Longer course at the classic.

[Von Der Hey]

It sure sounds like we just have to get rid of the lights. Just simply add up the cuts at the end of each heat. The lights are just for courtesy anyway. This was very successful in California in Q-500 and EF-1. There were hardly ever issues regarding judging.

[G.Freeman Jr.]

When I made this suggestion, it was during the heated “got a light and a cut” discussions. This is a very effective way to help reduce this when used properly. If you have ever sat down at pole 1 and watched the number of lights given because of workers anticipating the light you would be shocked (human error is always going to be there, not knock anyone).

The extended sight pole is NOT the new number one. It is there as a sight pole used to trigger the light. The extra 10 feet while almost nothing, is huge for the trigger-happy course worker. Furthermore, the instruction was if the pilot did go around pylon 1 and did not make the “extended” sight pole the pilot will get the turn light (might be a slight delay millisecond, but still get the light). Regardless, if you go around pylon 1 you will get the light. This was used to reduce the “cut and light” issue tremendously.

There is no simple solution and there will be something wrong with every solution (even no lights will have issues and human error) all we are trying to do is reduce the potential.

v/r
Gary Jr.

[airplanescotty]

In reference to Lee's 20/15 vision comment,,,,, workers at Tangerine and CAPS August Muncie race commented on having difficulty seeing their airplane!

Colors blend/fade with sun position, time of day ~ end of day ~ tired eyes,,,,

Scotty

[rocket]

Back in the day when I ran races I would instruct the pylon one people to not give a light until they were past the pole. This lead to massive anticipation and lots of free cuts. Later on I instructed them to not give a light until the plane was around the pole and on its way back. This lead to no lights until the plane crossed the pole on the way back which caused the callers to call longer and longer. The complaint was their not getting lights when they past the pole and the course worker was slow and sucked at his job. Then I instructed the worker give a light when the plane past the pole but not to anticipate the light with the plane passing the pole.. none of it worked for everyone. Either way, making the course longer IMHO is not the answer. Educating the course workers on how to run the lights is.

[DHG]

It sure sounds like we just have to get rid of the lights. Just simply add up the cuts at the end of each heat. The lights are just for courtesy anyway. This was very successful in California in Q-500 and EF-1. There were hardly ever issues regarding judging.

NCPL ran AMA 426 that way ... tons of fun, no arguments except over whose bratwurst got overcooked at the barbecue afterwards.

[G.Freeman Jr.]

Back in the day when I ran races I would instruct the pylon one people to not give a light until they were past the pole. This lead to massive anticipation and lots of free cuts. Later on I instructed them to not give a light until the plane was around the pole and on its way back. This lead to no lights until the plane crossed the pole on the way back which caused the callers to call longer and longer. The complaint was their not getting lights when they past the pole and the course worker was slow and sucked at his job. Then I instructed the worker give a light when the plane past the pole but not to anticipate the light with the plane passing the pole.. none of it worked for everyone. Either way, making the course longer IMHO is not the answer. Educating the course workers on how to run the lights is.

Again, the course isn't longer, just gives the worker a few moments to confirm the pilot went around the pole and reduces anticipating pushing the turn light. If you went around you get the light, if you didn't you DON'T get the light. This does not make the course longer. I have sat at number 1 for hundreds of heats and this works.

If anyone thinks that each worker is hitting the number one light at the same time each pilots breaks the pole they are wrong (impossible).

[GaryS]

Back in the day when I ran races I would instruct the pylon one people to not give a light until they were past the pole. This lead to massive anticipation and lots of free cuts. Later on I instructed them to not give a light until the plane was around the pole and on its way back. This lead to no lights until the plane crossed the pole on the way back which caused the callers to call longer and longer. The complaint was their not getting lights when they past the pole and the course worker was slow and sucked at his job. Then I instructed the worker give a light when the plane past the pole but not to anticipate the light with the plane passing the pole.. none of it worked for everyone. Either way, making the course longer IMHO is not the answer. Educating the course workers on how to run the lights is.

Any yet your own paragraph shows that "Educating the course workers on how to run the lights is" does not work. You instructed workers three different times, and none of it worked for everyone.

[dscherrer]

I have struggled some times with the lights at one. Last year I was really frustrated at a couple races.

However a few years back in Wichita I got a head cold between Friday practice and racing Saturday. I was still willing to give it a go on Saturday until I started a grass fire with glow fuel.

Knowing it was not my day I didn't race. I was a judge at one that weekend...Q40. It was way more difficult than I could imagine. Trying to do the lights well for the racers and callers. You think someone is going to make it...anticipate... You give the light and they cut by 5 feet. It is a quite difficult thing to do and yes they are volunteers. As a racer I was very aware of what it meant and tried my best and still made mistakes. When the planes are coming at 190+ there is little leeway. And the time factor is tenths of seconds. I like the idea of something to help the workers. If so it should be communicated... And if the plane passes one there should be a light even if the plus15 spot is not passed.

[Gino426018]

We strive to achieve around 5-15ft past the poll with our racing program, there were multiple times where we didn’t get the light but no cut, so this makes sense.

If you’re basing when to turn off the light generally you are going to be long. especially if you are basing it off the Phoenix configuration where it’s 15ft past, that equals 300ft if you are right on top of the sight pole, realistically you average about 10ft past the site pole which is 25ft further than the official pylon one and 500ft total during the race.

It’s well known that there are many inconsistencies with the workers at pylon one, some lanes are very consistent others are not. Yes getting the light feels good but most callers are counting the time out loud then adjusting the next lap based off of what they saw before. If they didn’t get a light they extend, if they got a light before saying turn they know they are long. Is it right to base your whole competition results off of an low paid or unpaid volunteer?

With the aircraft going as fast as they are now and the average age of a worker it may make sense to change the way we do things.

I don’t think flying a heat and getting no feedback until the end on how many cuts you received makes sense due to the technology we have. If cuts posted normally throughout the heat you could still adjust if you got one cut down there and complete the rest of the heat. Likewise if you double cut you would know and be able to get off the course as to not cause a midair.

Option #1 would be to get a light if you made the pole on your way back from 1 & 2.

Option #2 being no lights at one and you just get feedback on cuts down there live during the heat like normal.

I’m indifferent because we don’t really used the lights based on the inconsistencies and because the threshold we try to achieve past one is so narrow it’s hard to rely on the light even with the best judge.

Gino

[rocket]

Back in the day when I ran races I would instruct the pylon one people to not give a light until they were past the pole. This lead to massive anticipation and lots of free cuts. Later on I instructed them to not give a light until the plane was around the pole and on its way back. This lead to no lights until the plane crossed the pole on the way back which caused the callers to call longer and longer. The complaint was their not getting lights when they past the pole and the course worker was slow and sucked at his job. Then I instructed the worker give a light when the plane past the pole but not to anticipate the light with the plane passing the pole.. none of it worked for everyone. Either way, making the course longer IMHO is not the answer. Educating the course workers on how to run the lights is.

Any yet your own paragraph shows that "Educating the course workers on how to run the lights is" does not work. You instructed workers three different times, and none of it worked for everyone.

Exactly

[KRProton]

Most of us are attempting to contribute or further the conversation here. Here's my attempt:

I've done a little pylon 1 judging for practice sessions when we held the F5D US team trials back in Champaign, IL a few (okay, more than a few!) years ago. Many of you/us have done some pylon 1 judging also. The first thing I realized was how difficult (impossible?) it is to press the button the moment the plane crosses the line. Due to reaction time, the ONLY way this can be done is, of course, to anticipate. Whether the judge anticipates or not, a sighting pole between the judges and the pylon, but positioned directly in front of the judge(s) (about 6' out) greatly helps in detecting this moment. A sighting pole directly in front of the judges provides a distinct, easily visible line extending upward virtually to infinity. But with a sighting pole, the judges must all be in line - one behind the other, not side-by-side as we do in AMA, so I suppose a sighting pole is a mute point, just throwing that out there.

I pulled this from the AMA rule book:

13.1.10.
All aircraft are to be signaled the moment they break the plane (“gate”) established by the #1 pylon and the flaggers’ position. There will be no signals at the #2 or #3 pylons unless a pylon is cut. The judges shall use an appropriate method to notify pilots of cuts. If possible, such notification shall be simultaneous; however, it is not grounds for a re-fly if the pilot does not receive notification of a cut before the completion of the heat.

It says right there in black-and-white the light shall be given the moment the plane brakes the line. This is setting us up for problems, lights and cuts, whatever because, again, the ONLY way a judge can give the light the moment the plane crosses the line is to anticipate. (I guess assumes judges are instructed in this manner.)

I guess I haven't scoured the AMA rule book, but I don't see anywhere where it says you can't get a cut and a light. It's also interesting that it actually does say no re-fly if a cut (at any pole) is not signaled during the race.

The "light and a cut" method allows judges to anticipate, yet still get it right if the pilot actually does cut. At the Mike Tallman Q40 race (or all races at Heartland Speed Freekz as far as I know), this is explained and understood by all pilots/callers going in and, also as far as I know, has been working well.

Whatever system the CD puts into place, the main problem is always going to be inequality in the reaction time, focus, or methods each judge uses to detect when the plane has crossed the line. I suppose the methods CDs are experimenting with are an attempt to make it easier on the judges with the end result, hopefully, being more consistency between each judge and therefore from lane to lane.

Here's a picture for fun.

Tim Lampe

[DHG]

If the planes get any faster, we'll have to run them in a Wilson cloud chamber and analyze the vapor trails on video replay.

But seriously, until we get a reliable automated system, I think the Heartland Speed Freakz method ("we'll give you an accurate light to the best of our ability, but a cut prevails") is the least bad alternative. The sighting pole can help with accuracy but pilots & callers should be informed if it's used. Just my opinion.

Cheers,
Duane Gall

[Von Der Hey]

Hmmmmmmmmm. Me know how to fixem problem.
Each pilot would have two callers. One to launch and indicate to the pilot on when to turn. The second caller would be at pylon one pushing the pilots own turn light button. The pylon one judge for that lane would still post cuts for that lane. This way the two callers can argue which one of the three screwed up. See, me fixem problem. Von Der Hey

[GaryS]

Hmmmmmmmmm. Me know how to fixem problem.
Each pilot would have two callers. One to launch and indicate to the pilot on when to turn. The second caller would be at pylon one pushing the pilots own turn light button. The pylon one judge for that lane would still post cuts for that lane. This way the two callers can argue which one of the three screwed up. See, me fixem problem. Von Der Hey

Perfect!

[rocket]

At the worlds in 2015 they had a system where the worker at pylon 1 would do their best to anticipate the plane with a perfect light. If a plane made it they got a light instantly. if it didn’t, it got a light followed by 3 more flashing lights. This was instant notification that they were short. The genius in this system is
1, you got a single light if you made it.
2, if you got the light then instantly got the three flashing lights you knew you were close but short.
3 if you got no light you were not close enough to get the a light at all.
This was spurred by all the complaints of cuts/lights at one. The Bridge/Brown team were victims of this. How they do it at the worlds the starter would call each lanes turn judges to verify no cuts. When he called pylon one they reported back 2 cuts after giving lights for all ten laps.
Easy enough to train a worker to anticipate because they do it naturally and the caller instantly knows where they stand I.e. we got a light and a cut because you actually did get a light followed by three flashing and a cut. As a caller I liked it, not that I called any cuts at one. Bridge could give us all the cuts we needed at 2-3 that year. Well there might have been this one cut but I think he jumped me.