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

New Butterfly Vario



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #211  
Old February 17th 12, 06:53 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tom Kelley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 59
Default New Butterfly Vario

On Feb 17, 10:07*am, Sean Fidler wrote:
Fair enough.

At the end of the day this is all about having fun and being safe. *If I am massively naive in the level by which people will push the rules in this matter, I apologize.

It is unfortunate that we cannot simply have all of these tools in the gliders and trust that our fellow pilots would fly legally, fairly and within the rules. *But I do understand that this may not be the case and that their may not be a perfect solution here.

I enjoyed the discussion for the most part and look forward to seeing where this all goes. *For the record, I was going to exchange my V7 for a butterfly, but have decided to keep the V7 which has no AH.

I think its better to let this play out before investing $3500 in a modern Vario. *It would be too easy to be accused of foiling any safeguards in the Butterfly firmware. *Im not sure that butterfly will be successful in removing all of the risk of cheating with their effort.

What of the LX Zues? *What of all the others that come along, etc. *Probably better to see where this rule goes. *Probably better for the soaring instrument manufactures to rethink their product marketing, etc.

Sean
F2


I have asked the Rules committee for 2 waviers for the 2012 SSA
soaring season. One is for cell phones and the other concerns PDA
software. I have been informed that the waviers will not be needed as
clarification will be shortly announced.
Simply standby and allow the thought process to continue as it has
been shown by the past that the results usually turn out good and
sometimes better than expected.

Thomas Kelley #711.
  #212  
Old February 17th 12, 07:59 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tom Kelley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 59
Default New Butterfly Vario

On Feb 17, 10:53*am, Tom Kelley wrote:
On Feb 17, 10:07*am, Sean Fidler wrote:

Fair enough.


At the end of the day this is all about having fun and being safe. *If I am massively naive in the level by which people will push the rules in this matter, I apologize.


It is unfortunate that we cannot simply have all of these tools in the gliders and trust that our fellow pilots would fly legally, fairly and within the rules. *But I do understand that this may not be the case and that their may not be a perfect solution here.


I enjoyed the discussion for the most part and look forward to seeing where this all goes. *For the record, I was going to exchange my V7 for a butterfly, but have decided to keep the V7 which has no AH.


I think its better to let this play out before investing $3500 in a modern Vario. *It would be too easy to be accused of foiling any safeguards in the Butterfly firmware. *Im not sure that butterfly will be successful in removing all of the risk of cheating with their effort.


What of the LX Zues? *What of all the others that come along, etc. *Probably better to see where this rule goes. *Probably better for the soaring instrument manufactures to rethink their product marketing, etc.


Sean
F2


I have asked the Rules committee for 2 waviers for the 2012 SSA
contest season. One is for cell phones and the other concerns PDA
software. I have been informed that the waviers will not be needed as
clarification will be shortly announced.
Simply standby and allow the thought process to continue as it has
been shown by the past that the results usually turn out good and
sometimes better than expected.

Thomas Kelley #711.


Sean,

As your a fairly new contest pilot, I would like to ad that the many
that have come before you, have normally used Sportmanship with our
rules. Even if we disagreed with them we found ways to deal with them.
Some of these ways might not be the easiest way at the time, but it
was not that difficult either. Sportmanship has been found by many as
the best way to race by. Sportmanship is not where you place on the
scoresheet, but how you, and it is you, play the game. We are
responible for our actions as one but the sport lives because of
sportsmanship shown by all. My earlier post on Sportsmanship was not
created by me, it is how it has been defined by those who have come
much earlier in time. What it does give is a well thought out
dirrection some may wish to consider. I choose that dirrection.

All of us have shown, we have flown up and down the score sheet
during our history of contests. Very few of us have maintained a true
Sportmanslike attiude during some contests.
Bobby Jones once saw his golf ball move. His caddy and others never
saw that and they told him he didn't have to take that penality. But
he did, as he said he saw it and the rules rquired him to. He lost
that major tourament by one stroke. Other great players in out history
have stepped forward in many sports and done the same. Thats what they
are remembered for, is how they played the game.
What I, and I speak as one, have never seen at all the contests I have
been at, are some of the things you have spoken of. It surprizes me
that the few contests you have been at you have seen so much to be
this concerned about. I accept your concern and hope we all can
continue to grow.
As was posted earlier, once you break the chain of sound judgement and
reasoning, unexpected results can happen. Those results can cause
unrepairable harm to inocent bystanders who were never though of.
We have spoken many times on tasks that have been called. If your not
comfortable with the task, let the CD know. You are not forced to come
to a contest, you choose to come. You are expected to read and
understand the rules, and hopefully, in my case, all the rules will be
understood before my retirement from contest soaring.
What I am leading to, is our sport lives because of us. Since we offer
no prize moneys it has remained a amateur sport. Bobby Jones asked why
he remained a amateur, he answered as this showed his undivided love
for the sport. I hope to remain an amateur in our sport of contest
soaring.

Thomas Kelley #711.



  #213  
Old February 17th 12, 10:28 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Sean Fidler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,005
Default New Butterfly Vario

Tom,

I like the movie "The Legend of Bagger Vance" as much as anyone. That scene (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhnZzNWAwSM) where Bobby Jones gives himself a penalty is recreated there. It is a great moment in sport for sure.. I think many pilots in soaring have the same sportsman attitude and would do the same if they did something illegally such as broke cloud base with or without an AH.

Im not exactly sure what you are implying with the email in general to be honest. Let me say this.

I have no intention of cheating or being a bad sport. I dont intend to be a pain in the ass here. I simply wish to argue for a more righteous and simple path in general. I just find the gyro rule inconsistent, very difficult to enforce and strongly question that it is fundamentally safer to mercilessly ban any and all gyro's (smart phones, PNA's, etc) than to just go ahead and allow them.

I really dont feel that I have alot of contest knowledge. If that is what you are implying I agree with you 100%. I dont. I have a fair bit of CC soaring experience. I just really enjoy the sport of soaring, its people and the challenges it offers me at this point. It is a distinct passion. I also care about safety and understand the dangers of flying. I hope to be participating in the sport of soaring for some time. Trying to improve and learn.

As I pilot, an HONEST pilot, I dont like it that I cant have a gyro in my cockpit in contests. The idea of installing, uninstalling and screwing around with yet another problem is generally not attractive to me. I dont want this rule to be changed in order to cheat. I want this rule to be changed mainly out of the hope to be safe. I think it is possible that one day I may find myself in a cloud without any reference. Shame on me, but I think it will happen one day. Again, perhaps I am naive in my belief that this would help me fly straight and level out of IMC if I ever should need it...but gyro's certainly help me in other aircraft when in the clouds.

I personally am amazed that people (Euro's, etc) have learned to cloud fly effectively in a contest environment. I can honestly say that I would NEVER attempt it. Its illegal, crazy, endangers other pilots (power and glider) and would forever destroy the personal reputation of any pilot who is caught doing so. Its sad that that is apparently not true of all pilots.

I appreciate it that you took the time to write your thoughts.

Fly safe.

Best,

Sean
  #214  
Old February 18th 12, 01:35 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Chris Nicholas[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 197
Default New Butterfly Vario

Somebody posed the question whether instrument flying skills are part
of the European glider pilot license.


I don’t know about other European countries, but in the UK, it is
not. When pilot qualifications (not at present a license necessarily)
stop being a BGA matter and become an EASA issue instead between April
this year and 2015, there will be a glider pilots licence, and
separately an instrument rating that can be added to it or not.


None of what follows is in any way a suggestion that other countries
copy us – I am simply stating facts as far as I know them. AFAIAC,
what you do in the USA in particular is entirely your affair.


Under the present UK arrangements, it is legal for gliders to go IMC
in class G airspace, which is where most of us fly. Nobody knows how
many people do it, nor what training they have had. Some are PPLs or
ATPLs with instrument ratings anyway. Some are not, and have learned
cloud flying by less formal means. My impression is that only a small
minority of glider pilots fly in cloud at all – but I know of no way
to establish that with certainty. My impression is gained partly from
talking to other pilots, but mostly from monitoring the cloud flying
radio frequency. I rarely hear anybody using it for cloud flying.


Competitions in the UK are either “rated” (and count for placings
towards the national competitions and national team membership etc.)
or “unrated”. I don’t know about the former, but cloud flying is often
if not always permitted in unrated competitions, of which I have
entered many. Collisions in cloud in competitions are virtually
unknown these days – we have had a radio procedure which seems
effective for over 30 years, and I think no incidents in that time.
There were a very few before that, even fewer or maybe none fatal in
the UK as far as I know.


We did have one fatal break-up in cloud nearly 30-40 years ago (not in
a competition). It was a very experienced pilot flying a modified
glider (extended wings) and the cause was unknown as far as I recall.


We had one cloud related collision, not competition, more recently. It
was about at cloud base. IIRC, neither pilot was using the cloud
flying protocol. There was another in very poor visibility. I won’t
comment further as my knowledge is second hand, from the accident
reports.


In the UK it is common practice to thermal up to cloud base, with no
requirement for instrument flying training let alone an IR. It is also
common to fly close to wave clouds. Occasionally people do enter cloud
inadvertently, but not usually sucked up in the way so graphically
described in Kempton Izuno's article. Before modern gliders, and
before much use of wave in the UK, clouds were more often used to gain
gold and diamond heights, typically in CBs – but most UK CBs are
nothing like as vigorous as those often found in the USA. I doubt if
anyone ventures deliberately into active CBs these days. (I have been
in one, or perhaps 2, not realising what they were developing into –
and I soon got out when I realised, and before the flashing and
banging started.)


I would be interested to know if it is possible to deduce from an IGC
logger file whether cloud was entered or not. If anyone wants to try
some analysis, I could provide some traces where I climbed from below
cloud up into them. I can’t say at what height, though i have a rough
idea from other clues and memory. My guess is that a competition
scrutineer would have difficulty in identifying the entry height. Even
harder would be to say when it got closer than 500 or 1000 feet from
cloud base, without other traces for comparison.


I hope you don’t mind a Brit providing the above information. As I
said, I am not trying to influence the USA scene, just provide some
facts relevant to questions posed by others.


Chris N
  #215  
Old February 18th 12, 01:54 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tom Kelley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 59
Default New Butterfly Vario

On Feb 17, 2:28*pm, Sean Fidler wrote:
Tom,

I like the movie "The Legend of Bagger Vance" as much as anyone. *That scene (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhnZzNWAwSM) where Bobby Jones gives himself a penalty is recreated there. *It is a great moment in sport for sure. *I think many pilots in soaring have the same sportsman attitude and would do the same if they did something illegally such as broke cloud base with or without an AH.




Sean, thanks for the link, thats neat. I read some book about Jones
maybe 45 to 50 years ago.



Im not exactly sure what you are implying with the email in general to be honest. *Let me say this.




Sean, to be sure, I am not implying anything. I speak as one, not for
others, as I have learned they wish to speak for themselves.



I have no intention of cheating or being a bad sport. *I dont intend to be a pain in the ass here. *I simply wish to argue for a more righteous and simple path in general. *I just find the gyro rule inconsistent, very difficult to enforce and strongly question that it is fundamentally safer to mercilessly ban any and all gyro's (smart phones, PNA's, etc) than to just go ahead and allow them.



Sean,
I am willing to go to any length to help you on the above. In order
for me to do this, please produce a letter from your local FAA GADO
office inwhich shows that they give approval of using any of these
devices for inadverently entering IMC conditions during an SSA
contest. Also, a letter from your insurer showing the same. After said
letters are recieved, I will do what I can to be of help. I understand
that for you, my level and my fellow entrants level of Sportsmanship
is something you choose not to follow and you seek a change so some of
the others will not infringe upon the rules. This is fine with me. I
will choose to believe differently. My fellow racers race without
infrigement on our rules and with the highest levels of sportsmanship
they can attain. You can rest assured that the top of our list, our US
Team members, both current and past National Champions, have always
displayed and given honor to our sport. I feel this towards ALL
entrants. Rest assured that at any past World Soaring Championship,
our flag has been carried with respect, flown with honor and proudly
displayed for all to see. No need to ever worry here.

I really dont feel that I have alot of contest knowledge. *If that is what you are implying I agree with you 100%. *I dont. *I have a fair bit of CC soaring experience. I just really enjoy the sport of soaring, its people and the challenges it offers me at this point. *It is a distinct passion. *I also care about safety and understand the dangers of flying. *I hope to be participating in the sport of soaring for some time. *Trying to improve and learn.

As I pilot, an HONEST pilot, I dont like it that I cant have a gyro in my cockpit in contests. *The idea of installing, uninstalling and screwing around with yet another problem is generally not attractive to me. *I dont want this rule to be changed in order to cheat. *I want this rule to be changed mainly out of the hope to be safe. *I think it is possible that one day I may find myself in a cloud without any reference. *Shame on me, but I think it will happen one day. *Again, perhaps I am naive in my belief that this would help me fly straight and level out of IMC if I ever should need it...but gyro's certainly help me in other aircraft when in the clouds.


Sean,
Thank you again for coming forward on the above issue. I, as you,
along with every person I know, will always choose safety first. We
have learned that this road is best to go down. Your thoughts about
someday, after reading stories of such happenings of cloud suction and
your not seeing any avoidable way of inadverently going IMC, as
wanting to carry a AH or gyro during SSA contests. I understand it as
a pain for some, yet others not. Again, let me be of help. Please,
please for those inocence bystanders, request a letter from your local
FAA GADO office giving you a preclearance to do any inadverent cloud
climb someday, somewhere. Please on the first practice day, ask the
CD for time to talk with the other entrants and inform them that you
might be doing an inadverent cloud climb, as you do not understand how
to avoid possible IMC conditions. As you state, your honest, as I
believe you are, but this thought is in your mind, so let me be of
help to you. Please go and get these letters, as its a good starting
solution to this problem.

I personally am amazed that people (Euro's, etc) have learned to

cloud fly effectively in a contest environment. *I can honestly say
that I would NEVER attempt it. *Its illegal, crazy, endangers other
pilots (power and glider) and would forever destroy the personal
reputation of any pilot who is caught doing so. *Its sad that that is
apparently not true of all pilots.


Sean, since you now state ""you would never attempt it"" , ""its
crazy"" it ""endangers other pilot"" then you have learned somehow,
someway, to aviod inadverently going IMC and mantaining VFR conditions
during SSA contests. Also, as the FAR's require, I may ad. I am so
happy for me and you. Dang golly.

SEAN, no need to now go do all that work of getting letters and stuff.
Wow, praise GOD, wait till Hank reads this, another miracle has
happened on RAS. Sean has learned to avoid going into cloud by maybe
using safe and sound judgement, understanding the operation capablitiy
of his glider, heck, whatever, its just good, good, good.
Hope is good, miracles do happen. Thank you, thank you.

I appreciate it that you took the time to write your thoughts.

Fly safe.

Best,

Sean


Sean,

I have met you and know your father. I do think the best of your
family. With over 27,000 hrs., over 200 passing their licensing test,
countless solo's, to many dang years of contest flying, bothering to
many CD's,(love bugging John Good, fun, fun, fun), Kicking KS's ass
along with the rest.

Remember this.

I will go to any length to be of service to you.

Thermal tight, Soar high, Fly safe.


Thomas Kelley #711.

  #216  
Old February 18th 12, 01:54 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Marotta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,601
Default New Butterfly Vario

Very interesting post, Chris. Using a knowledge of physics, I would infer
that the climb rate would increase upon cloud entry due to the release of
the latent heat of vaporization of the water vapor as it condenses. Again,
this is only a guess.

As to how would the scorer know that someone entered a cloud? If someone's
flight was protested, I'd imagine the scorer could poll the field to
determine cloud base over the course and duration of the flight. Anything
significantly above the agreed cloud base would be cause for suspicion,
though not proof.

Still, it would be interesting to look at one of your cloud flying traces
and try to guess where the cloud base was during the flight.


"Chris Nicholas" wrote in message
...
Somebody posed the question whether instrument flying skills are part
of the European glider pilot license.


I don’t know about other European countries, but in the UK, it is
not. When pilot qualifications (not at present a license necessarily)
stop being a BGA matter and become an EASA issue instead between April
this year and 2015, there will be a glider pilots licence, and
separately an instrument rating that can be added to it or not.


None of what follows is in any way a suggestion that other countries
copy us – I am simply stating facts as far as I know them. AFAIAC,
what you do in the USA in particular is entirely your affair.


Under the present UK arrangements, it is legal for gliders to go IMC
in class G airspace, which is where most of us fly. Nobody knows how
many people do it, nor what training they have had. Some are PPLs or
ATPLs with instrument ratings anyway. Some are not, and have learned
cloud flying by less formal means. My impression is that only a small
minority of glider pilots fly in cloud at all – but I know of no way
to establish that with certainty. My impression is gained partly from
talking to other pilots, but mostly from monitoring the cloud flying
radio frequency. I rarely hear anybody using it for cloud flying.


Competitions in the UK are either “rated” (and count for placings
towards the national competitions and national team membership etc.)
or “unrated”. I don’t know about the former, but cloud flying is often
if not always permitted in unrated competitions, of which I have
entered many. Collisions in cloud in competitions are virtually
unknown these days – we have had a radio procedure which seems
effective for over 30 years, and I think no incidents in that time.
There were a very few before that, even fewer or maybe none fatal in
the UK as far as I know.


We did have one fatal break-up in cloud nearly 30-40 years ago (not in
a competition). It was a very experienced pilot flying a modified
glider (extended wings) and the cause was unknown as far as I recall.


We had one cloud related collision, not competition, more recently. It
was about at cloud base. IIRC, neither pilot was using the cloud
flying protocol. There was another in very poor visibility. I won’t
comment further as my knowledge is second hand, from the accident
reports.


In the UK it is common practice to thermal up to cloud base, with no
requirement for instrument flying training let alone an IR. It is also
common to fly close to wave clouds. Occasionally people do enter cloud
inadvertently, but not usually sucked up in the way so graphically
described in Kempton Izuno's article. Before modern gliders, and
before much use of wave in the UK, clouds were more often used to gain
gold and diamond heights, typically in CBs – but most UK CBs are
nothing like as vigorous as those often found in the USA. I doubt if
anyone ventures deliberately into active CBs these days. (I have been
in one, or perhaps 2, not realising what they were developing into –
and I soon got out when I realised, and before the flashing and
banging started.)


I would be interested to know if it is possible to deduce from an IGC
logger file whether cloud was entered or not. If anyone wants to try
some analysis, I could provide some traces where I climbed from below
cloud up into them. I can’t say at what height, though i have a rough
idea from other clues and memory. My guess is that a competition
scrutineer would have difficulty in identifying the entry height. Even
harder would be to say when it got closer than 500 or 1000 feet from
cloud base, without other traces for comparison.


I hope you don’t mind a Brit providing the above information. As I
said, I am not trying to influence the USA scene, just provide some
facts relevant to questions posed by others.


Chris N

  #217  
Old February 18th 12, 02:33 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Chris Nicholas[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 197
Default New Butterfly Vario

Dan, see your emails. Regards - Chris

  #218  
Old February 18th 12, 04:01 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
S. Murry
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 68
Default New Butterfly Vario

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
  #219  
Old February 18th 12, 04:12 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Eric Greenwell[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,939
Default New Butterfly Vario

On 2/17/2012 6:32 AM, Sean Fidler wrote:
Im starting to think that some think I am arguing so that I can
personally cheat. I hope not. I just think that going against the
tide of technology here is a waste of time. stop, and go with it.


I do not think you are hoping to cheat.

Why do you, eric, think it is bad to allow AH for everyone and
smartphones? Just go with it? Would that be bad? Why?


I do think that following your recommendations could lead to people
cheating (and discovering they can not handle cloud flying), and that it
could lead people to thinking others ARE cheating (so they decide "why
bother entering contests?").

I do think that it is becoming increasingly easier to cheat, given
changes in technology, so perhaps the method to discourage cloud flying
needs to change. The most practical one I can think of is a daily
altitude limit enforced like the current one on 18,000'. A long term
approach could be one that detects cloud around the glider, such as
video or relative humidity, and makes it part of the logger record.

The "honor method" seems impractical if everyone has an AH on their
panel, without some means penalizing egregious abuse. That might be a
committee of pilots, chosen randomly each day, that examines logger
files for climbs well above others in the area, and gives penalties.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)
  #220  
Old February 18th 12, 04:16 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Eric Greenwell[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,939
Default New Butterfly Vario

On 2/17/2012 6:39 AM, Sean Fidler wrote:
Eric- i understand that in europe cloud flying training was part of
the private glider pilot requirements. not sure if this is still the
case today.

in general i think basic instrument skills should be a part of all
pilot training, even sport& glider pilot. every pilot should have
some basic understanding of how to maintain control of their aircraft
if forced into imc. im not saying they will all live, but that
doesn't mean they should not have some training.


That is always available in a power plane, but I don't many glider-only
pilots seek it out, and I think requiring it would reduce the number of
glider pilots entering the sport if it were required, but to the point
here (contests): contest experience has not shown that it would help.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)
 




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
Butterfly iGlide Reed von Gal Soaring 4 May 2nd 12 06:00 PM
WTB: 57mm Cambridge Vario/FS: 80mm Cambridge Vario ufmechanic Soaring 0 March 24th 09 06:31 PM
TE vario G.A. Seguin Soaring 8 June 8th 04 04:44 AM
WTB LD-200 Vario Romeo Delta Soaring 0 June 4th 04 03:08 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:50 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.