TOPIC: ESAP Proposal

Sounds good to me as well.

This year, at the Nats, I could find no LSF stuff for sale. Did I miss it?

Preston

The LSF is in the process of re-organizing its merchandise offerings. If you have any ideas or comments contact Ed Franz at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Here is another modest proposal concerning modernizing Flight Tasks for the new ESAP.

I am proposing that we incorporate some modest modifications to the Flight Tasks described in the current SAP into our new ESAP. These changes would recognize some of the intrinsic differences on our planes. They would slightly increase the content of the tasks required for Levels I thru IV. They would recognize and instruct aspirants that beyond basic thermal flying and landing that are elements of our competitions, that persistence and consistent, repeatable performance are essential. This proposal ONLY addresses changes in the Flight Tasks NOT the Contest Requirements.

The first change that I would propose (and maybe the most important) is that EVERY attempt at a Flight Task be declared prior to the launch for that task. Only one declaration PER TASK PER DAY would be permitted. For the purposes of the declaration a TASK would constitute one discrete flight task unless specifically excepted. i.e. if the Precision Spot Landing task for a particular level called for five landings meeting a certain specification, each landing would count as a discrete task and could be attempted once on any calendar day. An aspirant who had not completed any of these landings could declare each one, up to a total of five, and count the successful ones on that calendar day. If he showed up on another day with, say, two remaining landings, he could make up to two declarations on that day. And so on until the task was accomplished.
The reason for proposing that change is reduce the possibility, especially on some of the higher level Thermal Duration Flights, that the completion of the task would be the result of flying into a thermal. My experience is that, at least up through the 30 minute thermal, that on any given summer day a guy is going to hit it with nothing more than blind luck and patience. Especially onerous in this regard is the 30 minute Level III Thermal Duration Flight. We go out on a lot of summer days here with our Radians and just launch and fly. Other than having to land if a restart is needed, it is a rare day where one of the flights we put up on one or two batteries won’t exceed 30 minutes.

For definitional reasons, the definition of a Thermal Duration Flight needs to be modified to reflect that it has to be flown by an electric powered airplane launched under its own power.

I am not a fan at all of including slope flights in the ESAP, but I have come around to thinking that, at the very least for Level V the slope requirements be retained SO LONG AS THEY ARE FLOWN BY PLANES LAUNCHED UNDER THEIR OWN POWER. As much as anything among the Flight Tasks, the 8 hour slope is THE defining task for LSF achievement. I hate it. And it is highly unlikely that I would ever bother with it – even if I had every other element in the bag. But it is reasonable to retain it out of respect for an important tradition.

I would propose to modify the current definition of a Precision Spot Landing to require a Thermal Duration Flight of a duration defined at each level preceding it instead of requiring a particular launch height. So a Precision Spot Landing for Level I might require landing within 3 meters for a Thermal Duration Flight of 5 minutes. To get the landing, you have to land within 3 meters as a part of a 5 minute Thermal Duration Flight. The reasoning is to provide a little more of the connection between coupling Flights with Landings that exists in our comps.

With these changes in definitions and procedures I would propose the following Flight Tasks for the ESAP:

Level I
1. One 7 minute Thermal Duration Flight (7 minutes instead of the SAP 5 minutes to adjust for the 30 seconds of free motor run time that you get and a little extra because 5 minutes is simply too easy – even for a Radian from 200 meters)
2. One 15 minute Slope Flight or One 7 minute Thermal Duration Flight not flown on the same day as the first Thermal Duration Flight.
3. Five Precision Spot Landings within 3 meters from Thermal Duration Flights of at least 5 minutes.

Level II
1. One 15 minute Thermal Duration Flight
2. One 1 hour Slope Duration Flight or One 15 minute Thermal Duration Flight not flown on the same day as the first Thermal Duration Flight
3. Ten Precision Spot Landings within 1.5 meters from Thermal Duration Flights of at least 10 minutes.

Level III
1. One 30 minute Thermal Duration Flight
2. One 2 hour Slope Duration Flight or one 30 minute Thermal Duration Flight not flown on the same day as the first Thermal Duration Flight.
3. Three CONSECUTIVE Precision Spot Landings within 1.5 meters from Thermal Duration Flights of at least 10 minutes (These three flights count as one task for the purpose of declarations.)
4. One 1 km Goal and Return

Level IV
1. One 60 minute Thermal Duration Flight
2. One 4 hour Slope Duration flight or one 60 minute Thermal Duration Flight not flown on the same day as the first Thermal Duration Flight.
3. Three CONSECUTIVE Precision Spot Landings within 1 meter from Thermal Duration Flights of at least 12 minutes (These three flights count as one task for the purpose of declarations.)
4. One 2 km Goal and Return.

Level V – Same as SAP

These changes are intended to increase the Flight Task content without requiring any additional equipment capabilities over the existing SAP. No changes are proposed for the Competition Requirements.

Happy Landings,

Don

dHarban wrote: snip...

The first change that I would propose (and maybe the most important) is that EVERY attempt at a Flight Task be declared prior to the launch for that task. Only one declaration PER TASK PER DAY would be permitted. For the purposes of the declaration a TASK would constitute one discrete flight task unless specifically excepted. i.e. if the Precision Spot Landing task for a particular level called for five landings meeting a certain specification, each landing would count as a discrete task and could be attempted once on any calendar day. An aspirant who had not completed any of these landings could declare each one, up to a total of five, and count the successful ones on that calendar day. If he showed up on another day with, say, two remaining landings, he could make up to two declarations on that day. And so on until the task was accomplished.

The reason for proposing that change is reduce the possibility, especially on some of the higher level Thermal Duration Flights, that the completion of the task would be the result of flying into a thermal. My experience is that, at least up through the 30 minute thermal, that on any given summer day a guy is going to hit it with nothing more than blind luck and patience. Especially onerous in this regard is the 30 minute Level III Thermal Duration Flight. We go out on a lot of summer days here with our Radians and just launch and fly. Other than having to land if a restart is needed, it is a rare day where one of the flights we put up on one or two batteries won’t exceed 30 minutes.

snip...

These changes are intended to increase the Flight Task content without requiring any additional equipment capabilities over the existing SAP. No changes are proposed for the Competition Requirements.

Happy Landings,

Don

I would not support this proposal as its only value is to drag out the process. How would it benefit anyone to have only one attempt a day at a task, other than to drag out the process?

If you need 5 landings to complete your level 1 why can't you do them all on the same day? And what does it matter if you need 15 attempts to do the 5.

OK, 5 landings done. On to the 5 minute thermal flight and the 15 minute slope flight all in the same day? Bingo, you have completed the requirements for level 1. You feel good and charged up and want to immediately start on level 2.

Under your proposal, a pilot who only flies once a month would need 7 months minimum to complete level 1. And if he missed any of the declared tasks, well that's another month to complete level 1. It could take years to complete level 1. Why?

No disrespect intended but what is the value of slowing things down and making this some kind of onerous drudge? If someone can accomplish 3 tasks in a day why would we want to discourage that? What is the benefit?


Note that I have that issue with the current program as well, if I understand the process. You can't start to work on Level X until you have mailed and postmarked the paper work for the previous level.


For example, let's suppose I need my 2 hour slope to finish level III. If I am at the slope and I have done my 2 hour slope flight, finished my level III. I have my witnesses, they have signed off. Level III done. Great.

Why can't I start on level 4 right here and now? I toss out the glider and start my 4 hour slope flight? I am at the slope, the lift is good, witnesses are here ... why not?


I personally just dislike barriers that contribute nothing other than to drag out the process. People grow tired of it an just drop it.

That's just my input.

dHarban wrote: The first change that I would propose (and maybe the most important) is that EVERY attempt at a Flight Task be declared prior to the launch for that task. Only one declaration PER TASK PER DAY would be permitted. For the purposes of the declaration a TASK would constitute one discrete flight task unless specifically excepted.

I think you are vastly discounting how much imposition that many of us are putting on our helpers/witnesses. Many folks are not able to attempt a cross country flight more than a few times a year due to lack of available courses. Asking a L2 witness to drive several hours to meet you at a XC course then only being able to make one attempt on it to me seems unreasonable to the aspirant and the helper. I think the same is true of the slope flights.

Stay thirsty my friend,

Ryan

The idea is not so much to slow things down simply for the sake of slowing them down, as it is to use the Flight Tasks to reinforce the notion that what counts is getting things done right the first time -- pretty much like contests where you do not get do overs.

Except for the very, very rare few who can actually do a slope and a thermal flight on the same day, most aspirants will take at least two days to get things done. As to the spot landings for Level I, what I proposed gives an aspirant who is just starting five chances to make one landing (or as many as five landings). I would suggest that if it takes 5 days for aspirant to get 5 landings, he will be well served by the practice in the mean time. If he makes even one of the five landings on the first day he has four chances on the next day to make anywhere between one and four more landings. Each required landing is a separate task. Will this take longer than knocking five off in one day? Probably. It's not so much about dragging things out as it is reinforcing the value of performing when the bell rings and not simply throwing a bunch of crappy landings at the wall until you get enough to stick.

I flew ALES at the NATS this year and maxed every flight up until the last one. On the last one I hit the throttle and nothing happened -- entirely because of my failure to properly prepare for the flight. The lesson: success is the result of performing when it counts. It seems to me that expecting even a Level I aspirant to stand there with his plane ready to launch understanding that if he does not succeed that, at least for a day, the opportunity will not return is a pretty good lesson.

Actually, in the competitive world that a Level I aspirant is seeking to enter it will make a LOT of difference whether or not he hit his landing when it really counts.

Reading the interesting history of the formation of the LSF, it is clear that the Flight Tasks were not intended as barriers, but as lessons which would enhance the ability of aspirants to compete.

Happy Landings,

Don

BTW: I would suggest that the LSF might not be the most productive endeavor for someone who only flies once a month.

Maybe so. But the totality of the current LSF program is not about convenience either with witnesses or other opportunities.

I don't think that it is particularly reasonable to require me to fly an 8 hour slope flight when there is not a usable slope within 7 hours of where I live. But it is what it is. I don't think the LSF contest requirements which would cause me to have to drive 20,000 or so miles a year for a couple years for a shot at Level V are reasonable. But they are what they are. And in the end I think its all great.

I appreciate you comments with regard to witnesses and would suggest that, at least for some tasks replacing one of two witnesses with a log might make sense. And it might make sense to allow a non-L2 to be a witness when the flight can be logged and notarized for some tasks at some times. (I have a logger which can provide the exact data that the FAI requires to establish performance for many of its categories. It will furnish a plot on Google Earth, plots of altitude and distance and data files with Lat, Long, Barometric and GPS Elevation on 0.1 sec intervals. It weighs a few grams and is just a little bigger than a postage stamp.)

From a practical point-of-view, the only tasks where this makes much of a difference for most aspirants are the L4 Slope, the L5 Slope and the L5 Goal and Return. All of the rest of the Flight Tasks can be performed by MOST aspirants at their local flying field (yes, even the 2K Goal and Return when you factor in that the potential for a motor restart, nullifying the flight, opens up most the countryside around most of our flying sites). We can complete the 1K on foot at our flying field. We can come very close on the 2K. And I suspect that if you polled successful L5's that the vast majority of them DID NOT use multiple attempts on the same day. I know it happens, but I suspect not very often.

Happy Landings,

Don

dHarban wrote: And I suspect that if you polled successful L5's that the vast majority of them DID NOT use multiple attempts on the same day. I know it happens, but I suspect not very often.

In most of the cross country I have seen people were making several attempts. The Electric aspect of it helps a little with land outs and gives smaller start point options that might not support a string launcher but doesn't really change the need to have a driver, a vehicle, and a suitable road for flying from a vehicle.

Ryan

never mind. I deleted my post.

A note here about SAP participants who appear to be stalled. During the eight years I served as LSF Secretary I observed many who "gunned" through the early Levels than "dropped out" only to reappear years later with a note that started "now that I'm retired, I'd like to resume the SAP". I always thought this to be a tribute to the value of the SAP. Another thing I noticed is that participants who have access to a club tend to progress faster than the "lone wolves".

One other side note, in the early days of the LSF, the LSF leadership thought that most members would stop at Level III satisfied with the skills the participation had given them.

IN the early days, winches were a factor in forming a club, could the ESAP potentially perform the same function in a population of today's "lone wolf" electric fliers?