Sean Franke wrote on 3/31/2021 6:13 PM:
On Wednesday, March 31, 2021 at 6:08:53 PM UTC-6, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Semantics Michael wrote on 3/31/2021 3:22 PM:
Hmmm ........disabling a critical safety feature makes perfect sense.

Nonsense. I've never needed one in 7000 hours of soaring - how critical can it be? Arguably,
someone with one is more likely to need one for safety, because they think they have an "out".
Also, it's been prohibited in US contests for 50+ years, and I don't recall a single fatality
linked to that prohibition.

Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1

I spoke with a pilot who flew in the Sierra wave many years ago and inadvertently went into a lenticular. See https://rec.aviation.soaring.narkive...-reno-pilot-ok. He had an artificial horizon which wasn't on. He considered it a safety feature and thought it was possible to get on soon enough when needed. Before he could get it on his wings came off. Today with LXNAV you can get to the AHRS with an instantaneous single click. The outcome may have been different today.

You can find stories in soaring books of pilots who were sucked up into thunderstorms.

My sailplane came with an artificial horizon. The previous owner considered it a safety feature. I removed it after installing an LX9000 with AHRS.

I don't recall an a single competition fatality linked to AHRS prohibition. However, it doesn't mean it won't happen.

I the end, after an accident, no one wants to explain why disabling a safety feature was required to enter a competition.
My comment was intended to address it's use in contests. I'm fine with people carrying them
otherwise, and I've carried a T&B or AH for decades. It's not clear to me that allowing them in
contests would actually increase safety, nor do I think excluding them increases legal issues.
It seems easy to explain why allowing them would be a bad idea for the sport and the safety of
the pilots, and I think a likely outcome would be contest rules that set task altitude limits
at least 1000' below the forecast cloud base.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1