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
  #21  
Old April 4th 12, 02:06 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
PCool
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 99
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

So you are confirming that the Horizon code is in the 6.2 version.
You say it is bugged, but the code says the contrary:

Quoted from xcsoar code:
This feature of having a backup artificial horizon based on inferred
orientation from GPS and vario data is useful, and reasonably well
tested, but has the issue of potentially invalidating use of XCSoar in
FAI contests due to rule ref Annex A to Section 3 (2010 Edition) 4.1.2

And xcsoar already knew it was forbidden to use it.
US RC are asking you to remove that piece of code.
The 6.2 version is not US RC compliant, all of a sudden.

Let me add that it was not smart nor clever to come here declaring that it
is easy to cheat by adulterating other's software.
The only software proven to be invalid right now is xcsoar in fact, and
there is no need to adulterate it, because it comes out naturally invalid.

Winpilot, SeeYou, Stretpla, LK, LX8000... why are xcsoar developers
concerned only about what others are doing?
You cannot prove that these software have illegal code inside, but now
everyone know by xcsoar's own admission that Xcsoar has it.
Nice move.

paolo





"Tobias Bieniek" ha scritto nel messaggio
news:20728050.2799.1333488993408.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbex14...
That is obviously wrong. The AH in 6.2 is bugged and will never be drawn
even if the code exists to draw it... How can you prove that such code isn't
included in WinPilot, SeeYou, Strepla, etc.?!

  #22  
Old April 4th 12, 02:22 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Evan Ludeman[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 484
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

https://play.google.com/store/search...Horizon&c=apps

Works for me.

T8
  #23  
Old April 4th 12, 02:47 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Blue Whale
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

To Sean's point, will there be x-ray machines and random strip searches on the grid before each day's launch to ensure no one has a PNA hidden in their jockey shorts?
  #24  
Old April 4th 12, 08:27 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Max Kellermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 171
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

PCool wrote:
And xcsoar already knew it was forbidden to use it.
US RC are asking you to remove that piece of code.
The 6.2 version is not US RC compliant, all of a sudden.


According to your "logic", a photo of a horizon would be a violation
of the FAI Sporting Code, because ... it renders a horizon!


I know you're the guy who likes trolling around spreading FUD and
never answers objective questions when one starts the futile attempt
to question your FUD, but let me give you yet another chance to make a
fool of yourself:

Please explain how XCSoar 6.2 violates the FAI Sporting Code.

I mean, really explain. Not just the usual screaming out loud "but
there's a horizon renderer, don't you see!!!!!!11", really explain how
the code for rendering a horizon (without code that calculates the
horizon) depicts an instrument that allows the pilot to fly without
visual reference to the ground.

Max
  #25  
Old April 4th 12, 09:22 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Peter Scholz[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 78
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAVcomputers?

Am 04.04.2012 09:27, Max Kellermann wrote:
wrote:
And xcsoar already knew it was forbidden to use it.
US RC are asking you to remove that piece of code.
The 6.2 version is not US RC compliant, all of a sudden.


According to your "logic", a photo of a horizon would be a violation
of the FAI Sporting Code, because ... it renders a horizon!


I know you're the guy who likes trolling around spreading FUD and
never answers objective questions when one starts the futile attempt
to question your FUD, but let me give you yet another chance to make a
fool of yourself:

Please explain how XCSoar 6.2 violates the FAI Sporting Code.

I mean, really explain. Not just the usual screaming out loud "but
there's a horizon renderer, don't you see!!!!!!11", really explain how
the code for rendering a horizon (without code that calculates the
horizon) depicts an instrument that allows the pilot to fly without
visual reference to the ground.

Max


Max & Paolo,

I would like to ask you kindly, could you please move your personal
discussion off to a more private terrain. I guess you know how to reach
each other via E-Mail, there is no need to bother the whole r.a.s.
community with this rather special dialog.

I don't want a flame war like we had a couple of years ago.

Thank you for your cooperation.
--
Peter Scholz
ASW24 JE
  #26  
Old April 4th 12, 11:23 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Evan Ludeman[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 484
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

On Apr 4, 3:27*am, Max Kellermann wrote:
PCool wrote:
And xcsoar already knew it was forbidden to use it.
US RC are asking you to remove that piece of code.
The 6.2 version is not US RC compliant, all of a sudden.


According to your "logic", a photo of a horizon would be a violation
of the FAI Sporting Code, because ... it renders a horizon!

I know you're the guy who likes trolling around spreading FUD and
never answers objective questions when one starts the futile attempt
to question your FUD, but let me give you yet another chance to make a
fool of yourself:

*Please explain how XCSoar 6.2 violates the FAI Sporting Code.

I mean, really explain. *Not just the usual screaming out loud "but
there's a horizon renderer, don't you see!!!!!!11", really explain how
the code for rendering a horizon (without code that calculates the
horizon) depicts an instrument that allows the pilot to fly without
visual reference to the ground.

Max


It doesn't, of course. FWIW I loaded 6.3 onto a Samsung Galaxy Player
last night (w SS gyros & accelerometers) so I could show the RC the
silly little toylike display that is causing so much brouhaha... and
it's still broken, doesn't display at all.

XCS developers, please just take this annoying, troublesome, untested,
non-working TOY out of your otherwise excellent code and just leave it
out. It serves no useful purpose.

There are plenty of other android horizon type applications out there
that people can amuse themselves with should they choose to do so.

T8
  #27  
Old April 4th 12, 02:35 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Sean Fidler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,005
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

On Tuesday, April 3, 2012 9:22:32 PM UTC-4, T8 wrote:
https://play.google.com/store/search...Horizon&c=apps

Works for me.

T8


Max! Why did you not use the special US rules icon! Please consider updating! Its priceless!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;-)
  #28  
Old April 4th 12, 03:50 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Sean Fidler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,005
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

What is the definition of AH toy? AH's that have a chance that they may actually allow cloud flying and AH's that have no chance?

The "toy" is not the problem. The problem (as this thread intends to point out) is the useless, outdated, nonenforceable, unenforced and unnecessary rule and all the hassle it is causing everyone (example: you trying to communicate with the rules committee on how ineffective XC soars AH is). The rule has no fundamental or measurable benefit other than making the traditional guard happy (who really do not understand the capability of the technology in my opinion) and irritating alot of people all over the world.

The rule should be for fixed gyro's only (systems which might actually work)...not cell phones with unfixed, un-calibrated solid state gyro's designed for rudimentary 1g gaming. The rule should be strictly, actively enforced or removed entirely.

Back to topic. LX NAV's system is clearly usable for cloud flying? Were is my statement on USRC policy outlawing its presence at contests? Hello RC....I know your'e reading this... We are waiting..............

Sean
F2

On Wednesday, April 4, 2012 6:23:51 AM UTC-4, T8 wrote:
On Apr 4, 3:27*am, Max Kellermann wrote:
PCool wrote:
And xcsoar already knew it was forbidden to use it.
US RC are asking you to remove that piece of code.
The 6.2 version is not US RC compliant, all of a sudden.


According to your "logic", a photo of a horizon would be a violation
of the FAI Sporting Code, because ... it renders a horizon!

I know you're the guy who likes trolling around spreading FUD and
never answers objective questions when one starts the futile attempt
to question your FUD, but let me give you yet another chance to make a
fool of yourself:

*Please explain how XCSoar 6.2 violates the FAI Sporting Code.

I mean, really explain. *Not just the usual screaming out loud "but
there's a horizon renderer, don't you see!!!!!!11", really explain how
the code for rendering a horizon (without code that calculates the
horizon) depicts an instrument that allows the pilot to fly without
visual reference to the ground.

Max


It doesn't, of course. FWIW I loaded 6.3 onto a Samsung Galaxy Player
last night (w SS gyros & accelerometers) so I could show the RC the
silly little toylike display that is causing so much brouhaha... and
it's still broken, doesn't display at all.

XCS developers, please just take this annoying, troublesome, untested,
non-working TOY out of your otherwise excellent code and just leave it
out. It serves no useful purpose.

There are plenty of other android horizon type applications out there
that people can amuse themselves with should they choose to do so.

T8


  #29  
Old April 4th 12, 06:24 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
kirk.stant
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,260
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

Sean, why are you the only person out there making a huge mountain out of this molehill?

The rule is simple - don't show up with a gyro AH or T&B (or the ability to display USEFUL attitude data) if you want to race. Yes that means no LX with AHRS. You also can't show up with 18M wings at a 15M race - its the RULE!

All your whining about smart phones and PDAs is exactly that - whining. Without gyros, none of them display USEFUL attitude data. That includes the latest smartphones. Just because it has a pretty "HUD" app doesn't mean you can use it to cloud fly! And no reasonable CD is going to waste the time worrying about iPhone apps or what version of XCLKSoar8000 you are using!

If you cloud fly and get caught you will get booted, regardless of what you have in your cockpit - so stay out of the clouds!

If you feel so stongly about changing the rule to allow gyros in the cockpit during a race, try building support from the racing community then approaching the RC with a reasoned argument and proposed solution.

And to be honest, I wouldn't mind having a backup AH in my cockpit - but it's just not a big deal for me.

But your approach of throwing a temper tantrum on RAS is REALLY counterproductive, IMO! - well, except for starting the hissy fit between Max and Paolo - as a SeeYouMobile user that was entertaining!

OK, I'll shut up now. Good luck with your contest at Ionia - I really enjoyed the times I raced there - great location and great people.

Cheers,

Kirk
66
  #30  
Old April 4th 12, 07:19 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dave[_26_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Question for US Rules committee on AH capability within LX NAV computers?

On Wednesday, April 4, 2012 8:50:21 AM UTC-6, Sean Fidler wrote:
What is the definition of AH toy? AH's that have a chance that they may actually allow cloud flying and AH's that have no chance?

The "toy" is not the problem. The problem (as this thread intends to point out) is the useless, outdated, nonenforceable, unenforced and unnecessary rule and all the hassle it is causing everyone (example: you trying to communicate with the rules committee on how ineffective XC soars AH is). The rule has no fundamental or measurable benefit other than making the traditional guard happy (who really do not understand the capability of the technology in my opinion) and irritating alot of people all over the world.

The rule should be for fixed gyro's only (systems which might actually work)...not cell phones with unfixed, un-calibrated solid state gyro's designed for rudimentary 1g gaming. The rule should be strictly, actively enforced or removed entirely.

Back to topic. LX NAV's system is clearly usable for cloud flying? Were is my statement on USRC policy outlawing its presence at contests? Hello RC...I know your'e reading this... We are waiting..............

Sean
F2

What are you waiting for? The policy published in Feb fits this perfectly.

Don't bring an LX with the external AHRS plugged into it. If you must, disable it and get a waiver. Its up to the individual competitor to get the waiver. Its not initiated by the RC.

-Dave
 




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 02:06 PM
US Rules Poll and Rules Committee Election Ken Sorenson Soaring 0 December 1st 06 01:36 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 02:36 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:42 PM.


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