Rule for asking another slot, after 1st HC broke and 2nd was in violation of spec

[Triarthrus]

Can a team be awarded an additional new slot if their first helicopter device malfunctioned and their second was found to be out of spec? In this situation, the team left the event area, returned later with their coach, and requested proctors. Proctors then allocated an additional 10 minutes slot after all other teams had completed the event. Despite this, the team was recorded as placing 4th in the final awards—something that was not extended to any other teams.

Several coaches raised concerns, but the issue was dismissed by the State Tournament Director. Is there any rule that permits a team to be given extra time to repair or replace a device and attempt the event again with new slot, ultimately earning a placement?

[coachchuckaahs]

Rules questions should go to SO through the FAQ process. If you have issues with the rules interpretation you should submit a request for arbitration at the contest.

It is IMPORTANT that you know and quote the rules. Just feeling something is wrong does not help the proctor (ES) nor the ED in making a decision. They may not know the rules well either.

I will respond, but this should be taken as MY OPINION and not any kind of official rules response.

Rule 5.b. states that "Once participants enter the cordoned off competition area to trim, practice, or compete, they must not receive outside materials (except as permitted by the Event Supervisor), assistance, or communication." Letting them leave to work on their heli and then come back does not seem to fit this (but it does allow ES discretion).

There is no "8-minute time slot".

Rule 5.e.v. indicates "Teams must not be given extra time to recover or repair their helicopter."

It is unclear from your description whether the failure occurred during or prior to the 10-minute flight window. This last rule applies once the flight window starts.

Had the flight window NOT started it appears the ES has discretion to allow outside materials, assistance, or communication. However, IMO it would be unusual to allow the students to leave to modify their heli.

Each event is governed by the ES, and appeals can be made through the arbitration process. There are always gray areas that may need interpretation, and even possibly contact with SO National HQ to resolve. Your description is not clear on the actual sequence of events, in also indicates that you did not know/review the rules to determine a proper position on this topic (since you are unaware of the actual time period, nor the two rules I mention above).

Again, these are my opinions, based on the limited data you gave, and my opinions are in no way official for your event. For anything more than an opinion, please submit an FAQ to SO.

Coach Chuck

[bjt4888]

All the details of the situation would be needed in order to evaluate. If the timers or judges or others not on the competing team had an effect on the "malfunction", thereby interfering with the team's performance (I'm sure by accident, if this was the case), then a reflight would be ok.

If this was not the case and it was entirely the team's responsibility for the malfunction, then a the reflight decision sounds a little odd.

Brian T

[Triarthrus]

Here are the sequence of events

• In the morning this team checked in two devices, one doesn’t fit in the box and out of spec
• Team started the competition with one device, had couple of trail runs
• On their official run helicopter got stuck into the projector machine.
• Proctors helped them to bring it down(not sure, if they can do this), in which case it ran for 30 seconds. and it was broken.
• They had another official run with same device, which was under 10 secs
• After their 10 min slot, two students left the room and packed their helicopter with them.
• Later a large number of students from that school and their coach approached the judge and judge provided the team with a second chance to run their helicopter at 3:30 pm or 4 pm.
• This team got a second chance at flying after they have officially ended the competition securing a top 5 place and left the room.

This is contradicting the rules 5.e.v, 5.e.vi. And this team is now qualified to nationals putting others behind. Other team Coaches reported the incident to state tournament director who squashed the plea.

Few Coaches reported the incident to National SCIO, not sure of the outcome yet.

[coachchuckaahs]

Obviously if your team felt the rules were violated, arbitration should have been filed prior to the awards ceremony. This forum will not solve the issue, and nothing said here can be official. Base don your sequence of events, it is likely a number of rules were not followed.

What can be said here is that the team (coach AND kids) MUST know the rules, and be able to reference them when addressing the ES. Most ES's are volunteers, many have not spent the season working with teams or the rules. In a lot of cases it is a professor you has skimmed the rules just prior to the event.

You MUST know the rules and follow the proper processes to address issues. I have even seen at Nationals where the ES did not know the rules. My kids knew the rules, showed the ES, and he adjusted the process, avoiding arbitration.

Without filing for arbitration on the day of the event, I am not certain anything further can be done.

Note that in the case of your team feeling slighted in their performance, you MUST leave your device and all equipment in the venue while filing arbitration (specific to Flight events, listed in the Flight rules). In your case your appeal is concerning another team, so that is not covered. If a verbal inquiry does not resolve the issue you MUST file for arbitration. Note that most events publish a complete guideline as to the process for arbitration or appeals, including who may file (usually head coach), deadlines, etc. These must be followed exactly.

Coach Chuck

[Triarthrus]

Yes, we are the affected team. Our coach submitted the appeal form, but the State Tournament Director told our coach that the appeal was already ‘squashed’. Although our coach properly submitted the form, no action was taken against the other team before the awards ceremony.

The awards were delayed by an hour, and we believed our plea was considered However, as the awards proceeded, the other team was announced as placing 5th in HC which was done in 2nd slot. and ranked higher than us and going to National.

[coachchuckaahs]

By SO rules, you cannot make an appeal to an appeal. The results of the appeal process are final.

Coach Chuck

[knightmoves]

Given your description of events, I think the rules are clear. A team's helicopter got stuck on a projector. By rule 5 e vii, that ends the flight time for that flight, because the lifting surfaces are no longer supporting the weight of the helicopter. By rule 5 e v, teams must not be given extra time to recover their helicopter.

The team showed up with two helicopters. One was out of spec, so they only have one helicopter that is legal. They began their 10 minute flight time, and got their helicopter stuck.

Event Supervisors should not handle a student build - certainly not while the event is live. I don't think the Event Supervisor should have assisted with the recovery of the helicopter until the 10 minute flight time had expired. If the students can retrieve the helicopter themselves in that time, they could fly it again, and if they break the helicopter while they retrieve it, that's on them.

Their other option would have been to attempt to bring their other device within legal measurements in their 10 minute period. That sounds quite hard.

Once the students remove their device from the event area, they give up the right to appeal.

I get the impression, from your post, that the team and their coach were claiming that the ES broke the helicopter while retrieving it, and so owed the team a do-over. If I accept the premise that the ES did something they shouldn't have done and caused the problem, then offering a re-flight comes as close as you can get to correcting the ES's error.

In this specific case, I'm not sure that I accept the premise, but the devil is in the details. What would have happened if the ES hadn't retrieved the helicopter from the projector? Would the team have been able to get it themselves (perhaps more carefully, and without causing damage)? Or would the 10 minute flight time have expired with the team staring forlornly at their only legal device sitting on top of a projector? The closer reality is to the first possibility, the more reasonable the ES offering a do-over is.

Technically, this team didn't file an appeal, and so didn't run foul of rule 5h. They just asked the ES for relief, and the ES used their discretion to grant it.

[nikolat]

The students left the room with their device, brought their coach, the coach appealed (i believe verbally) to the Director that the ES didn't allow the students to fly their 2nd helicopter even though they had it. He didn't mention that the 2nd helicopter was in a box that didn't meet spec. The Director was not in the room so she talked to the ES, I am not sure if the ES mentioned that the 2nd helicopter was in a box that didn't meet spec. My argument is since the students left the room with their device, the appeal is not valid. ES being students, I don't think they had the experience to stand up and say the 2nd helicopter box was a violation.

[sourlmns]

I'm assuming you're talking about Beckendorff JHS. You need to stop assuming their circumstances if you were not directly involved.
From a competitor on the Discord:
"The es didn’t let us use our second backup helicopter after the first one broke, saying that we needed “two measurement boxes because we had two planes” which is just completely false"
Their heli was not out of spec. They had every right to ask for an appeal and the decisions of that appeal are final. You cannot appeal against other teams for this exact reason: you don't know what happened! You need to understand and respect what happened, end of discussion, and you cannot blame them for other teams not making nationals.