If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Eric Greenwell wrote:
Uh, actually, they are some of the highest in the nation, as some of the are also National records. Try this URL: http://www.geocities.com/nvsoar/nv.html Nevada State Soaring Records and you will see that only two of the unrestricted records are open (most of the Feminine records are open). This is my mistake. I sometimes browse too quickly through files, on the internet, or get information which is outdated. Eric is correct. In that same vein, the NV state record seems to indicate a record for multi-place motorglider altitude (C. Herold), but the US www.ssa.org/records/natmotor2.pdf records seem to leave that category open...why is that? Perhaps these files are not accurate, the pilot found it too much "hassle" to calibrate the equipment after the flight, or the pilot simply opted to not apply... is the "hassle factor." But this remark is correct on a State level. It is easier now with flight recorders, and for speed records, it's _much_ easier, but many people don't realize this. For speed and distance records, I agree that flight recorders have been an absolute godsend. Instead of strong fingers to wind the $200 baro, some tape, a pen and a bit of baro paper, one needs a thousand dollar device, a continuous power source, a computer, and an O/O who is sophisticated with computers. A much rarer find indeed. You can still use the "$200 baro, some tape, a pen and a bit of baro paper" if you wish, but now there are other options. If you don't want to buy a flight recorder, try borrowing one (like we used to borrow barographs) or buy one as a partnership. The power to run them is minimal, computers are everywhere, and the OO doesn't need to be computer "sophisticated". Running one of the programs (there are several available) to check the flight is easy. We have more people in our club that can run SeeYou than can qualify as OOs - computer "expertise" is widespread these days. I flew for five different records this year, including 3 speed records, using a flight recorder, and the "hassle" is minimal and comes after the flight, in the evening, with a beer in one hand. I would never have tried the speed records without a flight recorder, because the visual gate required is a big hassle. For non-speed records, the flight recorder is still easier, but not by as much. For me, the hassle came before the flight. It involved getting a computer, purchasing a logger, getting the logger calibrated, loading software, downloading a manual, soldering several connectors, designing a power source (portable drill batteries worked best), configuring a hardware port, arranging velcro attachment points so the GPS antenna worked, and training the not terribly computer savy O/O how to download the trace. Compared to my 30 minute lesson on how to use a drum baro and then sticking it in a box in the back, this logger stuff was quite time consuming. -- ----- change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
In that same vein, the NV state record seems to indicate a record for multi-place motorglider altitude (C. Herold), but the US www.ssa.org/records/natmotor2.pdf records seem to leave that category open...why is that? Perhaps these files are not accurate, the pilot found it too much "hassle" to calibrate the equipment after the flight, or the pilot simply opted to not apply... I don't know about this case, but I do know people who have claimed a state record but not the national record because of the significant expense associated with applying for the national record. Larry Pardue 2I |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Mark James Boyd wrote:
For me, the hassle came before the flight. It involved getting a computer, purchasing a logger, getting the logger calibrated, loading software, downloading a manual, soldering several connectors, designing a power source (portable drill batteries worked best), configuring a hardware port, arranging velcro attachment points so the GPS antenna worked, and training the not terribly computer savy O/O how to download the trace. It sounds like you were setting up a club aircraft instead of your own. That can vary from simple to complex. It can be a lot easier, if you buy a new logger (Cambridge model 20), as I did: -it came calibrated for two years, so that didn't have to be done -cables came with it, so no soldering was needed -the glider had a battery, so there was already power available -my computers (and the ones at contests) recognized the flight recorder immediately -drilling one hole let me bolt it down -and I didn't have to train the OO, because the OO is not required to do the download, but merely observe it Compared to my 30 minute lesson on how to use a drum baro and then sticking it in a box in the back, this logger stuff was quite time consuming. If all you need is the barograph function, a flight recorder is overkill. If you need to round turnpoints, now you need a camera, a written declaration (which you can also use with a flight recorder instead of putting in turnpoints and declaring electronically, thus requiring the computer for download only), and a lot more than the 30 minutes instruction to get it all right when you include mounting the cameras and learning how to use them. Then you need an OO that knows how to control the cameras, knows what the turnpoints look like, knows how to interpret turnpoint photos, knows how to get the altitudes off a paper chart, plus chasing down the towpilot for release point, and of course, getting the film developed without having the important frames severed from each other! And, as you already realize, a speed task without a flight recorder means setting up a visual gate, which is the biggest hassle of all. Another "and": without a flight recorder, IGC approved or not, the pilot misses out on some fun later on, when everyone else is replaying their traces on SeeYou! -- ----- change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Jerome Conners wrote in message ...
What glider will provide the best characteristics for mountain wave ascents to record heights? What are those characteristics...air foil design, lofting characteristics, L/D ratio, oxygen system, etc. What publications provide the design information for mountain wave ascents? Jer Jerome Conners, PE Comstock Aeronautics and Engineering PO Box 509 Virginia City, NV 89440 775-834-8363 (work) 775-834-8364 (FAX) 775-847-0214 (home) Head on down 395 to the Minden Airport, a few miles south of Carson City. There's a bunch of folks flying wave all winter & spring. Been to 35K there myself. Take a twin grob & you can put your redundant o2 systems & such in the back seat. If you plan on exceeding the 49K record, you will need a pressure suit, or your blood will boil. You will also need a specially prepared aircraft, as described elsewhere, because at some point, VNE meets VSO. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
On 13 Dec 2003 22:17:25 GMT, Jerome Conners
wrote: What glider will provide the best characteristics for mountain wave ascents to record heights? This one: http://home.quicknet.nl/mw/prive/hwl/new-JP.jpg |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
bush rules! | Be Kind | Military Aviation | 53 | February 14th 04 04:26 PM |
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons | Curtl33 | General Aviation | 7 | January 9th 04 11:35 PM |
Edwards air show B-1 speed record attempt | Paul Hirose | Military Aviation | 146 | November 3rd 03 05:18 PM |
I wish I'd never got into this... | Kevin Neave | Soaring | 32 | September 19th 03 12:18 PM |
Restricting Glider Ops at Public Arpt. | rjciii | Soaring | 36 | August 25th 03 04:50 PM |