New Butterfly Vario

On Jan 27, 6:31*pm, Bruno wrote:
I am planning on getting my order in for the Butterfly next week at
the convention so this topic is of great interest. I don't understand
why the instrument needs to be disabled. I agree that it could give a
competitive edge in competition so why not just make sure the igc
records if the artificial horizon feature was used and we are good. *I
would hate to disable an instrument for a contest and then need that
instrument due to a life or death screw up on my part but it is now
disabled.

How about a rules consideration that says if an artificial horizon is
available during a contest that it must be associated with the logger
of the files being used for judging and that a log must be recorded if
that feature is used? *It would still be available if the crap hit the
fan to save the pilot's butt, however if used, the pilot gets zero
points for the day. *Some of the best pilots I know who are also very
safety conscious have confided in me that they have been trapped above
clouds without an artificial horizon and really scared themselves
getting out of it. I for one want the safety of having an instrument
to help me if my life depends on it. I am sure the rules can
accommodate that.

Looking forward to seeing you all next week at the convention.
Bruno - B4

Just to add a bit more fuel to the fire, there is a large body of
evidence on the power side that even *with* an artificial horizon and
turn indicator, the average lifetime for a non-instrument-rated pilot
in clouds is about 3 minutes, and the accident sequences on which this
evidence is based almost invariably start with straight and level
entry into IMC. Anyone who thinks that just installing an artificial
horizon in their glider is a 'get out of jail free' card is fooling
themselves. I urge anyone considering this to get a copy of Condor
(which has a turn indicator installed in most panels) and try their
luck at maintaining any sort of reasonable attitude/airspeed solely by
reference to instruments.

When I owned a Cirrus SR22 power plane some years back, I carried a
GPS-196 (with a GPS-generated artificial horizon and turn coordinator)
with me as a last-ditch backup if all the electrics died. This
worked, but it took quite a bit of practice to be able to stay
reasonably upright using just that instrument.

Just my $0.02

TA

At 19:15 09 February 2012, Frank Paynter wrote:
On Jan 27, 6:31=A0pm, Bruno wrote:
I am planning on getting my order in for the Butterfly next week at
the convention so this topic is of great interest. I don't understand
why the instrument needs to be disabled. I agree that it could give a
competitive edge in competition so why not just make sure the igc
records if the artificial horizon feature was used and we are good.
=A0I
would hate to disable an instrument for a contest and then need that
instrument due to a life or death screw up on my part but it is now
disabled.

How about a rules consideration that says if an artificial horizon is
available during a contest that it must be associated with the logger
of the files being used for judging and that a log must be recorded if
that feature is used? =A0It would still be available if the crap hit
the
fan to save the pilot's butt, however if used, the pilot gets zero
points for the day. =A0Some of the best pilots I know who are also very
safety conscious have confided in me that they have been trapped above
clouds without an artificial horizon and really scared themselves
getting out of it. I for one want the safety of having an instrument
to help me if my life depends on it. I am sure the rules can
accommodate that.

Looking forward to seeing you all next week at the convention.
Bruno - B4

Just to add a bit more fuel to the fire, there is a large body of
evidence on the power side that even *with* an artificial horizon and
turn indicator, the average lifetime for a non-instrument-rated pilot
in clouds is about 3 minutes, and the accident sequences on which this
evidence is based almost invariably start with straight and level
entry into IMC. Anyone who thinks that just installing an artificial
horizon in their glider is a 'get out of jail free' card is fooling
themselves. I urge anyone considering this to get a copy of Condor
(which has a turn indicator installed in most panels) and try their
luck at maintaining any sort of reasonable attitude/airspeed solely by
reference to instruments.

When I owned a Cirrus SR22 power plane some years back, I carried a
GPS-196 (with a GPS-generated artificial horizon and turn coordinator)
with me as a last-ditch backup if all the electrics died. This
worked, but it took quite a bit of practice to be able to stay
reasonably upright using just that instrument.

Just my $0.02

TA

CH Ventus B

"If we are all "just dust in the wind", then I want to be at the top of a Huge Dust Devil!"

John and All, Just for a moment put all the other rule-software-hardware
changes aside, how do you think contest pilots would react to the CD
setting a Max flying height for the day! Just say the weather man forcasts
cloudbase to be 10K msl for the day and the CD announces max flying height
of 9.5k and all logs for that day are checked for max height just as they
are now for 17.5k. Now no advantage to cloud flying, no need to worry about
what instruments we have or don't have.

Sure that weather man may not have it right but we still have a max height
limit regardless. If his estimate is low and cloud base is 2k higher it is
still fair as no one can go higher. If he is too high and cloudbase is
lower we are right where we are now but with todays forcasting abilities he
would not be off that far and it is movable right up until the start gate
opens.

Just sayin---


CH Ventus B

"If we are all "just dust in the wind", then I want to be at the top of a Huge Dust Devil!"

John and All, Just for a moment put all the other rule-software-hardware
changes aside, how do you think contest pilots would react to the CD
setting a Max flying height for the day! Just say the weather man forcasts
cloudbase to be 10K msl for the day and the CD announces max flying height
of 9.5k and all logs for that day are checked for max height just as they
are now for 17.5k. Now no advantage to cloud flying, no need to worry about
what instruments we have or don't have.

Sure that weather man may not have it right but we still have a max height
limit regardless. If his estimate is low and cloud base is 2k higher it is
still fair as no one can go higher. If he is too high and cloudbase is
lower we are right where we are now but with todays forcasting abilities he
would not be off that far and it is movable right up until the start gate
opens.

Just sayin---


CH Ventus B

"If we are all "just dust in the wind", then I want to be at the top of a Huge Dust Devil!"

On Feb 9, 3:28*pm, Cliff Hilty
wrote:
John and All, Just for a moment put all the other rule-software-hardware
changes aside, how do you think contest pilots would react to the CD
setting a Max flying height for the day! Just say the weather man forcasts
cloudbase to be 10K msl for the day and the CD announces max flying height
of 9.5k and all logs for that day are checked for max height just as they
are now for 17.5k. Now no advantage to cloud flying, no need to worry about
what instruments we have or don't have.

Sure that weather man may not have it right but we still have a max height
limit regardless. If his estimate is low and cloud base is 2k higher it is
still fair as no one can go higher. If he is too high and cloudbase is
lower we are right where we are now but with todays forcasting abilities he
would not be off that far and it is movable right up until the start gate
opens.

Just sayin---

CH Ventus B

"If we are all "just dust in the wind", then I want to be at the top of a Huge Dust Devil!"

Not practical in the East, for sure. As well, it doesn't necessarily
solve the problem.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

Exactly. So the chance of being proficient and climbing up into the cloud using a turn and bank is slim to none. Right. So why not let pilots have a turn and bank so that there is at least a chance for them if they do one day get into the cloud.

A hear post after post and frankly am losing respect fast.

This is so wrong...sad. The RC craps on safety out of fear that someone might cheat with an instrument that even the RC says is unusable for what is feared, thermal-ling into clouds with it.

You guys would be great witnesses in my trial...keep it coming.

Really think about what you are saying here.

1) assuming anyone with a safety instrument onboard at a contest has installed it to cheat
2) assuming that a) its impossible to use safely if IMC is encountered AND AT THE SAME TIME b) that everyone with one intends to cheat and will benefit from it.
3) totally disregarding the safety aspect of the instrument.

More observations:
Why does any glider have one?
Why does any light airplane have one?
Why do these companies build AH's into their instruments?

Are these people all idiots? Because that's what you are saying. Why do these instruments exist for gliders? In any form? Hmmmm?

On 2/9/2012 7:49 PM, Sean Fidler wrote:
Exactly. So the chance of being proficient and climbing up into the
cloud using a turn and bank is slim to none. Right. So why not let
pilots have a turn and bank so that there is at least a chance for
them if they do one day get into the cloud.

A hear post after post and frankly am losing respect fast.

This is so wrong...sad. The RC craps on safety out of fear that
someone might cheat with an instrument that even the RC says is
unusable for what is feared, thermal-ling into clouds with it.

You guys would be great witnesses in my trial...keep it coming.

Really think about what you are saying here.

1) assuming anyone with a safety instrument onboard at a contest has
installed it to cheat 2) assuming that a) its impossible to use
safely if IMC is encountered AND AT THE SAME TIME b) that everyone
with one intends to cheat and will benefit from it. 3) totally
disregarding the safety aspect of the instrument.

More observations: Why does any glider have one? Why does any light
airplane have one? Why do these companies build AH's into their
instruments?

Are these people all idiots? Because that's what you are saying.
Why do these instruments exist for gliders? In any form? Hmmmm?

My guess is you have not flown in contests, do not have experience
flying in clouds in a glider, and do not have very much glider
experience. I flew contests for 30 years, and never needed a
cloud-flying instrument, nor did anyone report needing one, and no one
has lobbied for them to be allowed. 30 years! Plus, I've flown 5000
hours in gliders outside of contests, and never needed one even then.

You are making way too big a deal out this. The risks in contests do not
come from flying without a cloud-flying instrument, but from many other
sources. It is not just at the bottom of the list; it's not even on the
list.

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

- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what
you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz

I do fly contests, have many, many hours, am a commercial pilot, instrument rated. So I guess your incorrect. Hmmm.

Any more lessons for me?

On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:05:24 -0600, Sean Fidler wrote:

I do fly contests, have many, many hours, am a commercial pilot,
instrument rated. So I guess your incorrect. Hmmm.

Any more lessons for me?

Does anyone here track the longest thread ever on RAS? This one's on its
third week. I think if we can keep Eric and Sean baiting each other for a
few more days, we'll probably have a record.

Whoever makes the Butterfly vario owes you guys a free sample...every day
I get about 10 pop-ups on my computer with "New Butterfly Vario" as the
subject. Personally, after all these pop-ups, I have a weird compulsion
to buy one of these things. I don't even know what it does, and I'm happy
with my current vario, but I just feel compelled to give Paul Remde my
credit card number...very strange.

Of course, if you do get a freebie, remember not to use it in a contest...

--
Stefan Murry