what's my line - Something to have a think about safety wise

Post by **chrisfozz** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 2:31 pm

Below are four bits of tracklog from Sunday’s fish and chip run.

If you were about to cross Runswick Bay which line would you choose and why?

For those unfamiliar with this area we are travelling from top left to bottom right.

Post by **colin keightley** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 2:39 pm

Obviously without taking height into consideration I would say track 2 safest if its a northerly as the rest cross by runswick to some degree, which the town itself sits in rotor if im not mistaken.

Graeme Gilroy · Post by **Graeme Gilroy** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 3:35 pm

Looks like whoever track 2 is they spent a bit of time topping up their height before making a run for it out the front of Runswick village, so would agree with Colin, I'm nee export like .

Graeme

berow · Post by **berow** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 3:40 pm

It was probably RonDon eating his sandwiches...

Graeme · Post by **Graeme** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 5:41 pm

Aren't 1 & 4 almost identical?

Both these tracks moreorless hug the coast line and don't cross over water?

I don't know this area and cant judge height flown - but looking at wind direction is their any risk of rotor when flying just inland behind the coast?

Post by **gary stenhouse** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:25 pm

its tricky as when I do a screen shot google earth my flight looks very different and assume one of them is mine

Post by **colin keightley** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:52 pm

Gary if screen shoting it in google earth you need to go in properties and select clamp to ground otherwise the elevation of the track gives a misrepresentation

brian day · Post by **brian day** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 7:03 pm

You also have to take into consideration that the image is taken at high tide and the crossings were made at low tide.
I know which is mine, so don't really thing I can comment to much, except to say I wasn't really topping up height, I was tarting about looking at my map, the route out of Brunswick bay at the south end and the wind direction, trying to work out if indeed it would be possible before making the move south whilst also weighing up the options of returning to Staithes and then to Marske.
So as well as the routes, there's a lot going on in the mind of the pilots,,,,or should be.
I am a cautious pilot on the coast and well aware that the coastline minders around and can catch out the unwary and will avoid possible areas of rotor and sink by the biggest margin possible.

berow · Post by **berow** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 7:20 pm

Great stuff this for a discussion point.

ron freeman · Post by **ron freeman** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 7:46 pm

Without doubt the no 2 is the best track, stopping to top up height to the max and then take the best line as to avoid rotor (if any)

Iv'e studied this run for a long time now and I feel the safest way to attempt it would be to wait for a forecast where the wind in the morning was n.n.east then going round to a n.east after dinner to give you maximum safety.

The pictures look like low tide due to the water marks on the sand.

Luis Martinez Iturbe · Thu Oct 22, 2015 9:00 pm

Very interesting post, I like to analyze my own flights and compare them with others, it's a good way of learning I believe... but keep in mind is not 100% accurate, there is a slight gap with google maps in certain areas.

If you analyze my flight for instance you see in the map that I landed in some tree in Robin Hood's Bay, I remeber getting my wing dirty with sand

http://www.nhpc.org.uk/nhpc/modules.php ... ghtID=8171

Luis Martinez Iturbe · Thu Oct 22, 2015 9:07 pm

Google Earth seems more accurate than Google maps, don't know why

Post by **gary stenhouse** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 9:28 pm

for me that day I was a good height most of the time and often double the height of the cliffs and never put a turn in accept for half turn at Whitby and one near robin hoods bay as I was going to turn back.

however I can confirm Whitby southside was definitely out of wind as it was coming from round the corner slightly. luckily I quickly realised by my ground speed but could feel turbulence more than anywhere else on the flight. I think for those not carrying detailed map gps then it was easy to make a mistake going into robin hoods bay.

would be good to get the tracklogs emailed to me so I can play them in seeyou at a meeting some time.

Post by **colin keightley** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 10:03 pm

Gary you should be able to save igc from XC league

Sad Northerner · Post by **Sad Northerner** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 10:11 pm

An excellent post/question Chris. My take on this is;

It hard to see exactly what the situation is in these cases as it is hard to get a true perspective on things but in my eyes pilot no 2 wins the day;

1. he appears top up when he has the opportunity, Why not?, every ft of height only serves to reduce and risk of being rotor and extend your glide distance.

2. he makes his glide leaving a good margin between himself and the potential ground associated rotor. I really can't see the point of hugging a ridge that is out of lift your only extending the distance you have to fly to get to the next lifting ridge.

3. but perhaps mostly he deserves credit because he appears to consider (have a strategy for) the next move; flying xc on the coast is not just ridge soaring it is a series of transitions each of which need a plan.

Ali

Fingers · Post by **Fingers** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 10:20 pm

This is all great but might it not be best to study the area where at least two people ended up dumped violently into the water?

Did these people have track log data? or was it knackered with water?

brian day · Post by **brian day** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 10:41 am

Richards vario is still refusing to start and I'm reluctant to attach it to my computer.

The next move getting out of Runswick Bay was actually more of an issue. I witnessed one pilot, not from our club, land on the leeward side of the point on the shingle beach, I had heard Gary on the radio earlier in the day questioning the route and had seen another pilot very low in a rotor area just make it via the front route.
I tested both routes a couple of times topping up height before each attempt, eventually coming to the conclusion that I couldn't make the front route safely so opted for the very uncomfortable higher back route.

For me, on that day, this was a step to far that fortunately I got away with, as it happens, quite easily.

In my opinion only one pilot to my knowledge made the right decision at this point, Nick on a Nova from North Yorks,,,,,he landed and walked away safely!

What did the rest of us gain,,,,a few km more!! Is it worth it?

berow · Post by **berow** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 10:49 am

One mans pleasure is another's poison. That's just the way it is. I enjoyed both Saturday and Sunday's flying

Post by **chrisfozz** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 1:05 pm

I’ve had another look at the tracklogs and in my view there is a discrepancy of somewhere between 20 to 70m with the track shown to the south west of where it should be, as pointed out by Gary and Luis. I think if the tracks were displayed accurately then it would show all pilots avoiding areas of potential rotor. So it would seem my original question was a bit pointless, although it is good to see people are able to identify where the rota is likely to be.

Having said that, I think my line would most closely resemble number 3. Why? - Particularly when I’m about to commit to a transition, like crossing Runswick Bay, I’ll take the time to do a few beats somewhere which is more or less into wind. I fly a reciprocal path and look at groundspeed on my gps to check out my assessment of wind direction and strength, usually it’s more or less how I imagined but sometimes I’m a little bit out and sometimes I’m quite a bit out. This is either because the wind has changed or because my perception of the orientation of the ridge I’m flying was wrong. I’m also using this time to build a picture in my mind of how I will fly the next transition. Ali and Brian Day’s posts above expand on what I’m doing here.

With better performance gliders these costal flights are becoming more and more accessible and for me they are a great experience, crossing Runswick Bay is quite committing but it’s a real buzz looking down on the surfers as I fly to the next area of lift. I hope having a look at these tracklogs has been useful and that the pilots concerned don’t mind me sharing there them in this way.

steve-gill · Post by **steve-gill** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 7:05 pm

best to study the area where at least two people ended up dumped violently into the water?

I can't find this post of anyone landing in water?

John Wallis · Post by **John Wallis** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 8:20 pm

http://www.nhpc.org.uk/nhpc/viewtopic.php?t=9586

Scroll down Steve

RonDon · Post by **RonDon** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 9:56 pm

Its a funny thing Chris, when I look at traces of other flights around Runswick Bay they dont seem to match up when I was there. However, I am a bit of a duffer at this.

steve-gill · Post by **steve-gill** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 10:40 pm

John, when I click on the link I get "The topic or post you requested does not exist"

John Wallis · Post by **John Wallis** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 12:18 am

Try again

http://www.nhpc.org.uk/nhpc/viewtopic.php?t=9586

Works OK this end Steve

steve-gill · Post by **steve-gill** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 1:23 pm

No. Still the same message.

Graeme Gilroy · Post by **Graeme Gilroy** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 2:11 pm

Works for me

NHPC Private and Public Forum

what's my line - Something to have a think about safety wise

what's my line - Something to have a think about safety wise

Track 2

No doubt

Runswick Bay

Ok