New Butterfly Vario

On Feb 16, 4:04*pm, "S. Murry" wrote:
[snipped]
Sorry for the very long post...

--Stefan

That was worth reading. Thanks.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

On Feb 16, 1:17*pm, T8 wrote:
On Feb 16, 4:04*pm, "S. Murry" wrote:
[snipped]

Sorry for the very long post...

--Stefan

That was worth reading. *Thanks.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

ditto.

The last time I believe a thread got much over 100 was a few years ago
and it was titled "the future of soaring"
I think this thread follows along those same lines. I have been very
entertained and informed and feel quite pleased to be able to
participate with such a group of smart people.

Brad

Well said, Stefan!


"S. Murry" wrote in message
news OK, I've made a couple of smart-assed remarks on this thread. But clearly
it is not going to die (ever!) and I suppose at this point I might point
out my "real" opinion on this.

First off, I am an instrument-rated airplane pilot, glider CFI, and
(beginning) competition glider pilot. I have been a licensed glider pilot
for 26 years, and power pilot for 24 year. I only bring this up so that
everyone here will know where I am coming from when I ask the following
question:

Question: "Has anyone actually tried cloud-flying with their smartphone?"

The reason why I ask is my reading of the rule, which I quote below (from
another post, so I hope it is accurate):

"6.6.1 Each sailplane is prohibited from carrying any instrument which:

• Permits flight without reference to the ground.

"
does not seem to prohibit carrying a smartphone, as some have asserted in
this thread.

John C. posits that it is theoretically possible to cloud fly using a GPS
moving map. I disagree about this point. Or I suppose I can't argue with
the "theoretically" part, since the definition of "cloud flying" itself is
not 100% clear (I mean, if you shoot through a vapor tendril under a CU
are you "cloud flying"? Inertia is enough to cloud fly for a least a
couple of seconds...). But, as a practical matter (as opposed to
"theoretical") I disagree that your smart phone enables cloud flying.
Here is why.

I have several hundred hours of actual instrument time in single engine
airplanes. I've had vacuum failures in solid IMC (i.e real-world
partial-panel flying), and lots of instrument training on instrument
flying with all sorts of limited instrument situations (as have all rated
instruments pilots). I also have a Garmin GPS 496, that features a
GPS-derived AH display. I have taken up a safety pilot in a fairly stable
(compared to most sailplanes) airplane and attempted to see if I could fly
IMC using my Garmin 496 (which I note is a dedicated aviation instrument,
thus I believe a step or two ahead of smartphones in terms of refresh
rate, etc.). My conclusion is that it is NOT possible to use this
instrument to "cloud fly." It MIGHT be possible in a very stable plane if
already configured in wings-level attitude to stay that way using a GPS
derived AH, but probably even this would not be possible for a very long
time. To me, the ability to maintain wings level for a short period falls
short of "permit[ting] flight without reference to the ground".

If you are in a less stable machine (like a glider), and trying to use one
of these devices to gain competitive advantage by thermalling (i.e.
turning) into a cloud, I would argue that these devices are useless. Yes,
you might live, but I know the story of a guy who jumped out of a B-17 in
WW-II without a parachute, fell 14,000 feet and lived. This does NOT mean
that flapping your arms when in freefall "permits flight without the use
of a parachute." You might get lucky, but most of the time jumping
without a parachute will be fatal.

Similarly, trying to use a smartphone to cloud fly is highly likely to
have a bad outcome.

The rule does not appear to prohibit any device that any person on RAS
believes might possibly be used to somehow "cloud fly." It prohibits
instruments that "permit flight without reference to the ground." My
smart phone does not do that and therefore if anyone challenges me in a
contest, I will maintain that this is not an instrument that permits
flight without reference to the ground and therefore is not prohibited by
the rules. If anyone disagrees with me, I'll ask them to go up and use my
phone to demonstrate "flight without reference to the ground" while
circling in a thermal (in their glider, of course, not mine because I'd
like mine to come back in one piece).

I do think that dedicated glider instruments that have greater
capabilities may exist, and probably are under development. Some of these
may actually "permit flight without reference to the ground." The rules
committee it seems to me has done a great job in clarifying how these
devices may be disabled such that they can be used (without the cloud
flying enabling features operating), or at least mentioning that the
possiblity of disabling certain features may allow one to use the
instrument sans cloud flying features in a contest. It seems to me that
this is eminently forward-looking and an attempt to accommodate these new
devices without making contest flying more dangerous by giving contestants
a little voice in the back of their head telling them that it's OK to gain
just another hundred feet in this booming thermal since I've got a "cloud
flying" instrument on board "just in case." All very sensible to me.

I just don't see that being alarmed about being called a "cheater" at a
contest because you have a smart phone with you is a realistic scenario.
I note also (and perhaps this is a suggestion for the rules committee),
that the rule bans any device that "permits flight without reference to
the ground." It does not ban anything that "permits flight without
reference to the horizon." Imagine a situation where you are in VMC above
a solid cloud layer. You can see the horizon (thus an AH is not needed),
but not the ground. In this case, a GPS or other navigation system is what
"permits flight without reference to the ground," since it enables you to
compensate for the normally visually-derived navigational information that
you lack due to your inability to see the ground. Thus, GPS devices
should be banned in contests, because they "permit flight without
reference to the ground." Clearly, a literal reading of this rule will
not have the intended effect. Thus, arguments that attempt to postulate
some imaginary scenario under which a contest pilot could innocently run
afoul of this rule and be penalized seem to me to be missing the point.
CDs and other competitors need to have some common sense, in conjunction
with the clarification provided recently by the rules committee, and I
think usually is enough to prevent the kind of dire outcomes that have
been mentioned in this thread.

Sorry for the very long post...

--Stefan





On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 13:56:42 -0600, John Cochrane
wrote:


Yes, it is theoretically possible to cloud fly using a GPS moving map,
or your iphone, or watching a pendulum. It's also possible to sneak
off on to other frequencies and team fly, or use your iphone to look
at the visible satellite loop, or sneak in walkie talkies to team fly.
If you do that, you're nuts, and you know you're cheating. There's no
prize money or groupies. There's also no paid staff of CDs and
scrutineers. For the moment at least, all these options are so
unreliable that it's really not worth putting in the enforcement
costs. Enforcement is, we just don't do stuff like this.







--
Stefan Murry

On Feb 16, 1:04*pm, "S. Murry" wrote:
I have several hundred hours of actual instrument time in single engine
airplanes. *I've had vacuum failures in solid IMC (i.e real-world
partial-panel flying), and lots of instrument training on instrument
flying with all sorts of limited instrument situations (as have all rated
instruments pilots). *I also have a Garmin GPS 496, that features a
GPS-derived AH display. *I have taken up a safety pilot in a fairly stable
(compared to most sailplanes) airplane and attempted to see if I could fly
IMC using my Garmin 496 (which I note is a dedicated aviation instrument,
thus I believe a step or two ahead of smartphones in terms of refresh
rate, etc.). *My conclusion is that it is NOT possible to use this
instrument to "cloud fly." *It MIGHT be possible in a very stable plane if
already configured in wings-level attitude to stay that way using a GPS
derived AH, but probably even this would not be possible for a very long
time. *To me, the ability to maintain wings level for a short period falls
short of "permit[ting] flight without reference to the ground".

Thank you for this informative post. The above paragraph,
unfortunately, contains an incorrect assumption. The new
"smartphones" being discussed are capable of more than just a GPS-
derived AH display. They contain full 3-axis solid state gyroscope,
accelerometer, and magnetometer (3D compass) sensors. Given the huge
size of the phone market, a single integrated circuit containing all
of these sensors now costs under $10. They are there primarily for
game playing and "augmented reality" applications, allowing the
orientation of the phone in 3D space to be determined in a stable,
repeatable, and accurate fashion, to within fractions of degrees, with
update rates upwards of 100 Hz. Software already exists (typically $5
in the appropriate app store) for some of these phones to implement a
full inertially-based (not GPS-derived) artificial horizon. With
properly implemented software, the performance can easily exceed that
of the spinning mechanical device in your IFR panel. Competition has
resulted in all new high end phones (like iPhone 4S) and tablets (like
iPad 2) being produced with this full sensor suite. This will filter
down to lower end smart phones and smaller tablets over the next few
years.

Converging from another direction are devices built, using the same
low cost sensor chips, for use in hobbyist autonomous UAVs. There are
huge online communities of people developing open source software and
hardware to allow these things to fly in a stable and controlled
fashion. Given that there is no pilot directly controlling what are
in some cases highly unstable aircraft (helicopters, quad rotors, high
speed ducted fans, even jets), accurate high rate attitude
determination is a must. This is why we're suddenly seeing phones,
tablets, varios, flight computers, etc., with usable artificial
horizons. This capability will only become more ubiquitous as time
goes on...


Marc

On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 19:38:21 -0600, Marc wrote:

Marc,

I sort-of agree with you here, at least insofar as I think that sooner or
later usable combinations of software and hardware running on smartphone
tablets may exist. I am not sure that this is true now (but I am sure
that it will be one day), but the "proof" for me will come when someone
demonstrates could flying using one of these instruments. When this
happens, then the clarification provided by the rules committee will have
to be applied and the could flying features disabled for contests.

If anyone has actually used any smartphone/tablet app in IMC, please let
me know (although I think that this would not be legal, so I will not
blame you if you decide not to "'fess up").

--Stefan


Thank you for this informative post. The above paragraph,
unfortunately, contains an incorrect assumption. The new
"smartphones" being discussed are capable of more than just a GPS-
derived AH display. They contain full 3-axis solid state gyroscope,
accelerometer, and magnetometer (3D compass) sensors. Given the huge
size of the phone market, a single integrated circuit containing all
of these sensors now costs under $10. They are there primarily for
game playing and "augmented reality" applications, allowing the
orientation of the phone in 3D space to be determined in a stable,
repeatable, and accurate fashion, to within fractions of degrees, with
update rates upwards of 100 Hz. Software already exists (typically $5
in the appropriate app store) for some of these phones to implement a
full inertially-based (not GPS-derived) artificial horizon. With
properly implemented software, the performance can easily exceed that
of the spinning mechanical device in your IFR panel. Competition has
resulted in all new high end phones (like iPhone 4S) and tablets (like
iPad 2) being produced with this full sensor suite. This will filter
down to lower end smart phones and smaller tablets over the next few
years.

Converging from another direction are devices built, using the same
low cost sensor chips, for use in hobbyist autonomous UAVs. There are
huge online communities of people developing open source software and
hardware to allow these things to fly in a stable and controlled
fashion. Given that there is no pilot directly controlling what are
in some cases highly unstable aircraft (helicopters, quad rotors, high
speed ducted fans, even jets), accurate high rate attitude
determination is a must. This is why we're suddenly seeing phones,
tablets, varios, flight computers, etc., with usable artificial
horizons. This capability will only become more ubiquitous as time
goes on...


Marc






--
Stefan Murry