US Rules Committee to ban XC Soar in US soaring competitioneffective immediately? - Ahh the "genius!"

On Feb 24, 1:12*pm, T8 wrote:
On Feb 24, 3:01*pm, wrote:

Evan:

It's degraded and slow to update if the gps source is 1 hz (as most are), also assumes zero sideslip and assumes pitch is related only to difference between TE vario and vertical speed.
Despite those limitations, I would consider that it *would be possible (but not recommended) for a pilot of average skill to cloud fly with such an algorithm.

Gps derived attitude is used in autopilots in low cost uavs.

There are also more capable gps-only attitude systems that use three gps receivers, the phase differences yielding attitude at high accuracy and high rate.

You can see now why I shudder when gyros are singled out as the evil component that supposedly enables cloud flying.

I think -- with respect to modern sailplanes -- you are
optimistic :-). *I've flown simulated instrument in Cessnas on riotous
soaring days. *I actually did a 45 minute check flight in a new type
that way, all under the hood, from 500 agl on take off, to 1000 agl in
the pattern one time. *Made me green as all get out. *But the point
is, the effective bandwidth of a real gyro horizon is probably on the
order of 20 or 30 Hz. *I am certain I could not cloud fly in
turbulence on 1 Hz. *I might be able to keep wings level on an
emergency letdown (flaps & spoilers out) in reasonably smooth air.
I'm hoping our RC interpretation is similar because it leads to a
simplification in the rules interpretation for guys with older (1 Hz)
equipment and modern softwa "No gyros / No 3G/4G / No problem". *QT
says otherwise in one of these threads, but I have had private
conversation with one of the other RC guys that sounded amenable to
this in principle. *I think it's defensible for the short term, if not
preferred for the medium or longer term. *The contest season is upon
us, we need solutions, pretty much right now.

Better ban these, and other (cheaper) products like it while you're at
it.
http://www.micropilot.com/
28 grams - two FOGs, GPS, pressure speed and altitude.
We either have an honor system, or we don't. Pick one. I'm just glad
my Dell Streak and I don't fly contests.

I would hope that the U.S. RC will not ban the GPS based AH
capability. It's probably unreliable with the 1sec GPS updates. Any
1sec update moving map software could probably be used as a crude AH
anyway... are we going to ban use of the ClearNav, Outdie, Minimaps,
etc?

The rules should specify banning devices that display an AH based on
an inertial measurement unit (IMU) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_measurement_unit

My plans are to fly this year with LK8000.

Walt Rogers, WX

On Feb 24, 9:18*am, wrote:
There seems to be a misconception around that gyros are required to implement a functional AH.
This is not true.

Gps derived attitude algorithms have been in the open literature for many years. Indeed, this is what is implemented in xcsoar.

A higher fidelity and faster AH is enabled by data fusion of gps, 3 axis accelerometers gyros and magnetometers. Emerging smartphones have these sensors.

To my knowledge, many of the apps available for smartphones do NOT implement the complete 9 degree of freedom data fusion - typically they assume unaccelerated dynamics (I.e not circling flight). This is just a warning should anyone decide to try those apps out.

On Feb 25, 5:29*pm, WaltWX wrote:
I would hope that the U.S. RC will not ban the GPS based AH
capability. It's probably unreliable with the 1sec GPS updates. Any
1sec update moving map software could probably be used as a crude AH
anyway... are we going to ban use of the ClearNav, Outdie, Minimaps,
etc?

The rules should specify banning devices that display an AH based on
an inertial measurement unit (IMU)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_measurement_unit

My plans are to fly this year with LK8000.

Walt Rogers, WX

On Feb 24, 9:18*am, wrote:







There seems to be a misconception around that gyros are required to implement a functional AH.
This is not true.

Gps derived attitude algorithms have been in the open literature for many years. Indeed, this is what is implemented in xcsoar.

A higher fidelity and faster AH is enabled by data fusion of gps, 3 axis accelerometers gyros and magnetometers. Emerging smartphones have these sensors.

To my knowledge, many of the apps available for smartphones do NOT implement the complete 9 degree of freedom data fusion - typically they assume unaccelerated dynamics (I.e not circling flight). This is just a warning should anyone decide to try those apps out.

Let me give some advice. Don't try to talk to the software guys about
this. They have taken this as a personal insult against their
beautiful work! You will get tarred and feathered if you try to make
any suggestions regarding this matter.

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 09:45:24 -0800 (PST), Tom Kelley
wrote:

It will be the responsibility of the pilot
to ensure that programs and applications that could make these devices
functional as AH equipment are not installed. Presence of these
programs or applications will be assumed to be evidence of intent not
to comply with the provisions described herein.

Pilots please note that substituting an inexpensive “retrieve phone”
in the glider for a more capable phone used in daily life can be
expected to avoid any questions in this area.


Hi Tom,

a silly question from someone who is having a really good laugh about
this discussion (I'm from Germany and therefore not affected):

How are you going to conduct the strip search of any pilot entering
his or her glider (in order to stop him/her from smuggeling a
smartphone on board) ...?



Andreas

On Feb 26, 12:41*pm, Andreas Maurer wrote:
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 09:45:24 -0800 (PST), Tom Kelley

wrote:
It will be the responsibility of the pilot
to ensure that programs and applications that could make these devices
functional as AH equipment are not installed. Presence of these
programs or applications will be assumed to be evidence of intent not
to comply with the provisions described herein.
Pilots please note that substituting an inexpensive “retrieve phone”
in the glider for a more capable phone used in daily life can be
expected to avoid any questions in this area.

Hi Tom,

a silly question from someone who is having a really good laugh about
this discussion (I'm from Germany and therefore not affected):

How are you going to conduct the strip search of any pilot entering
his or her glider (in order to stop him/her from smuggeling a
smartphone on board) ...?



Andreas

Andreas, that really is silly.
BUT sinced you asked,
The ""HOOTER"" girls will be coming out and doing their best!!!!

Regards, Tom.

On Feb 24, 12:52*pm, "kirk.stant" wrote:

So - I suggest we change the enforcement of the cloud flying ban from
the prohibition of any device that would allow it, to the use of
"sportmanship", coupled with the ability of PowerFLARM to show what
other gliders around you are doing. *If I'm circling 500' below
cloudbase, and see a PF track 2000' above me and climbing, and I look
up and see nothing but cloud - then I'm going to report that glider,
and it should be pretty easy to find out who it is via the turned in
logger traces.

Then stop worrying about it and race!

Kirk
66
No gyros - yet...

And just as a reminder, there are often days with weak wave around the
clouds. Even at Uvalde. Not much use during the race, as it is often
only a knot or two and the thermals are often much more. But, if the
start gate height is set high and the bases are lower, you can get "on
top" without losing sight of the ground and pick up a few minutes on
those hanging out below cloudbase.

I remember the first day of a regionals at TSA where I found the wave
and got at least 1000 feet up above base. On a day with 2 knot
thermals. Ha! Just got 5 minutes on all you suckers down there
trying to figure out "how the heck did he get up there?" But, I was
back down at cloudbase with the rest of them by the time I got to the
edge of the cylinder. But, seeing the desperation of the gliders
below me searching in the blue and sink was priceless.

So, don't be too quick to accuse someone of "cloud flying" just
because they are above you and you are "right at" cloud base.

Now, if the rain will just stop at Daytona...

Steve Leonard
Flat-land Wave Flyer

a silly question from someone who is having a really good laugh about
this discussion (I'm from Germany and therefore not affected):

How are you going to conduct the strip search of any pilot entering
his or her glider (in order to stop him/her from smuggeling a
smartphone on board) ...?



Andreas

Don't bet on not being affected. The IGC is on top of this every bit
as much as the US rules committee, they're just not masochistic enough
to read r.a.s.

There is also a huge difference between instruments sitting right in
the cockpit that everyone can see have artificial horizon displays,
and something you need to hack or smuggle in. The point is to raise
the costs of cheating, and avoid the environment in which each pilot
thinks "all the others are doing it" and feels justified.

Why don't we worry about hacked cell phones and smuggled artificial
horizons? Because anyone who wants to cheat that badly will obviously
put his efforts towards hacking IGC files and smuggling far more
useful electronics on board.

John Cochrane

On Feb 26, 3:56*pm, John Cochrane
wrote:
a silly question from someone who is having a really good laugh about
this discussion (I'm from Germany and therefore not affected):

How are you going to conduct the strip search of any pilot entering
his or her glider (in order to stop him/her from smuggeling a
smartphone on board) ...?



Andreas

Don't bet on not being affected. The IGC is on top of this every bit
as much as the US rules committee, they're just not masochistic enough
to read r.a.s.

There is also a huge difference between instruments sitting right in
the cockpit that everyone can see have artificial horizon displays,
and something you need to hack or smuggle in. The point is to raise
the costs of cheating, and avoid the environment in which each pilot
thinks "all the others are doing it" and feels justified.

Why don't we worry about hacked cell phones and smuggled artificial
horizons? Because anyone who wants to cheat that badly will obviously
put his efforts towards hacking IGC files and smuggling far more
useful electronics on board.

John Cochrane

John,

Can the rules make a differentiation between simple GPS displayed info
such as LK8000 and XCsoar? They have a simple turn and bank which is
simply based on ground track heading changes.

Lane
XF

On Sun, 26 Feb 2012 11:57:55 -0800 (PST), Tom Kelley
wrote:

How are you going to conduct the strip search of any pilot entering
his or her glider (in order to stop him/her from smuggeling a
smartphone on board) ...?



Andreas

Andreas, that really is silly.
BUT sinced you asked,
The ""HOOTER"" girls will be coming out and doing their best!!!!


Hi Tom,

that Hooter girls thing sounds good and is probably going to attract
many guys to the struggling US contest scene.

But in earnest:
Today nearly any appilication can be run on a small mobile device.
Banning certain types of applications is never going to work as long
as there is no way to enforce that such a device cannot be smuggled on
board.
I really wonder how the US is going to deal with this problem.


Cheers
Andreas

Is Garmin G1000 illegal?

:-)

On Friday, February 24, 2012 10:09:01 AM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
I hate to bring this up again...but I must.

I have learned this morning that XCSoar is to be banned from US soaring competitions. In fact our rules committee is apparently planning to also ban all free, open source applications because they "feel" they cannot control whether these applications may implement artificial horizons and other "cheater" functionality. Clearly these elite rule makers don't seem to understand how easy it is to install and use a different apps (or simply build your own) for these cheater AH functions and have decided to inconvenience many pilots in US Soaring Competition in a last ditched effort to maintain their completely unenforceable AH rule.

Please confirm or deny, US Rules Committee, this news for the US Pilots who use or have just started to use this outstanding, free and intensely popular software...XC Soar? You might save alot of people $300 on their android PDA they are buying to run it...

While they get back to us...this news is apparently true (confirmed by XC Soar Developers) and the folks over at the US Rules Committee are working hard to write up the documentation required to ban XC Soar for US Pilots as we speak.

Gentleman of the US Rules Committee. I have officially lost all respect for your leadership assuming this is true. This is without question the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard of in any of the many sports that I have been involved in over my lifetime.

As you (Rules Committee) darn well know...many in the US have actually spent winter preparing XC Soar for this season and buying Dell Streaks to run XC Soar on.

Maybe we should start banning pee systems aimed aft because they give us extra thrust? While your at it maybe we should ban compasses because I can promise you that I can hold course in IMC with that instrument and an airspeed indicator alone? Maybe ban the Airspeed Indicator too? How about we ban all instrumentation altogether and just use the force? How about we ban pilots from watching star wars movies? They might learn something and become able to fly with their eyes closed?

I look forward to more comedy in the weeks to come per your upcoming announcement of this ban of XC soar and any other FREE Navigation Software.

Wow! You cant make this kind of stuff up...

Sincerely,

Sean Fidler
F2