Cameras and barographs

[Jim Beckman]

Todd Smith posted:

I was a new guy in soaring about 7 years ago and as
I was working on
my Silver badge, got a lesson in how to smoke a windup
barograph and
all that. I bought a used thermal electric model that
required no
screwing around, all I had to do was put it in the
glider. I then
tried to do my Silver distance with a camera, the rigmarole
was
ridiculous. I ordered a Colibri immediately after that
and badge
flights have been simple (except for the flying) ever
since.
----------

Well, there's your mistake. No need for a camera to
do the Silver Distance flight, even back in the olden
days before GPS. I certainly didn't need one. I also
helped set one state record for distance without using
a camera.

Jim Beckman

[toad]

I also wanted to land back where I took off :-)

That's hard to do without the camera or logger.

Todd

[Chip Bearden]

On Sep 27, 9:11 am, toad > wrote:
> I also wanted to land back where I took off :-)
>
> That's hard to do without the camera or logger.
>
> Todd

Hard but not impossible. Back in the "olden days," you were allowed to
use observers. On more than one occasion my father radioed the FBO at
a local turnpoint and got him to come out and "observe" him (5,000
feet above!) as he crossed the airport. Then my dad would send the guy
a letter with a pre-filled form to sign and a stamped, self-addressed
envelope, and receive it a week later. OK, it was kludgy but it was
possible. :)

I agree that cameras and photo declarations and getting the film
processed without cutting the negative were a hassle. On the other
hand, so is trying to upload waypoints when ActiveSync won't release a
COM port or any number of other modern glitches. Just Google this
newsgroup for the plaintive cries for help. Worse yet, go to any user
group page on one of the hardware or software makers' Web sites and
read about the real-world experiences of pilots who are unknowingly
(and unwillingly) recruited as beta testers by engineers who know they
can't possibly afford to test their products for the soaring world the
way they would for a larger market. Cameras are sold by the tens of
thousands if not millions. By comparison, sales of loggers, flight
computers, and related software and systems are infinitesimal. And
anytime you think that the gliding community has somehow magically
developed the skills necessary to acquire, configure, use, and
troubleshoot various electronic gadgets that have to talk to each
other, just show up in the scorer's office at any contest to see the
parade of pilots waiting to have the scorer upload the contest
database for them.

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
USA

[toad]

On Sep 27, 10:06 am, Chip Bearden > wrote:
> On Sep 27, 9:11 am, toad > wrote:
>
> > I also wanted to land back where I took off :-)
>
> > That's hard to do without the camera or logger.
>
> > Todd
>
> Hard but not impossible. Back in the "olden days," you were allowed to
> use observers. On more than one occasion my father radioed the FBO at
> a local turnpoint and got him to come out and "observe" him (5,000
> feet above!) as he crossed the airport. Then my dad would send the guy
> a letter with a pre-filled form to sign and a stamped, self-addressed
> envelope, and receive it a week later. OK, it was kludgy but it was
> possible. :)
>
> I agree that cameras and photo declarations and getting the film
> processed without cutting the negative were a hassle. On the other
> hand, so is trying to upload waypoints when ActiveSync won't release a
> COM port or any number of other modern glitches. Just Google this
> newsgroup for the plaintive cries for help. Worse yet, go to any user
> group page on one of the hardware or software makers' Web sites and
> read about the real-world experiences of pilots who are unknowingly
> (and unwillingly) recruited as beta testers by engineers who know they
> can't possibly afford to test their products for the soaring world the
> way they would for a larger market. Cameras are sold by the tens of
> thousands if not millions. By comparison, sales of loggers, flight
> computers, and related software and systems are infinitesimal. And
> anytime you think that the gliding community has somehow magically
> developed the skills necessary to acquire, configure, use, and
> troubleshoot various electronic gadgets that have to talk to each
> other, just show up in the scorer's office at any contest to see the
> parade of pilots waiting to have the scorer upload the contest
> database for them.
>
> Chip Bearden
> ASW 24 "JB"
> USA

Or the contest pilot that shows up with a logger, but no cables to
upload or download that logger. Because I had the same logger (a
Colibri), I got drafted to help him.

So I understand that computers have there own problems. But for me,
the electronic skills were so much easier to deal with, and most
importantly, require very little from my potential observers and me on
the day of the flight, that I could declare a badge task at about 1
minutes notice before takeoff. All of the computer mucking about was
done on a tuesday night in my house, there was no work to be done at
the airport before takeoff.

Todd

[Ian Cant]

Out of curiosity, has anyone 'recently' attempted a
badge flight using a camera or ground observers ?
Did it get accepted by SSA without added hassle ?

I guess a digital camera is completely out of the question
!

Ian





At 14:42 27 September 2007, Toad wrote:
>On Sep 27, 10:06 am, Chip Bearden wrote:
>> On Sep 27, 9:11 am, toad wrote:
>>
>> > I also wanted to land back where I took off :-)
>>
>> > That's hard to do without the camera or logger.
>>
>> > Todd
>>
>> Hard but not impossible. Back in the 'olden days,'
>>you were allowed to
>> use observers. On more than one occasion my father
>>radioed the FBO at
>> a local turnpoint and got him to come out and 'observe'
>>him (5,000
>> feet above!) as he crossed the airport. Then my dad
>>would send the guy
>> a letter with a pre-filled form to sign and a stamped,
>>self-addressed
>> envelope, and receive it a week later. OK, it was
>>kludgy but it was
>> possible. :)
>>

[[email protected]]

> I guess a digital camera is completely out of the question
> !
>
> Ian

Think Photoshop!

[[email protected]]

On Sep 27, 8:00 am, Ian Cant >
wrote:
> Out of curiosity, has anyone 'recently' attempted a
> badge flight using a camera or ground observers ?
> Did it get accepted by SSA without added hassle ?
>
> I guess a digital camera is completely out of the question
> !
>
> Ian
>
> At 14:42 27 September 2007, Toad wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Sep 27, 10:06 am, Chip Bearden wrote:
> >> On Sep 27, 9:11 am, toad wrote:
>
> >> > I also wanted to land back where I took off :-)
>
> >> > That's hard to do without the camera or logger.
>
> >> > Todd
>
> >> Hard but not impossible. Back in the 'olden days,'
> >>you were allowed to
> >> use observers. On more than one occasion my father
> >>radioed the FBO at
> >> a local turnpoint and got him to come out and 'observe'
> >>him (5,000
> >> feet above!) as he crossed the airport. Then my dad
> >>would send the guy
> >> a letter with a pre-filled form to sign and a stamped,
> >>self-addressed
> >> envelope, and receive it a week later. OK, it was
> >>kludgy but it was
> >> possible. :)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

According to the Badge Lady, my Gold Distance flight (July 06) was the
ONLY baro and turnpoint camera badge she processed in all of 2006. I
am currently OO preparing a Diamond Goal badge claim for another club
member, and it's a LOT more work than a claim using a Certified Flight
Recorder.
Still, I'd like to smoke up another foil, mount up the camera, and do
one more badge flight that way before I retire the Baro forever....

[[email protected]]

On Sep 27, 8:46 pm, wrote:
> On Sep 27, 8:00 am, Ian Cant >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Out of curiosity, has anyone 'recently' attempted a
> > badge flight using a camera or ground observers ?
> > Did it get accepted by SSA without added hassle ?
>
> > I guess a digital camera is completely out of the question
> > !
>
> > Ian
>
> > At 14:42 27 September 2007, Toad wrote:
>
> > >On Sep 27, 10:06 am, Chip Bearden wrote:
> > >> On Sep 27, 9:11 am, toad wrote:
>
> > >> > I also wanted to land back where I took off :-)
>
> > >> > That's hard to do without the camera or logger.
>
> > >> > Todd
>
> > >> Hard but not impossible. Back in the 'olden days,'
> > >>you were allowed to
> > >> use observers. On more than one occasion my father
> > >>radioed the FBO at
> > >> a local turnpoint and got him to come out and 'observe'
> > >>him (5,000
> > >> feet above!) as he crossed the airport. Then my dad
> > >>would send the guy
> > >> a letter with a pre-filled form to sign and a stamped,
> > >>self-addressed
> > >> envelope, and receive it a week later. OK, it was
> > >>kludgy but it was
> > >> possible. :)- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> According to the Badge Lady, my Gold Distance flight (July 06) was the
> ONLY baro and turnpoint camera badge she processed in all of 2006. I
> am currently OO preparing a Diamond Goal badge claim for another club
> member, and it's a LOT more work than a claim using a Certified Flight
> Recorder.
> Still, I'd like to smoke up another foil, mount up the camera, and do
> one more badge flight that way before I retire the Baro forever....- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

someday my barograph will not fail, and she will have a Silver Badge
to process on paper.

unless of course someone decides to bankroll a flight recorder for me.

[Ian Cant]

At 15:54 28 September 2007, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:
>>
>You will then, no doubt be entertained by the proposal
>to remove Camera
>and Ground Observers for the Sporting Code from 1st
>October 2008.
>
>Tim Newport-Peace
>


That is interesting news. Perhaps it will/would only
affect a small number of pilots, but would it not be
nice to be informed about the proposal and have an
opportunity to comment ? Where are our representatives
on this ?

Cameras and barographs may be awkward and unfashionable,
but so are Ka-8s and 1-26s. Should we expect to see
some future Sporting Code that allows only glass/carbon
better than 40:1 for Silver badge attempts ? It might
even be a 'safety enhancement'. And it would certainly
reduce the number of impecunious upstarts who presume
to try to take part in the sport.

Open fire !

Ian

[Ian]

On 29 Sep, 15:33, Ian Cant >
wrote:
> At 15:54 28 September 2007, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:

> >You will then, no doubt be entertained by the proposal
> >to remove Camera
> >and Ground Observers for the Sporting Code from 1st
> >October 2008.

> That is interesting news. Perhaps it will/would only
> affect a small number of pilots, but would it not be
> nice to be informed about the proposal and have an
> opportunity to comment ? Where are our representatives
> on this ?

And what do our representatives fly?

> Cameras and barographs may be awkward and unfashionable,
> but so are Ka-8s and 1-26s. Should we expect to see
> some future Sporting Code that allows only glass/carbon
> better than 40:1 for Silver badge attempts ?

I'd rather it was changed to Silver Distance being 2km * best L/D for
the glider (and similarly for Gold and Diamond: 12km and 20km * best L/
D. Silver distance in modern glass is absurdly easy.

I am very disappointed that we might see and end to cameras and
mechanical barographs. Sometimes it seems that those of us at the
budget end of the sport really aren't welcome any more.

Ian

[Roy Clark, B6]

On Sep 30, 7:07 am, Ian > wrote:
> On 29 Sep, 15:33, Ian Cant >
> wrote:
>
> I'd rather it was changed to Silver Distance being 2km * best L/D for
> the glider (and similarly for Gold and Diamond: 12km and 20km * best L/
> D. Silver distance in modern glass is absurdly easy.
>

If Silver Distance were THAT EASY, then all would have one by their
second
season and we wouldn't have needed the OLC.

> I am very disappointed that we might see and end to cameras and
> mechanical barographs. Sometimes it seems that those of us at the
> budget end of the sport really aren't welcome any more.
>
> Ian

A budget reflects a choice of priorities. To relish what you can
choose to have
now is one of the better choices.

FYI, I earned my Silver Distance in SGS 1-26A SN 089 and helped grow a
volunteer-supported professional asistance program from a barely 5-
fiqure annual
budget into a professionally full-time staffed organization with a
just under 7-digit
annual budget.

I was also in full-time professional practice myself while doing the
above.

My viewpoint is that our student pilots and those still having to be
at the low budget
end of the sport are the seeds of the future for soaring. I encourage
those who have
been able to choose any advanced budget level of participation to give
a hand up to
those where they themselves used to be.

This includes not simply sharing of advice and club facilities, but
fair pricing of
no longer needed equipment - even an occasional gift.

[Doug Hoffman]

On Sep 30, 10:07 am, Ian > wrote:

[snip]

> I'd rather it was changed to Silver Distance being 2km * best L/D for
> the glider (and similarly for Gold and Diamond: 12km and 20km * best L/
> D. Silver distance in modern glass is absurdly easy.

Then don't forget to factor the available weather conditions into the
equation. For example: It might be a tiny bit easier to achieve
silver in Nevada than in Michigan, on average. ;-)

Regards,

-Doug

[Bruce]

The gift idea really works - A little generosity goes a long way.

Previous custodian of my Std Cirrus started a convention that those who do not
have access to a suitable ship use 66 for their Silver distance. This is mainly
a club convenience thing as the prospect of a field retrieve with a Bergfalke or
L13 is unappealing. The Cirrus has a great trailer, and is easy to rig. Of
course with a 1:37 glide it is a little too easy, so we insist on an elective
landing at a field 64km away. In our weather a wet tissue could do that on some
days, but that's life.

After I was the first in the club to buy a logger, I extended the convention to
making the logger available to folk for badge flights. Its a LX20 so is very
self contained, and relatively simple to use.

I imported recording strips for the replogle barograph my LX20 replaced and made
it available to anyone who wanted. So far I am the last person to get any badge
using the Replogle. (I used it for silver height and duration)

Clearly, given the choice people prefer the tech way. On the other hand a second
hand logger is not so expensive if you find a couple of people to share the cost.

Bruce

Roy Clark, B6 wrote:
> On Sep 30, 7:07 am, Ian > wrote:
>> On 29 Sep, 15:33, Ian Cant >
>> wrote:
>>
>> I'd rather it was changed to Silver Distance being 2km * best L/D for
>> the glider (and similarly for Gold and Diamond: 12km and 20km * best L/
>> D. Silver distance in modern glass is absurdly easy.
>>
>
> If Silver Distance were THAT EASY, then all would have one by their
> second
> season and we wouldn't have needed the OLC.
>
>> I am very disappointed that we might see and end to cameras and
>> mechanical barographs. Sometimes it seems that those of us at the
>> budget end of the sport really aren't welcome any more.
>>
>> Ian
>
> A budget reflects a choice of priorities. To relish what you can
> choose to have
> now is one of the better choices.
>
> FYI, I earned my Silver Distance in SGS 1-26A SN 089 and helped grow a
> volunteer-supported professional asistance program from a barely 5-
> fiqure annual
> budget into a professionally full-time staffed organization with a
> just under 7-digit
> annual budget.
>
> I was also in full-time professional practice myself while doing the
> above.
>
> My viewpoint is that our student pilots and those still having to be
> at the low budget
> end of the sport are the seeds of the future for soaring. I encourage
> those who have
> been able to choose any advanced budget level of participation to give
> a hand up to
> those where they themselves used to be.
>
> This includes not simply sharing of advice and club facilities, but
> fair pricing of
> no longer needed equipment - even an occasional gift.
>

[309]

I believe loggers have been required for records during the last
several years. But barographs & turnpoint photos were admissible
evidence for badges.

My diamond GOAL flight (in a 1-26) was saved by the fact that I
carried a Replogle barograph and disposable cameras (and I read
pertinent parts of Jackie Payne's Badge Book -- especially about
taking another declaration picture when a relight is required to fly
the day away). I had inadvertently entered the wrong longitude for my
start point using that "comfortable DOS software" that I had no choice
but to use with the Volkslogger I still have.

So the paper declaration (with correct lat-lon), barograph and
turnpoint cameras saved the day (and the diamond), and the Badge Lady
appreciated double documentation!

For those of us that can't afford two loggers (recommended by contest
and OLC Champion pilots...), the old dusty barograph & cameras are a
reasonable way to "back up" the normal (and much easier) documentation
obtained by a logger.

In my humble opinion, IGC should still allow barograph and photos for
BADGES, for the sake of TRADITION, if for no other reason. Well,
economy for clubs and neophyte pilots would be another. I think they
(and our representatives in the US) missed the mark. It may be tough
to reverse the tide, but we could request that they revise the
"Sporting" Code (again) and re-allow "old tech" flight recording
devices (barographs & turnpoint photos). The OO's bear the greatest
burden these tools impose (over loggers) -- maybe the Badge
administrators would voice different opinions. If somebody wants to
start a petition to "bring back barographs," I'll happily sign it (and
risk the wrath of the Badge Lady -- I still have to fly a diamond
distance flight to finish my 1-26 trio).

The other reason they should still allow barograph & photos is the
frequent jamming of GPS, which can destroy or contaminate evidence of
an otherwise exemplary flight. This has happened to me (though it
wasn't really an exemplary flight).

FWIW, my five hour endurance for Silver & Gold were documented by a
ground observer. All other legs (including diamond goal and diamond
altitude) were recorded using a Replogle and disposable cameras
(though the OO for the diamond climb chose to use the PRINT from an EW
electronic barograph I was also carrying...but then this device would
no longer be admissable, either!!!).

Yes, all I flew all my badge legs in a 1-26, so you can accuse me of
wanting to do things "the hard way." That is, of course, why I chose
to buy a Volkslogger!

-Pete
#309

[Eric Greenwell]

309 wrote:

> In my humble opinion, IGC should still allow barograph and photos for
> BADGES, for the sake of TRADITION, if for no other reason. Well,
> economy for clubs and neophyte pilots would be another. I think they
> (and our representatives in the US) missed the mark.

My understanding is this is currently a proposal, not a final rule, so
it's not clear to me our representatives have "missed the mark". Has
anyone contacted Eric Mozer to determine the status of the proposal and
how he is inclined to vote?

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
* "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

[Ian]

On 30 Sep, 16:48, "Roy Clark, B6" > wrote:

> This includes not simply sharing of advice and club facilities, but
> fair pricing of
> no longer needed equipment - even an occasional gift.

I have an artificial horizon in my Pirat which was sold to me for a
fraction of its value (at Sutton Bank) on the condition that, when I
no longer have need for it, I must sell it for what I paid. It has
been going round cheap gliders for some years!

Ian

[Ian]

On 30 Sep, 18:00, Doug Hoffman > wrote:
> On Sep 30, 10:07 am, Ian > wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > I'd rather it was changed to Silver Distance being 2km * best L/D for
> > the glider (and similarly for Gold and Diamond: 12km and 20km * best L/
> > D. Silver distance in modern glass is absurdly easy.
>
> Then don't forget to factor the available weather conditions into the
> equation. For example: It might be a tiny bit easier to achieve
> silver in Nevada than in Michigan, on average. ;-)

OK, let's introduce an inverse-speed condition. Silver distance to be
done in no less than two hours, gold five, diamond seven. No dawdling
allowed. It would mean that good days were no advantage.

Hmm. I may have to work on this a bit.

Ian

[Chris Reed[_1_]]

Ian wrote:
>
> OK, let's introduce an inverse-speed condition. Silver distance to be
> done in no less than two hours, gold five, diamond seven. No dawdling
> allowed. It would mean that good days were no advantage.
>
> Hmm. I may have to work on this a bit.
>
> Ian
>
>
Think you might need to. I flew my Gold distance in over 6 hours, but on
a day when the club pundit decided it wasn't worth a launch. I reckon I
earned it properly! Haven't yet managed Diamond, but in my Open Cirrus
in the UK I don't expect to take less than seven hours if I ever do
manage it.

And what about Silver in a K8 into any kind of a headwind?

My experience of talking to pilots who are trying for their Silver
distance is that the hard part is leaving gliding range of the home
airfield. I guess the exception might be flying somewhere you can take
one climb overhead, and the rest is final glide, but that doesn't happen
in my part of the world. The main barrier for Silver is psychological,
not ability or glider performance.

[Michael Ash]

Chris Reed > wrote:
> Ian wrote:
>>
>> OK, let's introduce an inverse-speed condition. Silver distance to be
>> done in no less than two hours, gold five, diamond seven. No dawdling
>> allowed. It would mean that good days were no advantage.
>>
>> Hmm. I may have to work on this a bit.
>
> Think you might need to. I flew my Gold distance in over 6 hours, but on
> a day when the club pundit decided it wasn't worth a launch. I reckon I
> earned it properly! Haven't yet managed Diamond, but in my Open Cirrus
> in the UK I don't expect to take less than seven hours if I ever do
> manage it.
>
> And what about Silver in a K8 into any kind of a headwind?

I believe you misunderstood the proposal. It would be a *minimum* time,
not a maximum. In other words, doing your Silver distance in an hour would
not qualify, but doing it in three hours would.

> My experience of talking to pilots who are trying for their Silver
> distance is that the hard part is leaving gliding range of the home
> airfield. I guess the exception might be flying somewhere you can take
> one climb overhead, and the rest is final glide, but that doesn't happen
> in my part of the world. The main barrier for Silver is psychological,
> not ability or glider performance.

I would tend to agree. I haven't done my Silver yet but I did an
unrecorded flight which would have qualified, in under two hours, in a
1-26. I see no reason why that shouldn't count!

I think the sensible thing to do would be to change the distance based on
the L/D of the glider flown. We already change it based on the release
altitude, so this wouldn't be too different. It does seem a bit unfair to
give someone a Silver badge for a 50km flight in an Antares (no offense
YO!) while requiring those same 50km for a 1-26.

On the other hand, life isn't fair. There are always a lot of factors
outside of the pilot. You might have a better glider, you might have a
better day, you might be flying in a better region, etc. What next,
compensate the distance based on the average thermal strength that day?
Require a longer flight if it's taken downwind instead of upwind?
Different badge requirements for each part of the world?

Ultimately the challenges will always be different. When I get a properly
documented Silver distance flight in a 1-26 I know it'll mean a lot more
than having done the same thing in high-performance glass. In the end I
prefer that over a handicap designed to make sure the glass pilot has just
as hard of a time as me.

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

[309]

That's where the silver/gold five hour duration flight comes in! Or
do you want him to fly 50k and then loiter for an hour and 20 minutes?

> I believe you misunderstood the proposal. It would be a *minimum* time,
> not a maximum. In other words, doing your Silver distance in an hour would
> not qualify, but doing it in three hours would.
>
> I would tend to agree. I haven't done my Silver yet but I did an
> unrecorded flight which would have qualified, in under two hours, in a
> 1-26. I see no reason why that shouldn't count!
>

Been there, done that, got the badge...and later flew over 5 hours for
diamond goal, in a 1-26. As it was pointed out, do you award "more
points" for doing it on a day that wasn't booming?? How do you
measure and enforce this?

> I think the sensible thing to do would be to change the distance based on
> the L/D of the glider flown. We already change it based on the release
> altitude, so this wouldn't be too different. It does seem a bit unfair to
> give someone a Silver badge for a 50km flight in an Antares (no offense
> YO!) while requiring those same 50km for a 1-26.
>

The distances were arbitrarily chosen back when it took exceptional
skill in the best glider of the day to fly the tasks. I doubt weather
was considered much, especially if you consider that the original
silver/gold/diamond requirements were laid out long before mountain
wave was understood. So we would not shorten the distances for a
1-26, we'd LENGTHEN them for the 30+ ships.

However, I would rather leave the rules UNchanged, as I said earlier,
for the sake of tradition. And I am humble: my 1-26 is a stellar
performer compared to the ships that were used to fly the first
silver, gold and diamond flights. It's probably more comfortable,
too. So to honor my soaring ancestors, once I get that third diamond
in my 1-26, I'll start over -- and fly them with the open cockpit
attachments ("Sports Canopy").

-Pete
#309

[toad]

I'm not sure what the point of changing the badge requirements would
be. Nobody really believes that a Silver/Gold/Diamond/1000km in an
open class ship is as impressive as the same flights in a 1-26, do
they ?

Bragging rights is all that you get for these badges. You don't get
money, power or fame. So if you did your badges in a 1-26, then you
get to one-up the pilot who did them in a supership.

And we have effectively increased the distances for badges. A diamond
distance today does not match one done 40 years ago, you have to fly
1000km or more to get the same kind of respect from your gliding
peers.

Todd Smith
3S

[Ian Cant]

I guess I should have called this thread 'proposed
new badge DOCUMENTATION requirements'.

This response, which looks very reasonable to me, came
from Judy Ruprecht:

'The proposal to eliminate both documentation by ground-based
Observer
and photo documentation in favor of 'commercial off
the shelf' GPS
units ('COTS') has been wafting around since agreed-upon
at the
Spring 2004 IGC meeting - a month or so before my time.
Since then,
I've received a total of 7 photo-documented claims
from US pilots...
and quite a bit of lobbying from those who see no reason
not to allow COTS.

This hasn't been kept secret - the 2004, 2005 and 2006
editions of
Sporting Code Section 3 are all prefaced with a note
regarding the
future demise of photographic evidence; the note at
the front of the
newest edition effective 1 October 2007 indicates photographic

evidence will not be allowed after September 30, 2008.

The current draft proposal will be reviewed by IGC
at their spring
2008 meeting and is subject to change by IGC. The current
draft would
require National Aero Club approval of COTS units and
software, and
an approved COTS unit, supplemented by mechanical or
electronic
barograph, could be used only for documentation of
Silver and Gold
badge legs. Barographs - used alone - would, as I understand
it,
remain viable for any badge altitude or duration claim
and IGC
approved Flight Recorders would be required for Diamond
Goal, Diamond
Distance and all world records.'

Ian

[Ian]

On 2 Oct, 15:48, Chris Reed > wrote:
> Ian wrote:
>
> > OK, let's introduce an inverse-speed condition. Silver distance to be
> > done in no less than two hours, gold five, diamond seven. No dawdling
> > allowed. It would mean that good days were no advantage.
>
> > Hmm. I may have to work on this a bit.
>
> > Ian
>
> Think you might need to. I flew my Gold distance in over 6 hours, but on
> a day when the club pundit decided it wasn't worth a launch. I reckon I
> earned it properly! Haven't yet managed Diamond, but in my Open Cirrus
> in the UK I don't expect to take less than seven hours if I ever do
> manage it.

Then you'll have no problem with my minimum time limits! Of course you
will be going rather further than the Ka8 drivers, but I am sure
you'll agree that that's quite fair ...

> And what about Silver in a K8 into any kind of a headwind?

Flying wood into headwinds is pointless and rather ostentatious.
Downwind is for dashing!

> My experience of talking to pilots who are trying for their Silver
> distance is that the hard part is leaving gliding range of the home
> airfield. I guess the exception might be flying somewhere you can take
> one climb overhead, and the rest is final glide, but that doesn't happen
> in my part of the world. The main barrier for Silver is psychological,
> not ability or glider performance.

I remember an enormous sense of liberation when I set off on my first
cross country - which was also my Silver Distance, as it happened.

Ian

[Ian]

On 2 Oct, 20:06, toad > wrote:
> I'm not sure what the point of changing the badge requirements would
> be. Nobody really believes that a Silver/Gold/Diamond/1000km in an
> open class ship is as impressive as the same flights in a 1-26, do
> they ?

Indeed. I never took seriously the Portmoak pilots who went solo, got
bronze, bought 40:1 glass and cruised along a single wave bar (maybe
two) round the Balmaha - Edzell milkrun for their 300km triangle. It's
like doing your five hours on a hill - it may be within the letter of
the law, but it's not quite gentlemanly.

Ian

[Ian]

On 2 Oct, 22:32, Ian Cant > wrote:

> an approved COTS unit, supplemented by mechanical or
> electronic
> barograph, could be used only for documentation of
> Silver and Gold
> badge legs.

Does that mean it would be possible to use one of these for a 300km
triangle and get gold distance but /not/ diamond goal as a result?
That would seem to devalue the gold quite a bit: "You might have
cheated, but we don't really care since it's only a gold."

Ian

[Chris Reed[_1_]]

Ian wrote:
> Flying wood into headwinds is pointless and rather ostentatious.
> Downwind is for dashing!
>
Ideally yes, but hardly anyone from the club where I learnt managed it
because we're near the UK East coast. East and south winds are rarely
soarable enough for a first 50k, and north blows you into controlled
airspace. The prevailing wind is west, so into wind it had to be for
most folk. Quite a lot of 30-49k attempts, even in 35:1+ glass!

> I remember an enormous sense of liberation when I set off on my first
> cross country - which was also my Silver Distance, as it happened.
>
Me too, and I think this is part of the psychological importance of the
Silver distance. Early soaring flights for me were a constant series of
checks whether I was still within gliding range of base. Once I set off
on my 50k and realised I was out of range, a real weight fell off my
shoulders - I could go anywhere I wanted, so it made sense to go where I
thought the best lift would be in the vague direction of my goal (this
seems to have stuck, so my flight traces look like a drunkard's
progress). Some people find this transition easy, but talking to those
who have struggled they find the invisible elastic cord which links them
to their home airfield is really difficult to escape from.

[Martin Gregorie[_1_]]

wrote:
>> I guess a digital camera is completely out of the question
>> !
>>
>> Ian
>
> Think Photoshop!
>
Quite apart from that, how do you verify what sequence a set of digital
photos were taken in? The camera's time&date stamp doesn't help: it can
be digitally edited by anybody who is willing to cheat and the file
names are easily changed.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |