iGlide update for iPhone 6 (4.7 inch) and iPhone 6 plus (5.5 inch)

The iPhone 6+ with iGlide (updated to use the new screen and hardware, barometric pressure, etc) would definitely be an economical and easy to use solution for cross country or racing navigation for pilots of all experience levels. I find the screen on my iPhone 5 to be bright enough. Hopefully the 6+ will be even brighter. The new barometric pressure sensor is probably very, very smart (perhaps better than what we have in existing loggers?) as it is mainly intended for the health app and in particular accurately measuring stair climbs and daily activity (it will also be important for health apps on the new Apple watch). Apple is under great pressure to catch up with and compete with Android phones in this area. I wonder if XC Soar has taken advantage of the barometric pressure sensors in the Android phones?

In terms of MATs I have been using an SN10 and an Oudie backup or iGlide (Perry). In terms of US rules 2 min under max start height, I simply use a stop watch and mechanical altimeter (cross referenced with SN10 altitude) with lots of buffer (2:30 to 3 min and usually 200 extra feet) to be safe from a penalty.

For MAT task "management" I have not learned of a flight computer that does a good job of automating the decision making process for choosing the right extra turnpoints (what do you recommend?). I simply estimate the choices manually and make the best choice I can based on key indicators. Choosing extra MAT turns is a very complex thing from a programming perspective. The computer can't see the clouds, other gliders (markers), can't see the terrain, towns, fields, etc. I would be skeptical of how a flight computer can support a MAT decision making process effectively. I would not trust or value the timing information or turnpoints recommendations said flight computer provides (I'm assuming one does this) in most cases. Anyway, for me, MAT tasks (not my favorite, I would much prefer pure Assigned Tasking with no complex time/distance "hocus pocus") are just about considering the key variables and making the "best guess" I can manually, often with a paper map. I'll add the turn(s) into the computer once I have made the general decision manually.

SIDENOTE: This guess we all make at the end of a MAT task (say we arrive at the last turn with 20 min to "kill") is a huge decision and can make or break the task for any given pilot. Perhaps this is "too huge" of a decision. This moment in a MAT can easily and drastically change the results (up to that point in the task) if the leaders make the wrong decision or the distance to the next available turnpoints does not work out as "cleanly" as it might for others behind. Just a few minutes or the nature of the nearby turnpoints (distance, terrain, cloud situation, etc) can make a massive difference in the final MAT task result. Of course the reverse can be true and it may work out perfectly for the leader and not for the trailers. I have actually won two task days I probably should not have for this very reason. Because of this, again, I would much prefer pure Assigned Tasks and think we need to fly a higher proportion of them (ATs not MATs) in the future. I feel ATs are are simply better tests. -END OF RANT

So, what am I missing? Have I set myself up for a ClearNav feature review :-)? Does the CN or perhaps the LX9000 handle MATs better? I'm guessing the LX 9000 does not support US rules?

Sean
7T