AH and minimum equip list

Brad's inner saftey monkey made him do it. :-)

Darryl

Some U.S. glider type certificates have pretty sparse minimum
equipment lists. The 1-23 only specifies an altimeter and shoulder
harness. Some type certificates get ridiculous, going to the extent of
stating make and model of instruments. I've never bothered delving
into the FAR's regarding equipment as the Transport Canada regulations
give me enough of a headache, but I'd be surprised if they didn't also
require ASI, Alt. and compass as required for day VFR flight.

This part of the CAR's has always baffled me:

"522.1303 Flight and Navigation Instruments

The following are required flight and navigation instruments:

(a) For all gliders:

(1) an air-speed indicator;

(2) an altimeter.

(b) For Powered Gliders. In addition to the instruments required in
522.1303(a):

(1) a magnetic direction indicator.

(c) For Gliders of Category A. In addition to the instruments required
in 522.1303(a) and (b):

(1) an accelerometer capable of retaining maximum and minimum values
of acceleration for any selected period of flight.

(d) For gliders equipped for water ballast. In addition to the
instruments required in 522.1303(a), (b) and (c).
(amended 2007/07/16)

(1) An outside air temperature gauge."

So, pure gliders don't need a magnetic compass right? Well:

"Gliders - Day VFR

605.21 No person shall operate a glider in day VFR flight unless it is
equipped with

(a) an altimeter;

(b) an airspeed indicator;

(c) a magnetic compass or a magnetic direction indicator; and

(d) subject to subsections 601.08(2) and 601.09(2), a
radiocommunication system adequate to permit two-way communication on
the appropriate frequency when the glider is operated within

(i) Class C or Class D airspace,

(ii) an MF area, unless the aircraft is operated pursuant to
subsection 602.97(3), or

(iii) the ADIZ. "

WHY don't they just put the compass requirement in the first part too?

As to the original post, if you have a choice with a minimum equipment
list (and aren't bound by a manufacturer's type certificate) it makes
sense to make it as minimum as possible. Just enough to satisfy the
bare legal requirements. Then you can go ahead and install anything
you want in addition to those things so long as you have the room and
payload for them.


On Feb 9, 7:14*pm, "C-FFKQ (42)" wrote:
Interesting that Steve would relate that some gliders are only required to have an ASI...
In Canada, the regulations require ASI, Alt and Compass... possibly a two-way radio (depending on the airspace).
There's a lot of overlap between Canadian and U.S. regs; that's an odd deviation.

On Feb 10, 2:04*am, Hagbard Celine wrote:
Some U.S. glider type certificates have pretty sparse minimum
equipment lists. The 1-23 only specifies an altimeter and shoulder
harness. Some type certificates get ridiculous, going to the extent of
stating make and model of instruments. I've never bothered delving
into the FAR's regarding equipment as the Transport Canada regulations
give me enough of a headache, but I'd be surprised if they didn't also
require ASI, Alt. and compass as required for day VFR flight.

This part of the CAR's has always baffled me:

"522.1303 Flight and Navigation Instruments

The following are required flight and navigation instruments:

(a) For all gliders:

(1) an air-speed indicator;

(2) an altimeter.

(b) For Powered Gliders. In addition to the instruments required in
522.1303(a):

(1) a magnetic direction indicator.

(c) For Gliders of Category A. In addition to the instruments required
in 522.1303(a) and (b):

(1) an accelerometer capable of retaining maximum and minimum values
of acceleration for any selected period of flight.

(d) For gliders equipped for water ballast. In addition to the
instruments required in 522.1303(a), (b) and (c).
(amended 2007/07/16)

(1) An outside air temperature gauge."

So, pure gliders don't need a magnetic compass right? Well:

"Gliders - Day VFR

605.21 No person shall operate a glider in day VFR flight unless it is
equipped with

(a) an altimeter;

(b) an airspeed indicator;

(c) a magnetic compass or a magnetic direction indicator; and

(d) subject to subsections 601.08(2) and 601.09(2), a
radiocommunication system adequate to permit two-way communication on
the appropriate frequency when the glider is operated within

(i) Class C or Class D airspace,

(ii) an MF area, unless the aircraft is operated pursuant to
subsection 602.97(3), or

(iii) the ADIZ. "

WHY don't they just put the compass requirement in the first part too?

As to the original post, if you have a choice with a minimum equipment
list (and aren't bound by a manufacturer's type certificate) it makes
sense to make it as minimum as possible. Just enough to satisfy the
bare legal requirements. Then you can go ahead and install anything
you want in addition to those things so long as you have the room and
payload for them.

On Feb 9, 7:14*pm, "C-FFKQ (42)" wrote:



Interesting that Steve would relate that some gliders are only required to have an ASI...
In Canada, the regulations require ASI, Alt and Compass... possibly a two-way radio (depending on the airspace).
There's a lot of overlap between Canadian and U.S. regs; that's an odd deviation.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ah the beauty of Air Regs! Section 522 covers Airworthiness i.e
requirements of the aircraft/equipment. Section 605 covers Airmanship
i.e requirements of the Pilot. For instance, if you put a gum machine
compass in your pocket, you are compliant. Same goes for a hand-held
radio - it doesn't need to be installed in the airplane, but if you,
as pilot fly into controlled airspace you need to dig it out of the
baggage compartment.

The minimum equipment list is similar. What should be on the MEL is
what the AIRPLANE needs installed to FLY. What the Pilot adds to that
is whatever the pilot needs to fly in the conditions he expects to
encounter.

Cheers,

Derek

This whole AH / contest debate has reached the point that this morning
XCSoar posted the following on Facebook:

"XCSoar is about to be banned from US soaring competitions. In fact they are
thinking about banning all free, open source applications because they can
not control whether these applications may implement artificial horizons and
other functionality. Apparently the rule makers don't seem to understand how
easy it is to install and use a different app for that... We would like to
ask our US fans to talk to their contacts and put some pressure on the rules
committee to prevent this. If the US will go through with this it is only a
small step until the FAI/IGC think about similar "solutions" to much greater
problems!"

I have flown with both XCSoar and am currently flying with LK8000. These
are great pieces of free software that have evolved to the point that they
have surpassed the capabilities of most, if not all, commercially available
products.

I do hope the XCSoar's Facebook posting is in error allowing resource
limited pilots to compete without having to purchase an inferior product
just for the purpose of contest flying.

Wayne
HP-14 "6F"


"Brad" wrote in message
...

On Feb 9, 10:07 am, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
To be clear, the requirement is not part of the HP-24 design.

Thanks, Bob K.

So it looks like my Tetra-15 will not be able to compete because I
elected to install an AH for safety reasons.

That's ok................it makes it easier now to continue with
recreational flying rather than see how well it and I might have done
in competition.

Brad

On Feb 24, 9:22*am, "Wayne Paul" wrote:
This whole AH / contest debate has reached the point that this morning
XCSoar posted the following on Facebook:

"XCSoar is about to be banned from US soaring competitions. In fact they are
thinking about banning all free, open source applications because they can
not control whether these applications may implement artificial horizons and
other functionality. Apparently the rule makers don't seem to understand how
easy it is to install and use a different app for that... We would like to
ask our US fans to talk to their contacts and put some pressure on the rules
committee to prevent this. If the US will go through with this it is only a
small step until the FAI/IGC think about similar "solutions" to much greater
problems!"

I have flown with both XCSoar and am currently flying with LK8000. *These
are great pieces of free software that have evolved to the point that they
have surpassed the capabilities of most, if not all, commercially available
products.

I do hope the XCSoar's Facebook posting is in error allowing resource
limited pilots to compete without having to purchase an inferior product
just for the purpose of contest flying.

Wayne
HP-14 "6F"

"Brad" *wrote in message

...

On Feb 9, 10:07 am, Bob Kuykendall wrote:

To be clear, the requirement is not part of the HP-24 design.

Thanks, Bob K.

So it looks like my Tetra-15 will not be able to compete because I
elected to install an AH for safety reasons.

That's ok................it makes it easier now to continue with
recreational flying rather than see how well it and I might have done
in competition.

Brad

I believe you will find that the artificial horizon generated from GPS
data is not accurate enough for cloud flying. I have heard some talk
of integrating accelerometers.

I've been working with the Dell Streak 5 using XCSoar as part of my
preparation to be as ready for the WGC as possible. Compared to my 10
year old hx4700, with an 8 year old operating system and a 5 year old
version of WinPilot, it is more advanced in every possible way. I've
invested a few $$ and far too many hours to get it integrated into my
panel and other sytems, plus training. If they ban XCSoar, I will be
****ed.

We should probably just go back to cameras. Oh wait! - people figured
out how to cheat with those too.

Derek

Regarding AH apps for Androids - I've downloaded and installed a couple of
them just to see how they work. They're so jittery as to be totally
useless. The other day, I stuck my Android to the window using a suction
cup mount and the talking in the room caused the window glass to vibrate
sufficiently as to render the AH useless. Imagine how it would work in the
cockpit... I've tried it there, too, and, believe me, I'd never attempt to
use it for cloud flying!


"Derek Mackie" wrote in message
...
I've been working with the Dell Streak 5 using XCSoar as part of my
preparation to be as ready for the WGC as possible. Compared to my 10
year old hx4700, with an 8 year old operating system and a 5 year old
version of WinPilot, it is more advanced in every possible way. I've
invested a few $$ and far too many hours to get it integrated into my
panel and other sytems, plus training. If they ban XCSoar, I will be
****ed.

We should probably just go back to cameras. Oh wait! - people figured
out how to cheat with those too.

Derek

Dell Streak and XC Soar are currently being made Illegal by the US Rules Committee. See my other topic on this...

Any free Glide Nav software for that matter and I suspect, any unapproved hardware with a gyro of any sort.

its coming...

On Feb 24, 8:22*am, "Wayne Paul" wrote:
This whole AH / contest debate has reached the point that this morning
XCSoar posted the following on Facebook:

"XCSoar is about to be banned from US soaring competitions. In fact they are
thinking about banning all free, open source applications because they can
not control whether these applications may implement artificial horizons and
other functionality. Apparently the rule makers don't seem to understand how
easy it is to install and use a different app for that... We would like to
ask our US fans to talk to their contacts and put some pressure on the rules
committee to prevent this. If the US will go through with this it is only a
small step until the FAI/IGC think about similar "solutions" to much greater
problems!"

I have flown with both XCSoar and am currently flying with LK8000. *These
are great pieces of free software that have evolved to the point that they
have surpassed the capabilities of most, if not all, commercially available
products.

I do hope the XCSoar's Facebook posting is in error allowing resource
limited pilots to compete without having to purchase an inferior product
just for the purpose of contest flying.

Wayne
HP-14 "6F"


It has nothing to do with free. XCsoar can put in the same features to
turn off the AH in competitions as other software can do. This is a
tiny amount of programming compared to the enormous amount they have
already done.
John Cochrane

So you dont think that someone who wants to cheat will write his own code or us the many existing apps to get an AH working?

YOU CANNOT CONTROL THIS GUYS! There are too many gyro equipped electronic devices available for you to ban...........

ALL YOU ARE DOING IS AGGRAVATING US! Soon the sport is going to consist of 15 guys and we will all be flying OLC...

If someone really wants to cheat they will find a way...