Airport Sydney International Motor Inn

Attendees: Dave Mills, Heike Hamann, Mark Newland, Mike Zupanc, Paul

Mollison (Sat only)

Apologies: Ian Jarmin, Neva Bull

1. GPS for flight verification

Have two applications for competitions next season that wish to use GPSs for flight verification:

Canungra Classic (Hang gliding) (Tim Cummings comp organizer)

Vic Open (Paragliding) (Brian Webb comp organizer)

Zupy talked about 3 options:

a. IGC proposal - cost ~$1500 per unit.

b. Data loggers - cost ~$500 per logger.

c. GPS track-log.

Sailplane pilots have software for GPS track-logs.

Tim Cummings is developing software that he wants to use for the Canungra competition.

Brian Webb is also developing software he wants to use.

The two competitions have applied to use the GPS track-log option.

Sectors: Considered alternatives to FAI sector for GPS track-log because of GPS error. "Beer can" sector where pilots need to fly within say 100m of the turn point.

We would use a combination of both - for track-log flight verification, the FAI sector with a 100m radius circle centred on the turnpoint will become the valid sector. For photographic verification, the normal FAI sector is valid.

Proposals: The proposals from Tim and Brian were considered and amended (and are attached as an appendix to these minutes). The proposal will be returned to Tim and Brian for consideration. If they are happy with the amended proposal they will be allowed to run with it as a trial. Zupy to co-ordinate this process.

A critical part of the amended proposal is that the GPS track-log shall be used as initial flight verification. Where the GPS data is not available, or in a dispute, photographic evidence will be used to verify the flight.

If the Canungra competition (taking place in October 1998) is a great success, then other competitions in the 98/99 season may be permitted to use the system if they apply to do so.

Comp entry fees: One of the main reasons for introducing GPS track-log verification is to cut down on the costs of buying films and processing them. The fee structure suggested by Brian was to have a lower competition entry fee, with pilots paying extra for each film that is required and processed. The committee was comfortable with this proposal. However, it is suggested pilots are made aware at the outset what the maximum film and processing costs could be.

2. Competition participation

Participation at HG comps is declining. PG comps seem to have improving attendance.

Aims of the discussion:

• to come up with strategies/ideas to increase number of pilots participating in comps
• to develop a strategy for the future of competitions and to recommend this strategy to the HGFA board

Problems seen are:

• comps focus on elite too much
• not fun - too serious - the temperament of the director impacts this
• have found in hang gliding, that there is a natural progression from fun comps to serious comps - what was once a fun comp becomes serious comp
• need to replace these fun comps
• no graduated scheme
• money to go OS has increased (since the Aussie $ devalued)
• entry fee - comps are expensive
• not enough willing directors
• task setting
• getting time off work - away from family and other commitments (appears to be mainly a problem for PGs)
• degree of flying pleasure
• rules too complicated

Possible solutions:

• limit the number of serious competitions
• different classes
• change aims of comps - learning also rewarded - day prizes
• roving comp directors
• comp fees down - use GPS etc.
• simplified rules (plain English) for lower level comps
• mixed PH/HG competitions
• comp organizers - feedback, seminar
• other types of comps

Outcome

Strategy

Focus more on entry level competitions.

• Invert the focus of the CC from focusing on the elite to now focusing on the newcomers to competitions
• Need the HGFA Board to approve this change in direction, in light of their overall strategy. What is their overall strategy? (eg. Overall strategy may be to increase the number of PG and HG pilots in Australia.) (Addendum: Note that the board approves the concept of more emphasis going onto minor competitions.)

• Still consider how to improve Australia's performance at international competitions

Why have this strategy?

• Encourage more people to fly and compete
• Skill sharing - learning between old and new pilots
• Increasing the number of people competing at entry level competitions will eventually produce more elite level competitors

How to achieve strategy

• Introduce class competitions
• Limit the number of elite level comps to a maximum of 3 high level comps.
• Help comp directors
• Seminars
• Mentors (Mollo, Zupy)
• Plain English rules and scoring system (for fun comps) (Mollo to come up with simple scoring system, Zupy to write concise plain English rules.)
• Technical delegates to support them
• Recognize them for their efforts (ask HGFA Board to instruct Ian Jarmin to write a letter to all comp directors thanking them for their efforts, signed by HGFA President)
• Reward learning in comps - encourage comp directors to award day prizes (include a section on the sanction application form asking whether day prizes will be awarded)
• Encourage instructors to run comps - add a section to the instructor seminar.
• Think about other types of comps
• Spot landing
• Sand drop, touching balloons etc.
• Speed gliding
• Freestyle
• Fast section, slow section, spot landing competition (such as Eungella competition)
• Encourage clubs at good locations to run such comps - Competition committee members (and board members) should identify features of their area and then pass on info to Zupy to package.
• Have guidelines to give them (Zupy to pull together existing information into a package and make any new additions)
• Encourage comp directors to apply for sanctions - will amend comp manual to allow C grade comps to get up to 100 sanction points by sending in the results of the competition, after the event; to receive the maximum C sanction points of 184 an application needs to be raised as per the existing procedure.
• Try to have a pilot with little competition experience as a rep on the CC for insight into what pilots flying entry level competitions require.
• Should a vacancy come up in the Competitions Committee, fill the position with someone with little competition experience. Any new member of the CC that fills this possible vacancy should (?) be a HG to satisfy the staffing requirements of the committee. Zupy to put suggest someone - if position can't be filled with a hangie, Heike will suggest a paragliding pilot.

Opportunities for future development

• Club ladder
• Reduce entry fees by using GPS for flight verification, rather than films

Ask HGFA Board

• Expand Craig Worth's role to be a comp director. (Addendum: Response from Board - No)
• Other person?
• Possible commercial operation: HGFA appoints a comp director/organizer who runs Aussie comps and gets Northern Hemisphere work.. (Addendum: Comments from Board - Finances and logistics?)

3. CIVL report

General report is attached as an appendix.

4. Sub-Classes

A need has been identified to expand the number of classes available in PG and HG to the following sub-classes:

• PG - "standard" and "open".

HG - "standard", "racing" and "open".

Rational for extra classes: To encourage up and coming competition pilots to fly a safer wing in competitions, rather than move onto high performance wings too quickly, and to offer more seasoned pilots the chance to compete on a more stable wing.

Definitions

PG "standard" is defined as: certified DHV 2 wing or lower or an Afnor rated standard wing. If there is a conflict in ratings, both the AFNOR and DHV ratings of the wing must meet the requirements.

PG Open Class is defined as: per existing Class 3 definition.

HG Standard Class (taken from Mollo’s email to S. Midwinter re subclassing 11/3/98):Aims - Entry level competition with emphasis on pilot skill (not equipment). Fun.

The class definition would restrict equipment to Skyfloater's like the Wills Wing Falcon. (Open Cross bar, light weight, low stall speed.) Conformity checking to certified standard (weight,dimensional and profile checks ) implemented at serious (state and national level) competitions. Glider competitive whilst ever it is safe to fly it.

HG Racing Class (taken from Mollo’s email to S. Midwinter re subclassing 11/3/98):

(Gung Ho name to satisfy low budget egos)Aims- Provide serious recreational and up a coming new competitions a cost effective class definition that allows them to compete against pilots of a similar level of ability and/or develop their competition skills.

Class definition would require a structural king post (on the basis that this provides the most cost effective structure). Intended to allow what were high performance hang gliders pre Kingpostless. No conformity checking requirements

Glider competitive until it is ragged out.

HG Open Class (taken from Mollo’s email to S. Midwinter re subclassing 11/3/98):

Aim - provide for competition at the highest level. Class definition as per existing Class 1 definition. Glider competitive until next meet.

(Note: the HGFA board have since instructed a fourth "intermediate class hang gliders" be added – see new competitions manual for definition of this and a simpler definition of all the above classes)

Prizes

Pilots of the lower classes can win prizes of that class but also of the higher. (eg. A pilot flying a standard class HG will win the standard class, the racing class and the open class prizes if s/he wins the competition.)

Prizes will be awarded as per 2.3.3 in the Competition Manual (3^rd edition) for each class, grade or category.

Masters class is to be removed from the Comp manual. A (open), B and C grade will remain, as will the women’s class. Competitors on open class wings will not be eligible for a B or C grade prize.

The ladder will remain the same for PG and HG – that is, there will not be separate ladders for each sub-class.

At a minimum we allow classes to exist in existing competitions. We further encourage and allow special class competitions to be run.

AAA, AA or A sanctioned competitions cannot restrict classes within that competition.

National Sporting Class Championships

Re: Ian Jarman's "National Sporting Class Championships". We support the idea but are unsure of what the aim of the competition is. Add the 2 PG classes. Rules will be required to restrict A grade pilots (if that is what Ian J. wants) – eg a maximum of one A grade pilot on each team – otherwise states will try to send there strongest team. Happy for Ian J. to further develop this.

5. Round based ladder.

A proposal was presented to the committee to introduce a second way of gaining National Ladder points based on taking scores of a certain number of rounds rather than the total score of the competition. The proposal was to calculate the Paragliding National Ladder using this method. The reason for suggesting this change was in recognition of the fact that as a whole, Australian paraglider pilots fly too conservatively when compared to the world flying scene – it also allows pilots to miss tasks in conditions they feel are unsafe for their own flying ability without necessarily impacting their National Ladder points.

Paul's problem with a round based ladder is related to the consistency of scoring between competitions – will a task flown during one comp score identically to an identical task flown at another comp? For example, if competitions have poorly set parameters then pilots who only go to comps with the poor parameters are disadvantaged. However at the top end of the ladder, most pilots will be at most comps, therefore are competing against each other most of the times.

Concerns were raised that the scoring process was being blamed for poor performance. This round based proposal has many complex arguments attached to it. Consider possible dropping of rounds within competitions for HG.

The proposal was accepted, and is attached as an appendix.

6. GAP

Problems from this year were highlighted. Zupy will follow up the following with CIVL.

• Problem of days where no one makes goal being worth more than days where goal is reached is rectified.
• Max task distance extended to 290 km.
• Graphical representation of task results.
• Departure and arrival bonuses worth more, pushes racing and leading.
• Bugs corrected

7. Web site.

Ian Ladyman currently maintains information on a web site for the CC. He is happy to continue doing this. Thanks (and a slab of Hahn Premium) go to Ian for creating this site and for continuing to maintain it.

Ian L. would like to include a written history of all competitions on this site – Ian J. will provide Ian L. with hang gliding competition information. Date or Heike will write the paragliding section with assistance from Ian L.

There is an agenda item for the next HGFA board meeting to discuss a WWW for the HGFA. Should this come into existence, the CC web site would be linked to the HGFA homepage.

(Addendum: HGFA will gain an official web presence with links to existing competitions committee site - CC site may or may not be dolled up.)

8. Archival of past competition results.

One location is required to store all competition results – the WWW seems the obvious place to keep the results.

Hopefully the HGFA will have the facility to do so. Failing that Ian Ladyman and/or Zupy will be able to do so. (Zupy is currently attempting to organize a world archive of Race results with CIVL.)

In the meantime, 97/98 season results should be sent to Ian Ladyman to place on the current CC webpage. (Action: Dave)

9. Technical delegate.

Proposal: That a technical delegate (TD) be present at every paragliding competition. Their role would be to assist the competition organizer on technical matters, be a reference regarding the rules, ensure all competitions follow the rules and meet required service levels. The TD will be able to fly in the competition, and will not be required to pay the competition entry fee. This would form the payment to the TD - the larger the competition, the greater the input probably required from the TD and the greater the "payment". The TD would be a competitions committee member or a proxy nominated by them. The decision of the TD may be subject to the normal protest procedures.

Discussion: Legal liability would be a concern. Also, conflict of interest could occur as the TD is competiting. The type of authority given to the TD was discussed, with the authority to cancel a round being an option. Pilots flying the competition should ensure the competition director is following the rules. Rules and role of TD need to be formalized into comps manual.

It was decided to make it a voluntary role for prospective directors who might want assistance. Entry fees would be waived in such circumstances.

The rules will be amended to require a comp manual to be posted on the board at all comps – when a competition organizer is awarded a sanction, s/he will receive two copies of the current manual – one for their own reference, and one to put up on the board.

Also amend rules to formalize the selection of a task committee and protest committee by election of the pilots prior to the first task.

Where a competition director has no previous competition directing experience, the use of a technical delegate will be accepted as the equivalent of previous experience. For AAA and AA comps the director will need experience of running either a B or C sanctioned comp and have a TD (or, as per the current requirements, have previously directed an A sanctioned comp).

10. National Team Selection – Challengeable Positions

Proposal: That the challengeable positions in a team should be applied for by the pilots eligible for filling this position. Currently the positions are filled by the next people on the ladder, unless someone else challenges them for the position. It was felt that this challenging of position could create ill-feeling.

Outcome: The above proposal was accepted for paragliding only. The comps manual will be reworded to reflect this change. Heike to produce new wording.

11. Funding for National Teams

The CC recommends to the HGFA Board that funded team members be assisted to a level of at least $1000. We also recommend that pilots not ranked in the top 15 of the team selection ladder generally not be eligible for financial assistance. However, on application to the HGFA board, pilots outside the top 15 may be given financial assistance.

(Addendum: The Board's response was that the existing level of funding per person remain (up to $1000) and that funding be generally restricted to the top 15 on the national ladder. Pilots outside the top 15 can apply for funding and that application will be looked at on a case by case basis.)

12. National Ladders

The Paragliding National Ladder is in existence, but needs to have one pilot who has been an Australian resident for over 12 months added. Heike to do this, and then send it to Ian Ladyman to put on the CC webpage.

The HG national ladder must be updated ASAP. Zupy or Ian Jarman to calculate ladder.

(Note: Ladder software is still not yet user friendly. Mollo has the system and will update as soon as workload permits.)

13. Team Selection for Pre-Worlds

Process for filling the team for the Paragliding Pre-Worlds underway. Once the hang gliding ladder has been calculated, Ian Jarman to be asked to send letters to pilots eligible to compete. Zupy to follow up.

After CC meetings, notification of up-coming international events should be publicized, with pilots asked to notify the HGFA or CC members to express interest.

Recommend to the HGFA (or follow up on previous recommendation) that HGFA membership renewal forms ask for expressions of interest (check box) in competing for Australia at International comps. (Ian J. – can you let us know the status of this please?)

(Addendum: The board considered putting another check box onto the existing membership renewal form, however, whether or not a pilot is interested in OS competition, depends largely on the actual competition, i.e., the pilot needs to know about the particular comp before he decides whether or not he is interested in attending. Catch 22. No action.)

With a Web site perhaps we could have a page where a list of email addresses of pilots is kept, in case a wider list is needed to fill a team (since snail mail can be too slow given timetables).

14. Next season's calendar.

Hang gliding:

The only application at this stage is Canungra. Given previous experience, the comp has always been well run, and according to the rules and so it is felt that the sanction should be awarded (with the GPS amendment).

Location: Canungra

Director: Tim Cummings

Dates: 10 Oct 1998

Sanction request: AA

It was expected that an application would have arrived from WA. No other applications have been received at this time. Mark and Zupy should encourage others to apply, and other applications considered by the CC via email prior to the end of April (for A sanction and above).

(Addendum: The Board would like to see the WA Nats proceed on the grounds that they put forward a professional application in a reasonable time. It would be good promotion for WA flying if this competition was a success, and no other AAA comp had made a formal application.

Since then, Bogong (with one launch, limited entry) and Forbes have said that they want AAA sanction. The committee must decide which comp gets what sanction.

Forbes is probably the most "competitive" one and therefore most deserving AAA sanction, but this would undermine the success of WA.

Bogong could be seen as more deserving on the grounds that the next World Meet is a mountain launch and this would then be the only AAA mountain launch event.)

Paragliding:

Applications are:

Alpine Open / Nationals

Location: Bright

Director: Brian Webb

Dates: 23 Jan - 30 Jan 1999 (31st reserve)

Sanction request: A (possibly AA)

Manilla Open

Location: Manilla

Director: Godfrey Wenness

Dates: 6 Mar - 13 Mar 1999

Sanction request: A (possibly AA or AAA if direct being a pilot rule is waived)

Flatlands

Location: Birchip

Director: Rob Lithgow

Dates: Feb - Feb - possibly Nov

Sanction request: A (possibly AA)

Great Ocean Road Coastal Challenge

Location: Torquay

Director: Rob Lithgow

Dates: Long weekend in early 1999 - probably Labour day weekend

Sanction request: C

Corryong Fun Competition

Location: Corryong

Director: Hamish Barker

Dates: December

Sanction request: C

15. Competition Manual amendments.

All changes as recorded in these minutes and:

3. Criteria for Assessment of Grade of Sanction:

• Change "notification and application for sanction strictly in accordance with annual timetable" (which doesn’t exist) to "notification and application for sanction by April 15".
• For AA sanction, change "Films to be collected and checked each day from all competitors with turnpoints" to "Films to be collected and checked each day from all competitors with turnpoints when strict ordered launch is used. Otherwise, films to be collected and checked each two rounds max."
• Under competition rules, add "require comp directors to have a copy of the Comp Manual on the comp notice board".

Heike to produce a sanction application form as an annex.

Section 2.5.1 Races:

• Re: Turn point verification being rejected and the pilot given distance back to the last correct turnpoint. Add "At the discretion of the director, if it is clear (from the photographic verification) that the pilot was near the turn point then the pilot will be awarded the distance to the turn point".

Section 2.10 Penalties and Disciplinary Action:

Consider placing FAI General Section 5.2 in our manual.

Section 2.3.3 Awards:

Include awards for women.

New manual will be Edition 3.1.

16. Removal of foreign pilots to score National Ladder

Proposal: To rescore Australian competitions with overseas competitors taken out to remove the inconsistent impact they have on Australian pilot’s scores when calculating the National Ladder.

Outcome: No – Firstly, having extra pilots in the air does impact (positively also) Australian pilot’s results; Secondly, rescoring both the Paragliding Nationals and the Paragliding Manilla Open showed the effect was negligible (biggest difference in NLPs was 7) when the OS competitors spread was evenly distributed through the Australian spread (such as at Manilla).

In competitions with high OS skill level present (PWC and similar) there is a scoring difference, however, if one (or more) Australian pilots beat a group of OS competitors and therefore gain a Nat. ladder advantage over the Australian pilots that were beaten by these international competitors, good luck to them!

17. Post competition audits

All competitions must submit an audit of income and expenditure to the CC and make the same available to all pilots on request.

18. Annexes to Comp Manual.

Include the GAP document as an annex. Include the GAP WWW addresses.

Ian Jarman to do.

Pilot handbook. Zupy to update Jenny's old copy and email to David.

Include a records annex including official and unofficial Australian records and world records. Ian Jarman.

History. Ian Ladyman will update PG. Zupy will do HG. (Note: Zupy has asked Ian J to do so, as he has done previous history.)

19. General

The next CC meeting should be held just after Canungra to evaluate feedback.

A report to be written for SkySailor about this meeting. Heike to write this.

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 - GAP track-log proposal

Suggested rules for the trial use of GPS at the Canungra HG comp and Bright PG comp.

• Each task will be flown in the normal way, with pilots circumnavigating all turn-points using standard FAI sectors.
• At the end of a task, a pilot’s GPS may be submitted to the competition organisers for download of the track-log.
• If there is any dispute or protest regarding a pilot’s flight of the task, or if the track-log downloaded fails to verify (in accordance with these rules) every turn point claimed by the pilot, the GPS track-log will be ignored (i.e. cannot be used as verification of a flight), in which case the pilot must submit a film as proof of flight. Flight verification and scoring will then be done as per standard rules.
• If it is shown that the co-ordinates supplied by the organiser are grossly in error and a protest is lodged (and upheld), no track-logs will be accepted for the task, and all films must be collected and processed at the organiser’s expense. In this case, the named turn point NOT the point at the co-ordinates given must be in sector of each pilot’s photo of that turn point.
• GPS track-logs will not be used for goal crossings. Traditional methods will be used for goal timings. The GPS track-log may be used as evidence in a dispute relating to goal.
• Any inconsistencies in track-log data may require photo verification (at the competition organiser’s discretion). All photo verification will use FAI sector only.

The track-log must satisfy the following criteria:

• The track-log must show one of the following (i.e. not purely FAI sector) for any start-gate and for each turn point claimed (the turn-point is taken to be at the co-ordinates supplied by the competition organiser):
• A point within 100m of the turn point
• A point within the normal FAI sector for the turn point
• A pair of points for which a straight line draw from the first point to the second point passes through the region within 100m of the turn-point
• A pair of points for which a straight line draw from the first point to the second point passes through the FAI sector for the turn-point
• A way-point will be accepted as a track-log point, provided that neither the speed required to fly from the track-log point before (in time) the way-point nor the speed required to fly from the way-point to the next track-log point (in time) exceed the maximum logged speed between any 2 consecutive points of the remainder of the track-log.
• The track-log must show at least 10 minutes of continuous track-log points prior to and after the track-log point or pair of points used to verify the turn-point (i.e. at least 20 minutes of continuous track-log) except where the pilot launched or landed (or both) within 10 minutes of rounding the turn-point. In such cases the track-log must begin or end (or both) at the point of launch or landing (NOTE: if multiple points satisfy one of the previous four criteria, only one needs satisfy this criteria).
• The track-log must contain at least 30 minutes of data (only continuous groups of points make up this 30 minutes – i.e. 3 points 10 minutes apart does not suffice)
• A continuous track-log is one where each consecutive point is at most 60 seconds from its predecessor
• If the track-log is used to determine a start time, the time will be interpolated from the pair of track-log points prior to and after crossing the start gate (a constant speed is assumed).
• The organisation will periodically call for random film checks to further ensure the accuracy and fairness of the GPS system. Random checks will be done at the organisers expense.
• Where a film is checked due to a protest, the protester will pay if the protest is rejected, and the protestee will pay if the protest is upheld.

Appendix 2 - Civil notes

CIVL meeting, Sintra, Portugal

Prior to the meeting, a workshop, directed by Dennis Pagen, was held to raise the awareness and skills of current and potential stewards and jury members. The need for this came about from the apparently increasing use of protests as a means of getting "your way" at competitions, and the fact that category one competitions are generally run by people who have not run a competition of this magnitude before.

The jury's role is an arbitrator, in situations that sometimes can cause personal offence to the people involved, and the role of the steward is to advise the competition director on possible conflicts and ways to help the event run competitively and smoothly.

Of course, this is only advice. The steward has no physical power to force change, and the jury can only patch up disputes after the incident.

The best solution would be to have experienced competition directors who travel and run major comps one after another, and experienced jury members who have background knowledge of past disputes and pilots tactics with regards to disputes.

To help with the jury skills, the existing CIVL jury and steward handbook (available from HGFA? And CIVL web site) will be expanded to include a history of protests and judgments. As for the roving comp director, this is a financial problem, and an ego problem. Most competition hosts will not want to hand over control of their competition to some outside person. The best we can hope for in this respect would be to get the steward to the "pre" event to identify problems early. That in itself, is still a financial problem. There was a proposal to have financial bonds paid by competition organizers to guarantee performance and financial transparency, but this was not supported.

There were some problems with sponsorship rights at the WAG. Advertising rules and legal documents to commercialize competitions will continue to be developed by FAI, and the FAI will develop a business plan. I will have a hard copy of the CIVL rules on advertising at the meeting.

Sepp Himberger has a proposal for sponsorship control rules (sounds similar to the HGFA sponsorship proposals) and these will be investigated further.

The IPPI cards are getting better recognized, but some countries are selective about what other country's IPPI cards they will accept. This problem seems usually to concern neighboring countries and I would hazard a guess to say that it is motivated by the desire to get more teaching and rating business for that countries instructors, from the pilots of the nearby country (who could travel to those instructors)

CIVL has agreed to look at the use of GPS dattalogging as a means of flight verification. A working group chaired by Per Arne Soldal (he also heads the barograph certification) with Angelo Crapanzano Gerolf Heinrichs, Howard Travers and myself has been formed to look at this. The group was in favor of using the existing IGC standards, however cost could be a major drawback here. The use of track log functions in existing GPS's is used in some circumstances by some sailplane associations and software for this purpose exists. I am keeping the group informed on Tim Cumings's system and software.

It is hoped to have trial dattalogging hardware to use during the hang gliding pre-world meet in Italy, but again, cost might be a problem. At this stage, there are difficulties with the concept. In Bassano, for example, the steep valleys make maintaining GPS contact impractical. In addition, the accuracy error can be a problem if two pilots flying side by side (or separately) have to fly different distances to round a TP. In sailplanes going an extra 100m and back is nothing, but in a paraglider, in sink it is an issue. In the future the in built error in the GPS system is supposed to be switched off, also the use of 12 channel GPS receivers will improve accuracy.

There are currently problems to be overcome, but I think the idea will be used before long.

Five instruments were approved for their barograph function in 97.

Ball Graphics Comp

Brauniger IQ Competition

Brauniger IQ Competition / GPS

Flytec 4020

Flytec 4030 (with GPS interface)

The question of in-air reporters was raised (i.e. Davis Straub at Forbes) People seemed to be in agreeance that this would help the public image with air to air filming and stories, but finding the right sort of person to do it may slow things down. The person needs to be a good reporter and non-biased and non-intrusive to the competitors. To have at least some in air reporting would certainly be good at major competitions.

There was a proposal to drop the European championships and have a World Championship every year (not supported).

The support for the women's world championships is continuing, but there was only one bidder for the next women's worlds (after Hungary), so the future here is not certain.

The CIVL pilot rankings are to be published at the CIVL and British League web sites. CIVL is looking for a name for the ranking system a new logo for CIVL. The meeting ran out of time to consider these.

It was proposed (and accepted) that all Paragliders at competitions will have at least "prototype certification" which is a statement that the lines are the same as a configuration that has passed the normal certification load tests (see attachments). This line configuration can then be used on any size or shape of canopy.

CIVL is planning to specify 5.12.2 of section 7for paragliding competitions: "That the statement of airworthiness provided by the NAC must be based on a prototype certificate from one of the CIVL recognized test organizations". These are currently Aerotests DHV/OAeC.

The NAC's, PWC, manufacturers and test organizations will be consulted before CIVL implements this at the next plenary meeting in 99

The safepro and parapro standards were reviewed I will have a hard copy at the meeting. I will have a copy of the Safety and Training sub committee report at the meeting.

GAP scoring was seen to have image problems. It is suffering from acute ignorance induced paranoia. At the previous CIVL meeting, the GAP scoring system was officially adopted by CIVL and in the process, forced on to the paragliding community (much to their horror, in some cases). The CIVL has decided to stick with its original decision to go with GAP and the RACE program, apologizing profusely to the paraglider pilots along the way. The paragliding community argued for different scoring philosophies, but under cross-examination, their most vocal critic had to concede that he did not understand the system that he knew and loved!

Both the para and hang factions that were present agreed to give the system a go for the next year and see where things are headed from there.

There is a pressing need for a historical story about the development of scoring systems in general with all the mistakes that were made in the past (Gerolf Heinrichs will work on this). This would serve to point out possible problems to the developers of paragliding scoring systems so that they do not repeat mistakes made by the hangies, and to show how the GAP scoring formulas evolved.

I am now the chairman for the GAP/Race working group and I will (supposedly) try to organize development in this area.

The section seven working group decided that the existing section seven will serve well into the foreseeable future (unfortunately).

A new discipline of hang gliding competition was introduced to CIVL, accuracy. Otherwise known as spot landing (apparently CIVL banned the idea some years ago?)

The British paracending (parasailing) association has been having competitions where by they tow up with towlines of only 200m or so and then land on a spot. The BHPA will run similar competitions, open to any wing that has paraglider certification and see how it goes. The Danish association is holding a similar event on sand dune ridges and this is being promoted as a family day out with a variety of attractions to get the general public and the media in attendance. Look up http://www.The18thHole.com/Paragliding/lokken98.html.

Imagine the exposure that could be gained by boat towing hang gliders and Paragliders on the Southport Broadwater on the Gold Coast.

This, in conjunction with speed gliding would be a good way to bring hang gliding into living rooms.

Mollo was awarded the Hang Gliding Diploma for his tireless efforts in the development of hang gliding.

Congratulations Mollo.

The election of office bearers went somewhat better than last year. This year nominations were actually accepted and elections were required.

Olivier Burhgele is the new head of the CIVL.

Noel Whittal and Jim Bower re-elected as secretary and treasurer respectively.

Dennis Pagen and Howard Travers re-elected as vice presidents, and two new faces, Riika Vilkuna (Finland) and Vasco Raposa (Portugal) as new Vice-presidents

I will have World Hang Gliding series annual report and CIVL budget report at the meeting.

The 1998-2000 competition schedule (so far)

Paragliding Europeans Spain 9-20.07.98

Hang gliding Europeans Slovakia 24.07-9.08.98

Hang gliding women's Worlds Hungary 13-23.08.98

Paragliding Worlds Austria 3-18.07.99

Pre-worlds 30.05-6.06.98

Hang gliding Worlds Italy end of 07.99

Pre-worlds 2-12.07.98

Hang gliding Pan American USA 15-29.06.00

Pre-pan 15-29.06.99

Hang gliding women's Worlds Greece 18-30.06.00

Pre-worlds 18-30.06.99

Hang gliding Europeans Austria 10-22.07.00

Pre-Euro 11-18.07.99

Paragliding Europeans Germany 27.07-13.08.00

Pre-Euro TBA

Hang gliding world Speed Gliding Greece 15-29.06.00

Pre-speed 15-29.06.99

These dates may change.

Appendix 3 - Round Based National Ladder

Introduction

This document proposes a new way of calculating National Ladder points, based on individual rounds of competitions rather than taking the competition as a whole.

Proposal

1. Competitions are sanctioned as per the current system.
1. Competitions are run as usual and declare their own competition champion(s) according to the scores calculated using GAP.
1. Each sanctioned competition round (rather than the competition as a whole) is worth a certain number of National Ladder points to each pilot.
1. National ladder points (for each round) are calculated using the following formula: NLP = GAP score (for that round) x CompSanctionPoints /1000
1. A pilot’s best 8 scores are used to calculate their National Ladder points for that season. A maximum of five rounds can be taken from any one competition.
1. The highest ranked pilots on the National Ladder at the end of the season are declared the National Champions (Australian, Female and Masters).
1. The highest ranked pilot in ‘B’ Grade on the National Ladder at the end of the season is declared the ‘B’ Grade National Champion.
1. Provisional National Ladders are drawn up at the end of each competition round and displayed along with the GAP scores for the competition.
1. National Team selection is based on a Team Selection Ladder. The Team Selection Ladder is calculated on the 15th of April each year by taking the best 10 rounds over two years, with the previous season’s rounds devalued by 20%.
1. At least 5 rounds of competitions with an ‘A’ sanction or above must be flown in a season. These rounds must each have a day quality factor (as used in GAP) of 0.7 or greater. If this does not occur, the season is not a valid one, and therefore no Champions can be awarded.