A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 1st 12, 03:07 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Sean Fidler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,005
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wR4a...e_gdata_player

Please endure the music and watch this video, paying particular attention to 2:00 to 2:25 into the short video.

As was often argued with other PNA bases systems recently...why would these well known soaring manufactures offer instruments which allow precise flight without reference to the ground? Please comment.

Have these companies been approached by the USRC in the same manner as Butterfly Nav, LK8000 and XC Soar in terms of providing versions of there software that is assured of not being usable in contests?

Perry is a few short weeks away and alot of folks may have LXNAV systems in there cockpits. Certainly a few do. The World Championships will undoubtedly by full of them.

What is the status of LXNAV 8000, 8080 & 9000 Flight computers in US contests? Clearly they possess the capability of providing AH functionality to their pilots, easily.

Sean
F2


  #2  
Old April 1st 12, 05:46 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

On Sunday, April 1, 2012 10:07:36 AM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wR4a...e_gdata_player

Please endure the music and watch this video, paying particular attention to 2:00 to 2:25 into the short video.

As was often argued with other PNA bases systems recently...why would these well known soaring manufactures offer instruments which allow precise flight without reference to the ground? Please comment.

Have these companies been approached by the USRC in the same manner as Butterfly Nav, LK8000 and XC Soar in terms of providing versions of there software that is assured of not being usable in contests?

Perry is a few short weeks away and alot of folks may have LXNAV systems in there cockpits. Certainly a few do. The World Championships will undoubtedly by full of them.

What is the status of LXNAV 8000, 8080 & 9000 Flight computers in US contests? Clearly they possess the capability of providing AH functionality to their pilots, easily.

Sean
F2


I didn't see any VFR into IMC flight The RC needs to lighten up IMO.
  #3  
Old April 1st 12, 06:30 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
GM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 211
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

On Sunday, April 1, 2012 8:07:36 AM UTC-6, Sean Fidler wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wR4a...e_gdata_player

Please endure the music and watch this video, paying particular attention to 2:00 to 2:25 into the short video.

As was often argued with other PNA bases systems recently...why would these well known soaring manufactures offer instruments which allow precise flight without reference to the ground? Please comment.

Have these companies been approached by the USRC in the same manner as Butterfly Nav, LK8000 and XC Soar in terms of providing versions of there software that is assured of not being usable in contests?

Perry is a few short weeks away and alot of folks may have LXNAV systems in there cockpits. Certainly a few do. The World Championships will undoubtedly by full of them.

What is the status of LXNAV 8000, 8080 & 9000 Flight computers in US contests? Clearly they possess the capability of providing AH functionality to their pilots, easily.

Sean
F2


Please endure the music and watch this video...

What's wrong with the music?
  #4  
Old April 1st 12, 11:54 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Sean Fidler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,005
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

I, personally, like AC/DC ina nostalgic way. I imagine the rules committee being more into classical. Perhaps the occasional jazz flute...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c_uf...e_gdata_player
  #5  
Old April 2nd 12, 12:47 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dave[_26_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

On Sunday, April 1, 2012 8:07:36 AM UTC-6, Sean Fidler wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wR4a...e_gdata_player

Please endure the music and watch this video, paying particular attention to 2:00 to 2:25 into the short video.

As was often argued with other PNA bases systems recently...why would these well known soaring manufactures offer instruments which allow precise flight without reference to the ground? Please comment.

Have these companies been approached by the USRC in the same manner as Butterfly Nav, LK8000 and XC Soar in terms of providing versions of there software that is assured of not being usable in contests?

Perry is a few short weeks away and alot of folks may have LXNAV systems in there cockpits. Certainly a few do. The World Championships will undoubtedly by full of them.

What is the status of LXNAV 8000, 8080 & 9000 Flight computers in US contests? Clearly they possess the capability of providing AH functionality to their pilots, easily.

Sean
F2


Whats your point?

There is a $1700 AHRS module (physical external box) that can be plugged into some pretty expensive glide computers to allow cloud flying.

Its not allowed in SSA sanctioned contests this year. Or in IGC sanctioned contests (like the WGC in Uvalde). LX8000, no problem. LX AHRS box, big problem.

Asking the organizers if they will check for it? Maybe. You can take your chances and plead ignorance if caught. Don't expect much sympathy.

Why would they build it? To sell a few, maybe. Gotta have some feature to differentiate your product from the rest.

Why did they not integrate it into the main glide computer? It only adds 30% to the price and makes the package much cleaner. And everyone wants it anyway, right?

-Dave





  #6  
Old April 2nd 12, 04:21 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Sean Fidler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,005
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

Thanks Dave.

The points are intentionally subtle.

To put it into a less subtle form:

....It seems that many or perhaps MOST glide computer & instrument manufacturers (Butterfly, LX NAV, XC SOAR, LK 8000, etc) are indeed building AH capability into their products. Several notables on RAS recently went nuts stating "how dare instrument manufactures include this technology in their wares...etc" Several "organizations" were recently shaken down very directly with ultimatums to ensure new software versions are GUARANTEED not to have the capability to utilize the functionality in ANY WAY etc (or they would be put on a black list and deemed illegal for US contests). Meaning special software versions must be developed by these organizations which absolutely are incapable of utilizing AH functions (BOX OR NO BOX!).

LXNAV seems absolutely untouched in this area even though there product offers highly capably "pro grade" AH functionality complete with a hard mounted fixed gyro, etc. Trust but verify. Here is why...nobody is going to check thru the glider and ID the box. This is a cold hard fact.

So I ask the rules committee VERY DIRECTLY. Is LXNAV going to be required to develop a special US Contest Firmware version (time locked or permanent) which CANNOT utilize the AH box? Thus ENSURING that the AH functionality is unusable on the instrument? Just as ButterflyNAV and XC Soar (and LK 8000) have been forced to do in order to be allowed in US Contests in 2012? Are the LXNAV product owners going to be forced to install these new firmware versions which ensure the functionality is locked out during the entire contest in the same way ButterflyNAV has been asked to do? And in the same way XC Soar is being forced to do for literally no useful reason (its AH functionality is utterly useless).

If not...WHY NOT? Very peculiar. Borderline hypocrisy. Especially when the capability and potential of the new LX NAV AH is considered.

That is my point I guess. I would like to see consistency and all pilots and manufactures inconvenienced equally. ;-)

Sean
F2




On Sunday, April 1, 2012 7:47:31 PM UTC-4, Dave wrote:
On Sunday, April 1, 2012 8:07:36 AM UTC-6, Sean Fidler wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wR4a...e_gdata_player

Please endure the music and watch this video, paying particular attention to 2:00 to 2:25 into the short video.

As was often argued with other PNA bases systems recently...why would these well known soaring manufactures offer instruments which allow precise flight without reference to the ground? Please comment.

Have these companies been approached by the USRC in the same manner as Butterfly Nav, LK8000 and XC Soar in terms of providing versions of there software that is assured of not being usable in contests?

Perry is a few short weeks away and alot of folks may have LXNAV systems in there cockpits. Certainly a few do. The World Championships will undoubtedly by full of them.

What is the status of LXNAV 8000, 8080 & 9000 Flight computers in US contests? Clearly they possess the capability of providing AH functionality to their pilots, easily.

Sean
F2


Whats your point?

There is a $1700 AHRS module (physical external box) that can be plugged into some pretty expensive glide computers to allow cloud flying.

Its not allowed in SSA sanctioned contests this year. Or in IGC sanctioned contests (like the WGC in Uvalde). LX8000, no problem. LX AHRS box, big problem.

Asking the organizers if they will check for it? Maybe. You can take your chances and plead ignorance if caught. Don't expect much sympathy.

Why would they build it? To sell a few, maybe. Gotta have some feature to differentiate your product from the rest.

Why did they not integrate it into the main glide computer? It only adds 30% to the price and makes the package much cleaner. And everyone wants it anyway, right?

-Dave


  #7  
Old April 2nd 12, 04:30 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Sean Fidler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,005
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

Thanks Dave.

The points are intentionally subtle.

To put it into a less subtle form:

....It seems that many or perhaps MOST glide computer & instrument manufacturers (Butterfly, LX NAV, XC SOAR, LK 8000, etc) are indeed building AH capability into their products. Several notables on RAS recently went nuts stating "how dare instrument manufactures include this technology in their wares...etc" Several "organizations" were recently shaken down with ultimatums from the USRC to ensure new software versions are GUARANTEED to NOT have the capability to utilize AH functionality in ANY WAY etc (or they would be put on a black list and deemed illegal for US contests). This requires special software versions be developed by these "offending" organizations which absolutely GUARANTEES are incapable of utilizing AH functions (BOX OR NO BOX!).

LXNAV seems absolutely untouched in this area even though their new line of products offers highly capably "pro grade" AH functionality complete with a hard mounted fixed gyros, etc. I love the term, "Trust but verify." Here is why...nobody is going to check thru the glider and ID the existence of the box at a regional. This is a cold hard fact. So why not the same standard that has been set just weeks ago for all the rest?

I will ask the rules committee VERY DIRECTLY so there is no confusion.

Is LXNAV going to be required to develop a special US Contest Firmware version (time locked or permanent) which CANNOT utilize the AH box? Thus ENSURING that the AH functionality is unusable on the instrument? Just as ButterflyNAV and XC Soar (and LK 8000) have been forced to do in order to be allowed in US Contests in 2012 (just weeks ago)? Are the LXNAV product owners going to be forced to install these new firmware versions which ensure the functionality is locked out during the entire contest in the same way ButterflyNAV has been asked to do? And in the same way XC Soar is being forced to do for literally no useful reason (its AH functionality is utterly useless).

If not...WHY NOT? I find this all very peculiar and must say it borders on hypocrisy. Especially when the capability and potential of the new LX NAV AH is considered. This "offensive" :-) contest capability must be absolutely ensured INOPERATIVE during contests. These are not my words...but the standard that has been set for us all (pilots and equipment manufactures (and dealers)).

That is my point I guess. I would like to see consistency and all pilots and manufactures (and dealers) inconvenienced equally. ;-)

Sean
F2

On Sunday, April 1, 2012 7:47:31 PM UTC-4, Dave wrote:
On Sunday, April 1, 2012 8:07:36 AM UTC-6, Sean Fidler wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wR4a...e_gdata_player

Please endure the music and watch this video, paying particular attention to 2:00 to 2:25 into the short video.

As was often argued with other PNA bases systems recently...why would these well known soaring manufactures offer instruments which allow precise flight without reference to the ground? Please comment.

Have these companies been approached by the USRC in the same manner as Butterfly Nav, LK8000 and XC Soar in terms of providing versions of there software that is assured of not being usable in contests?

Perry is a few short weeks away and alot of folks may have LXNAV systems in there cockpits. Certainly a few do. The World Championships will undoubtedly by full of them.

What is the status of LXNAV 8000, 8080 & 9000 Flight computers in US contests? Clearly they possess the capability of providing AH functionality to their pilots, easily.

Sean
F2


Whats your point?

There is a $1700 AHRS module (physical external box) that can be plugged into some pretty expensive glide computers to allow cloud flying.

Its not allowed in SSA sanctioned contests this year. Or in IGC sanctioned contests (like the WGC in Uvalde). LX8000, no problem. LX AHRS box, big problem.

Asking the organizers if they will check for it? Maybe. You can take your chances and plead ignorance if caught. Don't expect much sympathy.

Why would they build it? To sell a few, maybe. Gotta have some feature to differentiate your product from the rest.

Why did they not integrate it into the main glide computer? It only adds 30% to the price and makes the package much cleaner. And everyone wants it anyway, right?

-Dave

  #8  
Old April 3rd 12, 04:16 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Sean Fidler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,005
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

So a completely docile and different approach for a LXNAV, a far more "dangerous" system in terms of AH cheating risk in US Contests. Makes perfect sense really...

On Sunday, April 1, 2012 10:07:36 AM UTC-4, Sean Fidler wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wR4a...e_gdata_player

Please endure the music and watch this video, paying particular attention to 2:00 to 2:25 into the short video.

As was often argued with other PNA bases systems recently...why would these well known soaring manufactures offer instruments which allow precise flight without reference to the ground? Please comment.

Have these companies been approached by the USRC in the same manner as Butterfly Nav, LK8000 and XC Soar in terms of providing versions of there software that is assured of not being usable in contests?

Perry is a few short weeks away and alot of folks may have LXNAV systems in there cockpits. Certainly a few do. The World Championships will undoubtedly by full of them.

What is the status of LXNAV 8000, 8080 & 9000 Flight computers in US contests? Clearly they possess the capability of providing AH functionality to their pilots, easily.

Sean
F2


  #9  
Old April 3rd 12, 03:00 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Paul Remde
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,691
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

Hi Sean and everyone,

Interestingly, LXNAV has just announced new firmware version 2.8 for the
LX8000, LX8080 and LX9000. I don't think the details are on their web site
yet. In addition to many cool new features, they announced a new
"Competition Mode" for customers using an AHRS. It makes it possible to
switch off the AHRS for the entire contest period. The screen capture in
the PDF file shows a dialog box appearing on the screen showing "AHRS will
be switched OFF for 14 days! Do you really wish to do that?". This implies
that the AHRS is completely disabled and can't be re-enabled for the 14
days.

I imagine that the U.S. Rules Committee will need to approve the new
feature. I don't know whether or not LXNAV has approached the U.S. Rules
Committee in regard to this new feature yet.

It is very easy to remove the AHRS for the entire contest period anyway, but
this new feature would make it so that a pilot couldn't sneak the AHRS back
into the glider during the contest.

I have just installed an LX9000 and AHRS in our DG-1000S. I plan to fly in
a U.S. contest in 2013. If necessary I plan to completely remove the AHRS
from the glider for the duration of the contest. But, I must admit, it
really makes me very, very unhappy/angry that I must remove the AHRS from
the glider, or disable it, or both. I would never use it to cheat. I will
already be agreeing to fly by the rules. It just bugs me that I must
disable this cool and fun high-tech feature because the rules committee
(which I highly respect and appreciate) is worried that pilots would use an
AHRS-like feature to fly up into clouds (which would be unsafe and
cheating).

Best Regards,

Paul Remde

"Sean Fidler" wrote in message
news:11592598.2199.1333289256635.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yneo2...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wR4a...e_gdata_player

Please endure the music and watch this video, paying particular attention to
2:00 to 2:25 into the short video.

As was often argued with other PNA bases systems recently...why would these
well known soaring manufactures offer instruments which allow precise flight
without reference to the ground? Please comment.

Have these companies been approached by the USRC in the same manner as
Butterfly Nav, LK8000 and XC Soar in terms of providing versions of there
software that is assured of not being usable in contests?

Perry is a few short weeks away and alot of folks may have LXNAV systems in
there cockpits. Certainly a few do. The World Championships will
undoubtedly by full of them.

What is the status of LXNAV 8000, 8080 & 9000 Flight computers in US
contests? Clearly they possess the capability of providing AH functionality
to their pilots, easily.

Sean
F2




  #10  
Old April 3rd 12, 03:26 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Max Kellermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 171
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

Paul Remde wrote:
This implies that the AHRS is completely disabled and can't be
re-enabled for the 14 days.


What if I publish a proof-of-concept patch that adds a horizon to
LX8000 and others, circumventing this switch?

I think I can assemble one for LX8000/9000 (from LXNav) and the
upcoming LX Zeus (from LX Navigation) in a matter of a few days. It
will not be detectable without special equipment. And it will work
without the new AHRS hardware.

(Pilots interested in such an exploit may send me a private message)

If mainline XCSoar gets banned, I will demonstrate that most other
products must be banned, too. Better keep an old first-generation
electronic vario at hand when you attend a contest, to avoid surprises
;-)

I have already written a patch for LK8000 that pretends to be
"LKCOMPETITION" but doesn't actually disable the horizon:

http://git.xcsoar.org/cgit/max/lk800...5859495c5818d2

Given the existence of this patch, contest organizers cannot be sure
whether a pilot's PNA runs an approved LK8000 version or a fake
full-featured version with my patch.

I'm not trying to support cheaters, I just want to make clear that
banning new technology is not a useful measure to prevent cheating.

Max
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
U.S.A Rules Committee: We Didn't Mean It? SoarPoint Soaring 3 November 15th 10 02:06 PM
US Rules Poll and Rules Committee Election Ken Sorenson Soaring 0 December 1st 06 01:36 AM
SSA Rules Poll and Rules Committee Election Ken Sorenson Soaring 2 October 6th 06 03:27 PM
US Rules Committee Election and Rules Poll Ken Sorenson Soaring 1 September 27th 05 10:52 PM
FLASH! U.S.A. Rules Committee to Address Rules Complexity? SoarPoint Soaring 1 February 3rd 04 02:36 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.