Minutes of Fall 2014 USA Rules Committee meeting posted on SSA website

On Thursday, January 15, 2015 at 6:22:58 PM UTC-5, Ron Gleason wrote:
Tom that survey is over two years old! Damn the torpedo's

Yeah, but when you're as old as Tom, seems like just minutes ago ;-)

On Thursday, January 15, 2015 at 4:42:04 PM UTC-7, Dave Nadler wrote:
On Thursday, January 15, 2015 at 6:22:58 PM UTC-5, Ron Gleason wrote:
Tom that survey is over two years old! Damn the torpedo's

Yeah, but when you're as old as Tom, seems like just minutes ago ;-)

Etymology
From "Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!", a famous order issued by Admiral David Farragut during the Battle of Mobile Bay, a paraphrase of the actual order, "Damn the torpedoes! Four bells. Captain Drayton, go ahead! Jouett, full speed!"

Start charging them batteries Nadler, will see you @ the Seniors.............#711.

Just wondering - did you maintain the required horizontal (and vertical)
cloud separation for the altitude and class of airspace? I know you can
do that while following one of our wonderful shear lines.


On 1/15/2015 11:55 AM, Mike the Strike wrote:
snips thermals and wave sometimes enable you to climb higher than cloudbase quite legally. (I did this in Moriarty last year).



Mike

--
Dan Marotta

On Friday, January 16, 2015 at 10:24:53 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
Just wondering - did you maintain the required horizontal (and
vertical) cloud separation for the altitude and class of airspace?*
I know you can do that while following one of our wonderful shear
lines.






On 1/15/2015 11:55 AM, Mike the Strike
wrote:



snips thermals and wave sometimes enable you to climb higher than cloudbase quite legally. (I did this in Moriarty last year).



Mike





--

Dan Marotta

Yep - I used my 500-foot retractable tape measure!

Mike

On Friday, January 16, 2015 at 7:11:08 PM UTC-8, Mike the Strike wrote:
On Friday, January 16, 2015 at 10:24:53 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
Just wondering - did you maintain the required horizontal (and
vertical) cloud separation for the altitude and class of airspace?*
I know you can do that while following one of our wonderful shear
lines.






On 1/15/2015 11:55 AM, Mike the Strike
wrote:



snips thermals and wave sometimes enable you to climb higher than cloudbase quite legally. (I did this in Moriarty last year).



Mike





--

Dan Marotta

Yep - I used my 500-foot retractable tape measure!

Mike

Isn't it easier to drop a 500' (or 1,000') plum line, mark that point in the sky and then dive down and fly there?

It's very hard to detect when a glider or aircraft enters into a cloud. But, this sensor appears to be inexpensive and could be adapted with a custom logger (match book size) and attached in the cockpit at World Championships:

Balloon-borne disposable radiometer for cloud detection

http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip...1063/1.3685252

Here's another article

https://www.dropbox.com/s/d1wb0jttcz...ction.pdf?dl=0

Suppose you built 10 matchbook boxes and 100 fake ones. They would be installed on all gliders, but you never know which one has the real one. Logging of temp, RH and solar radiation could be analyzed after the fact.

Maybe this is too complex even for a World Soaring Championship. But, if cloud flying became a problem in the future, this technique would be a good deterrent.

Walt Rogers WX

Actually... I like the $50 cockpit camera idea. It's simple and commercially available. Place 10 real ones in cockpit ... and the rest look-a-likes. I think it would be easy to detect more than 20 secs of IMC flying, at which point you would be busted.

Walt Rogers WX

On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 6:13:29 PM UTC-8, WaltWX wrote:
Actually... I like the $50 cockpit camera idea. It's simple and commercially available. Place 10 real ones in cockpit ... and the rest look-a-likes. I think it would be easy to detect more than 20 secs of IMC flying, at which point you would be busted.

Walt Rogers WX

I took a look. There are a boatload of inexpensive HD cameras available with a variety of interesting features - they can run on external power, shoot time lapse, record to SD cards of various capacities so you get get 12+ hours of recording, loop recording, multiple mounting options, etc. Turns out car cameras (kind of like police car cameras it seems) are all over the place in addition to sports cameras, FPV cameras, surveillance cameras. Lots to choose from.

I bought a couple of interesting candidates to play with in 2015 to see what might be practical if it comes to the need to verify adherence to FARs and racing rules.

Hopefully people aren't making a habit out of this as a tactic - it is unsportsmanlike, in violation of FARs and potentially a risk to life and property as gliders are not generally equipped for for flight into instrument conditions and certainly not designed for flight into icing conditions. CDs are within their authority to deal with violations in the harshest terms.

9B

On Monday, January 19, 2015 at 8:59:47 PM UTC-5, WaltWX wrote:
It's very hard to detect when a glider or aircraft enters into a cloud. But, this sensor appears to be inexpensive and could be adapted with a custom logger (match book size) and attached in the cockpit at World Championships:

Balloon-borne disposable radiometer for cloud detection

http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip...1063/1.3685252

Here's another article

https://www.dropbox.com/s/d1wb0jttcz...ction.pdf?dl=0

Suppose you built 10 matchbook boxes and 100 fake ones. They would be installed on all gliders, but you never know which one has the real one. Logging of temp, RH and solar radiation could be analyzed after the fact.

Maybe this is too complex even for a World Soaring Championship. But, if cloud flying became a problem in the future, this technique would be a good deterrent.

Walt Rogers WX

I don't think we need another device installed that then has to be checked by contest officials.
The current long standing prohibition of instruments that allow true instrument flight, as well as compliance and, sportsmanship on the part of competitors, has made this a non issue for decades.
Permitting true instrument flying tools installed has the real potential to change this. It also retains the strong position against flying non VFR in contests.
It is true that some devices have features that may make flight without reference to the horizon possible, however whether they are good enough for continuous instrument flight in thermals is of some question. You need a very good instrument to do this, particularly with modern slippery gliders. use of the turn rate features in some GPS displays is good enough in a 1-26, if you know how to do it, but now way will it work with any degree of reliability in my '29.
The enforcement argument has a real degree of truth. We can't practically enforce this rule if someone wants to sneak something into their ship. That said, we don't need to outright permit it.
Voluntary compliance and sportsmanship have proven to be adequate. Why add the potential temptation to instrument fly by expressly allowing the needed equipment?
Most changes in the rules come about because there is a need identified by pilots. This proposed change is done in the "cause" of simplification. In my view, and that of many I've talked to, it is not needed and adds a real risk of negative consequences.
Now, I'll throw the gas. If the RC is serious about simplification, how about throwing out the complicated finish height provisions in the rules that lots of pilots really don't like?
Under my desk now
UH

At a regionals last year 3 pilots said they 'iced up' on the last day and one of them won 4 days in a row, beating the second-place handicapped speed by 10 mph on most days. Guess who won the contest? I submit that a few are already venturing into short bursts of IFR flight and we have no way to catch them short of someone seeing another glider enter or exit a cloud. On at least one occasion, the winner sought out and then deliberately flew under storm clouds, exchanging lift into speed. Not illegal if you stay VFR, but the chance of being forced into the cloud is always present. This 2-place ship had 'fat' cell phones stuck to the canopy in both seats. Does anyone believe they weren't accessing near real-time radar WX and artificial horizon app installed?

Lets give the CD a couple of recording cameras. I believe just showing the camera along with a stern warning at the mandatory pilots meeting would bring this unauthorized IFR flight, to a screeching halt!

Oh, the shame of being asked (forced) to wear the CD's ankle bracelet!

JJ