeed 4

16:04:03

7

Paulo Eduardo Baz, Cambuquira

Wills Wing Talon

16:04:14

8

Pedro Matos, Pedrão, 25

Moyes Litespeed

16:04:19

9

AndrÉ Wolf, André Wolf, 5

Moyes Litespeed 4

16:04:28

10

Koji Daimon, Koji, 101

Aeros Combat 2

16:09:21

After four tasks:

1

Carlos Schmitz, Betinho Schmitz (red Bu

3658

2

Mario Alonzi, Mario Alonzi (armee De L'ai

3433

3

AndrÉ Wolf, André Wolf (moyes - Ondas D

3315

4

Hazlett Brett, Brett (moyes)

3165

5

Gerard Jean Francois, Gerard

3161

6

Heinrichs, Gerolf (moyes Delta Gliobs)

3103

7

Fabio Cardoso Nunes, Fabio Nunes (ond

3098

8

Boisselier Antonie, Tonio (skyline / Nsd

3057

9

Pedro Matos, Pedrão (citroen/nike/immtu

3024

10

Gustavo De Araujo Saldanha, Guga (b

2963

Taken from a PDF file (and therefore not as useful as the results shown above).

Discuss "Brazilian Nationals – Betinho on fire" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Thu, Aug 7 2003, 2:00:02 pm EDT

to Table of Contentsto next topic 2004 USHGA NTSS ranking

Bubba Goodman|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bubba Goodman|Davis Straub|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bubba Goodman|Davis Straub|Mike Barber|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bubba Goodman|Chris Zimmerman|Davis Straub|Mike Barber|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bubba Goodman|Chris Zimmerman|Davis Straub|Mike Barber|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bruce Barmakian|Bubba Goodman|Chris Zimmerman|Davis Straub|Mike Barber|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bruce Barmakian|Bubba Goodman|Campbell Bowen|Chris Zimmerman|Davis Straub|Mike Barber|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bruce Barmakian|Bubba Goodman|Campbell Bowen|Chris Zimmerman|Davis Straub|Mark Bolt|Mike Barber|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bruce Barmakian|Bubba Goodman|Campbell Bowen|Chris Zimmerman|Davis Straub|Kari Castle|Mark Bolt|Mike Barber|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bruce Barmakian|Bubba Goodman|Campbell Bowen|Chris Zimmerman|Davis Straub|Kari Castle|Mark Bolt|Mike Barber|Mike Degtoff|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bruce Barmakian|Bubba Goodman|Campbell Bowen|Chris Zimmerman|Davis Straub|Kari Castle|Mark Bolt|Mike Barber|Mike Degtoff|Ron Gleason|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bruce Barmakian|Bubba Goodman|Campbell Bowen|Chris Zimmerman|Davis Straub|James Lamb|Kari Castle|Mark Bolt|Mike Barber|Mike Degtoff|Ron Gleason|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bruce Barmakian|Bubba Goodman|Campbell Bowen|Chris Zimmerman|Davis Straub|James Lamb|Jim Lee|Kari Castle|Mark Bolt|Mike Barber|Mike Degtoff|Ron Gleason|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bruce Barmakian|Bubba Goodman|Campbell Bowen|Chris Zimmerman|Davis Straub|Dennis Pagen|James Lamb|Jim Lee|Kari Castle|Mark Bolt|Mike Barber|Mike Degtoff|Ron Gleason|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bruce Barmakian|Bubba Goodman|Campbell Bowen|Chris Zimmerman|Davis Straub|Dennis Pagen|James Lamb|Jim Lee|Kari Castle|Mark Bolt|Mike Barber|Mike Degtoff|Ron Gleason|Steve Rewolinski|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bruce Barmakian|Bubba Goodman|Campbell Bowen|Chris Zimmerman|Davis Straub|Dennis Pagen|George Stebbins|James Lamb|Jim Lee|Kari Castle|Mark Bolt|Mike Barber|Mike Degtoff|Ron Gleason|Steve Rewolinski|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bruce Barmakian|Bubba Goodman|Campbell Bowen|Chris Zimmerman|Davis Straub|Dennis Pagen|George Stebbins|Glen Volk|James Lamb|Jim Lee|Kari Castle|Mark Bolt|Mike Barber|Mike Degtoff|Ron Gleason|Steve Rewolinski|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bruce Barmakian|Bubba Goodman|Campbell Bowen|Chris Zimmerman|Davis Straub|Dennis Pagen|George Stebbins|Glen Volk|James Lamb|Jim Lee|Kari Castle|Mark Bolt|Mike Barber|Mike Degtoff|Paris Williams|Ron Gleason|Steve Rewolinski|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bruce Barmakian|Bubba Goodman|Campbell Bowen|Chris Zimmerman|David Prentice|Davis Straub|Dennis Pagen|George Stebbins|Glen Volk|James Lamb|Jim Lee|Kari Castle|Mark Bolt|Mike Barber|Mike Degtoff|Paris Williams|Ron Gleason|Steve Rewolinski|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

Bo Hagewood|Bruce Barmakian|Bubba Goodman|Campbell Bowen|Chris Zimmerman|David Prentice|Davis Straub|Dennis Pagen|George Stebbins|Glen Volk|James Lamb|Jim Lee|Kari Castle|Mark Bolt|Mike Barber|Mike Degtoff|Paris Williams|Ron Gleason|Steve Rewolinski|USHGA|USHGA NTSS ranking 2004|US Nationals

The 2004 USHGA NTSS ranking after the US Nationals for rigid wings and flex wings is as follows:

Rigids:

1

BARMAKIAN Bruce

1839

2

Straub Davis

1578

3

GLEASON Ron

1508

4

Yocom Jim

1455

5

BIESEL Heiner

1396

6

ENDTER Vincent

1386

7

Bowen Campbell

1350

8

POUSTICHIAN Mark

1032

9

LAMB James

919

10

DEGTOFF Mike

837

Flex wings:

1

Williams Paris

2356

2

Warren Curt

2143

3

Bessa Carlos

2035

4

Rossignol Jerz

1992

5

Castle Kari

1920

6

Lee Jim

1864

7

Barber Mike

1766

7

ZIMMERMAN Chris

1766

9

Hagewood Bo

1750

10

PRESLEY Terry

1639

11

SAUER Richard

1547

12

Pagen Dennis

1451

13

Goodman Bubba

1436

14

Volk Glen

1398

15

Bolt Mark

1388

16

VASSORT Claire

1346

17

STINNETT James

1010

18

Rewolinski Steve

997

19

PRENTICE David

935

20

Stebbins George

913

The full ranking is available on the Oz Report web site https://ozreport.com. Click Competition, then Pilot Ranking.

Discuss "2004 USHGA NTSS ranking" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Thu, Aug 7 2003, 2:00:03 pm EDT

to Table of Contentsto next topic US National Team in Brazil

CIVL|Dennis Pagen|Jim Lee|record|Ron Gleason|USHGA|Worlds

Ron Gleason «xcflying», chairman of the USHGA competition committee, writes:

Davis wrote:

It seems likely that there will be a protest about Carlos flying for the US and the FAI rules indicate that the jury may choose to uphold the protest.

Ron Gleason writes:

This specific issue has been discussed at length between myself and Dennis Pagen, at the time the USHGA CIVL delegate.  Your conclusion that the jury ‘may’ chose to uphold the protest is just your conclusion and is not shared by myself or Dennis.

(editor’s note: Actually, it is not just my conclusion, it is shared by others.  Do we get to count noses to see who’s right?  Does your or Dennis’ vote count more than mine?  Or are we all just speculating with equal uncertainty about the future?  I certainly haven’t been impressed lately with Dennis’ reads about what action CIVL would take.)

Davis wrote:

Carlos flew for the Brazilian Team in the pre-Worlds last year in Brasilia.  He didn’t have an FAI Sporting License at the time.  He now has a US FAI Sporting License.

Ron Gleason writes:

The NAA, the National Aeronautical Club (NAC) that represents the FAI within the US, issued Carlos a sporting license.  Are we to assume that the NAA checks the eligibility of the applicant?  I do not know but I would hope that they do perform so level of validation.

(editor’s note: I seriously doubt it. Why do you think they would?  I think that all that is required is residency.  Carlos is a naturalized US citizen.  By the way for the benefit of the reader, they issued the license just recently, not before the pre-Worlds last year.)

Ron Gleason writes:

It is important that as many relevant sections of the FAI General Section be published to your readers.  Here are a few more that shed more light on the issue: (readers who are interested in the exact are encouraged to go to the FAI site and download the General Section, go to the CIVL site and download Section 7)

3. 7 IDENTITY AND REPRESENTATION RIGHTS

3. 7.1 IDENTIFICATION OF PARTICIPANTS.  The identity of participants is proved by an identification document issued by or on behalf of the government of the participant's country or country of residence.

3. 7.2 COMPETITOR'S RIGHTS OF REPRESENTATION

3. 7.2.1 In international sporting events, a competitor represents the NAC that issued his FAI Sporting Licence, unless he belongs to a international team.

3. 7.2.2 FAI competitors or teams complying with 3.2.1 and/or 3.6.1, may be invited to participate in international sporting events, providing that the organising NAC confirms that vacancies exist.

Therefore, since Carlos did not have a Sporting License when he flew in the pre-worlds he technically did not represent Brazil.  Furthermore, the pre-worlds were not a team event, like the worlds.

(editor’s note: I believe this is again speculation on Ron’s part.  He most definitely flew for the Brazilian team in the Pre-Worlds.  Carlos was listed as a Brazilian on the results http://www.brasilia2003.com/resultados.htm# and was pictured with the Brazilian team holding a medal (team medal?).

 

Carlos and the Brazilian team at the pre-Worlds

Ron may think that these additional sections of the FAI general rules are relevant.  Perhaps they are, but they don’t seem quite as relevant nor as specific as the ones I have quoted.)

Davis wrote:

So that question is, was the 2002 Brazilian Pre-Worlds an FAI Airsport Activity, and did Carlos “really” represent Brazil in the pre-Worlds.  I’d say the answer to both those questions is yes.

Ron Gleason writes:

Again, just your conclusions and not representative of the jury or others.  In mine opinion the answers are YES the pre-worlds was an FAI Airsport Activity and NO Carlos did not represent Brazil (whatever NAC represents Brazil) since he did not possess a sporting license.  People may be saying ‘But I thought you needed a sporting license to fly in an FAI Airsport Activity?’ This is true but has not been enforced.  A grey area at best.

(editor’s note: Does Ron know the opinion of the jury members already?  One of my informants had another opinion about what one juror’s likely opinion was.  Another had a similar opinion about what another juror’s opinion was.  Both disagree with Ron’s opinion.

In addition, unnamed others, also disagree with Ron’s opinion here.  Of course, no fault here.  We are just talking speculation after all, and Ron is perfectly free to speculate as much as the next guy.)

Davis wrote:

The jury and steward have been contacted by a number of individuals.  Their statement is that this can’t be ruled on until the start of the Worlds.  Therefore Carlos won’t really know if he can fly for the US national team until he goes to Brazil for the Worlds.

Ron Gleason writes:

Your reporting of the facts is accurate, your conclusions are yours, but the question that needs to be examined is: What should/can the US world team and the USHGA do to minimize the risk?  I believe that we have done as much as we possibly can.  We have examined and interpreted the rules to the best of our ability and the six pilots representing the US are qualified, have their paperwork in order, and are ready to go.

As a backup, Jim Lee, ranked 7th via the NTSS system, is prepared to fly to Brazil at the last minute if any situation arises that prevents any US pilot from participating.

You presented a potential problem scenario, however you did not present a solution or steps that you feel should have been taken.

(editor’s note: Like Ron, I believe that the USHGA has done the best that they could given the circumstances.  Since none of the jurors were willing to rule on this issue in advance, the USHGA is left is an untenable situation.  Perhaps, it would have been better to send Jim down with the team, so that if the issue was brought up before the competition began, then perhaps Jim could be ready to replace Carlos.  It is not even clear if this would be allowed.

But, this is not the most likely scenario.  A protest against Carlos’ eligibility could easily be launched after a few days (with Jim still sitting back in the US), and if he is ruled ineligible at that point, well there is no recovery then.

The USHGA could have ruled that Carlos had flown for the Brazilians in the pre-Worlds and therefore was ineligible for the US National team.  This would have been seen as mean spirited, perhaps xenophobic, and contrary to the fact that he, by his flying record, deserved to fly for the US. Still, Carlos made his own decision to fly with his countryman in the pre-Worlds, and not get a Sporting License from the US nor Brazil.  Perhaps he should have had to live with the consequences.

Now, it is Carlos and the US team that together have to live with the consequences.  For Carlos’ and the US Team’s sake I hope that no one protests, but if there is a protest, I hope that he is confirmed as a US Team member.)

Discuss "US National Team in Brazil" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Thu, Aug 7 2003, 2:00:04 pm EDT

to Table of Contentsto next topic Flex wing Vs. Rigid wing

Florida|Jim Yocom

Jim Yocom «jim» writes:

With the recent competition success of pilots like Dave Seaburg and Michael Tryon switching from flex wings to rigids, I thought it might be interesting to compare the relative performance of pilots flying Class 5 rigids to pilots flying Class 1 flex wings at the three major US competitions this year.

The nationals at Big Spring had 7 days of flying, Wallaby had 5,and Quest had 7 for a total of 19 competition days.  I looked at the percentage of competing pilots who finished each day.  Here are the results:

Nationals:

%Flex

%Rigid

Day1

49

80

Day2

65

93

Day3

6

27

Day4

3

33

Day5

59

93

Day6

41

92

Day7

68

100

 

 

 

Wallaby:

%Flex

%Rigid

Day1

45

82

Day2

20

71

Day3

16

53

Day4

45

71

Day5

47

82

 

 

 

Quest:

%Flex

%Rigid

Day1

6

36

Day2

60

96

Day3

55

54

Day4

10

14

Day5

31

50

Day6

49

65

Day7

81

96

 

 

 

Overall

40

68

The numbers indicate that on an average competition day, 2 out of 3 Class 5 rigid wing pilots can expect to make goal, while only slightly more than 1 out of 3 Class 1 flex wing pilots can expect to cross the goal line.

This simple comparison raises a number of issues.  The most obvious is of course whether the rigid pilots are as a group are that much better than the flex pilots, or does the rigid wing give pilots that much of an advantage in performance?  Are task committees calling too easy tasks for rigids or too difficult tasks for flexes?  Should flexes and rigids be flying the same tasks?  We all flew the same tasks in Texas, but often had slightly different turnpoints in Florida.

Discuss "Flex wing Vs. Rigid wing" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Thu, Aug 7 2003, 2:00:05 pm EDT

to Table of Contentsto next topic FAI Cylinders

CIVL|Martin Henry|record|Thierry Montigneaux

FAI - Thierry Montigneaux «thierrym» writes:

Your article on "FAI cylinders and world records" includes a typo error which may cause some confusion (I will not enter here the debate on the perceived confusion in the way SC7 is written).

At some point it says when quoting SC7 3.5.2 (note also that your text incorrectly refers to 3.5.1 instead of 3.5.2):

"…For record attempts, flight data recorders that comply with the IGC (Sporting code section 3) may be used."

SC7 actually reads:

"…For record attempts, flight data recorders that comply with the IGC (Sporting code section 3) STANDARDS may be used."

Note the missing word 'standards' after the brackets.  This is quite important as what we are talking about here are the technical standards for the equipment eligible to be used (in practice it refers to the document published at http://www.fai.org/gliding/gnss/tech_spec_gnss.asp), and not the sporting code rules to be followed to evaluate the flight.

As an example, it means that a HG pilot cannot use a Filser LX-20 loaded with firmware version 2.0, as the IGC has tested, found to be in compliance and approved that unit only if loaded with firmware version 3.0 or later (see http://www.fai.org/gliding/gnss/filserlx20.pdf). An *.igc file with a hang glider flight trace will be evaluated using the CIVL SC7 sporting code rules, and not the IGC (Gliding Commission) SC3 rules.  The IGC definition of an observation zone is irrelevant here, and I do not think SC7 3.5.2 says anything else.

A final note: I noticed that SC3 Annex C is mentioned in the article.  To clear up any misunderstanding, it is important to remember that this document is a companion document to SC3, a guide which provides (I quote the cover page) "…support and examples of means by which the letter and spirit of the Sporting Code [SC3] may be met". It is not a rulebook, but an interesting and useful first try of an FAI Commission at providing explanatory add-ons to sporting code documents.

Martin Henry «fnglide» responds

"Standards" is a minor point, but I made an error on transposing the wording.

I did not make much of an issue of it, but the more critical element of the guide is the phrase "may"…ambiguity…ambiguity.  At the very least, using SC3 and its associated guidelines is a footing for a base of standards (this is where we need to clean up SC7 and set some RULES in stone).

Here is an idea that I would like those that are interested to consider.  I feel that it is extremely important that the basic principle of a World record task is providing proof that a "declared task" has been completed and is supported by evidence that proves the sector principles have been attained (that the pilot has rounded all of the turnpoints declared or has entered an observation zone that leaves no question that a pilot has successfully navigated a distance no less than the declaration). So…

What if we nail down a "sector policy" for the purpose of a "record claims" (SC3 sectors, 1km radius or a new 250 meter radius cylinder).

From here, we separate the task from a claim.  If a pilot wishes to make a claim during a competition, it would be up to the pilot to deal with a records protocol.  A smart competitor would position a Start/Finnish sector within the competition Start "cylinder" in a way that would not compromise either the record or the task (No need to use the edge of the start cylinder.  Position your "claim" Start/Finnish where you want it).

It would be up to the task committee to accommodate the potential for FAI records by creating a task that could "fit" the potential for claims.  This would leave it up to the pilot to decided if they want to pursue both the task and record claims.  (This would also get rid of this ridiculous situation of organizers of class one events being responsible for providing proof to the FAI for a claim.) A good organizer could easily provide Lat/Long data for FAI claim starts and it would be up to the competitor to apply them.).

(editor’s note: Well, the point of allowing cylinders is to encourage more folks to go for world records.  In this case the folks in a competition.  It is also to encourage meet directors or task committees to come up with FAI task for the meet.  What Martin proposes undermines this goal.  Martin also shares in the desire to encourage more folks to go for world records.

I suggest that we just clear up the ambiguity re start and finish cylinders.)

Discuss "FAI Cylinders" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Thu, Aug 7 2003, 2:00:06 pm EDT

to Table of Contentsto next topic Plight II cancelled

calendar|Davis Straub

https://ozreport.com/toc.php?7.112#6

Joerg and Maria writes:

Due to some serious incident that occurred to us very recently we are unable to continue with the organising of this special event and thus unfortunately have to cancel it for this year, with the hope that we will get it back on track for the year 2004.

Discuss "Plight II cancelled" at the Oz Report forum   link»

The Oz Report, a near-daily, world wide hang gliding news ezine, with reports on competitions, pilot rankings, political issues, fly-ins, the latest technology, ultralight sailplanes, reader feedback and anything else from within the global HG community worthy of coverage. Hang gliding, paragliding, hang gliders, paragliders, aerotowing, hang glide, paraglide, platform towing, competitions, fly-ins. Hang gliding and paragliding news from around the world, by Davis Straub.

The Oz Report is being read from (approximately) these locations:
Locations of visitors to this page