Turn and Bank indicator and competition

If I understood the original post correctly, the question was whether
you would be within the rules if you sealed the T&B in such a way as
it would still be available as a safety device (e.g. in case of an
emergency such as being sucked into clouds). The (unofficial - but
pretty certain) answer is no. The question of whether a sealed T&B
should allowed under the rules for emergency use (presumably subject
to a penalty) is a question I suspect the rules committee has debated
for decades. I would argue that it is an open question whether having
a T&B on board would give many pilots extra "courage" to fly into
questionable conditions, thinking if something bad happened they could
always turn on the old T&B. This sort of pilot logic of course
nullifys much of the intent of the rule in the first place. How that
would balance out from an overall safety perspective (more risky
behavior with greater ability to mitigate bad outcomes) is impossible
to judge a priori.

The thought of sealing it or diabling the T&B so that it cannot be
used in flight at all seems to me to be more hassle than just removing
it.

9B

On Feb 20, 2:14 pm, wrote:

....snip...

The thought of sealing it or diabling the T&B so that it cannot be
used in flight at all seems to me to be more hassle than just removing
it.

9B

Exactly.

Todd
3S

toad wrote:

The thought of sealing it or diabling the T&B so that it cannot be
used in flight at all seems to me to be more hassle than just removing
it.

Exactly.

As I already said earlier: Use staybolts with a hole to mount the T&S.
Like this, covering the instrument with a sheet of alu, locking the
cover with a wire through those holes and securing the wire with a seal
is a matter of half a minute. Couldn't think of anything easier. Used to
be the common way to do it where I fly.

And to prevent pilots to rely on the hidden safety device: A broken seal
means disqualification from the whole contest, pretty much a non
brainer. To my (admittedly limited) knowledge, this has never happened.

I originally posted this question.

The intention of leaving T&B in place was not to use it as a safety
device during competition but rather in wave flying outside a contest.

I hate to remove it every time I go to a contest, but I have no
problem taking the instrument cover off and disconnecting it from the
power source so is could not be operated in flight, not even in
emergency.

Since flying in clouds is illegal in gliders why do we have a rule
prohibiting an illegal flight?

We do not prohibit people from having cell phones. Is this an honor
system? Yes it is. If I disconnect the T&B why anyone would have a
problem?

I can't cover the front of the T&B with aluminum plate because it is
screwed with loose nuts in the back. Trying to put a cover in the
front would be as much trouble as removing it. Why don't I want to
remove it, because my panel has very little space behind the
instrument? I have a power bus connection behind it. I would have to
dismantle most of my electrical system to get the T&B out.

There must be a way out we are not kids...

Maybe it is a good idea to create a rule. If someone cheats he/she
gets kicked out of competition for a year or two. I think that would
discourage anyone from cheating.

Do you suggest I talk to a CD?

On Feb 20, 5:32 pm, AK wrote:
I originally posted this question.

The intention of leaving T&B in place was not to use it as a safety
device during competition but rather in wave flying outside a contest.

I hate to remove it every time I go to a contest, but I have no
problem taking the instrument cover off and disconnecting it from the
power source so is could not be operated in flight, not even in
emergency.

Since flying in clouds is illegal in gliders why do we have a rule
prohibiting an illegal flight?

We do not prohibit people from having cell phones. Is this an honor
system? Yes it is. If I disconnect the T&B why anyone would have a
problem?

I can't cover the front of the T&B with aluminum plate because it is
screwed with loose nuts in the back. Trying to put a cover in the
front would be as much trouble as removing it. Why don't I want to
remove it, because my panel has very little space behind the
instrument? I have a power bus connection behind it. I would have to
dismantle most of my electrical system to get the T&B out.

There must be a way out we are not kids...

Maybe it is a good idea to create a rule. If someone cheats he/she
gets kicked out of competition for a year or two. I think that would
discourage anyone from cheating.

Do you suggest I talk to a CD?

Also, what about solid state devices like Garmin which have the same
functionality as T&B indicators? Are we searching people before they
get into a cockpit to find out if they don't have one of these in
their pockets? Of course not, so it is an honor system and maybe we
should deal with disconnected T&B indicator in the same way.

AK wrote:
Since flying in clouds is illegal in gliders why do we have a rule
prohibiting an illegal flight?

As has been discussed here endlessly, cloud flying in gliders is not
illegal in the US, as long as the glider is properly equipped, the pilot
has an instrument rating, and has secured the necessary clearances...

Marc

Actually I really like the idea of the aluminum cover for it. You
don't have to use the same screw holes that the mount the instrument.
You could add some additional screw holes and blind nuts for the
plate.
It then should not be to hard to either safety wire or apply a seal to
the screws or plate that would confirm to the CD that it has not been
used.

I don't know if this would pass the Rules test or be acceptable to the
CD. But it certainly seems like it should.

YES, The CD is really the one you should be talking to.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

9B wrote:
I would argue that it is an open question whether having
a T&B on board would give many pilots extra "courage" to fly into
questionable conditions, thinking if something bad happened they could
always turn on the old T&B. This sort of pilot logic of course
nullifys much of the intent of the rule in the first place. How that
would balance out from an overall safety perspective (more risky
behavior with greater ability to mitigate bad outcomes) is impossible
to judge a priori.

There's ample precedent for this type of conundrum: e.g., GPS
navigation. Legalizing GPS receivers for contests leveled the playing
field and was touted as increasing safety because pilots would always
know where the closest airport was and whether they could [probably]
glide there. On the other hand, this eliminated a skill (i.e.,
navigation) that many believed was an integral part of soaring. And
similar to flying in marginal weather without blind flying
instruments, those who were more accomplished at navigation could, pre-
GPS, use this skill to fly more aggressively than others with equal
safety. Ironically, post GPS, ALL pilots could engage in more
aggressive behavior than they might otherwise have attempted: e.g.,
marginal final glides.

The Rules Committee decided the benefits of GPS receivers (including,
not incidentally, flight recorders) tilted the decision in their
favor. Another factor was the difficulty of policing pilots who could
easily slip a GPS receiver into their pockets before takeoff.
Regarding blind flying instruments, I suspect the overriding factor
would be that this type of flying is difficult for gliders to do
legally in the U.S. and impossible in a contest. Many would say the
ability to enter clouds is not a skill we wish to evaluate. Those who
have flown in past contests outside the U.S. that permitted cloud
flying might disagree. In any event, the Rules Committee appears to
have drawn the line firmly: having an operable T&B on board "just in
case" is not an option.

But that's apparently not what AK was requesting. As for letting
individual Competition Directors make the call on disabling vs.
covering vs. removal, I prefer guidance from the Rules Committee. I
have the utmost respect for those who tackle the difficult job of CD
but anyone who has flown a few contests knows that each has his/her
unique opinions. Sometimes these can be controversial; e.g., the CD
who decreed that notwithstanding the general practice that any airport
on the Sectional chart was eligible for the 25 point airport landout
bonus, in his contest only those airports with paved runways (all of
which were turnpoints) qualified. The organizers feared being sued by
a pilot who landed at any of the numerous private strips,
groundlooped, and then blamed them for not knowing the grass hadn't
been cut in six months! Or the CD who decreed that the airspace under
a Class C was ineligible (the Rules only prohibited flight in or over
a Class C) despite there being several attractive landout airports
just inside the edge. I well remember the stir that went through the
crowd when they were told, rather flippantly, "There are plenty of
good fields up there." I have more stories and I'm sure other pilots
do, too.

For something like this, better to get input from the Rules Committee
who generally does an admirable job of analyzing these issues and
acting.

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
USA

Oh my, I don't know where to start with this, so lets start with a
little history; Johnny Robinson won 2 nationals in his Zanonia because
he had a gyro and tought himself to fly in clouds (like CB's). Little
wonder he won because he was venturing out at 20,000 feet when
everyone else was trying it at 6000. About the same time (1940's) one
could see pieces of sailplanes raining down from the bottom of CB's
because 2 ships had run into each other OR one had iced up and come
screamind down OR the pilot had become disoriented and pulled the
wings off. Well guess what? The rules committee came up with the rule
that said no gyros will be allowed. The question has been asked, why
not just make cloud flying illegal? Like putting that in the rules
would do anything. How is the CD supposed to know if old Johnny had
been doing some 'illligal' activities? Don't kid yourself, we have
those who would get an extra 1000 feet or so if they could safely
continue on up into a Q, then come out the side a bit higher than the
rest of us. We're all quite observant and if Johhny's getting away
with it, believe I'll try it too and soon we're right back to pieces
of sailplanes raining out of clouds.

On Feb 21, 6:47*am, JJ Sinclair wrote:
Oh my, I don't know where to start with this, so lets start with a
little history; Johnny Robinson won 2 nationals in his Zanonia because
he had a gyro and tought himself to fly in clouds (like CB's). Little
wonder he won because he was venturing out at 20,000 feet when
everyone else was trying it at 6000. About the same time (1940's) one
could see pieces of sailplanes raining down from the bottom of CB's
because 2 ships had run into each other OR one had iced up and come
screamind down OR the pilot had become disoriented and pulled the
wings off. Well guess what? The rules committee came up with the rule
that said no gyros will be allowed. The question has been asked, why
not just make cloud flying illegal? Like putting that in the rules
would do anything. How is the CD supposed to know if old Johnny had
been doing some 'illligal' activities? Don't kid yourself, we have
those who would get an extra 1000 feet or so if they could safely
continue on up into a Q, then come out the side a bit higher than the
rest of us. We're all quite observant and if Johhny's getting away
with it, believe I'll try it too and soon we're right back to pieces
of sailplanes raining out of clouds.

I too recall stories of world championships that allowed use of gyros
(we are way off topic now - but it's interesting so I'll go with it).
There were accounts of multiple gliders climbing up into cu and mostly
parts coming out. Allowing gyros for use to enable cloud flying is a
very bad idea...

...but the issue here is a bit different. Specifically, should the
rules allow a sealed T&B for emergency use only, where breaking the
seal would result is being disqualified for the day, the contest,
something substantial? Chip's GPS analogy is instructive in that
there are in my observation many more low final glides now than there
were 20 years ago. But GPS also has big safety benefits in uses that
don't encourage risky behavior. Allowing emergency T&B seems dodgy to
me as I wonder whether there are many circumstances where a pilot
would choose to break the seal and take the DQ prior to getting so
hoplessly disoriented that the T&B wouldn't spin up in a state that it
could help. That is, wouldn't (s)he try to get out of trouble without
breaking out the T&B under most circumstances?

It does make me wonder how many pilots have used GPS to climb into
cloud in a straight line to get an extra few thousand feet or so. It's
certainly possible.

9B