Here is the text of the petition that the vast majority of the pilots, and meet officials (including the meet steward, Heather Mull) signed:......”

At NO time did I sign this petition and if Davis actually sighted my signature then someone has gone to the trouble of forging it.

So hopefully that’s cleared up the point of me signing the petition.  My own views on the rule have nothing to do with the fact that as a steward I am expected to ensure the rules as they stand are followed at the competitions.

I did make the comment to Vicki that as the meet director for Forbes petitioning for a safety rule (however flawed it’s considered to be) to be withdrawn/suspended, she might leave herself open to complications if a pilot did die from head injuries - not unheard of in a tow meet - and was found to be wearing an uncertified helmet – even in the Pre-Worlds.  It’s usually an organiser/meet director’s neck on the line rather than the names on a petition. 

One point in the petition states that the current helmet certification ruling “encourages cheating...”. Give me a break!!  Like competitors don’t have the backbone to not cheat in competitions, that their minds can be swayed into cheating and justifying it in their minds because the rule isn’t to their liking?

As for the suggested CIVL working group coming up with the good helmet answers, that wouldn’t seem necessary, especially when...  “Pilots are tired on all the obligations that CIVL places on them and on meet organizers” - now it looks like there’s the best working group of all to come up with the
more reasonable solutions – all the pilots who put their name on the petition! 
Surely so much expertise from so many knowledgeable pilots will sort out the
issue, and give their proposals to the delegates to discuss and ratify at the
next Plenary – or even have in place by the Pre-Worlds in Forbes.  Or is it just
another mass of pilots willing (and I bet some felt pressured to sign) to put
their name to a list of complaints and be prepared to do nothing about it – as
has happened so many times in the past.  Some pilots on that list have even said
to me that they were actually glad their head was better protected now, and that
it had been time they had bought a new helmet anyway.

Now that my down time has been interrupted, I might as well get a few more things off my chest which might as well be said by someone who’s getting jaded from the never ending CIVL bashing and whingeing, but who often sees hypocrisy in pilot words and actions.  Just a reminder, that I’m not on the CIVL Bureau, I just work at some of the comp’s for the CIVL as an advisor to the meet director – trying to help them make sense of whatever rules currently exist as voted on by your delegates at the Plenaries, and to help them get all the pilots safely through the competition.

I believe Vicki Cain is the meet director for Forbes.  When I asked her in Italy last year who would be meet director, Davis was very quick to advise Vicki not to discuss that with me.  What’s the big deal or the secrecy for?  But then, it was interesting that a pilot was overheard in Monte Cucco this year apparently saying something to a CIVL official along the lines of – When I’m the meet director at Forbes next year, I gonna have a lot of power over you then...  Hmmm... Apparently the CIVL Bureau has not received any formal notification of a petition or request of a staff alteration from those listed in the Worlds Bid.

Apparently Gerolf has been busy on the forums lately – comments on helmet issues, and wire thickness and how the last task at Monte Cucco was handled etc, but has he said much yet about pilots cheating their way through registrations by having certified helmet stickers placed into their non-certified helmets?  It’s no secret of course that Gerolf did this in Ager last year – along with some other pilots – because when we were debating “toe to toe” during the registration at Monte Cucco with other pilots around us he even had the audacity to say that the staff checking the helmets in Ager had been too stupid to know his helmet was uncertified!  Even worse, he tried to pull the same stunt shortly afterwards at the Monte Cucco registration – even though he’d known about the issue for a full year.  Sorry, no respect from me for you anymore.

Then I have to put up with off-hand comments like (from an ‘old timer’) that my claim to fame was having had Gerolf thrown out of the competition.  What a load of rubbish – Gerolf was given every opportunity to compete at Monte Cucco, and then some – the decisions on which helmets would be accepted or not in the competition were ultimately up to the meet and safety directors, and Gerolf just couldn’t realise that he’d already well and truly made his points and there was no reason to not compete.  Not much thought for his team mates or sponsors. That’s just called poor sportsmanship where I come from.

One of his comments to me in the past was that I just wanted to be friends with everyone.... actually, I can count my real friends on one hand.  Let’s see how many “friends” I can lose with the next comments and see if my quality of life
really takes a big dive because of it.

Let’s go back to the statement “Pilots are tired on all the obligations that CIVL places on them and on meet organizers.”  Do you as
pilots, meet directors, organisers, sponsors etc think about why there are so many rules?  If pilots did not knowingly cheat; if you took full responsibility for your actions; if your family knew they were not to try suing organisers/meet directors because of your death due to an incorrect decision on your part; if you didn’t cloud fly; if you didn’t turn off your GPS’ near airspace; if you could be counted on to land before there was lightning flashing around you; if you didn’t do low passes on launch with your ego incorrectly assuming all below you were in awe of your ability to pass so close to them without injuring them; if you didn’t compromise the safety of your glider by making definitely suspect modifications; if you didn’t fly aggressively; if you had the skills to take off and land safely; if you didn’t have any external pressures on you to perform outside your usual safety margins; if you didn’t take low glides into areas of rotor or areas of no decent landings; if you checked the goal fields for safe landing possibilities instead of just pulling them off Google Earth when the task was being set (don’t even get me started on the most horrific goal field I’ve ever seen pilots have to negotiate their way into, during the Texas Worlds); if you could swallow your macho pride and go to land instead of flying
through horrific turbulence to keep flying that task.......how many less rules there would need to be!

How many of the above boxes can you honestly tick as applying to you?  What a data base of knowledge I have about who is willing to do what to break the rules, after having been around the comp’ scene for 23 years. Section 7 is a constant updating of rules in response to pilots trying to cheat, accidents and often pilot stupidity in an effort to see that pilots go home in one piece after the competitions.

Which brings me to the last task at Monte Cucco.  What a sad end to a
competition that was so passionately organised, and safely conducted – but no
one controls the weather.  When I asked the meet and safety directors why we had
gone to Cucco North instead of Tre Pizzi, they replied that the wind would not
have been right there.  Call me naive, but I chose to believe their answer. 
Another huge bug bear of mine, is the insistence of some pilots to prove the
“authorities” wrong in their decision making.... by flying the task anyway
(often without giving thought to whether a flyable day means a taskable day),
and by doing whatever they can to ridicule the decisions that have been made in
their best interests.  Once again, often pilots who have no idea how difficult
it can be making decisions that take the best interests of all pilots in the
competition to heart, not just the “top guns.” Then I hear from one of the
safety committee members after most of the committee agonised over how turbulent
launch conditions were for launching everyone safely and getting them away from
launch (and there were top pilots running around saying they wouldn’t be setting
up or flying) and when the safety director finally stopped the last task, that a
member of the French entourage had been sporting enough to announce to the
pilot’s face that he hoped this person would never be elected to a safety
committee again!  Disgraceful.

Which in closing, brings me to the pilots who I believe do deserve some respect – and I’m talking about respect that pilots can earn which doesn’t necessarily
revolve around their flying abilities (Cloudbase Foundation rocks guys).  It
includes those pilots who are doing something useful with their flying skills to
improve the lives of others; those who can take the time to acknowledge the
effort people are putting in on their behalf; those who even when something has
gone against them can still present a positive, sporting attitude; those who
compete fairly, honestly and sportingly; those who can see when a hug of
encouragement is needed after a dose of “steward bashing;” those who do put
their hand up to be part of the solution and not just whinge at the problems;
those who aren’t ashamed to cry when life gets really tough – you know who you
are, so thank-you.  Qualities these pilots share revolve around having some
social skills and the ability to feel empathy with others – and usually having a
life outside flying.  Now there’s an idea for helping the pilots to have
fun at the competitions – how about getting rid of the mandatory safety
briefing and have a mandatory session on how to acquire or improve your social
skills and to learn how to feel empathy for others! 

And after four hours of getting things off my chest, it’s amazing how much better I feel.  Don’t expect any replies if you want to try for online debates with me – I’m going back to much needed down time. You might want to take it up with your delegates my “friends”.