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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
On Feb 13, 4:17*pm, T8 wrote:
Can anyone name a single pilot who has an accident, or even a bad scare due to entering IMC in competition? -Evan Ludeman / T8 Yes, Evan, I had a bad scare in a contest environment (Elmira 2009 Sports Class Nationals) I found myself in heavy down pour (IMC). I am talking about the kind of down pour that makes you stop on the highway because you don't see anything. I was not able to see anything neither ahead nor down for what seemed like eternity. In reality the IMC lasted 20 seconds or maybe a bit more before I barely saw the ground. For all that time I did not touch controls and that saved the day. After I started seeing bits and pieces of the ground I turned away from the cloud. If I had a gyro I would have executed 180 deg right away and I would have avoided much of the stress. Saying all that, it was my bad judgement that got me there, although I could swear the cloud did not look bad up to the moment I got poured on. I learned from that experience. I am still worried more about people flying in clouds than me entering IMC again. I am thinking that if someone is going to fly in clouds they better do it with the right equipment rather than a cell phone gyro especially if I am under the cloud they are flying in. I am slowly thinking that maybe allowing gyros is not that bad of an idea. I can't make up my mind on which side of this argument I am on. Andrzej |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
One more comment and then I promise I'll shut up on this topic for a
few days: ----- § 91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command. (a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft. ----- SSA rules do not trump FARs, nor do the SSA rules take precedence over the responsibility of the PIC. Even if the SSA permits AH devices, its still the PIC who's at-fault if he dies while trying to cloud-fly. (And if he's that eager to cheat and cares that little about his own safety, do we really think a rule will discourage him? Especially when things like iPhones and PDAs and mini-EFIS systems are so portable and readily available?) --Noel |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
Sure, a number of them, but I won't.
The rules recommendation to set start cylinder top WELL BELOW CLOUDBASE has helped (when CDs have followed the recommendation)... |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
On Feb 13, 2:15*pm, Andy wrote:
On Feb 13, 2:45*pm, Brad wrote: I would also hope that my fellow competitors would approve of my action and not protest. Brad, Your proposal is incomplete. *To be complete you would need to define the penalty that would be applied if your disabling means was found to have been broken at any time during the contest. Such penalty could reasonably include loss off all contest points up to and including the day on which the disabling device was found to be ineffective. *Restricting the points loss to a single day may require your glider to inspected every day, something you could perhaps arrange with the CD, scorer, or an other designated competitor. Andy Andy, That all sounds reasonable to me. It's much easier for me to do what we've talked about rather than pull my instrument pod, unscrew the panel, un-hook the wires and un-screw and remove my Tru_trak. If I am willing to take several days off of work and spend a bunch of money for a contest I am sure not going to cheat and risk everything. That being said......IF I needed my Tru-Trak, then I would accept the agreed upon penalty.............but if the AH saved me from pulling my wings off and being a lawn dart (as some have suggested) then at least I would be alive to take my beating for cheating! thanks, Brad |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
On Feb 13, 6:17*pm, Dave Nadler wrote:
Sure, a number of them, but I won't. The rules recommendation to set start cylinder top WELL BELOW CLOUDBASE has helped (when CDs have followed the recommendation)... If we're talking about pilots willfully flying into the edges of clouds, then it doesn't seem like adding AHs is going to contribute to safety. Maybe you see it differently? -Evan Ludeman / T8 |
#126
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
I am just passing along observations.
Remember, the rule was created (at least) partly to reduce the temptation... FWIW, Best Regards, Dave |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
On Feb 13, 4:08*pm, Dave Nadler wrote:
I am just passing along observations. Remember, the rule was created (at least) partly to reduce the temptation.... FWIW, Best Regards, Dave Sorry, I realize I'm breaking my word about shutting up - but was that rule created *before* the new start-cylinder rules that require you to be below start cylinder height for 2 minutes prior to going through the gate? Because with the newer start-cylinder rules in place, a lot of these concerns go away. --Noel (OK, really this time, I'll be quiet for a bit!) |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
On Feb 13, 3:22*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
Brad - Here's the catch though: *You'd still be illegal to fly because you use LK8000 or XCSoar. *Since they have AH functions that you cannot "safety-wire" in the off position, you can't use them. *Sorry! No contest-flying for you! *Not until you buy a dedicated flight computer for a couple-thousand-dollars! *Oh, and if you buy a nice cell-phone, you cannot fly with it. *Sorry, gotta hike to a farmer's house in the middle of nowhere to make a call and get retrieved! How do these things improve safety or help increase participation? They don't - THAT'S the insanity of this rule. *Its much, much larger than the half-dozen idiots in the country who'd kill themselves trying to cloud-fly simply because they have an AH in the cockpit. The sport and its rule-makers _must_ adjust to modern realities or the sport is going to continue to die. *In some ways they're doing great things; but in others they're falling flat on their face. *Adjusting to modern society _doesn't_ mean you have to support million-dollar thermal-detectors; but it _does_ mean the application of common- sense!! *Skew the rules towards the greater common good; _don't_ skew the rules and everyone's equipment out of fear that a teeny fraction of individuals will cheat. Anyone willing to cheat to cloud-fly is also willing to be a big dick at their next contest and protest everyone who flies with a smart- phone. *I'd LOVE to see the fallout from *that* event! --Noel XCSoar has an artificial horizon? I did not know that. |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
On Feb 13, 4:51*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
On Feb 13, 4:08*pm, Dave Nadler wrote: I am just passing along observations. Remember, the rule was created (at least) partly to reduce the temptation... FWIW, Best Regards, Dave Sorry, I realize I'm breaking my word about shutting up - but was that rule created *before* the new start-cylinder rules that require you to be below start cylinder height for 2 minutes prior to going through the gate? Because with the newer start-cylinder rules in place, a lot of these concerns go away. --Noel (OK, really this time, I'll be quiet for a bit!) it's easier if you just say "I won't post anymore" to yourself rather than post it, how do I know this...... besides, this is a good thread with a lot of information........if the internet was around in it's current form during the early day's of GPS I bet things would have sounded very similar. Brad |
#130
|
|||
|
|||
New Butterfly Vario
On Feb 13, 7:51*pm, "noel.wade" wrote:
On Feb 13, 4:08*pm, Dave Nadler wrote: I am just passing along observations. Remember, the rule was created (at least) partly to reduce the temptation... FWIW, Best Regards, Dave Sorry, I realize I'm breaking my word about shutting up - but was that rule created *before* the new start-cylinder rules that require you to be below start cylinder height for 2 minutes prior to going through the gate? Because with the newer start-cylinder rules in place, a lot of these concerns go away. --Noel (OK, really this time, I'll be quiet for a bit!) 2 minute rule has been with us since the beginning of GPS start. Problems arise when top of lift is 5500 and top of gate is 6000 and guys poke up into the murk. CDs don't always follow recommended practice.... Nav devices without gyros probably are never going to constitute instruments that "permit flight without reference to ground". GPS plus ipaq or similar probably okay no matter what software. I don't speak for the RC, but I think this is a pretty defensible position. I'm planning on using XCSoar in comps in April & May. -Evan Ludeman / T8 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
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 05:31 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 |