![]() |
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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 12, 3:19*pm, Chip Bearden wrote:
From experience, nearly every contest I've flown since 1968 has had multiple points where knowledge of the weather elsewhere on the course or upstream of it would have conferred a significant, in many cases winning advantage. And this applies even to the formerly ubiquitous assigned tasks, as well as to today's area tasks. In many of these cases, simply seeing the cloud cover would have sufficed. In other cases, a more detailed assessment of local forecasts and observations would have been necessary. The argument that onboard weather is of marginal value in competition doesn't hold up. There is a downside to all of this. We already know we have a potential safety problem with pilots spending too much time staring at their little displays and not enough looking outside the cockpits owing to the rapid proliferation of flight computers and GPS navigation systems of increasing capability (read: complexity). How much will onboard weather on a smart phone exacerbate this problem? I don't think anyone can answer this analytically. It depends on the application, the hardware platform (e.g., the UI and display), response time, the information needed, the urgency of the need, and the user, among other factors. We're considering requiring a PowerFLARM in every cockpit to reduce the odds of a midair collision which, to be cold, happens very seldom. Yet some of the same folks who are loudest in their call for PowerFLARM seem to take a rather more cavalier attitude towards situational awareness when it comes to using a handheld PC or smartphone to deliver detailed weather info. Sure, the availability of better weather info could increase safety, but only to pilots who choose to proceed instead of simply turning back or going around. It's similar to the argument made about GPS years ago: knowing exactly where you were should have allowed safer flying. Instead, what happened was that most pilots used that precise location data to shave their safety margin down on final glides. A few even flew right down to the deck, almost oblivious to the fact that they were getting low enough to choose a field. OK, GPS doesn't break gliders; pilots break gliders. And onboard weather won't make good pilots less safe...unless they focus on it to the exclusion of keeping an outside view. Maybe that's why FLARM is necessary, to allow us all to focus on our electronics, trusting FLARM to warn us if we're getting close to someone. I agree that trying to ban technology is difficult. But it's not impossible, as nearly every sport has demonstrated (think golf, Formula 1, America's Cup sailing, baseball, swimming, etc.). It all comes down to what are our objectives and what rules do we all agree to abide by. Most pilots are fundamentally honest. What causes some of them to be tempted is when they think other competitors are doing it, too. If we, as a group, decide not to allow onboard weather (or AH) for the moment, we can make it stick by the simple expediant of clear rules and Draconian penalties. We should make our views known (as the above posters have done) and look to the Rules Committee for leadership rather than letting technology drive our sport. I work in a technology business. Technology is never a goal and never inevitable. It is an optional means to an end. Clearly defining our objectives allows us to more easily promulgate rules that allow the appropriate use of technology in achieving them. Chip Bearden ASW 24 "JB" U.S.A. Chip, I think the "heads down while fiddling with the gadgets" problem (and I agree there is one) is due to a single cause and it's not the presence of the gadgets. It's pilots stupidly trying to learn how to use them while in flight. If a pilot really knows how to use a gadget, the pilot will look at it only when information is needed. It won't take more than a second or two and it'll represent ~1% of the total flight time. The right way to learn a gadget is on the ground using Condor as a GPS stand in or while playing back a flight on SeeYou. I've seen a couple of pilots sitting in their cockpits on the ground with a laptop running SeeYou in animation mode feeding NMEA data to the glide computer. Smart guys. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
R9N Logan Competition | Ron Gleason | Soaring | 1 | July 20th 10 08:12 PM |
304S in competition again | Tim Mara | Soaring | 7 | July 25th 08 06:41 PM |
See You Competition | Mal[_4_] | Soaring | 0 | August 14th 07 01:56 PM |
Satellite wx competition | john smith | Piloting | 0 | February 10th 06 02:03 AM |
Competition I.D. | Ray Lovinggood | Soaring | 22 | December 17th 03 12:22 AM |