New Butterfly Vario

What a classy one.

On Feb 10, 6:15 pm, "John Godfrey (QT)"
wrote:
- show quoted text -
Looks like meds a kicking in.
All that said, I'll be clear about policy;
There is no way that the RC could ever go to the BOD and say that we
can accept permitting equipment that permits true cloud flying into
the cockpits of contest gliders. Multiple gliders circling up in
clouds, the obvious potential and likely outcome sooner or later, is
illegal number one, and invites a huge disaster.
If we were to do so, our heads would be on a pike in no time.
What we have worked on very hard in the last week is a proacative
solution to a coming issue of instrument manufacturers adding features
to try to create differentiaton from their competitors. In doing so,
they may add features that are not permissable in US competition(note
that in the area of A/H we are the same as the the WGC). We have put
together a way that such features can be disabled without huge impact
on the pilot or the contest organizers.
It is the competitor's responsibility to ensure his equipment is legal
according to the published rules.
There may be coming consumer devices that make maintaining orientation
easier and, as such, will not comply with our rules. Enforcement may
become an issue. I hope it doesn't. It is unsportsmanlike to use these
devices and such conduct has penalties that should make it not worth
the risk.
The safety argument is pretty much crap. It is 100% safer to stay out
of the clouds- period. Having A/H instruments available only
increases temptation because the perceived risk is less.
Incidentally, The Butterfly folks appear to be just fine with what we
have developed.
CU
UH
RC Chair

Who all thinks our rules chair might need some meds to help sedate his ego a little bit. Wow the arrogance.

I think it might be a good start.

On 2/12/2012 8:30 PM, Sean Fidler wrote:
Who all thinks our rules chair might need some meds to help sedate his ego a little bit. Wow the arrogance.

I think it might be a good start.

He's told you how we make changes to the rules, and it's the same
process we all get to use. It's worked well for many years. Now it's up
to you to win supporters for your ideas, and make it happen for next
year per the procedure. How is that offensive?

And here's a hint: a lot of us think Hank is a sensible, pragmatic guy
trying to make the sport work for as many people as possible. Dissing
him will lose you many more supporters than it wins.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)

I simply do not appreciate insults and complete disregard and dismissive tone to an important topic to many within the SSA.

Being the rules chair is an important responsibility (much bigger than oneself), not a ticket to insult people who disagree. I continue to question the logic the rules chair & committee on this particular rule. I just sat thru a couple big safety presentations in Reno. Its as if the rules committee is on a different planet when it comes to evaluating the sanity of this rule.

Shouldn't we be doing everything possible to make our sport safer, especially in contests? In this case we, in the name of pure competitive insanity, remove the only instrument that can help an innocent pilot maintain control (not thermaling, but level flight) if IMC occurs.

We do fly contests for fun, do we not? Think about that for a second everyone.

As an SSA member and a new contest pilot, many like me think this is a very valid argument for safety. It is frankly shocking the see how the rules committee justifies its logic and deals out personal insults. Its would be equally shocking if a rule for no parachutes in contests was adopted to reduce the chance of dangerous flying.

Many have read but avoided posting on this message board because of the way those who have argued for the safety aspect of a AH are being attacked. I have received numerous emails in support of the AH being allowed from folks all over the country. I think we should get this up for a vote to the SSA membership or contest ranked pilots. I plan on pushing for that.

An equal number a little upset about how our rules chair called the safety argument "crap" and refereed to my response as "meds are kicking in." This would be funny in grade school, but not in a board discussion that has to do with honest peoples lives. I do not appreciate it.

To review, I am not concerned about people who choose to cheat and cloud fly. They are not a part of this discussion in my opinion. Just as people who would try to falsify their ICG files are not a concern. I am concerned about honest nice people who are flying competitions and might one day make a mistake. These guys and gals would like to have an instrument to refer too, if they so choose.

I would not have come back to the thread if not for emails pointing out the insulting response to me. I would think that a respectful, professional approach would be better. A little late for that unfortunately.

Here is a hint: Try being professional, respectful and open to new opinions and "the chance" that you might be wrong. I know this may be very, very hard for some of us...but I am confident you can still learn new tricks.

On Feb 13, 3:15*pm, Sean Fidler wrote:
I simply do not appreciate insults and complete disregard and dismissive tone to an important topic to many within the SSA.

Being the rules chair is an important responsibility (much bigger than oneself), not a ticket to insult people who disagree. *I continue to question the logic the rules chair & committee on this particular rule. *I just sat thru a couple big safety presentations in Reno. *Its as if the rules committee is on a different planet when it comes to evaluating the sanity of this rule.

Shouldn't we be doing everything possible to make our sport safer, especially in contests? *In this case we, in the name of pure competitive insanity, remove the only instrument that can help an innocent pilot maintain control (not thermaling, but level flight) if IMC occurs.

We do fly contests for fun, do we not? *Think about that for a second everyone.

As an SSA member and a new contest pilot, many like me think this is a very valid argument for safety. *It is frankly shocking the see how the rules committee justifies its logic and deals out personal insults. *Its would be equally shocking if a rule for no parachutes in contests was adopted to reduce the chance of dangerous flying.

Many have read but avoided posting on this message board because of the way those who have argued for the safety aspect of a AH are being attacked. *I have received numerous emails in support of the AH being allowed from folks all over the country. *I think we should get this up for a vote to the SSA membership or contest ranked pilots. *I plan on pushing for that.

An equal number a little upset about how our rules chair called the safety argument "crap" and refereed to my response as "meds are kicking in." *This would be funny in grade school, but not in a board discussion that has to do with honest peoples lives. *I do not appreciate it.

To review, I am not concerned about people who choose to cheat and cloud fly. *They are not a part of this discussion in my opinion. *Just as people who would try to falsify their ICG files are not a concern. *I am concerned about honest nice people who are flying competitions and might one day make a mistake. *These guys and gals would like to have an instrument to refer too, if they so choose.

I would not have come back to the thread if not for emails pointing out the insulting response to me. *I would think that a respectful, professional approach would be better. *A little late for that unfortunately.

Here is a hint: *Try being professional, respectful and open to new opinions and "the chance" that you might be wrong. *I know this may be very, very hard for some of us...but I am confident you can still learn new tricks.

I sincerly appologize for the meds comment. I was a repeat of a
comment to me and I never should have included it.
That said, the rationale for continuing the long standing policy
against permitting equipment that can allow cloud flying
has been explained quite clearly and the reasons why changing this
position have also been explained.
UH

Can anyone name a single pilot who has an accident, or even a bad
scare due to entering IMC in competition?

-Evan Ludeman / T8

On Feb 13, 12:32*pm, wrote:
On Feb 13, 3:15*pm, Sean Fidler wrote:









I simply do not appreciate insults and complete disregard and dismissive tone to an important topic to many within the SSA.

Being the rules chair is an important responsibility (much bigger than oneself), not a ticket to insult people who disagree. *I continue to question the logic the rules chair & committee on this particular rule. *I just sat thru a couple big safety presentations in Reno. *Its as if the rules committee is on a different planet when it comes to evaluating the sanity of this rule.

Shouldn't we be doing everything possible to make our sport safer, especially in contests? *In this case we, in the name of pure competitive insanity, remove the only instrument that can help an innocent pilot maintain control (not thermaling, but level flight) if IMC occurs.

We do fly contests for fun, do we not? *Think about that for a second everyone.

As an SSA member and a new contest pilot, many like me think this is a very valid argument for safety. *It is frankly shocking the see how the rules committee justifies its logic and deals out personal insults. *Its would be equally shocking if a rule for no parachutes in contests was adopted to reduce the chance of dangerous flying.

Many have read but avoided posting on this message board because of the way those who have argued for the safety aspect of a AH are being attacked.. *I have received numerous emails in support of the AH being allowed from folks all over the country. *I think we should get this up for a vote to the SSA membership or contest ranked pilots. *I plan on pushing for that.

On Feb 13, 2:45*pm, Brad wrote:
I would also hope that my fellow competitors would
approve of my action and not protest.


Brad,

Your proposal is incomplete. To be complete you would need to define
the penalty that would be applied if your disabling means was found to
have been broken at any time during the contest.

Such penalty could reasonably include loss off all contest points up
to and including the day on which the disabling device was found to be
ineffective. Restricting the points loss to a single day may require
your glider to inspected every day, something you could perhaps
arrange with the CD, scorer, or an other designated competitor.

Andy

Brad -

Here's the catch though: You'd still be illegal to fly because you
use LK8000 or XCSoar. Since they have AH functions that you cannot
"safety-wire" in the off position, you can't use them. Sorry! No
contest-flying for you! Not until you buy a dedicated flight computer
for a couple-thousand-dollars! Oh, and if you buy a nice cell-phone,
you cannot fly with it. Sorry, gotta hike to a farmer's house in the
middle of nowhere to make a call and get retrieved!

How do these things improve safety or help increase participation?
They don't - THAT'S the insanity of this rule. Its much, much larger
than the half-dozen idiots in the country who'd kill themselves trying
to cloud-fly simply because they have an AH in the cockpit.

The sport and its rule-makers _must_ adjust to modern realities or the
sport is going to continue to die. In some ways they're doing great
things; but in others they're falling flat on their face. Adjusting
to modern society _doesn't_ mean you have to support million-dollar
thermal-detectors; but it _does_ mean the application of common-
sense!! Skew the rules towards the greater common good; _don't_ skew
the rules and everyone's equipment out of fear that a teeny fraction
of individuals will cheat.

Anyone willing to cheat to cloud-fly is also willing to be a big dick
at their next contest and protest everyone who flies with a smart-
phone. I'd LOVE to see the fallout from *that* event!

--Noel

On Feb 11, 5:58*am, wrote:
the cockpit, then there may be no pilots willing to compete. I am
certainly not flying, competition or not, without my Android phone.
Just curious- what is so critical to your flying that you won't fly
without your phone?

Mainly the possibility of a landout. Of course, I am aware that two
decades ago everyone flew without a cell phone. Still, it is a
convenience I am not willing to give up.

Bart