Jump to content
paul garnett

FIA ruling on reflights

Recommended Posts

Peter G

I agree with Nigel, I don't think the new interpretation makes things fairer and I don't think it makes it more fun. It certainly makes regular interruptions more likely in marginal conditions, which can be very frustrating for everyone.

However, the rules did change between 2016 & 2017 and the new rule could be interpreted either way i.e. the comp must be interrupted as soon as the (illegal) conditions arise or not as before and the pilot is offered a reflight at the end of the run, the time being confirmed after the pilot has made a decision.

So I do think it needs to be clarified / changed in the rules, possibly by just going back to the previous wording: 'if these conditions arise during a flight, the competitor is entitled to a re-flight.'

That would leave things to the CD as before to impliment the rule in a sensible way, which would normally be to leave the pilot to concentrate on his flying  as far as possible and interrupt at the end of the run. Clearly if the wind has gone 90 degrees off the slope and the pilot is struggling, the CD could intervene sooner. All pretty much as we did before.

It appears to me that the intention of the rule change was probably just to introduce the 2m height for the wind meter and introduce rain as a reason to be entitled to a re-flight. But I can't find any minutes of the 2016 F3 CIAM technical meeting to confirm this.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brett82
28 minutes ago, Peter G said:

i.e. the comp must be interrupted as soon as the (illegal) conditions arise or not as before and the pilot is offered a reflight at the end of the run, the time being confirmed after the pilot has made a decision.

I agree with Nigel too, surely common sense will prevail.

Hi Pete

Just on what you have put above and how it can be interpreted. When I read that, I dont see how it says the competitor is forced to take a re flight anyway. It says the comp must be interrupted, to me that means the moment it drops below legal the CD must immediately announce this to the pilot. To me, interruption does not mean the flight must be stopped. Its just the CD must not wait for the flight to finish before announcing it.

It then says the pilot is offered a re flight at the end of the run. To me that is clear, once the pilot has completed the 10 laps he/she has the option to take a re flight if they so wish.  Surely if you were forced to take a re flight it would not say offered.

The pilot then decides if they want a re flight and only after that the time is announced. Or is that the 2017 rules and my whole message is pointless... haha

To me it would make sense to keep the wording "the comp must be interrupted as soon as the (illegal) conditions arise". This is important as it means the moment its illegal, the pilot is made aware. That way, if you are not in booming lift and you are really struggling, you have the option as soon as possible to abandon the run and try get some height to land. Rather than trying to complete the  run and potentially losing more height and ending up a a bad situation.

Brett

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peter G

Hi Brett, I was trying to draw a conclusion from this discussion but apparently you dont think the rule needs to be clarified? So lets have a look at the actual text:

2016

if these conditions arise during a flight, the  competitor is entitled to a re-flight

2017

if these conditions arise during a flight, the contest director must interrupt the contest and competitor is entitled to a re-flight

The Cambridge dictionary definition of the verb, interrupt is:  'to stop something from happening for a short period'

So for me interruption in this context = stoppage

So the 2017 rule does imply that the competition should be stopped if the conditions arise during a flight. It does not specify when the interruption should happen, but it would be a valid interpretation to think that it should be stopped as soon as the conditions arise i.e. during the flight and therefore the pilot must take a re-flight.

This is the problem, the change to the rule has made it more ambiguous, but not in a good way. It could lead to two different results as Pierre suggested.

If the rule is changed to how it was before, we can go back to the interpretation as it was before.

Conversely, if the rule is left as it is we might be flying different rules (which appear to be fairly universally unpopular) in La Muela and in the UK from the rest of the world, which would be silly!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brett82

Hi Pete

Sorry, maybe I wasnt clear. I 100% think the new rule needs clarification or for the wording to be completely changed to eliminate any uncertainty. 

What I meant was, my take on the rule (right or wrong) meant the CD wouldn't stop the flight but would *butt in* to inform the pilot he was entitled to a reflight at the earliest point.

It was then up to the pilot to make the decision as it states it would be "offered" as opposed to forced.

Now, I could have it completely wrong, this only proves everyone's point that the rule is quite frankly sh*t. 

All I meant was, if my perception of the rule was correct then I would agree with the rule, but at the same time, yes, it 100% needs clarification and re wording. 

Brett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brett82

Irony...

Writing an unclear reply about a rule that's unclear... 

:blush:

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peter G

I was just remembering that LaMuela has form for new interpretations of the rules...

A few years back I seem to recall they marked out a very specific landing area and handed out zero scores to anyone who missed! More of a landing competition than a safety thing afaik. That was pretty unpopular too. Within the rules but not really in the spirit of f3f.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromit

After following this discussion with much interest, I am unclear / confused as to what the outcome is / has been. 

I am certain that just like myself, a definitive answer to the following would be very much appreciated  please. 

 

1;- Are we going to carry on with the reflight & wind direction ruling exactly as we have done for many years.  This having been working perfectly & fairly for all. I personally sincerely hope this is the case.

2;- Are we to adopt this new interpretation of the reflight , wind direction ruling  for all UK competitions ? 

3;- Are we presently waiting for clarity or confirmation from the FIA or other bodies, to clear this matter up once & for all ?

 

Thank you. 

     Stu. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oipigface

I’m in much the same boat, Stuart, but I think the situation is this: 

1. Since the ‘new rule’ is generally agreed to have been a mistake, I haven’t seen any convincing argument in favour of continuing with it.

2. No. I think it is true to say that strict application of the rules applies only to events where Eurotour or World Cup points are to be earned, or if competitors have aspirations to break records.

3. It has been suggested that clarification of the rule about wind direction is desirable. In particular, it’s not clear, nor is it consistent with the one about strength. There also some doubts about what ‘interrupting’ the contest means. The discussion here has led to some measure of agreement that the rules need tidying up, but there has not been any formal approach to CIAM (or whatever the appropriate committee is). I suppose that if the matter is to be pursued it’s a job for GBSRA.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromit
On 02/07/2019 at 18:59, mtreble said:

This is an FAI rule Stu. I believe we have the choice to override it if we wish, especially for domestic competitions.

The rule was applied in Spain earlier this year, but not in Norway.

I made a decision to enforce this rule before the UK League started, so it will continue for the remainder of the year. Maybe we can have a discussion about it at the GBSRA AGM, and decide as a group if we wish to continue to enforce it or drop it for our domestic competitions next year.

Winter Leagues and other competitions are run entirely at the organiser's discretion.

As it is an FAI rule I think that we should enforce it at FAI competitions. I also think that it is a good idea to keep the rules the same across the board otherwise it can get confusing especially as FAI competitions form part of our BMFA League.

Hi Mark,

                    So as to put an end to much speculatiuon, would you kindly please clarify to us all as to whether after considering all the discussion in this thread, it is still the case that you will be enforcing the 'non existant new rule' at all the BMFA league comps this year, as you state in your earlier post ? (see above)  . thank you. 

And the same question too please regarding  this years  Welsh Open ,

I'm certain that we all wish to have this clarification on my questions asap please.

Thank you Mark, so very much appreciated. 

  Stu. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.