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

"Sean F2" wrote in message
news:18597873.26.1333823663671.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbuc18...
I flew with XC soar 6.3 and the AH actually worked (looks like an actual AH,
globe blue top/brown bottom). It seems to function fairly well...but i
could not figure out how accurate it was. I think it was simply using GPS
alt and heading...not really a gyro funtion becuase it was easy to trick
with skids, slips and inverted flight. This was the first time I have seen
it function. As much of a toy as any other mobile based AH, but neat! Well
done Max and team.

As to the arguments that LXNAV is exempt from firmware requirements via USRC
(when Butterfly and others are not) to be legal to fly in US contests...I
simply disgree. The current LXNAV firmare has the AH mode code needed to
utilize harware which going to be burried in the panel or elsewhere.

The LXNAV firmware is ready to go, AH capable (this is a fact)...and nobody
is going to check to confirm if the AH box exists or is plugged in. Do the
only way to be sure is to require special firmware as butterfly has built.
Dangerous stuff indeed.

I think the RC needs to clarify this...

As for the personal comments I am amused. This should not be that
emotionally stimulating...

Sean
______________

Hi Sean,

I don't see anyone saying that LXNAV is exempt from anything. But it seems
to me that LXNAV has already met the requirements in the same way that
Butterfly has. The AHRS can be disabled for 14 days. And/or it can be
removed from the glider. I don't know what could be more rules compliant
than that.

Paul Remde

On Sat, 07 Apr 2012 13:10:29 -0700, resigler wrote:

Where is the AH in XCSOAR 6.3? I've looked through all the menus and
don't see it. Is there special confuguration to enable it or something?

Running XCS standard build 6.3.

Its an info box - at least it is in 6.2.5.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

Paul Remde wrote:
Hi Max, Please clarify. How could it be possible to mess with the LXNAV
LX8000, LX8080 and LX9000 firmware?

The LXNav products are just Linux PCs, and it is easy to install a
customized firmware.

The LXNav firmware update comes with a shell script that gets executed
on the LX8000 (autorun.sh), and that would be the easiest hook of all
to get custom code in.

Once you have your custom AH code in, you can easily run it as a Linux
daemon, overlaying its data on the Linux frame buffer (/dev/fb0).

To detect such a hack, you would need to inspect all of the LX8000's
memory, it would be as hard as detecting a computer virus or a
rootkit. In other words: practically impossible for a competition to
do.

(The same is true for any other flight computer, the LX8000 is just an
example, because my club has one and I know well how the firmware
works)

In your first reply I assumed that you were saying LX8000 when you meant
LK8000.

No. The LK8000 name was explicitly choosen to get mixed up with
LX8000, to benefit from its good name, but no I really meant LXNav
LX8000.

Max

I shouldn't really but want to see if any out there have seen this?

http://www.aviation.levil.com/AHRS_mini.htm

Looks a cool piece of kit. Pity I'm not into cloud flying otherwise this could be quite compelling.

Colin

p.s. I don't live in the US or contest fly

This should be mandatory in the US! Of course we won't fly into clouds
because we're all honest. The Rules Committee should OK this immediately
for the safety of all! Tax payers should gladly purchase these for all
glider pilots!

Uhhhh... Nevermind...



"Ventus_a" wrote in message
...

I shouldn't really but want to see if any out there have seen this?

http://www.aviation.levil.com/AHRS_mini.htm

Looks a cool piece of kit. Pity I'm not into cloud flying otherwise
this could be quite compelling.

Colin

-p.s.- I don't live in the US or contest fly




--
Ventus_a

Actually, that looks like a cool toy for an experimental aircraft. Too bad
there's no room in my LAK and I'd rather be looking outside anyway.


"Dan Marotta" wrote in message
...
This should be mandatory in the US! Of course we won't fly into clouds
because we're all honest. The Rules Committee should OK this immediately
for the safety of all! Tax payers should gladly purchase these for all
glider pilots!

Uhhhh... Nevermind...



"Ventus_a" wrote in message
...

I shouldn't really but want to see if any out there have seen this?

http://www.aviation.levil.com/AHRS_mini.htm

Looks a cool piece of kit. Pity I'm not into cloud flying otherwise
this could be quite compelling.

Colin

-p.s.- I don't live in the US or contest fly




--
Ventus_a

On Wednesday, April 4, 2012 5:26:50 PM UTC-4, Max Kellermann wrote:
Sean Fidler wrote:
How is this for a logo for "not XC Soar" without the totally unusable 1 cm^2 "AH" box.

https://plus.google.com/photos/10776...52900309699361

LOL, I would "+1" this if I had an account :-)

Don't forget to copy the FAI, I'm sure they will enjoy it also.
FAI Sporting Code (Section 3, Annex A, 4.1.2b)

At 06:42 09 April 2012, Max Kellermann wrote:
Paul Remde wrote:
Hi Max, Please clarify. How could it be possible to mess with the
LXNAV

LX8000, LX8080 and LX9000 firmware?

The LXNav products are just Linux PCs, and it is easy to install a
customized firmware.

The LXNav firmware update comes with a shell script that gets executed
on the LX8000 (autorun.sh), and that would be the easiest hook of all
to get custom code in.

Once you have your custom AH code in, you can easily run it as a Linux
daemon, overlaying its data on the Linux frame buffer (/dev/fb0).

To detect such a hack, you would need to inspect all of the LX8000's
memory, it would be as hard as detecting a computer virus or a
rootkit. In other words: practically impossible for a competition to
do.

(The same is true for any other flight computer, the LX8000 is just an
example, because my club has one and I know well how the firmware
works)

Seriously this identifies the problem with this sort of rule: it is
impossible to enforce. A rule that cannot be enforced, like a law that is
not enforced is seldom complied with even by "honest" people. Pandora is
out of the box, technology has overtaken the ability to detect the fitting
or use of such an instrument. The FAI is as out of touch with reality on
this as they are with flight recorders, hacking the code for IGC files is
now so simple that it is no longer secure and it matters not how long the
key is. (The private key is in every flight recorder produced so all you
have to so is break into the software to get it, who wants to try and
compute it from the public key?)
When making rules one of the primary considerations should be "can it be
enforced"? Far to often the answer is no but ignorant people still make the
rule.

On Apr 13, 5:50*pm, Don Johnstone wrote:
(The private key is in every flight recorder produced so all you
have to so is break into the software to get it, who wants to try and
compute it from the public key?)

The correct wording here would be that "A private key is in every
flight recorder produced so all you have to do is break into the
hardware to get it". Thank you for warning us, every badge or record
flight made by you or your mates in the future will require that the
flight recorder be sent to the IGC for inspection 8^)

Marc

At 01:19 14 April 2012, Marc wrote:
On Apr 13, 5:50=A0pm, Don Johnstone wrote:
(The private key is in every flight recorder produced so all you
have to so is break into the software to get it, who wants to try and
compute it from the public key?)

The correct wording here would be that "A private key is in every
flight recorder produced so all you have to do is break into the
hardware to get it". Thank you for warning us, every badge or record
flight made by you or your mates in the future will require that the
flight recorder be sent to the IGC for inspection 8^)

Marc

That is not going to work. The same private code is used in many flight
recorders, so all you have to do is break into one and break into the
software. You then have the private key for all similar flight recorders.
Mine as you put it is still intact. It is pointless relying on a private
key of any length if you are going to put it out into the world in an
easily available box, that is not security, that is total ignorance and I
suspect the penny has already dropped with the IGC as well, took em long
enough.
Getting back to the subject of the AH here are so many solid state rate
gyros on the market, which will interface to a pocket PC or whatever that
is is a complete nonsence to ban soaring software that has ability to
display an AH. Using a small stand alone unit, smuggled into the glider in
your Glock holster would make far more sense if someone is determined to
fly in cloud. Having the instrument does not force you to fly in cloud
anyway. Banning useful software in this way is an ignorant and ineffective
thing to do, especially when the software is "Open Source" and you can
change it how you will with no-one else being the wiser.
I have managed to get two of my gyros I use on models to inteface with my
iPaq and provide a working artificial horizon so it is not at all
difficult. Anyone who would like plans forward your name on a £50 note
to............