Turn coordinator? How dare they!

At 17:22 22 February 2013, wrote:
On Friday, February 22, 2013 11:12:20 AM UTC-6,
wrote=
:
On Friday, February 22, 2013 9:05:01 AM UTC-6, Tony wrote:
=20
the rules do take the 'gentlemanly' approach. they allow wireless
telep=
hones to be carried as long as they are not used in flight. How
reasonable.
=20
=20
=20
And yet that same approach is unacceptable for artificial horizons.
make=
s no sense to trust the gentlemen in one instance and not the other.

There is a big difference between a cell phone, in your pocket, of very
que=
stionable use in flight anyway, and a real, gyro-operated, trustworthy,
art=
ificial horizon staring you in the face from the instrument panel. They
AH
=
is very useful indeed for someone hearty enough to head up into a cu to
get=
some altitude before heading through the big blue hole, or to get
through
=
the rain and storm that the rest of us go way around or even land out
rathe=
r than penetrate.
=20
It's a matter of social dynamics as well. Nobody else is going to be
bother=
ed by the thought of you having a cell phone in your pocket and you might
w=
ant to waste some time in flight playing with it. The rule just clarifies
"=
don't do it" so you know if you do that you're cheating.=20

If people show up with real artificial horizons a on/off switch from
operat=
ion, it's pretty clear that everyone will assume it's being used
illegally
=
and think "I have to get one too." They can justify cheating on the idea
"w=
ell, everyone else is doing it."=20

Spring cannot come soon enough.=20

John Cochrane

Firstly some facts. I can only speak for the iPhone but I suspect the same
applies to the software on any smart phone. The Artificial Horizon app is
pretty accurate over the 10 of 15 minutes that it is likely to be used to
carry out a climb (or descent) in cloud. (I know this because I have tested
it). Over time it does become un-reliable.
It is almost impossible to detect a iPhone if it is being carried on the
person and switched off so if a person gets into a glider with an iPhone it
will be impossible to detect without a search. In the USA you have the
forth amendment so conducting a personal search is unlawful and I suspect
that a competition rule requiring competitors to submit to a search would
fall foul of the first amendment. The conclusion is that any rule banning
the taking into the air of a smart phone is completely un-enforceable.
So you have a rule. Some people will comply with the rule, because they are
honest and playing the game is more important than winning. These people
would not use, or even fit, an artificial horizon in their aircraft,
because they know that IFR flight is illegal so such an instrument is
unecessary, so the rule is unecessary for them.
Some people will see that there is a great advantage to having a smart
phone with the app. They would not normally cheat but they will know that
there are some who will take advantage and do not feel that they should be
disadvantaged by a rule which they know cannot be enforced, and that others
will break, so they will consider using their smart phone.
Then there are the others who will use every means possible to win, they
will take a smart phone because they know it might give them the advantage
and that they cannot be caught.
I think you will see that having a rule which there is absolutely no
chance of being able to enforce is far worse than having no rule at all.
The solution is simple, forget about rules about carrying unlawful items
and deal with the real offence of flying IFR, while that may be difficult
to enforce it can be done. Treat the disease, not the symptoms.
Thankfully in the UK we can still fly in cloud so we do not have the
problem, we do have a law banning unlawful searches and a wonderful
organisation called the European Court for Human rights, which is similar
to your first amendment with bells and whistles and which changes on a
regular basis. (They make it up as they go along). Probably best not to get
me started the lands the other side of the English Channel, especially that
one. :-)