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 |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
On Feb 9, 1:21*pm, Bruno wrote:
Thank you Rules Committee for going through the effort to get this done so quickly. I have a Butterfly Vario on order and am relieved there is now a mechanism in place for it to remain in the glider during contests. Fingers are crossed that Butterfly will be able to make the software changes necessary to implement these rules for the 2012 season. Thanks again, Bruno - B4 We worked with Butterfly in developing this process and they are on board. UH |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
On Feb 9, 1:25*pm, Bart wrote:
On Feb 9, 9:32*am, John Cochrane wrote: When you look at it this way, you see that not only do we need a ban on AH, it has to be very clear to everyone that the ban is enforced. Everyone around you needs to see that you're not carrying an AH. It's not enough to say "oh yeah, that big thing in the panel. I pulled the tube out the back." You may have, but others don't really know you have, so we again unwind the gentleman's agreement. John, What is the policy regarding unidentified instruments? You see, I happen to enjoy making my own gadgets. Let's imagine that I entered a competition and you are the CD or a fellow competitor. You glance at my panel and see this weird, LCD screen. Out of curiosity, you ask "what is it?". My answers: (1) I would rather not answer. (2) It's an intelligent vario. I made it myself! (3) It's an intelligent vario. One with g-meters, gyros etc. I made it myself! (4) It's an intelligent vario. One with g-meters, gyros etc. I made it myself! In theory, it could even act as an AH, I just haven't written the firmware yet. (5) It's an intelligent vario. One with g-meters, gyros etc. I made it myself! It could even act as an AH, but I have a vario-only version of firmware loaded right now. (6) It's an intelligent vario and AH. I made it myself! I promise I will not use it as an AH. What would you do? Note that no matter what my answer is, you have no way of verifying it - short of reverse-engineering the device. Bart If I was the CD or scorer (and I have been both) I would respond as follows: 1. Expect to have your altitude trace closely compared against others. Remember rule 6.1 2. Very nice! See 1 3. Even nicer! See 1 4. See 3 5. Show me your waiver. If no waiver, here is a screwdriver 6. Show me your waiver. If no waiver, here is a screwdriver QT |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
On Jan 27, 6:31*pm, Bruno wrote:
I am planning on getting my order in for the Butterfly next week at the convention so this topic is of great interest. I don't understand why the instrument needs to be disabled. I agree that it could give a competitive edge in competition so why not just make sure the igc records if the artificial horizon feature was used and we are good. *I would hate to disable an instrument for a contest and then need that instrument due to a life or death screw up on my part but it is now disabled. How about a rules consideration that says if an artificial horizon is available during a contest that it must be associated with the logger of the files being used for judging and that a log must be recorded if that feature is used? *It would still be available if the crap hit the fan to save the pilot's butt, however if used, the pilot gets zero points for the day. *Some of the best pilots I know who are also very safety conscious have confided in me that they have been trapped above clouds without an artificial horizon and really scared themselves getting out of it. I for one want the safety of having an instrument to help me if my life depends on it. I am sure the rules can accommodate that. Looking forward to seeing you all next week at the convention. Bruno - B4 Just to add a bit more fuel to the fire, there is a large body of evidence on the power side that even *with* an artificial horizon and turn indicator, the average lifetime for a non-instrument-rated pilot in clouds is about 3 minutes, and the accident sequences on which this evidence is based almost invariably start with straight and level entry into IMC. Anyone who thinks that just installing an artificial horizon in their glider is a 'get out of jail free' card is fooling themselves. I urge anyone considering this to get a copy of Condor (which has a turn indicator installed in most panels) and try their luck at maintaining any sort of reasonable attitude/airspeed solely by reference to instruments. When I owned a Cirrus SR22 power plane some years back, I carried a GPS-196 (with a GPS-generated artificial horizon and turn coordinator) with me as a last-ditch backup if all the electrics died. This worked, but it took quite a bit of practice to be able to stay reasonably upright using just that instrument. Just my $0.02 TA |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
At 19:15 09 February 2012, Frank Paynter wrote:
On Jan 27, 6:31=A0pm, Bruno wrote: I am planning on getting my order in for the Butterfly next week at the convention so this topic is of great interest. I don't understand why the instrument needs to be disabled. I agree that it could give a competitive edge in competition so why not just make sure the igc records if the artificial horizon feature was used and we are good. =A0I would hate to disable an instrument for a contest and then need that instrument due to a life or death screw up on my part but it is now disabled. How about a rules consideration that says if an artificial horizon is available during a contest that it must be associated with the logger of the files being used for judging and that a log must be recorded if that feature is used? =A0It would still be available if the crap hit the fan to save the pilot's butt, however if used, the pilot gets zero points for the day. =A0Some of the best pilots I know who are also very safety conscious have confided in me that they have been trapped above clouds without an artificial horizon and really scared themselves getting out of it. I for one want the safety of having an instrument to help me if my life depends on it. I am sure the rules can accommodate that. Looking forward to seeing you all next week at the convention. Bruno - B4 Just to add a bit more fuel to the fire, there is a large body of evidence on the power side that even *with* an artificial horizon and turn indicator, the average lifetime for a non-instrument-rated pilot in clouds is about 3 minutes, and the accident sequences on which this evidence is based almost invariably start with straight and level entry into IMC. Anyone who thinks that just installing an artificial horizon in their glider is a 'get out of jail free' card is fooling themselves. I urge anyone considering this to get a copy of Condor (which has a turn indicator installed in most panels) and try their luck at maintaining any sort of reasonable attitude/airspeed solely by reference to instruments. When I owned a Cirrus SR22 power plane some years back, I carried a GPS-196 (with a GPS-generated artificial horizon and turn coordinator) with me as a last-ditch backup if all the electrics died. This worked, but it took quite a bit of practice to be able to stay reasonably upright using just that instrument. Just my $0.02 TA CH Ventus B "If we are all "just dust in the wind", then I want to be at the top of a Huge Dust Devil!" |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
On Feb 9, 11:48*am, "John Godfrey (QT)"
wrote: If I was the CD or scorer (and I have been both) I would respond as follows: 1. Expect to have your altitude trace closely compared against others. That can't possibly be a valid test. The first season I had my ASW-28 I had a convincing win on Day 1 on R9. The reason was that I found a thermal climb in severe VMC to an altitude several thousand feet above the best anyone else saw for the day. Similary in a local club contest, on a day that everyone was struggling to even stay in the air, one competitor found a huge thermal that enabled a glide to the first turnpoint and a day win. There is currently no practical way to ensure a competitor does not enter cloud. There is currently no practical way to ensure a competitor does not violate cloud clearance regulations. As long as that it true competitive pilots will push as close to cloud base are they think will give a competitive advantage. Some pilots are more competitive than others but I doubt there is a single pilot on the West coast that would break off a 10kt climb at 12,000ft because they estimated that the cloudbase was 13,000ft Andy (GY) |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
John and All, Just for a moment put all the other rule-software-hardware
changes aside, how do you think contest pilots would react to the CD setting a Max flying height for the day! Just say the weather man forcasts cloudbase to be 10K msl for the day and the CD announces max flying height of 9.5k and all logs for that day are checked for max height just as they are now for 17.5k. Now no advantage to cloud flying, no need to worry about what instruments we have or don't have. Sure that weather man may not have it right but we still have a max height limit regardless. If his estimate is low and cloud base is 2k higher it is still fair as no one can go higher. If he is too high and cloudbase is lower we are right where we are now but with todays forcasting abilities he would not be off that far and it is movable right up until the start gate opens. Just sayin--- CH Ventus B "If we are all "just dust in the wind", then I want to be at the top of a Huge Dust Devil!" |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
John and All, Just for a moment put all the other rule-software-hardware
changes aside, how do you think contest pilots would react to the CD setting a Max flying height for the day! Just say the weather man forcasts cloudbase to be 10K msl for the day and the CD announces max flying height of 9.5k and all logs for that day are checked for max height just as they are now for 17.5k. Now no advantage to cloud flying, no need to worry about what instruments we have or don't have. Sure that weather man may not have it right but we still have a max height limit regardless. If his estimate is low and cloud base is 2k higher it is still fair as no one can go higher. If he is too high and cloudbase is lower we are right where we are now but with todays forcasting abilities he would not be off that far and it is movable right up until the start gate opens. Just sayin--- CH Ventus B "If we are all "just dust in the wind", then I want to be at the top of a Huge Dust Devil!" |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
On Feb 9, 3:28*pm, Cliff Hilty
wrote: John and All, Just for a moment put all the other rule-software-hardware changes aside, how do you think contest pilots would react to the CD setting a Max flying height for the day! Just say the weather man forcasts cloudbase to be 10K msl for the day and the CD announces max flying height of 9.5k and all logs for that day are checked for max height just as they are now for 17.5k. Now no advantage to cloud flying, no need to worry about what instruments we have or don't have. Sure that weather man may not have it right but we still have a max height limit regardless. If his estimate is low and cloud base is 2k higher it is still fair as no one can go higher. If he is too high and cloudbase is lower we are right where we are now but with todays forcasting abilities he would not be off that far and it is movable right up until the start gate opens. Just sayin--- CH Ventus B "If we are all "just dust in the wind", then I want to be at the top of a Huge Dust Devil!" Not practical in the East, for sure. As well, it doesn't necessarily solve the problem. -Evan Ludeman / T8 |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
On Feb 9, 1:17*pm, Mike the Strike wrote:
*Even the "gentleman's agreement" doesn't work to control this. *I have been in and around enough contests to see this frequently and (at least after a few beers) most contest pilots will fess up! *I have seen more than one of the names high on the ranking list sneaking out of the side of a cumulus! Then you have a problem. Your options would appear to be peer pressure or the safety box. I'm not really a safety monkey (I'd go back to zero height finish lines in a heartbeat), but I chafe badly when confronted with borderline suicidal behavior. This is one such instance. I'd be absolutely ripped if I had a really good day, stayed legal, got beat by some jackass cloud flying. -Evan Ludeman / T8 |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
On Feb 9, 2:04*pm, T8 wrote:
On Feb 9, 1:17*pm, Mike the Strike wrote: *Even the "gentleman's agreement" doesn't work to control this. *I have been in and around enough contests to see this frequently and (at least after a few beers) most contest pilots will fess up! *I have seen more than one of the names high on the ranking list sneaking out of the side of a cumulus! Then you have a problem. *Your options would appear to be peer pressure or the safety box. I'm not really a safety monkey (I'd go back to zero height finish lines in a heartbeat), but I chafe badly when confronted with borderline suicidal behavior. *This is one such instance. *I'd be absolutely ripped if I had a really good day, stayed legal, got beat by some jackass cloud flying. -Evan Ludeman / T8 I'll repeat what I said earlier and Andy pointed out a few posts ago - it's very hard to know when to pull out of a strong thermal as you approach cloudbase, particularly out west. Most competitive pilots will go as high as they can, since there is no practical way to maintain the mandated clearance and no penalty if they do bust it. Most will go into cloud as an unintended consequence at the top of a fast climb they held for just one turn too many. This will happen regardless of whether or not there are cloud-flying instruments. Many competitors are already breaking the rules on mandated clearance from clouds and there is no way to monitor this or penalize the behavior. If you want to prevent it, you are going to have to come up with a way to monitor it. As a fellow contest pilot said to me "I'll start worrying when clouds are shown on igc files" Mike |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Butterfly iGlide | Reed von Gal | Soaring | 4 | May 2nd 12 06:00 PM |
WTB: 57mm Cambridge Vario/FS: 80mm Cambridge Vario | ufmechanic | Soaring | 0 | March 24th 09 05:31 PM |
TE vario | G.A. Seguin | Soaring | 8 | June 8th 04 04:44 AM |
WTB LD-200 Vario | Romeo Delta | Soaring | 0 | June 4th 04 03:08 PM |