A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old May 17th 17, 05:30 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
jfitch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,134
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 9:23:30 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 10:35:22 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 6:32:23 PM UTC-4, wrote:
-Are LXNAV products with AHRS available by software key allowed? They are not on this list:
-The "restricted device policy" claims there will be a list published of acceptable software. And unacceptable software. That might be useful. Where is it?
-This antique discussion thread implies that XCSoar (which as of 2017 still has a not-very-good AH option) is illegal. Is it? Do I have to run some forked version of it?
-In the year 2017 is anyone in the US competing using XCSoar as a flight computer? On a phone with no SIM card installed?


Since no one here is interested in answering these questions, is there anyone at SSA I should be emailing? Calling? Sending a letter?

The SSA "Guide to Competition" also says exactly nothing about flight computers, instruments, etc....


I have been away from my desk for a few days and am sorry for reply that is too slow for your needs.
The relevant information is available on the SSA web site.
Sailplane racing
Contest Rules and process
Important reading
You will find the applicable guidance documents there.
UH
RC Chair


With all due respect sir I looked at all that information and then asked several specific questions (which you've just quoted) that are as near as I can tell unanswered by the documents on the SSA website. You'll notice I'm asking specific questions based on language in the documents you just suggested I read.

Meanwhile other racers have reassured me that the stuff I'm considering is commonly used, but technically illegal, and that doesn't exactly give me a warm feeling about buying instruments etc.

Thank you for the response. I reiterate that if you want to prove no one is flying in cloud there is a simple, cheap solution to that in 2017 that doesn't require all of this handwringing. I suspect that wouldn't be popular as it might call into question some folks measurement of 500 feet.


500 ft below the cloud has always been measured by whether the top winglet was still visible. At least by me and a bunch of other pilots .
  #102  
Old May 17th 17, 03:16 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Marotta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,601
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAVcomputers?


On 5/16/2017 10:30 PM, jfitch wrote:

500 ft below the cloud has always been measured by whether the top winglet was still visible. At least by me and a bunch of other pilots .

....Like back in the day when we were young studs, sitting on the ramp 50
feet from the farthest part of the jet, smoking cigarettes while they
were refueling it for our next hop...

I recall a cartoon in a safety magazine back then showing a Cessna,
tooling along just below a cloud and, overtaking from the rear, is a
landing gear truck from a C-5 hanging just below the cloud...
--
Dan, 5J
  #103  
Old May 17th 17, 06:51 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tango Eight
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 962
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 12:23:30 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Meanwhile other racers have reassured me that the stuff I'm considering is commonly used, but technically illegal, and that doesn't exactly give me a warm feeling about buying instruments etc.


Let's try this: "May I have a show of hands please? How many of you have been asked to disable your gyro instruments at a US contest?"

Will we get even one?

I speculate that in 2017 we are at, or close to 100% non-compliance on the part of organizers, which makes this a dead issue. Asking the RC to get rid of the rule may well still be futile due to 50 years inertia ("We're not about to ask the board to get rid of a rule that's worked for 50 years" is what I was told). I still pull my trutrak turn indicator out of the panel for contests (takes 5 minutes), but it feels silly to do so when there are so many AHRS capable instruments out there. The reason I do pull it out is a) that's what the rules require and b) there's no downside, other than 5 minutes wasted time.

-Evan Ludeman / T8
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
U.S.A Rules Committee: We Didn't Mean It? SoarPoint Soaring 3 November 15th 10 03:06 PM
US Rules Poll and Rules Committee Election Ken Sorenson Soaring 0 December 1st 06 02:36 AM
SSA Rules Poll and Rules Committee Election Ken Sorenson Soaring 2 October 6th 06 03:27 PM
US Rules Committee Election and Rules Poll Ken Sorenson Soaring 1 September 27th 05 10:52 PM
FLASH! U.S.A. Rules Committee to Address Rules Complexity? SoarPoint Soaring 1 February 3rd 04 03:36 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.