Wills Wing
Flytec

Oz Report

topic: GPS

145 articles, page:  1 

Mitch McAleer's take on the RRRG trial

Fri, Mar 25 2022, 12:26:51 pm MDT

He was in the court room

Andrei Firtat|Brad Hill|Crestline Soaring Society|Gil Dodgen|GPS|injury|insurance|lawyer|Marcello de Barros|Martin Palmaz|midair collision|Mitchell "Mitch" McAleer|PASA|Peter Pivka|RRRG|Tim Herr|USHGA|USHPA

Mitch writes:

The United States Hang Gliding and Paragliding Association executive management lies, all the time.

Mitchell McAleer

November 01 2021 at 10:36 PM

I spent three days in San Bernardino court watching the Peter Pivka, USHPA vs. Andrei Firtat trial. The USHPA, Tim Herr, and hired attorney Kirshbaum are defending Peter Pivka, a known liar, expelled from the USHPA, and the Crestline Soaring Society for lying about the mid air incident he caused, badly injuring Andrei, resulting in 4 fused upper lumbar vertebrae, long term care, loss of work, and long term chronic back pain for the victim of Peter Pivka's colossal ego, coupled with poor judgment and poor piloting skills.

At breaks in the trial Pivka walks from the defendant's chair, past me in the gallery never looking me in the eye, head high, shoulders back, a purposefully arrogant liar. Tim Herr, the lifetime USHGA, USHPA attorney is no different.

Pivka came to my house the day after the incident in 2017, asking for a couple broken upper brake lines replaced. He told me his version of the mid air story, claiming Andrei appeared below him in a steep climbing turn and impacted trailing edge of Andrei's canopy to Pivka's chest. Marcello de Barros came up the following day and showed me Andrei's GPS track, a virtually straight course along the front of Cloud peak ridge until impact and a straight line descent under a canopy collapsed by Pivka's body running into the trailing edge until Andrei's glider stalled and fell 100 feet to impact with the terrain above the 750 launch.

After looking at Andrei's GPS track, it's clear Peter Pivka was lying, and the cause of the mid air. From the GPS track and witnesses in the air that day Pivka was trying to milk the last weak lift and stay above Andrei, 2 minutes before this incident, Andrei turned 180º away from Pivka, who then followed him around the north west face of the Cloud peak ridge toward regionals launch, turning 180º left traveling toward the 750 for at least 200 yards, attempting to stay higher, or possibly wing walk on Andrei's canopy, to be cool, you know, like the pro's, except he caused a total collapse by impacting trailing edge at chest level continuing forward without any attempt to slow down or change course until Andrei's canopy stalled, collapsed and fell 100 feet impacting hard enough to break bones.

Day two, Kirshbaum attempts to claim the USHPA membership waiver excludes Pivka from any responsibility. That's absurd, self serving, as if the USHPA executive never had any intention of supporting membership by paying out liability claims and simply wants to keep all the self insurance fund for some other purpose. Kirshbaum asks a few leading questions alluding to Andrei's failure to deploy his reserve as the cause of his injury, another lame attempt to shift blame, based on a fiction, like it's a good idea to abandon control near the terrain and deploy a reserve and not control the main canopy at under 100 feet above ground.

Brad Hill, Discover Paragliding out of central Oregon coast showed up last Friday, October 29, and lied like a rug, claiming it's standard USHPA practice to teach entry level students to twist their risers 180° in flight to look behind them to see and avoid traffic closing from behind. Twisting risers and flying a paraglider with the pilot facing backwards is an advanced maneuver reserved for high time aerobatic pilots in the appropriate setting, most of the time, 1000 feet above ground over water, definitely more than 100 feet from terrain for a recreational pilot.

Turning around and facing away from direction of travel when this close to terrain is stupid and dangerous, and that's exactly what Brad Hill suggested should be standard procedure for low skill novice pilots. The premise is ridiculous, endorsed by USHPA attorney Tim Herr, every paraglider pilot must be alert as if we are all constant targets of suicidal kamakazie weekend warrior pilots, the same pilots we rode up with, drink beer with in the LZ after the flight. This is another lame attempt at blame shifting, and more delusional, poor ethical behavior from USHPA.

Tim Herr is a lawyer, he evidently hired Mr. Kirshbaum, who did all the work at the trial. Herr never questioned any witness, or said much, if anything the entire 3 days I was there. My experience indicates Mr Kirshbaum costs around $50K per year, and this case is 3 years old. That's potentially $150K wasted on a losing case, that might cost the PASA, RRG, USHPA self insurance scam millions in court costs, compensation for Andrei's medical expenses, pain and suffering, and long term care.

Verdict 11/2/2021

Jury found the defendant liable for $6 Million. Tim Herr USHPA attorney is visibly upset. The USHPA PASA, RRG self insurance scam started with $2 Million in donations from membership, and my guess, Palmaz, Herr, and the USHPA Colorado Springs office staff has absorbed a good part of that money in salaries, and there isn't anywhere near $6 million between Peter Pivka and the USHPA self insurance scam to pay Andrei Firtat compensation according to the jury verdict today.

Pivka's behavior coming to my house the day after the incident and spinning his actions to render himself blameless for Andrei's injury, and his story changing 3 times between depositions and the trial tells me he's lying, and in denial of the consequences of his actions. Peter Pivka's colossal ego compelled him to milk the last of the day and stay above Andrei, following directly behind and above for two minutes until he plowed into Andrei's glider.

If the USHPA had attempted a fair settlement, would the case have gone to trial? Between Pivka's ego, Tim Herr's ego, his vested interest, conflict of interest paying out multi million dollar injury settlement from the USHPA PASA funds, evidently no other outcome was possible.

Tim Herr and Martin Palmaz have been the USHPA executive management through both the loss of the Lloyd's of London coverage that used to cost USHGA, USHPA members $59 a year, and included a bi monthly magazine edited by Gil Dodgen. Now it seems their management style is also going to collapse the PASA self insurance scam.

Discuss "Mitch McAleer's take on the RRRG trial" at the Oz Report forum   link»   »

Vario freeze problem fixed for 6030

Sat, Sep 11 2021, 6:47:44 pm MDT

A fix of a fix

GPS|Volirium|Flytec 6020|Flytec 6030|Bräuniger IQ Competino+|Bräuniger Compeo+|Bräuniger IQ Motor+

"Volirium News" «news» writes:

We just released new firmware for the Flytec 6020 and 6030 (aka Bräuniger IQ Competino+ and Compeo+), as well as the Bräuniger IQ Motor+. These versions prevent the vario "freezes" experience by some pilots with the software released in June. The updates can be downloaded from here:

Software support for Flytec 6020 and 6030 (aka Bräuniger IQ Competino+ and Compeo+)

https://www.volirium.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Flytec6030_5.04g.exe

https://www.volirium.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Flytec6030_5.04g_ReleaseNotes_EN.pdf

If you enjoy the fact that we are keeping your vario alive, donate us a cup of coffee. Thank you!

Discuss "Vario freeze problem fixed for 6030" at the Oz Report forum   link»   »

GPS problems with 6020, 6030, Competino+, Compeo+ and Motor+ - Fixing the GPS module

Mon, Jul 5 2021, 2:43:09 pm MDT

The hard way and the easy way

GPS|Flytec 6020|Flytec 6030|Bräuniger Competino+|Bräuniger Compeo+|Bräuniger Motor+|Joerg Ewald

https://OzReport.com/toc.php?25.103#0

https://OzReport.com/toc.php?25.104#1

"Joerg Ewald" «joerg.ewald» writes with respect to the installation steps from Fabiano that follows:

Thank you and Fabiano for helping pilots updating their 6030/Compeo+. My thoughts?

1. Only varios manufactured before August 2014 are affected by the problem you are alluding to. From then on, we built them using a Prolific communications chip that is compatible with Windows 10.

2. For older varios, the easiest and most reliable way to get communication with Windows 10 going is to send the vario to a repair shop (e.g. Flytec USA) and have them replace the communications chip.

3. Fabiano's work-around with a virtual machine works, but we found that it exceeds the level of technical involvement most pilots are willing or able to muster.

4. Apart from a chip upgrade, the most reliable and easiest to use shortcut method was built by UK pilot John Stevenson: https://github.com/johnstevenson/pl2303-win10 - see “Usage” at the bottom of the page. Since this means circumventing some of Windows 10’s updating mechanisms, this may stop working again at any time - in that case just re-install. To avoid that risk, have the chip replaced.

We found a small bug in 5.04a that can lead to the pilot name being garbled up in the menu and the IGC files. This has been fixed with V5.04b, available now on our website: https://www.volirium.com/en/volirium/support/software-maintenance-for-flytec-6020-and-6030/.

By the way, thank you very much for donating that proverbial cup of coffee, it’s highly appreciated and keeps us motivated to keep those older varios alive.

Fabiano originally posted this, which Joerg is responding to:

- download and install Oracle Virtual Box: https://download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/6.1.22/VirtualBox-6.1.22-144080-Win.exe
- *get yourself a Windows XP Virtual Machine compatible version https://helpdeskgeek.com/virtualization/how-to-set-up-a-windows-xp-virtual-machine-for-free/
- Install the XP VM onto the Virtual Box
- download the Flytec 5.04a installer from the Flytec site: https://www.volirium.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Flytec6030_5.04b.exe
- donwload the Prolyfic driver files from the Prolyfic site: http://www.prolific.com.tw/UserFiles/files/PL2303_Prolific_DriverInstaller_v1200.zip
- copy the Flytec and Prolyfic donwloads to a Pen Drive
- run the Virtual Box software
- run Windows XP under the Virtual Box
- stick the pen drive to your PC : you should hear 2 different USB recognition sounds, as both the current Windows version as well as the Windows XP will recognize the Pen Drive into their OS.
- open the Pen Drive folder inside the XP environment and copy both files (Prolyfic + Flytec) to any folder in Windows XP.
- unplug the Pen Drive
- install the Prolyfic driver into Windows XP, running the executable on the XP environment
- plug your instrument into the PC and wait for the customary USB recognition sound on your version of Windows
- click on the Virtual Box interface Menu on "Connections" or "Interfaces" and activate the Prolyfic drivers
- wait to hear the old Windows XP USB recognition sound
- run the Flytec Updater executable and for the Port leave it on "Auto"
- the updater will find the instrument and install the firmware

Voilà! Hopefully it should work and update your instrument without a glitch!

It was actually easier to do than writing this tutorial.

*I guess the hardest part is preparing the Windows XP file, I had a friend do it for me, and I could make it available except it's too big to attach to this post or to send by e-mail. It's also bigger than my virtual drive can handle so I could wetransfer to anyone interested."

Discuss "GPS problems with 6020, 6030, Competino+, Compeo+ and Motor+ - Fixing the GPS module" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

GPS problems with 6020, 6030, Competino+, Compeo+ and Motor+⁣ fixed - GPS Module

Sun, Jun 20 2021, 8:05:49 am MDT

6020, 6030 and Motor+

GPS problems with 6020, 6030, Competino+, Compeo+ and Motor+⁣ fixed - GPS Module

Bräuniger Compeo+|Bräuniger Competino+|Bräuniger Motor+|Flytec 6020|Flytec 6030|GPS

«Volirium News» sends:

We just released new firmware for the Flytec 6020 and 6030 (aka Bräuniger IQ Competino+ and Compeo+), as well as the Bräuniger IQ Motor+. These versions fix the bug in some of the GPS modules’ software that caused a loss of GPS reception after 1-3 hours. The firmware can be downloaded from here:

If you enjoy the fact that we are keeping your vario alive, donate us a cup of coffee. Thank you!

Download this for the 6030: https://www.volirium.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Flytec6030_5.04a.exe

GPS problems with 6020, 6030, Competino+, Compeo+ and Motor+ - Help Us Fix the GPS Module

Thu, Jun 17 2021, 12:53:47 pm MDT

Needs a firmware fix

GPS problems with 6020, 6030, Competino+, Compeo+ and Motor+ - Help Us Fix the GPS Module

Bräuniger Compeo+|Bräuniger Competino+|Bräuniger Motor+|Flytec 6020|Flytec 6030|GPS

Jörg Ewald writes:

Dear techie pilots, we need your help. Fixing the GPS problem in the Flytec 6020, 6030, 6040, Bräuniger IQ Competino+, Compeo+, and Motor+ involves sending the contents of a so-called "patch file" to the vario's GPS receiver module. Implementing this patching mechanism was a bit tricky, but last night we finally made it work, which is a fantastic breakthrough.

Unfortunately, we currently only have access to the patch file for one of the two affected GPS modules, and that's the less common one (Telit SE880). We have been unable so far to obtain the patch file for the module we used for the majority of those varios, the Fastrax IT430.

The company Fastrax was bought out by u-blox a few years ago, and u-blox has since ceased support for Fastrax modules. Their support is no longer responding to any of my requests.

The software itself is produced and supported by a company that is now part of Qualcomm. The patch file we need for the IT430 is visible on Qualcomm's website: GSD4e_4.0.4-P1_RPATCH_06 (https://www.qualcomm.com/products/sirfstar-iv-4e/software - see "Authorized Resources", click on "Show 6 more"). Unfortunately, we are unable to obtain it from there, download is restricted to "verified companies". Our request to become a verified company was denied, and our support tickets remain unanswered.

This is where we hope that one of the many techies in our great pilot community can help us out: Maybe you work for Qualcomm, maybe you work for one of Qualcomm's verified companies, or have some other means to give us access to the patch file GSD4e_4.0.4-P1_RPATCH_06.pd2. If so, please contact me at «joerg.ewald». We will gladly sign any NDA necessary to obtain the patch file.

Once we have the file, if all goes well, we will be able to release a new firmware version for all the varios mentioned above within a day or two and make this pesky GPS problem finally go away for good.

Flymaster GPS LS

October 30, 2020, 8:08:13 pm MDT

Flymaster GPS LS

Budget

Flymaster tracker|GPS|Jugdeep Aggarwal

Jugdeep Aggarwal <<jugdeep>> writes:

Flymaster is proud to announce the availability of its budget vario/GPS combination instrument called the GPS LS retailing at $280. This light and simple unit features wind speed and wind direction, glide ratio and the thermal assist ball (magic dot) as well as displaying GPS or barometric altitude, high sensitivity altimeter and up to 60 hours on a single charge. It is intuitive to use without the need for a manual and interfaces with Mac or PC computers for the easy download of tracklogs. For more information check out https://flymasterusa.com/flymaster-instruments/gps-ls/ or email Jugdeep at <jugdeep>.

GPS⁣ seemed to work on Thursday »

Fri, Feb 8 2019, 7:17:44 am EST

GPS, ADS-B may be out in Southeast during 'interference tests'

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2019/february/05/gps-adsb-may-be-unavailable-in-southeast-during-interference-tests

AOPA calls FAA’s response to flight safety risk unacceptable.

http://download.aopa.org/advocacy/2019/190205_GPS.pdf?_ga=2.241380418.1907224794.1549624092-639807270.1549624092

Discuss "GPS⁣ seemed to work on Thursday" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

The GPS 2019 Week Rollover

Tue, Feb 5 2019, 1:39:58 pm GMT

April 6, 2019

GPS|IGC

https://www.orolia.com/resources/blog/lisa-perdue/2018/gps-2019-week-rollover-what-you-need-know

There is a GPS week number rollover event on April 6/7 2019. After this date, some instruments might report the wrong date in an unpredictable manner. In competitions this spring it might be necessary to have a temporary measure to allow IGC files with the wrong date when a pilot's instrument is shown to have that behaviour. After all, it is not an issue with identifying which task is being attempted. The time and positions should remain correct. But any GPS chip designed over about ten years ago might fail. And it is possible that even newer instruments can be fitted with these older GPS chips.

Discuss "The GPS 2019 Week Rollover" at the Oz Report forum   link»

The Ripple Effects of the Shutdown Reach the GPS System (and Beyond)

January 23, 2019, 8:36:55 EST

The Ripple Effects of the Shutdown Reach the GPS System (and Beyond)

No CORS data

government|GPS

https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2019/01/ripple-effects-shutdown-reach-gps-system-and-beyond/580246/

Your readers might be interested in a little-known but serious consequence of the government shutdown: the loss of the public CORS data supplied by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (see https://www.ngs.noaa.gov/CORS/).

I work for a company that uses CORS data to apply real-time kinematics to vehicle GPS readings. The same CORS data is also used for surveying, GPS-guided farming, and a host of other applications. All of them will now be forced to rely on private data that may not cover all areas and whose quality may vary. The NOAA data, by contrast, comes from a unique public-private partnership that has very wide coverage. It's also accessible to academic institutions and startups.

Investigation into 2D fixes

August 28, 2018, 9:02:07 MDT

Investigation into 2D fixes

Fixed the 17 year old code

Andrej Kolar|GPS|IGC

https://ozreport.com/22.170#0

Andrej Kolar at Naviter Info <<info>> writes:

After re-examining our source code I agree with Wesley completely and we have changed the way fixes are stored in IGC files. The code is 17 years old and has never changed in this area.

Thanks, Wesley!

If you want to do more detailed testing I suggest you install the latest version on the Oudie and examine the NMEALog folder. The last 50 MB worth of raw NMEA sentences are always stored there.

GPS⁣es go crazy »

July 18, 2018, 12:56:09 pm MDT GMT-0600

No two can agree?

We have heard the rumor that now there are lots of issues with the tracklogs and similar GPSes showing pilots missing the turnpoints by 100 to 200 meters. And there were a lot of "turnpoints" today, an amazing task call, unlike any I have ever seen. Perhaps it overtaxed our "fragile" system. Hopefully we will get more than rumors.

It appears from reviewing their Flymaster tracklogs that both Grant Crossingham and Alexander Barvinskiy trackers quit broadcasting early in the flight.

Discuss "GPS⁣es go crazy" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

GPS/INS method

July 17, 2018, 9:19:23 MDT

GPS/INS method

Inertial navigation systems, not every dot is a GPS dot

CIVL|GPS|PG

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS/INS

GPS/INS is commonly used on aircraft for navigation purposes. Using GPS/INS allows for smoother position and velocity estimates that can be provided at a sampling rate faster than the GPS receiver. This also allows for accurate estimation of the aircraft attitude (roll, pitch, and yaw) angles.

A post from Dhayner to https://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=56724

Track Logs: GPS vs. INS and Blending, 16 Jul 2018 8:46 pm

As I recall, the Oudie boasts of containing 3-axis gyros and 3-axis accelerometers as part of an IMU. The correcting altimeter should be pressure based to eliminate and dependence on the GPS. The track log looks like many INS only tracks I’ve seen – not random, just a drift component due to biases and drifts native to all inertial sensors.

What I suspect is that the INS track is used to “filter” the GPS track to remove the GPS jumps and dither. Also, if the GPS data quality falls below some level, the INS track is more heavily weighted than the GPS track. Once a good, high quality GPS data track is re-established, the INS is reset to the GPS track.

The jump, or correction we see in the data near the goal may be Oudie software deciding the GPS data is of sufficient quality to start to weight it more heavily (and the INS track less).

The developers need to disclose this in detail and provide some sort of visual indicator (in all screens) that the GPS data is being ignored or de-emphasized. Unfortunately, depending on the algorithm details, the developers may not even know. There are many pre-packaged INS/GPS blending apps available that are extremely sophisticated, but little details are provided on what is going on deep in the guts of the algorithms.

I’ve also seen many “professional products” developed by teams essentially ignorant of the details of the Kalman or Particle filters employed and how statistical measures of signal quality are used.

As an example of my concern of the Oudie developers understanding of how to use inertial sensors, they claim on their Web site:

Exceptionally accurate Vario (Gyro assisted) for the quickest climb rate

Gyros measure angular rate which has little to do with moving up or down in a gravitational field. Accelerometers, corrected for sensing angle by the gyros, could assist. But it is the accelerometer data that is measuring “up” or “down” accelerations, not the gyros.

The performance of the small, low cost MEMS gyroscopes and accelerometers employed in these products have drift rates and uncorrected biases far beyond practical use for INS only navigation for hang gliding or paragliding competitions. Given these errors and several other reasons, I suspect CIVL will need to specify that GPS only track logs will be the only accepted track.

Another case at the European Championships of GPS disagreement?

Tue, Jul 17 2018, 6:03:13 am MDT

We should expect this

Another case

European Championships 2018|GPS|Roland Wöhrle

The Flymaster tracker track for Roland Wöhrle task 6, 2nd waypoint, shows him short of the cylinder:

But apparently as he was scored making the turnpoint. Perhaps his flight instrument showed him getting the turnpoint. Perhaps this track log was within the error band.

Discuss "Another case at the European Championships of GPS disagreement?" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

Drawing Airplanes

August 8, 2017, 7:21:23 MST -0600

Drawing Airplanes

GPS art

art|GPS

http://cnnmon.ie/2v0xpBj

The aerospace giant was testing a upgraded engine for its 787 Dreamliner for long endurance flights and reliability and the company had 18 hours to kill. So its flight planners designed a route that, once finished, looked liked one of its Dreamliner jets.

Discuss "Drawing Airplanes" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Centimeter level GPS accuracy

February 19, 2016, 9:03:56 EST

Centimeter level GPS accuracy

A chip

GPS

https://www.u-blox.com/en/product/neo-m8p

Centimeter-level GNSS positioning for the mass market

Discuss "Centimeter level GPS accuracy" at the Oz Report forum   link»

GPS⁣ spoofing »

Wed, Jul 11 2012, 7:53:22 am CDT

Cheap way to cause problems

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/07/drone-hijacking/all/

On the evening of June 19, a group of researchers from the University of Texas successfully hijacked a civilian drone at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico during a test organized by the Department of Homeland Security.

The drone, an Adaptive Flight Hornet Mini, was hovering at around 60 feet, locked into a predetermined position guided by GPS. Then, with a device that cost around $1,000 and the help of sophisticated software that took four years to develop, the researchers sent a radio signal from a hilltop one kilometer away. In security lingo, they carried out a spoofing attack.

“We fooled the UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) into thinking that it was rising straight up,” says Todd Humphreys, assistant professor at the Radionavigation Laboratory at the University of Texas.

Deceiving the drone’s GPS receiver, they changed its perceived coordinates. To compensate, the small copter dove straight down, thinking it was returning to its programmed position. If not for a safety pilot intervening before the drone hit the ground, it would have crashed.

Discuss "GPS⁣ spoofing" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

Lumby Air Races 2012

Mon, Apr 23 2012, 5:34:47 pm EDT

June 7th-10th 2012

beer|competition|fire|flight park|food|GPS|HPAC|insurance|music|news|PayPal|Randy Rauck|scoring|triangle

Online Registration Link here.

«Randy Rauck» writes:

The 7th Lumby Air Races June 7th-10th 2012 promises to be a fun and exciting event. Early Bird Discount before May 15.

The Lumby Air Force hopes you can make it. It's been expanded to four days. For accomplished flyers, this is your opportunity to support our flying event, get current on all the latest flying news and win some great cash prizes and trophies for your superior efforts. For newer flyers the education gathered in these social settings will be priceless.

You will need your HPAC number. You can find it here: http://hpac.ca/pub/?pid=145. If you are an international pilot, you will be able to get temporary membership online at www.hpac.ca or@the event.

The format will be closed circuit triangle racing around the town and area of Lumby BC Canada.

GPS will be used for scoring.

This is an International event and is open to Hang Glider and Paraglider Pilots. Registration 8 AM Thursday June 7th@the Raven Aviation hanger on the Freedom Flight Park. Pilots meetings daily@the hanger 9AM sharp.

Landings will be@the Freedom Flight Park, just 1 mile north of the village of Lumby BC on the Mabel Lake Road. Late starts for pilots who can't make it Thursday morning will be allowed on Friday only. Limit - first 75 paid up Pilots.

HPAC insurance mandatory and available@registration if necessary. Please do your best to renew yours or get it in advance at http://hpac.ca/pub/?pid=96. International pilots only require a $40.00 temp policy available@the same web address. Minimum experience - 20 hours logged airtime and 20 high foot launches.

Expect $2000.00 - $3000.00 in cash prize money and trophies and prizes. Plenty of Extraordinary food for Saturday Eve celebration

Big Fire of Life

Live dance music Saturday Eve after dinner for pilots and friends and support personal. Flyers Music Performances/Jam starting around 10pm Saturday Bring your instruments and rhythm makers Ongoing Lumby Days festivities including concerts, beer gardens, amusement park and fun and games for kids.

Competition, Dinner and Dance - $75.00 before May 1st. - $100.00 after.

Registration available online soon or send a cheque payable to: Lumby Air Force #754 Eastwood Road, Lumby BC Canada, V0E2G7, Send PayPal or interac fees to Oz Report forum   link»  

GPS, heading for trouble? »

April 8, 2011, 9:38:21 EDT

GPS, heading for trouble?

Radio interference from nearby frequency?

GPS|Quest Air|Ron Gleason

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110406/ap_on_hi_te/us_tec_gps_threats

A new, ultra-fast wireless Internet network is threatening to overpower GPS signals across the U.S. and interfere with everything from airplanes to police cars to consumer navigation devices.

The problem stems from a recent government decision to let a Virginia company called LightSquared build a nationwide broadband network using airwaves next to those used for GPS. Manufacturers of GPS equipment warn that strong signals from the planned network could jam existing navigation systems.

LightSquared and the FCC both insist the new network can co-exist with GPS systems. But device makers fear GPS signals will suffer the way a radio station can get drowned out by a stronger broadcast in a nearby channel.

The problem, they say, is that sensitive satellite receivers - designed to pick up relatively weak signals coming from space - could be overwhelmed when LightSquared starts sending high-power signals from as many as 40,000 transmitters on the ground using the airwaves next door.

Hays believes it will cost no more than $12 million - or 30 cents per device - to install better filters in roughly 40 million standalone GPS units made worldwide each year. Cell phones, he said, will be fine because they don't rely solely on GPS to determine location and have better filters anyway.

But Tim Farrar, a consultant with TMF Associates, insists cellphones need upgrades, too - raising the annual cost to as much as $1 billion.

Tens of billions of dollars of existing equipment may also need to be replaced, Farrar said.

GPS manufacturers insist that neither they nor their customers should have to pay.

That's because GPS receivers were designed to screen out low-power signals next door, and now the government is changing the rules, said Scott Burgett, software engineering manager with Garmin Ltd.

Thanks to Ron Gleason

Discuss "GPS, heading for trouble?" at the Oz Report forum   link»

GPS - first launched on Valentines Day, 1989 »

February 16, 2011, 10:30:28

GPS - first launched on Valentines Day, 1989

It changed everything.

The small notice from Wired here.

Discuss "GPS - first launched on Valentines Day, 1989" at the Oz Report forum   link»

GPS⁣ tracking from Garmin »

Wed, Jan 12 2011, 1:30:28 pm AEDT

GPRS

GPS|Jim Yocom

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?pID=67686

The GTU 10 is small, lightweight and waterproof. It easily attaches to a backpack, pet collar or whatever is important to you.

When you purchase a new GTU 10, it comes with 1 year of Standard Tracking (coverage dependent on GSM wireless service within the U.S.), so you’ll be ready to go once you register and activate it in your Garmin account.

Then, you can view the location of your GTU 10 on a map from the friendly confines of your computer. For an added level of convenience, you can download the free Garmin Tracker™ app for your mobile device to compare your current location to the direction and location of your GTU 10. For the ability to automatically route to your GTU 10, you can use a Garmin nüLink!™ device.

Thanks to Jim Yocom.

Discuss "GPS⁣ tracking from Garmin" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

GPS⁣ goggles »

Fri, Dec 3 2010, 8:06:48 am PST

More flying features are asked for

Alistair McKay|GPS

https://www.zealoptics.com/transcend/

Thanks to Alistair McKay.

Discuss "GPS⁣ goggles" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

Competition pilots downloading their GPSes

June 23, 2010, 9:06:00 CDT

Pilots downloading their GPSes

The instructions

competition|GPS|track log

http://ozreport.com/pilotdownload.php

Please send in any comments. These instructions are meant only for downloading your flight instruments to create IGC files during a competition.

Discuss "Pilots downloading their GPSes" at the Oz Report forum   link»

GPS⁣ Tracking »

Mon, Jun 7 2010, 8:49:54 am EDT

What are they using for tracking at the European Paragliding Championships?

Facebook|GPS|PG|photo

This device. See here and here.

Maybe this would work.

The first device is the one used at the 2010 European Paragliding Championships.

Discuss "GPS⁣ Tracking" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

GPS⁣ Scare? »

Mon, May 25 2009, 9:15:03 am EDT

Every couple of years we get this scare.

GPS|John Chambers

PC World article. Blue Water Sailing article.

The Global Positioning System faces the possibility of failures and blackouts, a federal watchdog agency has warned the U.S. Congress. Mismanagement by and underinvestment by the U.S. Air Force places the GPS at risk of failure in 2010 and beyond. The problem: Delays in launching replacement satellites, among other things.

Thanks to Bernie and John Chambers.

Discuss "GPS⁣ Scare?" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

GPS⁣ info »

Sat, May 10 2008, 7:16:30 pm EDT

GPS

A blog that follows the devices as they come out

GPS|Russell "Russ" Brown

http://www.navigadget.com/

Thanks to Russ Brown.

Discuss "GPS⁣ info" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

Tracking with Nokia

Thu, Nov 29 2007, 1:02:51 pm MST

A bit of an expensive tracking alternative

Tracking

Europe|Google Earth|GPS|iPhone|Rich Lovelace|site|tracking

Rich L «dickndoris» writes:

http://sportstracker.nokia.com/nts/main/index.do

Above is the link to the Nokia web site that allows you to use your GPS enabled Nokia phone, to track live and also lets you upload your 3d track to view in Google Earth or over a map and it's free! Don't know if it will work out side of Europe or not as I have not played with it enough yet. I have an N95 (iPhone EATER) and found it very easy to put the application on.

Discuss "Tracking with Nokia" at the Oz Report forum   link»   »

GPS⁣ satellites »

Thu, Sep 20 2007, 9:05:06 am PDT

GPS

No to degradation

GPS|Ron Gleason

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20853198/

President Bush on Tuesday accepted the Pentagon’s decision to stop buying Global Positioning System satellites that can intentionally degrade the accuracy of civil signals used for a myriad of purposes —

Thanks to Ron Gleason.

Discuss "GPS⁣ satellites" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

Flygirl's view of a bad day at Manilla

Fri, Feb 16 2007, 11:01:50 am AEDT

Manilla

Well the other ones were doing it.

cloudsuck|Ewa "Birdy" Wiśnierska-Cieślewicz|fatality|Gaynor "Flygirl" Schoeman|GPS|He Zhongpin|New South Wales State Titles 2007|PG|weather

http://flygirl.co.za/content/view/108/29/

Coming up to the big overdeveloping clouds I started getting nervous. Pilots above me were disappearing and reappearing and I was very soon starting to mist out myself. Took a heading on my GPS and dreaded the thought of sharing the grey room with this many pilots. Suddenly was not enjoying myself anymore with the only respite from the big clouds being into the gentle SW wind or a hole to the East.

To the north, downwind, it was ugly and black and raining. I had had enough. Pulled bigears and speedbarred my way east, leaving the hotshots to run north along the ridge and do battle with the cloudsuck in their gaggles. I felt trapped as I was still going up, although slowly and there was not much blue around. I wanted to land. Could not understand why no-one else was on big ears although they probably were on speedbar. The difference between a good weather xc pilot and a comp xc pilot clearly.

Discuss "Flygirl's view of a bad day at Manilla" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

Chinese GPS?

August 24, 2006, 8:55:01 CDT

China

What's up with the proposed Compass System?

GPS

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002635.html

As has been widely reported, China plans to construct its own global satellite navigation network. Or so it would appear. No one’s quite sure. The system, dubbed Compass, is mired in confusion, with possible intentions ranging from a modest upgrade of their regional Beidou system to a full blown competitor to GPS and Galileo.

China invested in the European Galileo system through the Galileo Joint Undertaking. Remarkably, this investment will not allow the Chinese any role in Galileo when it transitions to the Supervisory Authority at the end of the year, likely due to the sensitive nature of Galileo’s encrypted signals. It’s no surprise, then, that China would feel betrayed by its partnership in the Joint Undertaking. Compass may be a result of China’s desire to strike out on its own– or a bluff aimed at wrangling a more substantive role in Galileo

Discuss China at the Oz Report forum

GPS⁣ in your camera »

Mon, Aug 7 2006, 8:35:22 pm CDT

GPS camera

Know where you took that shot

GPS|photo|record

thermalr fly «thermalr» sends:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0608/06080202sonygpscs1.asp

Be sure to check out the online mapping page example. A very unique way to organize your flight pictures.

Wednesday, 2 August 2006

Sony GPS tracker for photographers Sony has today announced a very interesting little device for recording the position where photographs are taken. The GPS-CS1 is a small (9 cm / 3.5 in) cylindrical device which you simply attach to a backpack or belt loop and carry with you while you shoot, it records your GPS location and this information can later be synchronized with your digital images to provide a map of where your photos were taken. We assume it does this using date and time information stored in the image header (which obviously requires your camera's clock to be synchronized). Interestingly the mapping solution is an online website with maps provided by Google Maps (it appears that the synchronization software will write the GPS location into JPEG EXIF headers).

Discuss "GPS⁣ in your camera" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

GPS⁣ satellite upgrade »

Fri, Jan 27 2006, 4:13:18 pm AEDT

GPS

The US will upgrade its GPS system

http://rcrnews.com/news.cms?newsId=25430

"The new signal-known as 'L2C-was specifically designed with commercial needs in mind," said Deputy Commerce Secretary David Sampson in remarks prepared for delivery at a U.S. Chamber of Commerce press event this morning. "For example, it is transmitted with a higher effective power, so GPS receivers work better in urban areas and indoors. And it requires less energy to receive the signal, an important feature for battery-powered devices such as mobile phones."

Discuss "GPS⁣ satellite upgrade" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

GPS - the future »

December 27, 2005, 12:41:21 PST

Galileo

Europe is building a better satellite  system and making it interoperable with the US one

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4555276.stm

It will still be free to the user at the public level.

Discuss Galileo at the Oz Report forum

GPS data files to Google Earth

December 20, 2005, 9:19:44 PST

GPS to KML

You can use this service to convert your GPS data files to KML or KMZ files

Google Earth|GPS

http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/map?form=googleearth

Inexpensive GPS mount

December 12, 2005, 4:07:42 pm PST

GPS mount

Just lash your GPS onto your basetube.

gear|GPS

The Wrap & Roll; a simple, silicone rubber wrap that secures your favorite gadget to your handlebars in seconds. Made from an elastic rubber, similar to a rubber band, the Wrap can hold all sorts of devices securely while riding.

Here

A review here

When you consider that the Wrap&Roll has no associated hardware, requires no tools, and adapts to nearly any bar (road, mountain, oversized, oval, whatever), the ingenuity of the design becomes more obvious. Installation is incredibly simple: place the Wrap&Roll on top of the handlebar, wrap each loop around the bottom of the bar and then around the item to be attached, and you're done. Granted, certain combinations of handlebars and accessories may lend themselves to pairing more than others, but overall, this thing really is quite accommodating. I found it to work quite well on my mobile phone, an iPod, as well as a small Garmin GPS.

GPS »

Fri, Oct 14 2005, 4:00:04 pm EDT

Aging satellites and a cheap GPS phone

David Glover

David Glover

David Glover found this:

Do it yourself GPS tracking with Mologogo

Old satellites

Discuss GPS at the Oz Report forum

Dutch Open

Mon, Aug 1 2005, 6:00:01 pm GMT

At Greifenburg

Dutch Open 2005|gaggle|GPS|Hans Kiefinger|Koos de Keijzer

Koos de Keijzer «kdkeijzer» writes:

Hans Kiefinger is doing well at the Dutch Open in Greifenburg. The first day he was the fastest, but missed the first turnpoint by 5 meters because he had forgotten to put his GPS back on 5 sec interval:-( But today with task 2 he is the fastest again). Read his report:

"The conditions were OK on the first day, but cloudbase was low at 2100m. I started very early, but I was not in the perfect position at first start gate. I was too low, so I waited for the second start at 13.30. I hoped that cloudbase would rise as well, but it did not.

We flew at cloudbase most of the time. Then just before the second start gate I hit a very nice thermal with Harry Renders. It was a really fresh and strong one. Harry and I managed to get to 2400 on the border of a big cloud. It was very beautiful.

Harry and I started together. We were flying just on the right side of the cloud to the first waypoint. Then I lost Harry. I turned to go back to second. I was always high, just slowing for lift. On glide I flew 70-75km/h, in lift I slowed down to 50-55.

On the whole leg to the second turnpoint I made only two turns and they were not even needed. At the second turnpoint I caught up with lead gaggle that started at the first start gate.

After the turnpoint I went back to the mountain and found good lift. Then I had to slow down a bit, it was not so good any more. Halfway at the height of Greifenburg I was forced to take slow lift, just 1 m/s. There I lost a few minutes.

At Stator I found 4 m/s lift and got up to 2300 m. This was good enough for final glide. I just had to cross the valley to the last waypoint. Then at goal was really surprised to find Koos (de Keijzer) there, I did not see him all the time. I really thought I was the first pilot today. I flew the task in one hour and thirteen minutes, Koos was 6 minutes slower but he took the first gate."

For results, foto's and clips look here

Discuss "Dutch Open" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

Track logging software connected to Google Earth

Sat, Jul 23 2005, 1:00:01 am GMT

The obvious connection.

CUP|G7ToWin|Google Earth|GPS|IGC|Ulf Arndt

Ulf Arndt <ulfa@za.ibm.com>, author of GPS logging software, writes:

I'm busy extending the TP and T3D2 code with kml and kmz Interface format. Right click here for an example of a flight in Porterville from takeoff to the Flyers Lodge using the IGC to KML/KMZ Conversion Option of TP.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/gpstp

http://gpstp.sourceforge.net/htmldocs/User/KML/kml.html

And for those clued up in Java, the T3D2 code analyzes IGC tracks for thermals and and makes a kml file. You can download an example here.

http://t3d2.sourceforge.net/KML/KML.html

http://sourceforge.net/projects/t3d2

(editor's note: You can use G7ToWin to convert IGC track log files or CUP waypoint files to the gpx format, which can be read and translated by Google Earth to the kmz format.)

Discuss Google Earth at the Oz Report forum

Brauniger IQ/Comp and the Garmin 96C

Together again.

varios and GPSes

Mon, Mar 14 2005, 10:00:03 pm GMT

Bräuniger IQ/Comp|Bräuniger IQ/Comp|Garmin 60C|Garmin 96C|GPS

Mark Tymiski «mark.tyminski» writes:

As a direct result of canvassing Bräuniger about the Garmin 96C/IQ-COMP-GPS issue, Bräuniger has announced a fix to the data transfer problem on their website.

Basically, the Garmin GPS96C/60C needed a special trigger signal to activate the NMEA data-out signal. Normal IQ-COMP-GPS instruments weren't able to support this signal. Bräuniger had to modify the IQ-COMP-GPS hardware and combine this with a new connection cable. You can now connect the Garmin GPS96C/60C and use all special speed to fly and target functions as well.

Discuss "Brauniger IQ/Comp and the Garmin 96C" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

GPS⁣'s - they need to tell the truth »

Thu, Feb 3 2005, 6:00:01 am EST

An interesting thing happened at the Worlds.

GPS|Kevin Carter|record|Wesley "Wes" Hill

It turned out that on the last day of the Worlds, a pilot flying in a Compeo or a 5030 as well as a Garmin GPS was found to have two tracklogs that were separated by 200 meters. A pilot flying near the said pilot noticed that the pilot turned before he got close enough to the turnpoint (about 200 meters short) and wondered just what was going on.

Upon examination it was found that the pilot's Compeo was set to the Australian Geod '66 coordinate datum.

Then, on the day before the start of the Bogong Cup Wesley Hill, the scorekeeper at the Worlds and the Bogong Cup (with the Garmin 12), Kevin Carter (driver) and I (with a Flytec 5030) took a little drive. When we looked at the tracklogs (in CompeGPS) sure enough it was possible to change the datum in the 5030 and shift the tracklog without this being obvious, say to the scorekeeper, and the scorekeeping software.

After an extensive discussion with Flytec it was decided that the alternate datum feature would be removed from the Compeo and the 5030 and just the world standard, WGS84, would be supported. This is exactly what needed to happen. The new version of the firmware is available here.

Then, something else interesting happened. We looked at the fact that the Garmin GPS's leave an extrapolated track log for thirty seconds after losing the satellites, say when a competitor covers the GPS with his/her hand. This has been reported earlier in the Oz Report. So, like the 5030, the Garmin could lay down a track log that didn't correspond to where the pilot actually flew. It wasn't foolproof.

I spoke to a Garmin representative and found this out:

It is not possible to falsify a tracklog on a Garmin unit. The date and time stamp are removed when you upload to a unit and this function is contained within our core program which has never been broken. This core program is only accessible to Garmin Engineers and requires the correct codes and Garmin software building tools not available to anyone outside Garmin.

There was one small change for the pressure units. They have allowed the time stamp only, not the date to be uploaded to a unit so that it can display the elevation graph by time. They are thinking of removing this for security.

Propagation is where the unit will continue to lay down tracklog points even if there is a loss of reception. This is really for auto navigation but was unnecessary for the tracklog data. I have requested this be removed to allow Garmin to comply with the IGC requirements. They have already removed this from the new 76C and 96C series and we are planning to remove this feature from all models that will be used with the IGC. The units will still propagate but will no longer lay down a tracklog point.

Current propagation will leave points for thirty seconds after a loss of reception. The unit will lay these points in a straight line based on the last known track. So you can imagine you are approaching a turn point. Just cover the antenna, wait two-three seconds then complete the turn before the turn point and the unit will keep laying down points for thirty seconds and leave track points at the turn even though you were not there. This is what we are disabling in the new models.

Of course, it is rather difficult to use these "features" of these GPS's to any advantage in an actual competition. Still we rely on GPSes to give us a true record of where the pilot flew and any deviation from that standard is questionable. The feature has been removed from the latest version of the Compeo and 5030 software. It seems the feature will soon be removed from Garmin GPSs.

I personally feel that these are very small problems, but at the Bogong Cup we 5030 users were almost penalized by being required to go within 200 meters of a turnpoint instead of 400 meters. Thankfully a vote of the pilots bailed us out of that and similar other requirements. Later we allowed the other pilots to continue using their Garmins without requiring that they spend at least 30 seconds within the turnpoint cylinders. :-)

We should continue on as we have been using GPSes and virtual goals. Compeo and 5030 pilots should be required to update to the latest version of the software and this can be checked by the meet officials at waypoint download time. When the firmware fixes come out from Garmin, they should be required. MLR's are required to be in 3D mode.

In the true spirit of competition

Mon, Jan 31 2005, 4:00:00 pm GMT

At the 2005 Worlds

the Worlds

Andrew Edney|camera|competition|GPS|Koos de Keijzer|photo|Worlds 2005

Andrew Edney «andye» writes:

Koos de Keijzer represents the spirit of competition in this picture at goal. Picture by Andrew Edney..

Angelo just can't help himself and neither can I in response!

1. 0 Importance of using camera evidence. Why was it used?

As stated in my previous response, camera times (as opposed to GPS times) taken at goal were invaluable in two circumstances:

A. Where GPS tracklog failed to indicate a pilot had crossed the goal line (whereas photographic evidence demonstrated they had made goal).

B. Where GPS tracklog showed an error of 13 seconds on goal line crossing time.

Angelo's comments fail to address circumstance A.

Angelo's comments indicate pilots may require the purchase of a new GPS (to address circumstance B) to be correctly scored (on GPS) in the 2005 worlds - would the majority of pilots consider this a reasonable situation? Angelo's comments indicate the 13 second error may only exist in some competition directors minds - if this is the case why did we experience the problem with hard data at the 2005 worlds?

2. 0 Continuing criticisms of camera data:

Where does Angelo's comment that the camera was not used in a "perfect way" 100% of the time originate from?

In my previous comments, I stated that the introduction of a string line structure created additional difficulty for the photographer due to the camera wanting to focus on the string line and associated insects. This problem was identified before any official goal time shots were taken and rectified by adopting another (less convenient) camera focus mode (AF servo as opposed to AF continuous).

The addition of the string line structure provided no measurable improvement or detriment to photographic timing accuracy. (Although in future - I would recommend the use of a string line sighting structure to provide a more robust procedure to less experienced camera operators - also mainly to alleviate the invalid criticism I have experienced) :)

3. 0 My thoughts:

"The truth of the matter need only be spoken once - other interpretations of events may require much repetition and iteration to strive to achieve credibility" - Anonymous

Discuss "In the true spirit of competition" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

Artificial Horizons

Wed, Nov 24 2004, 6:00:03 pm GMT

For when you don't know where you are.

horizons

cloud|GPS|safety|software|Ted Conowal

Ted J. Conowal writes:

Here and here are some links for a couple of websites which have artificial horizons, attitude software for handheld PDA computers.

Our club had someone who was in strong lift recently, and was a little bugged out by it. It seems he got a little too close for comfort to a large fat cloud, and ran away before he got sucked up. His fault being there anyway, but most of us high time pilots, have been in similar situations close to the clouds, or by not paying attention, or just being stupid.

The cheaper one (second one above) by Hanger B-17 is coupled to a GPS unit, which acts as the gyro for the horizon. The other by PC flight Systems is a bit more complicated, and has many features designed for general aviation aircraft, such as engine monitoring etc. The PC Flight Systems setup is a true glass cockpit.

I just think that these items would be a good additional safety margin to add to our instruments. I don't condone any breaking of FARs, but I must admit that I have done so by being sucked up myself.

Discuss "Artificial Horizons" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

GPS drawings »

Tue, Aug 31 2004, 2:00:02 am EDT

Beautiful drawings.

art|GPS|Jaco Herbst

GPS

Jaco Herbst «jacoherbst» sends in this URL:

http://www.gpsdrawing.com

GPS⁣es built into PDAs »

Tue, Jul 27 2004, 3:00:05 pm EDT

Soon the GPS will be built into everything.

GPS

Whalley, Stephen «Stephen.Whalley» sends this URL:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/07/21/gps_devices/

Discuss GPS at the Oz Report forum

Canadian Nats

Sat, Jun 19 2004, 12:00:02 pm GMT

65 miles? Is that all?

Canadian Nationals 2004|Chelan XC Classic 2004|Dave Scott|GPS|history|Mark Dowsett|scoring|Tom Pierce

Mark Dowsett «mark» writes:

http://www.dowsett.ca/cdnnats

We have had four tasks out of five days at the Canadian HG Nationals. The last two have been very close to 1000 point days with strong climbs to over 12,000’. Thursday we had a 111 km task which I think is our longest task in Canadian history with six pilots making goal.

The American’s are doing great - Tom Pierce has won a couple days (but he is the only rigid wing) and Dave Scott is kicking ass too - this is his first racing competition (he has flown the Classic) and is loving the conditions up here. He says due to the great flying conditions and our focus on teaching pilots how to use their GPSs in competitions, there is nothing else like this event in the Pacific North West.

(editor's note: Perhaps they can help pilots with GPS scoring at the CXCC)

GPS⁣ photo linking »

Wed, Jun 16 2004, 8:00:02 pm EDT

Document your flight.

GPS cameras

GPS|photo

Stewart «stewart» writes:

Now here's a cool way to document your x-c flights: GPS photo linking.

You make use of special software to read data about your collection of in-flight digital images, and compare the time-stamp of the photos with the time stamp in your track-log. You can then easily identify exactly where on your flight you were where you took each fascinating image.

There's an article on the software, and process, here.

Soon you won't even need that software, because there will be GPS-enabled cameras, like this one from Ricoh. This model using a CF-card GPS, which is a bit bulky, but SD-card sized GPS units are on the horizon.

Discuss "GPS⁣ photo linking" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

Flytec Championship - day three »

Sun, Apr 18 2004, 8:00:00 pm GMT

It's a blue day with a few wisps that give us the dots for us to connect.

competition

Flytec Championship - day three

Alex Ploner|cloud|competition|Eric Paquette|Flytec Championships 2004|Flytec Championships 2005|gaggle|GPS|Jim Yocom|Mario Alonzi|Ron Gleason|trike

The results are posted here: http://www.flytec.com/flytec_champ_04/index.html

Saturday's flight:

http://olc.onlinecontest.org/olcphp/2004/ausw_fluginfo.php?ref3=3924&ueb=N&olc=holc-usa&spr=en&dclp=d541cda3b5bfd158c1613bcacda1b61e

Sunday's task and flight:

http://olc.onlinecontest.org/olcphp/2004/ausw_fluginfo.php?ref3=4002&ueb=N&olc=holc-usa&spr=en&dclp=d541cda3b5bfd158c1613bcacda1b61e

The high pressure ridge which set up on the first day of the competition from the Gulf of Mexico out to the Atlantic off the Carolina coast will apparently be with us through at least Thursday, so we'll have east winds for a good number of days. The winds fortunately are not so strong that we can't call a task and accomplish it.

We again decide to go north west of Ocala for a cross wind task, because unlike yesterday the early clouds thin out and we get only a few wisps to provide an guidance. We also add a south leg cross wind into goal at Dunellon.

Dunellon is a huge sparsely used airfield built during World War II. It was raised out of the nearby swamps, so it is high and dry.

As the clouds thin out before the launch pilots are worrying about whether there will be any lift out on the course line. Didier comes to me to see if they should change the flex wing task.

Most of the rigid wing pilots are in the air already, but I'm waiting as David Chaumet and Alex Ploner seem to go near the end of the launch time. With strong winds and no clouds I figure why get going early when it is likely I'll be blown down wind. Besides maybe I can stick with Alex and David. And, besides, on the last two days we've had big problems with GPS coverage to the east over the cell tower, and I want to stay away from the area.

The trike pilot pulls me right to a wisp of a cloud to the east and I start climbing in 200 fpm. I just hang in there as who knows where there is any other lift. Soon Alex, David and Johann come in under me and we all slowly climb out.

I'm sticking with Alex and David if I can and we move north to try to stay as far east as we can. The entry start circle starts ten miles out, and there is no way that we are going to make it there at 1:30. Still most of the rigid wing pilots are down wind and low. I'm with the top two pilots, so when they start will be good enough.

As we move north, Ron Gleason and Jim Yocom are still over Quest trying to get up. Alex and David are 500 feet over us. Eric Paquette, Johann Posh and I were together just below them and that is where we would stay.

There were very few wisps of clouds to the north as we approached the start circle circumference. Everyone was being very cautious given the lack of visible thermal markers. We all stay together even though the three of us are below.

Just before the prisons (there are four of them now) a few miles south of the turnpike, I follow Alex on a seven mile glide to the next cloud north of the prisons. It's 500+ fpm from 1,500'.

Soon it will be my turn, as I also take a seven mile glide from the turnpike to the spot where I can see the next clouds forming and find 600 fpm from 1,500'. Eric was following behind me and everyone else was holding back but come to join me when they see what I've got.

The day has really turned on and even though there are very few clouds we are getting confident. We can keep track of Alex and David above us as we start racing in the strong lift not taking any long runs getting low.

Fifteen miles out from the north turnpoint Eric trailing Johann and I finds much better lift and gets above us. Johann misses a thermal and gets behind. We are all spread out now as we approach the turnpoint to the north. I can still keep Alex, David and Eric in view.

The flex wings launch behind us and have three start times starting at 2 PM, after our 1:30 PM start time. Given the tough conditions at launch no one is up and able to take the 2 PM start time.

A few get the 2:15 start, and the rest have to settle for the last time at 2:30 with only a few pilots in good position. They all quickly gaggle up given the conditions and cautiously work their way north.

They'll all stay together until five miles before the north turnpoint when Mario Alonzi finds a good thermal and gets above everyone. Mario will stay high around the turnpoint and head back south toward goal.

Alex will get to goal first, followed shortly by David, then Eric, me, and fifteen minutes later Johann. The Swifts will come in just behind me.

Alex Ploner at Quest

Half an hour later Mario will come in and later about fifteen flex wing pilots will make it in.

Flytec Championship »

Mon, Apr 12 2004, 7:00:01 pm GMT

It starts on Friday

Flytec Championship 2004

The last cold front of the season, and the strongest all spring, is coming through today. One came through yesterday also bringing some winds and rain. This has closed down flying for a couple of days, but we should be up and running for Wednesday and Thursday before the meet.

Oleg is here. The French team of a dozen pilots are here. We've got two Tsunami's. A couple of Stratoses. It looks like the US-Japanese Swift Friendship team is here. The Ukrainian-American Friendship team is back together.

A dozen new Moyes gliders came in a few days ago. Terry Presley got his going right away and was mightily pleased even if it was the pre 2004 version. Kurt got the latest version and according to him the area near the tips isn't as fat as on the S. Maybe it isn't S-shaped anymore even though the name is the same. I hope to find out more later.

Kevin Carter is going to be flying an Aeros Combat L-15, the bigger glider. No ballast I hear. He is landing on one foot. Oleg's got his new 13 L. I've a new version of the original la Mouette Topless under a new name and updates of course. Also , Guillen with a new Icaro 2000 Laminar Zero 7.

I sure hope everyone camped here at the first of the week has good tents. It is supposed to not get out of the sixties on Wednesday.

Well, now that I see that it may be too windy on Wednesday after the front passes through on Tuesday.

Discuss the at the Oz Report forum

Phone GPS

Sun, Apr 11 2004, 12:00:01 pm GMT

Let's get this together and use this technology.

GPS|Will Gadd

Will Gadd <gadd@gravsports.com> writes:

There are several companies that already make phone GPS combination systems (http://www.pointersolutions.com/eng/metsastys_koiragps.htm), and we used the RUAG (http://www.gps-logger.ch/east/overview.php) in the Red Bull X Alps.

It worked pretty well in cell-dense Europe, the response to seeing live positions on the web immediately was amazing, the demand took Red Bull’s servers (and they had good gear) down twice before they got enough bandwidth to handle the demand. The live web GPS coverage made the X Alps probably the most-viewed paragliding event in history.

If you were out of cell for an hour or two the Ruag East would store all the info and then send it once a signal was acquired, pretty cool.

The X Alps organizers communicated with the athletes with SMS, and the RUAG had an “emergency” button that sent your GPS coordinates out to the organizers, the safety director and your chase crew when pressed and held in a certain manner. Pretty cool.

We also used Blue Tooth cell phones to send pictures taken with a BT capable digital camera; fun, but BT is painfully slow for sending any file over a few hundred KB. If you network two computers together with BT it takes forever to transfers files, you can burn CDs and transfer info much faster that way than with BT (or just use an Ethernet cable).

I was initially a BT fan, but after using it seems too slow and convoluted to be worth the bother, it’s not a feature I’ll look for in computers, phones, cameras or GPS in the future. A cable works faster, is simpler and more reliable.

Anyhow, marketing-wise having live race results for major comps in North America would be great, I think it would draw a tremendous amount of interest to recreational flying. How cool would it be if our comps had the same level coverage as NASCAR? Thinking about it, NASCAR is like watching paint dry compared to a good flying comp, there really ought to be a way to make this work. Imagine how fast gliding technology would progress with serious money behind it.

Discuss phone GPS at the Oz Report forum

GPS clamp »

Tue, Dec 30 2003, 8:00:01 pm GMT

GPSes

GPS

http://www.mobilecx.com

jim finger <jimfinger@charter.net> writes:

Here's a cool company that makes clamping devices that will attach any GPS to any glider. You can even fly with your laptop and write flight reviews during those long XCs. Or not.

Discuss "GPS clamp" at the Oz Report forum   link»

GPS⁣es for world records – limping along »

Thu, Nov 20 2003, 2:00:04 pm EST

GPS|John Aldridge|record

Six months after being given the mandate to come up with a way to use GPSes for world record purposes, the committee seems to be doing work that doesn’t meet with the Bureau’s standards.

John Aldridge reported on the recent work he had received from Anestis Paliatsos, but expressed concern that the subcommittee is merely collating the suggested changes they received without evaluating them. Also there is no indication that they are checking that proposed changes do not conflict with FAI General Section rules. They appear to have included GPS as a form of flight verification without identifying which ones (if any) have the necessary security features.

The report indicates that a further subcommittee should investigate this aspect but does not indicate who will form this subcommittee. John suggested that the subcommittee should be consulting similar groups within other commissions (such as the IGC) to find out if some of this work has already been done elsewhere.

It also appears that our attempts to introduce use of cylinder turnpoint sectors for record purposes may be in conflict with the FAI General Section. Olivier suggested that if this is the case and we wish to change it we are unlikely to succeed in isolation but may be successful if others (such as the IGC) also wish change.

The sub committee should contact the IGC about this and regarding the use of GPS’s for record setting.

There is a need for barograph approval standards. Any proposals for FAI General Section changes in the next edition will have to be submitted by Olivier before the end of November. John Aldridge to contact Anestis Paliatsos about these matters.

Well, I see that not much progress has been made on this issue. I thought there were some committed people working on this. What happened?

Discuss GPSes at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "GPS⁣es for world records – limping along" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

Finding your way in Cyprus (and elsewhere)

Wed, Oct 15 2003, 5:00:03 am EDT

track logs

Cyprus|directions|GPS|record|Sotos Christoforou

Sotos Christoforou http://www.flycyprus.com

Regarding the recent article of thermal waypoint database in Europe I would like to point out another way to use the GPS. Instead of thermal waypoints someone can download from my website all the tracks along the roads in Cyprus in order to find the launch point of each site.

Many foreign visitors were complaining that many of our sites are not so easy to find as a result of the complicated forest roads. Many of them are narrow and you may have to back up in reverse for more than a kilometer if you take the wrong one. You can suddenly find an impasse and so a 10 minute trip can turn into a two hour one.

So I started to record the track along the roads to each site with my GPS starting from an exit of a high way or a main road up to the top. Then in order to encourage anyone to use this method I uploaded all the tracks in my website in a file format of a free GPS software package. So for any flying site in Cyprus there are directions to an exit of a road and then you just follow the track uploaded to your GPS from my site until you find the launch.

Believe it or not I received lots of email from many pilots who found the way to the top easily with lots of good comments and some of them kindly requested me to share the idea with them to do something similar in their places.

The free GPS software is the GPS track maker (http://www.gpstm.com) and you can download the file of it with the tracks of my country at (http://www.flycyprus.com/260502.gtm). Have a look at it and let me know if you found anything interesting.

Finally I am available for any questions related to this idea but also for any suggestion to improve it. Who knows, if any association composes such a database of all the sites with in its reach then it will be possible to make something similar as the navigation system of high way use.

Discuss "Finding your way in Cyprus (and elsewhere)" at the Oz Report forum   link»  

2003 Team Challenge »

Thu, Jul 17 2003, 3:00:02 pm EDT

aerotow|competition|David "Dave" Glover|David Glover|GPS|NTSS|scoring|sport|Sport Class|Tennessee Tree Toppers|towing|USHGA

Jeff Dodgen <windgypsy@bledsoe.net> writes:

Team Challenge 2003 is September 21-27. David Glover will be the meet Director and Tim Meany will be scorekeeper. David is applying for USHGA regular and Sport Class sanctioning. The field will be limited to 70 pilots so register early ($125 early registration).

The Team Challenge has historically been a fun meet with a competitive edge. It is an opportunity for experienced pilots to mentor new pilots and new pilots to learn cross country and competition skills. David is planning a meet that will allow nationally ranked pilots to earn NTSS points. These ranked pilots will be teamed up with less experienced pilots interested in learning cross country and competition flying skills.

Scoring will be designed such that the more pilots from the same team that make it to goal and the closer the entire team makes it to goal, the more team points will be awarded to that team. This will benefit all by encouraging the current nationally ranked pilots to mentor and coach their less experienced teammates.

Distance to goal and time to goal will all be considered. Foot launching is the priority with towing available based on conditions.

You must be Intermediate (Hang 3) for Whitwell launch and have an aerotow signoff to aerotow prior to the meet. You will need a GPS for national point scoring, but will not be necessary for team scores. This is a good time to get a GPS and learn how to use it!

The Tennessee Tree Toppers will host a party the night before the competition starts on Saturday September 20th. A $10.00 donation will be waived for registered competition pilots, but otherwise required as this party will be catered.

The Awards Pizza Dinner will be held on the last night of the event at the dome. If you have some great videos - bring 'em. If you have some vintage slides - we'd love to see those too!!

Discuss "2003 Team Challenge" at the Oz Report forum   link»

WA state record - 185 miles

Wed, Jul 16 2003, 6:00:03 pm EDT

GPS|landing|record|scoring

Aaron writes:

The reason I originally provided Larry’s flight as 185 miles was because of the discrepancy between where launch is and where the Butte turnpoint is located. It was typical that pilots would show a bit longer flight on their GPS than would be recorded in the score system for the Classic because the Butte Turnpoint, used for measuring flights for the contest, is located at the towers, which is east of launch. On a flight to the east, or anywhere east of a southerly direction, the distance indicated on the scoring system would be shorter than the actual flight.

For that reason, it is fair to say that Larry’s score for the Classic indicated points based on the Towers to landing, but his flight was actually longer, more like the 185 miles that I mentioned. Larry should be able to provide the exact GPS distances from launch to landing, which is the true measure of a State record, not an artificial distance measured from a turnpoint some distance from launch to landing. Larry deserves every tenth of a mile he worked for on that flight.

Discuss "WA state record - 185 miles" at the Oz Report forum   link»

IQ Compeo Revision 2.13

Tue, Jul 8 2003, 6:00:01 pm EDT

Flavio Tebaldi|Flytec 5030|GPS

Flavio Tebaldi <dclaveno@tin.it> writes:

I have tested the new IQ -Compeo firmware (a beta version 2.13), and it's fantastic. Now the instrument is ready to be used in competitions. Peter Brauniger has met all my requests and I tested them with a new IQ-Compeo he sent me last week.

As you can see, now the GPS reception is better with the new GPS receiver. My old instrument received 3 satellites with medium signal, my new instrument received 5 satellites with signal near to maximum!

(editor’s note: If you look in the upper left hand corner of each screen you’ll see a bar and a number. This is the GPS signal strength and number of satellites acquired. The Galileo has a higher signal strength and more satellites.)

Now the waypoint transfer rate to and from pc is faster and the instrument doesn't miss any waypoint!

Discuss the IQ-Compeo (Flytec 5030) at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "IQ Compeo Revision 2.13" at the Oz Report forum   link»

The Spanish ATOS “incident”

Mon, Jul 7 2003, 6:00:05 pm GMT

accident|aerotow|airline|airspace|altitude|Angelo Crapanzano|bridle|Carlos Avila|certification|cloud|control frame|DHV|environment|equipment|Felix Ruehle|Florida|foot launch|general aviation|GPS|harness|injury|job|landing|military|Moyes Xtralite|parachute|Ron Richardson|safety|site|spin|Swift|tail|technique|tow|towing|tumble|USHGA|Wallaby Ranch|winch

David Cross <d.cross@chello.nl> writes:

I have recently had the unfortunate experience of departing controlled flight in an ATOS rigid wing hang glider. I have written this report to share the experience with my fellow aviators so that any lessons learnt may be shared and the accident assessed by those with a better insight in this field than I.

Description of Flight Conditions

I had launched in the mid afternoon with an aero tow from Aerotow.com's facilities near the town of Avila in central Spain. I was planning to fly some cross country under the tuition of the highly experienced Ron Richardson. It was my second flight of the day. On the previous flight I had found the conditions to be weak with the thermals broken and the climbs poor and I had not been able to stay up for long. The afternoon however improved with the cloud base lifting to about 7000' altitude (average ground elevation of 3000'), with promising cumulus development downwind to the east and no sign of the previous day's overdevelopment.

The second aero tow was bumpy but easy to handle on the ATOS with its excellent control harmony between pitch and roll. I was waved off in some lift over a small ridgeline to the south east of the field. I again found the lift to be broken and the climb weak. Ron was at this stage further to the east overhead the town and was calling a 300'/min climb on the averager. As I was at this stage too low to get over to him I focused on what I had in order to build more altitude. I scratched up to 4800' altitude and then ran for a good looking cumulus on the way to Ron's position.

Loss of Control

Entering the Thermal

I rolled right hand into the lift under the cumulus and worked hard to centre it. The conditions were choppy but not rough and smoothed out somewhat above 5000' altitude to a steady 300 fpm up. The conditions downwind were now looking really good and through each turn I was scanning to pick up Ron's Avian Cheetah on the horizon, and I could hear Darren Blackman heading in towards us on his Swift. Things were at last coming together after a week of poor conditions. I was relaxed, thoroughly enjoying the ATOS and looking forward to the afternoons flying.

Turn Reversal

I had in the last turn noticed a slight increase in lift in the southern sector of my circle. I glanced down to see if there were any birds marking the core and was presented with a magnificent stork circling left hand counter flow to me with slightly intersecting circles. After one more turn I saw that (as always) he was doing a better job than I and so I planned a turn reversal into his circle.

The reversal worked out well. As the stork slid under my nose I experienced a moderate pitch up from the stronger lift and eased the bar in to lower the nose and accelerate while rolling out of the right hand turn into a left hand circle. Due to the fair conditions I had been thermalling at 40-45 km/h (25-28 mph) indicated airspeed (IAS) with 20-25° of bank and had felt very comfortable at this speed.

(editor’s note: Unless the thermal is absolutely light (50-100 fpm) and full with no turbulence, I’m flying at 34-38 mph. The speeds indicated above are much too slow for the conditions described.)

As I had now accelerated into the stronger lift I estimate that the IAS was approximately 48-50 km/h (30 mph) as I started the reversal. The flap was set at 8-10°. The reversal was initiated with moderate spoiler application - I estimate ⅓ to ½ deflection. The altitude was now 6000' (about 2500' AGL due to the ridge below).

Departing Controlled Flight

As the left hand turn was established I felt a light short period aerodynamic buffet on the control frame and almost simultaneously experienced a very rapid nose down pitch rotation through approximately 90° of pitch. I estimate the pitch rotation rate to be 50 -60°/sec. There was also some left hand roll rotation, although this was less than the amount of pitch rotation. I was not aware of any significant yaw.

As the departure started my assessment was that the glider was auto-rotating and that I was in the incipient stage of a spin. I had been thermalling with the bar in the upper chest to lower chin position. As the nose down pitch started I rapidly moved the bar in to the mid chest position in an attempt to reduce the angle of attack, un-stall the wing and stop the autorotation. This appeared to stop the left roll rotation rate but had little effect on the rate of nose down pitch. During the latter part of the initial nose down rotation I estimate that the g loading on my body was 0 - 0.5 g (I felt almost weightless).

The glider then appeared to stabilize very briefly in the vertical nose down position before rotating extremely rapidly in pitch to the inverted position. This second rotation was violent and uncontrollable. As it happened I felt a powerful rearward pull from my hang strap and the control bar was pulled from my grip. I was thrown hard into the undersurface of the glider which was now inverted, next to the A frame. I estimate that this pitch down rate was well in excess of 90°/sec.

The glider now stabilized in the inverted position while descending in what appeared to be a relatively gentle oscillatory spiral. I was somewhat disorientated at this point and so may not be too accurate about the motion of the glider. I do however recall some spiral motion and some oscillation above and below the horizon.

I was lying on the undersurface of the wing to the left of and outside the A frame. I immediately checked the leading edges and tips and observed no apparent structural damage. I assessed that I had sufficient altitude and attempted to right the glider and reached for the A frame to do this. When I grasped the left down tube to attempt to right the glider, the glider entered a very disorientating oscillatory rotation but remained inverted. I assume this was caused by spoiler deflection when I moved the A frame.

After two rapid rotations it did not appear to be recovering. At this stage I was losing situational awareness with respect to the height remaining for recovery. In addition the gliders unstable motion had me concerned about the possibility of being knocked unconscious.

Parachute Deployment

I thus looked for clear air and deployed my emergency parachute hard in the direction of rotation half way between the right hand wingtip and the keel. The parachute deployed immediately and then appeared to semi collapse as the glider was rotated by the parachute deployment into the upright position, swinging me hard to hang to the outside of the A frame. The parachute then reopened immediately.

The system of parachute, glider and pilot now became extremely unstable with the parachute and the glider appearing to work in opposition. The glider appeared to accelerate and pitch nose up, causing the chute to collapse and then re-open before the cycle was repeated by the glider. From my vantage point the parachute was describing a sine curve-like path across the horizon while collapsing partially and re-opening in sequence with the pitch motion of the glider.

The glider and parachute appeared to be rotating rapidly about each other with the centre of this rotation somewhere between the glider and the parachute. At no stage was the parachute positioned above the glider. The centripetal acceleration of this system rapidly became very high. I estimate the g loading to be approximately 3 g and I was swung out helplessly under the wing clear of the A frame unable to control the system at all.

Stabilizing the System

I now broadcast a Mayday call, and informed Ron that I had deployed the parachute and was going down. I described my status and informed him that it did not look promising. At this stage the rate of descent and particularly the angular rotation appeared to me to be very high and I was sure that ground impact in this configuration would have severe consequences.

After several high g rotations I managed to grab the hang strap behind my neck and pull myself toward the A frame and grasp a down tube. Adrenaline is a wonderful thing. I then pulled myself into the A frame. This had an immediate positive effect. The parachute stabilized above the glider, the angular velocity reduced and the g loading reduced. I was now descending through about 500' AGL with a moderate oscillation but no angular rotation at all. I now called Ron to inform him that the situation was under control and proceeded to describe my probable touchdown position to him.

Touchdown

I descended onto the slope of a rocky tree covered ridge. Before impact I positioned myself as high into the A frame as possible as I was not sure what the rate of descent was and I wished to protect myself from any impact on what appeared to be very rocky terrain. I kept my legs bent to absorb as much shock as possible.

I was fortunate to impact into the crown of a moderately sized tree. The A frame took much of the initial impact of the branches. The glider was then swung out of the top of the tree throwing me out of the A frame. As I fell to the ground the glider hooked onto a branch and my fall was arrested with my feet 12cm off the ground. I was completely uninjured. I transmitted to Ron that I was down and safe and that he should cancel any ambulance.

The only apparent damage to the glider was a broken main spar and associated sail damage approximately ⅓ in from the right wingtip. This occurred on ground impact and not in flight. My assessment was that the glider was completely undamaged until ground contact.

Discussion

As with any aviation accident there are several lessons to be learnt. Most accidents are not caused by a single event but by a combination of factors. Often an accident could have been prevented if just one of these factors, however minor it may have seemed at the time, could have been identified and stopped. I will now discuss my background, what I think may have been the contributing factors to this accident and the lessons learnt from it. This is obviously my subjective opinion and I welcome any discussion on these points that may offer a more informed insight.

Flying Experience and Background

I am a USHGA intermediate rated pilot who has been flying for three years. I did my initial training in the French Alps mountain launching and completed my training at Wallaby Ranch where I also obtained an aero tow rating. I did a further foot launching course at Lookout Mountain where I obtained cliff launch, flat slope launch and assisted windy cliff launch ratings. My flying has taken place mostly in Florida and the Alps and has always been under the supervision of more experienced pilots. I currently fly a Moyes Xtralite. One month prior to the accident I had flown under the supervision of Chris Dawes in the UK where I did some winch foot launch training and some aero towing as an early season refresher. Prior to this I had last flown the previous late summer in the Alps.

I am a current airline pilot flying Boeing 747's and a current Air Force reserve pilot on fighter type aircraft. I hold a Glider Pilot's License although I am not at present current on sailplanes. I have some experience flying paragliders although I have not yet completed my license. My total flying experience is 8000 hours.

I have mentioned the military experience as I feel it is relevant with respect to my experience in spinning three axis control aircraft. My air force background has provided me with extensive spin training. I have been fortunate to have had the opportunity of spinning a variety of aircraft, from military trainers and fighters to general aviation aircraft, aerobatic aircraft and sailplanes.

Two weeks prior to this accident I carried out a maintenance test flight on a military trainer that included several multi turn full spins and recoveries. I thus feel that I may be considered current as far as spin identification, entry and recovery on three axis aircraft is concerned. This has relevance as there has been much discussion about the advantages of doing spin training on three axis aircraft before flying rigid wing hang gliders.

ATOS Experience

I had come to Spain specifically for the opportunity of flying the ATOS. At the time of the accident I had flown 11 flights on the ATOS for a total of 5.00 flying hours. All flight had been under the supervision of Felix Ruehle and I had been extensively and professionally briefed by him on all aspects of the glider.

Although this was my first experience on a rigid wing hang glider I had felt comfortable and confident on the ATOS from the first flight. I had on the second flight in smooth evening conditions flown the glider to the stall and found the recovery to be simple. I had confidence thermalling the glider in the moderate conditions I had experienced and at no stage had any reservations about the handling of the glider. I found the control harmony particularly pleasant and aero towing simple.

(editor’s note: An inexperienced hang glider pilot, new to an ATOS, was flying it too slow in a thermal.)

Equipment

The glider was a standard ATOS. I had for most of the week prior to the accident been flying another standard ATOS. The hang point for the accident glider (as on the previous glider) had been adjusted towards the forward centre of gravity (C of G) limit, appropriate to my hook in weight. On the accident glider my hang position was slightly higher than that of the glider I had flown previously in the week and the trim speed was slightly lower. Both the hang position and the trim speed were well within safe limits. The glider was fitted with an A.I.R. horizontal stabilizer.

I was using a Woody Valley Tenax harness with the parachute mounted on the right chest. The harness was fitted with a Metamorfosi Conar 18 Gore parachute, which was just over one year old and had recently been repacked by myself. No swivel was fitted to the bridle. My weight is 72 kg making a hook in weight of 87kg.

Airspeed information was provided by a Brauniger Galileo set to indicated airspeed (IAS) mode and a mechanical pitot system fitted by Felix. I used the mechanical system for airspeed reference as I had not yet calibrated the Galileo and was not sure of the reliability of the airspeed display.

Departure from Controlled Flight

I feel that the departure from controlled flight had two distinct phases, a non divergent autorotation phase, and a divergent pitch instability phase.

Autorotation Phase

The autorotation phase I would describe as a gust induced stall in the turn followed by an autorotation and an incipient spin (the incipient stage of the spin being where the aerodynamic and gyroscopic effects of the spin are still influenced by the initial flight path of the glider - in this case a left hand turn). Although the nose down rotation of this phase was rapid it did not feel to me to be divergent. I thus do not feel that the gust had at this stage placed the wing at an AOA/hang point loading combination that had exceeded any static stability margins.

I was surprised by the limited aerodynamic stall warning and the rate of the initial nose down rotation. For these reasons I think the gust onset was significant and rapid. All my previous spinning experience in aircraft had led me to expect an initial rotation rate in roll and yaw that equaled or exceeded any initial nose down pitch rotation. As the initial nose down rotation started I had reduced the AOA aggressively. This seemed to stop any further roll or yaw rotation but had little effect on the rate of nose down pitch rotation. At no stage did the glider enter a stabilized spin.

I feel that there are several factors that could have contributed to the initial autorotation.

Firstly the glider was trimmed slightly slower than that to which I had been used to on the previous ATOS I had flown. As stated this was well within safe limits but may have caused a tendency towards slightly slower flight if I was distracted.

Secondly, I was using flap to thermal. This would move the bar position slightly back and I would, if focused primarily on bar position, have the tendency to move the bar further forward than required.

Thirdly, I had completed a turn reversal prior to the autorotation and the spoiler deflection would have caused some nose up pitching moment. If not corrected this would cause an obvious reduction in IAS and place the glider closer to the stall.

All the above factors are conducive to slower flight. However I am accustomed to flying aircraft that require accurate speed control and feel that I was very aware of the IAS while thermalling. I was also aware that the spin behavior of rigid wing gliders can be unpredictable and had no desire to explore that environment. My thermalling speed of 42-45 km/h (26 mph) felt comfortable for the conditions I was experiencing. I have since been informed that it was perhaps on the low side but not unsafe.

(editor’s note: Pilot is unaware that he is flying too slow.)

I had thermalled at similar speeds in equivalent conditions for most of the week without ever approaching any stall margins. The accuracy of the airspeed reference must also be considered. As mentioned previously my primary reference was the mechanical pitot system as I felt it was more accurate than my as yet un-calibrated electronic reference.

Some points with respect to the turn reversal technique. I normally unload the wing (thus reducing the AOA) before initiating any reversal in order to improve the roll rate. This obviously also results in an increase in IAS. Whether my technique was sufficient to counter any pitch up due to spoiler deflection may be debated. I did not notice any significant pitch up during this particular reversal. My limited experience on the ATOS could of course preclude this.

In addition I had experienced acceleration on entering the increased lift prior to the reversal. I had countered the nose up pitch that this had caused and so feel that my IAS margins on entry to the turn reversal were probably sufficient for normal conditions. I had as well been briefed on the "rule of thumb" safe range for forward and rearward bar positions and at all times flew within this range.

I thus think there must have been some significant gust effect present. Simply approaching the stall in a turn should not result in the almost immediate and rapid rotation experienced with minimal stall warning. I have described the conditions as moderate. I was experiencing an average climb of 300 fpm with maximum instantaneous readings of 1000 fpm.

However, Ron Richardson reported some strong turbulence while descending through the airspace I had been flying in, shortly after I deployed the parachute. My assessment is that a gust rapidly exceeded the critical AOA of the wing. As I was not yet fully established in a stable turn, there would have been some asymmetric loading on the wing, possibly resulting in the auto-rotation. I feel that this is supported by the fact that my rapid reduction in the AOA had no appreciable effect on the pitch rotation rate.

Pitch Instability Phase

I will now discuss what I consider to be the second phase of the departure. During the initial auto-rotation I had not experienced any reduction in g loading on my body - the hang point still felt loaded. Although the initial nose down rotation was high, I still felt that I had some control input and that the glider would recover. However, as the glider passed through about 60° nose down I experienced a reduction in g loading and felt almost weightless.

From this point I felt I no longer had control of the glider and I was unable to hold the bar in any longer. This is when the rapid rotation to the inverted position occurred and I lost my grip on the control bar. Perhaps the excessive AOA of the wing combined with the unloading of the hang point caused the static stability margins of the wing to be exceeded, causing a divergent rotation in pitch. The first auto-rotation phase initially felt controllable. The second phase of pitch instability was definitely not controllable.

Lessons Learnt

Thermalling at higher speed, steeper bank angles and higher g loadings, while not necessarily providing an increase in stall margin, will improve the damping in pitch and make a departure less likely.

It would be of value to calculate the exact stall speeds for the actual wing loading at various appropriate bank angles. With an accurate IAS reference sufficient margins could be applied to these calculated stall speeds for safer thermalling. An accurate IAS reference is obviously necessary. Of even more value would be a vane type AOA reference (Here's hoping!).

I found the ATOS easy and a pleasure to fly. However, in retrospect I feel that more time spent exploring the performance of the glider in smooth air would have been of benefit. I think in particular, the effect of flap on trim speeds and bar position, spoiler effect on pitch in turn reversals and approaches to the stall in wings level and turning flight should have been more fully explored before flying in more challenging conditions.

I think that my initial reaction to the auto-rotation phase was correct. Moving the bar in reduces the AOA and places the centre of gravity in the best possible position for dive recovery. Should this happen again I will do the same while attempting to hold on tighter. I do however feel that it was impossible to maintain grip on the control bar during the rotation to the inverted position.

Some comments on pilot experience. I was very excited to be offered the opportunity to fly the ATOS by Felix, as I consider myself a low time hang glider pilot. His briefing was comprehensive and gave me confidence in the glider while making me aware of how it differed from other gliders I had flown. I flew the glider conservatively and felt very confident with the general handling.

The afternoon following the accident I flew another standard ATOS in moderate thermic conditions for a 1 ½ hour flight. While understandably nervous at first the pleasant handling of the glider allowed me to settle down and soon regain my confidence. In summary I experienced nothing in the handling of the ATOS that should exceed the abilities of an intermediate pilot. In most respects I found the ATOS easier to fly than an intermediate flex wing hang glider.

Some discussion on three axis spin training for rigid wing pilots. I feel the main benefit of this would be spin entry recognition and reduced disorientation. The spin entry techniques and recovery procedures for a three axis aircraft are different to that of a rigid wing hang glider and themselves can vary dependant on the design of the aircraft. Practicing these procedures would I feel have limited benefit for rigid wing pilots and may even reinforce incorrect techniques. In this accident the main benefit to me of my spin training was recognition of the initial situation and orientation in the unusual attitudes experienced.

Some points on the parachute deployment. It has been suggested, considering the glider was undamaged while inverted, that I could have tried harder to right the glider before deploying the parachute. In retrospect I am glad I did not. I lost a lot of height trying to stabilize the spinning parachute/glider combination. Had I deployed the parachute any later I might have impacted before stabilizing the system. At the time I did not feel that this would have been survivable.

I have discussed this with Angelo Crapanzano from Metamorfosi. He commented that although I was experiencing high g loadings, because the centre of gravity of the pilot/glider/parachute system would have been very close to the pilot/glider combination, my rotational speed would actually have been quite low. In addition he said that my descent rate would perhaps have been even less than when I had stabilized the system. He thus feels that even when the system was not stabilized, it was survivable. The perception from the pilot's point of view remains unpleasant.

In addition it is not certain how the glider may have reacted in the attempt to right it and there is a strong possibility of pilot injury in attempting this. This may then preclude parachute deployment. I thus feel strongly that if one is fortunate to survive a loss of control situation uninjured, the priority is to get the parachute deployed immediately. Considering the instability after parachute deployment, I feel the priority should be to get ones mass as close as possible to the hang point.

Angelo Crapanzano recommends that one gets as close as possible to the nose of the glider, or at least in front of the hang point. This can however be difficult and the A frame is a familiar refuge when under stress and can provide impact protection. It would have helped if I had held onto some part of the A frame before deploying the parachute, as this might have prevented me from being flung away from the A frame as the parachute deployed and righted the glider.

Had I been able to remain closer to the A frame the spiral motion might not have developed. I also feel that some thought should be given to the option of releasing from the glider prior to parachute deployment. All my complications were due to the fact that I was still attached to the glider.

I am very pleased that I had the Conar HG18 parachute. The rate of descent once stabilized was acceptable and the opening time impressively fast. It worked as advertised.

Some discussion on communications and search and rescue procedures. I was able to transmit a Mayday to Ron Richardson seconds after deploying the parachute as I had a transmit button fixed to my thumb. Ron demonstrated professionalism and true airmanship. He acknowledged my call, was overhead my position within minutes, plotted GPS co-ordinates and arranged a rescue. He then landed in a difficult location and was at the accident site within 30 minutes.

Had I been seriously injured Ron's actions would have been potentially life saving. The lessons here are to always fly with someone, be able to communicate effectively with them, even under duress, and always be prepared to assist effectively in an emergency. I had water in my harness but no first aid kit or emergency rations. This has been rectified.

Conclusion

In summary, I suggest that this accident was a result of a gust exceeding the critical angle of attack of the wing by a large margin. This resulted in auto-rotation with a rapid nose down pitch and unloading of the hang point. The static stability margin of the wing was exceeded and the wing experienced a divergent rotation to the inverted position.

Contributory factors were the relatively low indicated airspeed while thermalling, the effect of flap on the control bar position, pilot technique in the turn reversal and the pitch up effect of spoiler deflection.

Flex Ruehle’s Comments

I have attached an email from Felix Ruehle with his comments on the report and the incident.

You report is excellent however I think it's hard to see how quickly or slowly everything happened because my experience is that reports from stress situations follow a different clock.

Since hang gliding was born turbulence can be a problem for safe flying. However different developments improved the safety. One of the latest developments is the fixed V-tail with a lifting airfoil from A-I-R. How does it work? The glider is designed to have the same pitch up moment with tail like the standard ATOS with 0° flap.

With thermal, take off and landing flap setting the pitch up moment is significantly higher with the V-tail. Additionally the V-tail increases pitch damping very significantly with all flap settings. Of course instead of a tail the sweep angle can be increased too to get the same pitch damping effect. However this didn't work out as well for the ATOS, because higher sweep in combination with wing bending would cause dynamic problems.

With the V-tail the glider flies significantly more comfortable. In opposite to the opinion of some pilots, that a positive pitch up moment only protects a glider from tumbling, this is not the case. It is a result of several flight incidents with all types of hang gliders and as well with the hang glider drop test made by the DHV a few years ago that even with a certified hang glider it is possible to tumble.

According to my opinion the main parameters are: Pitch damping which can be increased by higher speed and by the wing area distribution in flight direction. For example a higher sweep angle or a tail, increase pitch damping as well as a forward pilot position. Pitch up moment. This is the moment which must be above a certain value for certification. Small distance from aerodynamic centre to CG.

For example a short A-frame is positive. High airspeed in relation to the turbulence is positive too.

The incident

The air was not very smooth this day and there was over development with rain shortly after the incident at this spot. Ron who landed close to help Dave (thanks Ron) hit some strong turbulence too. However, the day wasn't that rough that pilots usually would stop flying.

According to my opinion the tumbling from Dave was caused due to low airspeed in relation to the turbulence. The thermal speed under this condition was already little slow. The reversal turn reduced the speed probably further. This for example is a very good practice in smooth condition, doing reversal with constant speed. Take care: If you don't pull in during the reversal the speed drops.

I flew to the same spot the next day and felt comfortable with about 55km/h (34 mph) as min. thermal speed. This day looked smoother to me as the previous day.

Does the tail improve the safety? At the online contest (olc) 2002 the ATOS is the glider which has flown the most km before any other wing (including flex wing) and the ATOS flew much more km than other rigids, too. Many pilots have flown sometimes under extremely hard conditions and have reported the good behavior under turbulent condition.

It looks to me like active flying is getting more and more important. With the fast gliders the pilots have the possibility to fly with extra speed or high bank angle without losing too much of performance and it looks too me like the ATOS with the new V-tail is a step to improve pilots safety to a very high level even with the incident of Dave.

Under strong condition the glider gets extra stability with high bank angle and higher speed. While doing a reversal you can easily lose speed and the pilot has no extra g loading. I think this can be an interesting discussion how different pilots handle turbulent air.

Discuss "The Spanish ATOS “incident”" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Competition Formats / Start times

Thu, Jul 3 2003, 3:00:03 pm EDT

Alessandro "Alex" Ploner|Alex Ploner|Angelo Crapanzano|cloud|collision|competition|Europe|FAI|gaggle|game|GAP|GAP 2002|Gerolf Heinrichs|GPS|Ivan Twose|midair collision|power|Richard Walbec|scoring|Thomas "Tom/Tomas" Weissenberger|weather

Angelo Crapanzano <angelo@metamorfosi.com> writes:

The pre Europeans is over and it was a good competition. The weather was varying but good overall and Richard Walbec was a very good meet director plus all the crew was friendly and willing to help (thanks a lot to everybody!) Unfortunately we lost what we discovered had been the best day ever in Millau: in this day a local pilot got up to 4700 m (15500 ft) while most of the competitors were blocked on takeoff by an unpredicted strong side wind.

This day Federico Bausone waited, ready for takeoff, for over one hour and fifteen minutes (with nobody pushing, of course), then the task was cancelled because there was not enough time for all the pilots to get the start gate. Fifteen minutes later the wind started changing and in half an hour it was perfectly straight but most pilots already packed the gliders :-(

As far as I know Millau was, both last year and this one, the only international competition using the GAP 2002 at "full power" (i.e. with the Leading bonus calculated from the actual tracklog of each pilot). Despite the scoring explanation was published besides the daily score, there were several questions on it; probably because pilots like to ask instead of reading and possibly because they know I like to answer.

I had the feeling pilots did like the idea of the Leading bonus when they exactly understood how it works (to know more have a look at my webpage www.metamorfosi.com and click on the GAP icon). On the first day Betiño did perfectly show how the leading bonus works: he started 15 minutes before the first gaggle, flew always on his own well in front of everybody but landed 4 km short of goal. Despite he was not in goal Betiño got the biggest leading bonus on that day to reward his early flying.

On another day Tom Weissenberger and Alex Ploner were for most of the task in front of the leading gaggle trying to escape but, just before goal, got stacked and the leading gaggle flew above them to goal. Alex and Tom got goal shortly afterwards with, of course, a worse time and less speed points but the leading bonus allowed them to reduce the loss of points as a reward for leading for most of the flight.

During the comp there was some discussion about start systems. Except on the last day, where it was set a pure race with single start for everybody, Richard always set a multiple start (mostly with 15 minutes interval but once 10 minutes and once 30 minutes). There was also a debate (mainly between Gerolf and me) about using a multiple start for everybody, except the first 20 in the general standing forced to get the central start.

This proposal come out because many top pilots prefers races but it was not felt safe to have 110 pilots taking the same start. Top pilots like races because it's more fun, they can fly in the same conditions, it's easier to know how one is doing compared to the others and it's also easy to control the opponents because everybody has to start at the same time.

I was strongly against this proposal because to set a different start system to some pilots compared the others is almost like to set a different task. All pilots in a competition are supposed to play the same game with the same rules but if we force the first 20 pilots in the total ranking to take a single start while the others can chose, we could end up with the same tracklog giving different points depending if the pilot was placed 20th or 21st.

To make it clear let's make an example with five starts every 15 minutes, from 14:00 to 15:00, but top 20 pilots have to start at 14:30. If a pilot placed in the first 20 is late and only manages to start at 14:45 he will be scored as he started at 14:30 while if he's not in the first 20 he will be scored as he started at 14:45. This means the same tracklog would bring to quite a different score and, in my opinion, this is not acceptable: all pilots are in the same competition and must play with the same rules.

Somebody says the priority on takeoff for the best scored pilots is already a different rule but I don't agree: it's just a "courtesy" - on the ground - to the pilots which are fighting for the top positions. Once in the air every pilot must follow the same rules!

Of course I do perfectly agree races are a lot of fun and easier to understand for everybody but, unfortunately, the risk of a midair collision gets quite high if there are too many pilots and there is an easy to get cloud base. The multiple start was invented after at the preworld in Ager '94 we ended up with 180 pilots waiting for the tarp in the same thermal for over half an hour: we were lucky enough not to have a midair collision but it was a nightmare!

Unfortunately it looks that pilots and organizers are too conservative and always want to do the same thing: in Brazil only races while in Europe only multiple starts but, in my opinion, in both cases it's not the best thing to do.

Let's analyze our possibilities: we can use three different start cylinders:

- start on Exit

- start on Enter without achieving the turn point inside

- start on Enter plus achieving the turn point inside

we can use four different in flight start time systems:

- Race start

- Free start

- Multiple start

- Open start. These, combined, give us 12 different options: some bad some better but, several, simply different.

Let's speak first about the start cylinder.

- Start on Exit Most pilots and organizers in hang gliding are used to the Start on Exit: normally it's a 5 km radius start cylinder centered on takeoff, where pilots have to be inside the radius just after start time. Pilot start time for scoring purpose is thus last exit from the cylinder (rounded to the previous start time interval which is usually 15 minutes). This system will somehow reduce the crowding only if the radius is quite big.

Unfortunately there is always a single optimum point where all pilots are likely going to met. With the Start on Exit pilots have to make a GoTo to takeoff then, after start, make a GoTo to the next turnpoint or activate the route which, depending on the GPS used, may require to press several buttons.

- Start on Enter without turnpoint inside this is mostly used in paragliding: Start is usually the first turnpoint and the pilot has to be outside of the start cylinder just after start time, then goes in and can immediately go for the next turnpoint without going to the FAI 400 m cylinder at the centre. This is not much different from the Start on Exit because there is still an optimum point where to make the start. However there are some problems calculating the correct task distance (Takeoff-StartCircumference-TP1) which shall be used instead of the distance calculated by the GPS (Takeoff-StartCentre-TP1).

- Start on Enter plus turnpoint inside this is the system we mostly use in Italy since this season and was often used at the pre Europeans in Millau: usually the start is the first turnpoint, with a big enough radius to have the start at a reasonable distance from takeoff. The pilot has to be outside of the cylinder after start time then has to go to the FAI 400 m cylinder at the center.

With this kind of start the pilot has to remember the start radius (which would be different on each day) but will only have to make a GoTo to the first turnpoint or just set the route. In this case pilots can, theoretically, spread along the whole circumference because any point of the start circumference is at the same distance from the turnpoint at the centre. Of course there would be better places than others depending on ridges, thermals and wind, but is undoubtedly more likely to get the pilots spread than with the other systems.

Giving this analysis, except possibly on some quite particular cases, the Start on Enter plus turnpoint inside should always be the preferred start cylinder: has no disadvantages, it's safer, gives more flight options to the pilot and it's the easier to handle with the GPS.

Now let's go to the start time systems.

- Race start this is for sure the simplest one: there is one single start for everybody. It's a lot of fun, everybody knows if he's doing good or bad and it's easy to understand both for pilots and spectators (are there any?). Pilots will fly in the same conditions and the fastest one wins. The pure race reduces the chance of a lucky start time but also eliminates the possibility to choose a better one.

This system gives to a pilot who wants to recover no options except to try to escape from the first gaggle by flying very fast and gives the pilot which is leading the competition the possibility to better control his opponents. The race will put all pilots at the start cylinder at the same time. This could be extremely dangerous if there are too many pilots and especially if cloudbase is too easy to achieve.

Of course there are systems to reduce the crowding which, in a proper day, could allow to make a safe race even with lots of pilots: should be a good day with good thermals and ceiling to spread pilots vertically, but little no clouds, start cylinder should be on enter plus turnpoint inside and wind should be at an angle to the Takeoff-StartTP direction to help the spreading along the start circumference. Start should also be reasonably far from takeoff (about 15 to 20 km) to reduce the crowding because some pilot would already bomb out and others would be late or low. Taking these expedients it would be possible to make a Race even with lots of pilots.

- Free start looks very simple and easy to handle but is totally unused: with this system the pilot start time is the last time he crosses the start circumference. Top pilots would need to wait forever (and bottom pilots would wait for them to go) because the best tactic is to wait for your opponent to start, then follow him after a few minutes and catch him. Being the tactic the same for everybody, all pilots will wait until it's almost too late to complete the task. This system is unsafe because we'll end up with lots of pilots waiting for a long time. Moreover we'll also waste the first part of the day and everything will end up later.

- Multiple start it's right now the most used system in hang gliding. Normally start interval is 15 minutes and there are 3 to 5 starts (half an hour to one hour). Pilots crossing the start circumference are scored as they started at the previous start interval. It reduces the crowding by spreading the pilots into several starts. Multiple starts also allow good pilots to play different tactics from his direct opponents to recover some places: one could start earlier and fly on his own to get more leading points or one could start later and fly fast by using the pilots in front. This system proved to be well suited on most conditions but this doesn't mean it should be the only one to be used.

- Open start this used by sailplanes and is a good option in some cases. Let's say start is open from 14:00 to 14:30. Every pilot starting while the start is open will be scored according to the last time he crossed the start circumference, while pilots starting after 14:30 will be scored as they started at 14:00.

With this kind of start is likely that several pilots will start as soon as they get cloudbase but the top pilots cannot afford to have their opponent starting just after so would likely wait for the start closing (14:30 in the example). If a good pilot has to recover he could risk to start on his own at start opening (14:00 in the example) and go for the leading bonus. In my opinion the start should, almost always, be 30 minutes long: shorter it would be useless and longer would oblige the top pilots to wait too much.

This kind of start is very useful in case of too much crowding (low and easy to get cloudbase for example) because most pilots would go away as soon as they are high and only the top ones have a reason to wait (but they are the ones which could handle the situation better). The Open start gets, practically, the same results of "forcing" the top 20 pilots to make a race (but using the same rule for everybody) but still gives a top pilot which wants to recover the option to play a different tactic from the others.

Conclusions: analyzing start cylinders format we ended up with the start on enter plus turnpoint in centre to be clearly better than the other possibilities but, speaking of start times, there is not a better one. We have to exclude the Free start but Race, Multiple and Open start have advantages one over the other depending on clouds, ceiling, wind and flight area. In my opinion it's simply wrong to use always the same system: all of them should be used depending on which one is better in the given day. They also test different pilots abilities and that's why, possibly, all these start systems should be used within the same competition: as a minimum it's more fun than playing always the same game :-)

Speaking about testing different pilots abilities, I've designed a system to be able to score an X-MAX task, with GAP scoring, within a normal competition. This way we'll test new pilot's abilities: to be able to find the best route and to correctly judge the day and himself (please don't tell me it's a matter of luck because I bet would be always the same in front…). Ivan Twose had not yet enough time implementing this but I'm sure it would be tested in Italy before the end of the season and would be ready next year.

Discuss competition formats at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Competition Formats / Start times" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Talking about the time

Mon, Jun 30 2003, 6:00:02 pm EDT

FAI|Gordon Rigg|GPS|Kraig Coomber|software|Thierry Montigneaux|track log

FAI - Thierry Montigneaux <thierrym@fai.org> writes:

See http://www.fai.org/astronautics/time.asp for additional information on time standards. Interesting reading, especially for people who continue to speak 'GMT'.

Gordon Rigg <hangpoints@btinternet.com> writes:

http://www.btinternet.com/~rigg/documents/gpstime.htm

These seconds is where Garmin slipped up and put the wrong time in the track log in early 12 and 12XL units. Some of these cannot be updated, but most can. This is how Kraig Coomber was always 13 seconds slow in Oz this year as both his Garmin’s had the old software and he didn't update them.

(editor’s note: As I recall that wasn’t the case.)

Going through the start 13 seconds early is a pretty useless advantage compared to being marked 13 seconds slow and 3 places back in the field at a GPS goal!

Discuss time at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Talking about the time" at the Oz Report forum   link»

2003 King Mountain Meet

Mon, Jun 30 2003, 10:00:01 pm GMT

altitude|beer|Bill Soderquist|boating|Colin Rathbun|food|Glen Salmon|GPS|John Woiwode|landing|scoring|Shannon Allen|sport|Stephen Rudy|Steve Benn|Tim King|triangle|weather|XC

Jon Woiwode <Woiwodejon@cs.com> writes:

Yesterday's great flying got the buzz going, and we all hoped for another big day to finish the meet. We were not disappointed. Winds aloft were forecasted to be 190 through 9000', with 250 and more westerlies clocking around at the higher altitudes. Route 1 is in its prime element with stacked winds at 220 from surface to 18000'. That maximizes the lift component along the range, and provides a nice quartering tailwind. Also, at about the 45 mile mark en route, the winds aloft on Route 1 always shift about 20-30° more westerly, providing an even nicer tailwind component for the dogleg across the gaping canyons to Salmon, the lofty goal of 100 miles.

But 190 low with 250 aloft is a bit tricky. The lift component on the range would be minimal, and often it goes easterly, rotoring those on the range and sliding the pilots out into the valley. Something to watch for. And where is the shear, and how strong? It is what it is when we get there.

The task committee calls Route 1, the proper call, and everyone is excited. The winds are surprisingly strong on launch, and pretty much straight in. Two Falcons launch from upper at 1300, and boat up in the very buoyant air. There is a mad rush to get on course.

I get off at 1330 and after dodging boating launch traffic, I hook a snarly thermal on a rock point and take it straight up at 900 fpm. Montana pilot Will Lanier joins with me at altitude, and we take that to 13000'. Looking good. I note the strong and distinct shear from the south to the west at 11,500'; this would remain throughout the flight.

My flying partner Steve "Bigfoot" Rathbun got behind some pilots in the queue, and got off about 20 minutes behind me. Too bad, as we really wanted to fly this one together. We did stay in touch the whole flight, though, and compared conditions along the range continually.

Will and I shot across Rams Horn Canyon to Mr. Nasty, but he only offered turbulence, so we continued along Sunset Ridge at 10,500'. At the high point of the ridge I hook a broken core to 12,700'; Will caught a part of this, but I leave him behind there, telling my self to move as fast as possible.

I cross the broad area in front of Pass Creek at the 13 mile mark, note the strength of the venturi in the pass as significant, then drive into Red Rocks. No lift. Hmm. Now down to 8100' (valley floor at 5500' or so) I polish the rocks on the corner of the venturi, with limited effect. I've caught up to Frank Gillette in his Falcon, and he and I are trying to sort out the lift component on the range. Pilots are finding that the 190 offers no lift component on the range, and the valley is starting to litter with gliders. I hug the range, no easterlies yet, and pull a thermal off the rocks that is moving directly along, not uphill, on the range to 13,000'.

The shear is sharp and turbulent as I go through 11,500', and the westerly headwind component strong at altitude, so I plan my course along the range to stay within 10,500 and 11,500'. I am able to move fast, though am surprised at the infrequency of lift; each real thermal is a long ways from the last.

Lofty and big shouldered, Mt. McCaleb (11,330') at the 25 mile mark offered only rough turbulence, so I skate over to the Three Sisters (11, 720-11,989'), 10,500' at the 30 mile mark. Holy smokes there was something here, but violent. The conditions made my instruments make unnatural sounds, only to loft me weightless in an uncontrollable spiral. Where was it??

I would alternate between trying to find the thermal and trying to fly out, using faulty logic such as "if I can just find the core, I can get through this and everything would be ok." Finally I said forget this, radioed to Bigfoot the bad spot on the range, and pushed further along, past Leatherman Peak (12,228') at 9500', gunning for Corner Mountain, the 35 mile mark, with the south tailwind.

When crossing a few canyons relatively low, I was able to note easterlies sliding out with my GPS. I am sure this affected many pilots, as I was seeing more and more pilots on the ground in the valley. Almost to Corner, down to 9,000', I definitely was getting an east flow driving me away from the range. The turbulence was terrible, and I called for landing winds. I also said this is the place, if I can get up anywhere in these conditions, it would be at Corner.

I found a sharp thermal that drifted with the easterlies, but I was unquestionably right at the shear point of east, south and westerlies. It was gut wrenching to hold onto and track this rocket, but I held it and she paid off: once I got the Aeros wrapped on a wingtip, she took me through all shears; it is not often that one sees 2000 fpm on the averager, but there it was and I rode this Atlas Rocket straight up. She bent back nicely to the west over the peak. I pulled out at 14,500' with plenty of altitude for the next crossing.

The next move is to bypass Mt Borah (12, 662', highest point in Idaho) to the west and glide the 10 miles across the broad valley to intersect with the range again at Dickey Peak (11,141'). Dickey is always a great thermal source; I hit it at 10,500' and was astounded to not have a trace of lift on the peak. Part of the problem was the 190 below 11,500'; Dickey is best with more west, and was just not producing.

I slid out in front of the peak and about two miles in front, I centered on a nice thermal that pushed me NE toward Victory Ridge. I topped at 14,000' and headed north on this beautiful 12 mile long knife edge ridge. This is normally our "free ride", as it usually faces into dominant westerlies and one hardly has to turn to zip along this leg of the flight. But with the 190 there was no lift component on the ridge, it overcast and shadowed for 20 miles in front of me, and even from 14,000' I had a sick feeling that I was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I glided for the next 15 miles without a peep out of the instruments, and flared and landed five miles short of Challis, 64.1 miles. Nuts. Shannon Raby landed three miles past me for 67, a few others in the area.

In retrospect, maybe I was moving too fast, but the day was a series of windows that opened and closed, and I got stuck in a closed window. I radioed to Bigfoot, who then slowed his flying accordingly, and 25 minutes later he over flew me at 11,500', in clear sunshine. It’s kinda like that sometimes.

Bigfoot played the cards perfectly for the next move: almost to Challis (70 mile mark), he hooked and drifted with a thermal over the piddly end of the Lost Rivers (here called the Pahsimerois). The drift had him right on course, making the dogleg in textbook style, climbing to over 17,000' drifting above Ellis. Perfect crossing.

He then glided along the deep and intimidating Salmon River canyon, holding altitude well, getting to the end of the canyon and looking at Salmon with 12,000' and a thermal. I was all encouragement: "Take any drift and get over the Continental Divide into Montana. Go go go!"; it was still early (1800) and he had a shot at a really big flight. But a rain cell formed to the NW and then moved in front of him closing his route, so he circled down to land east of Salmon for 101 miles. Nice flight!!

We got back to the awards ceremony being held at Sally's Ramshorn Cafe and Bar in Darlington, 10 miles north of Moore, at 2300. Everybody was there, telling great stories of their flights over flowing beer and Mexican food.

Scott Huber flew the farthest in his tailed ATOS, the only one to cross the Divide for 138 miles. Four other pilots landed at Salmon, landing at the Salmon rodeo grounds (106 miles) for the bonus LZ points. Salt Lake pilot Jeff O’brien did that flight in a king posted Predator. Montana pilot Karl Hallerman logged his first 100 miler! Great flights by all, really well done!!

I don't have the final placings at this writing, though my impression from the scene at Sally's is that placements were not all that important. It was another great day of big air flying, and the stories abounded.

Many pilots opted to land at the bonus LZ of the May airport, 65 miles, in order to secure those points. The open distance format is really great in this day and age of triangle contests. If we could just get rid of those disincentives to flying real open distance, the "bonus LZs", the scoring would reflect more of the true XC efforts.

An example of hundreds I could draw from, Teammate Salt Lake pilot K.C. Benn got to May at 15,500' and said, oh what the heck, the bonus points are probably more than I can get by continuing on, then circled down 10,000' to land at the airport! The idea is open distance XC, and disincentives should not be placed en route to dissuade one from doing his or her best. KC' s best was less than 75 miles to this point; he surely would have exceeded it if given the nudge in the right direction.

It was a great gathering of pilots from all over the country, and everyone had a great time in the big air. No injuries that I heard of, just a fair rash of broken downtubes, all related to misreading of winds on landing. There were fourteen 100+ mile flights, all flown during the last two days, and many personal bests: three of the 100 milers were first timers. They'll be telling those stories for years to come, with wide eyed gesticulations, and somewhere in the mix of words, a phrase like "there I was, no shit, thought I was going to die…" will surface, appropriately.

Rudy.Stephen.R <Stephen.Rudy@IGT.com> writes:

I was happy to see Jon Woiwode send in a write up about the King Mtn. meet. It did seem a little too negative about the call to go upwind on Friday the 20th. I think part of the task committee's thinking is that there were a lot of pilots there that just don't have the XC experience to be comfortable going over the back at King.

More than half the competitors didn't go downwind on Thursday when the mostly downwind route was called, so calling a task to push into the headwind it least got some of the recreation class pilots some miles.

I also don't know why Jon ignored my flights - he mentions Bill Soderquist and Zach Majors on day 2 making the bonus LZ at 89.3 miles as the best flights of the day when I flew 104 miles. On day 3 he mentions Bill, Zach and Shannon Raby making the bonus LZ at May airport - I was also there for the longest flights of the day.

In any case, the weather was great, the scenery is magnificent, the organizers put a huge amount of effort into making it a fantastic meet and they do it purely for the love of the sport.

Discuss "2003 King Mountain Meet" at the Oz Report forum   link»

What time is it really?

Sun, Jun 29 2003, 5:00:02 pm EDT

GPS|Ken Seligman

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,985025,00.html

Ken Seligman sends in the above URL.

The missing thirteen seconds. Why GPS and UTC time disagree.

“It includes the leap seconds added until the GPS clock was set in 1980, but has ignored those added since. This means GPS time is now running 13 seconds ahead of coordinated universal time - which includes all added leap seconds and to which most clocks on Earth are set - but is some 19 seconds behind international atomic time, which is based on atomic clocks and ignores leap seconds.”

Discuss time at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "What time is it really?" at the Oz Report forum   link»

USHGA - disappointed once again »

Fri, Jun 27 2003, 6:00:03 pm EDT

Bill Bolosky|CIVL|competition|Dennis Pagen|Europe|FAI|GPS|Jim Zeiset|NAA|newsletter|Oz Report|power|record|statistics|USHGA|world record|Worlds

https://OzReport.com/toc.php?7.169

Well, I guess like those people who buy lottery tickets I have a basic misunderstanding about statistics. I felt that I couldn’t possibly be appointed the CIVL representative for the USHGA by the President only to be disappointed by him a few days later, just like I was by Jim Zeiset earlier, but it has come to pass.

https://OzReport.com/toc.php?Ozv6n29.htm

It is truly unbelievable to be twice appointed, basically out of the blue, as the USHGA CIVL representative, and to twice be told by the current USHGA President that upon further consideration that they are very sorry but they will have to withdraw the appointment.

I thought Bill Bolosky was very courageous to appoint me (and said so to him directly and to the Oz Report readers). I knew that a lot of folks have taken my disagreements about CIVL policies and directions as personal matters and I thought that Bill would be hearing from those folks. He did.

He heard from Dennis Pagen as always, although Dennis was kind enough to say that he would be willing to continue as the CIVL alternate delegate to provide assistance. He heard from the NAA (the US FAI affiliate) stating that they had to power to make the USHGA CIVL appointment, not Bill, and while they wouldn’t not let Bill make the appointment, they were very displeased by his choice. He heard from folks from CIVL itself who felt that I couldn’t be effective with them (oh, and who, by the way were not at all happy with my appointment).

Unbelievable. A tempest in a teapot. The little world in a turmoil.

So is there anything of import here?

Well, the funny thing is that merely as an editor of an on-line hang gliding newsletter, and as an interested and concerned competition pilot and world record holder, I have argued for certain changes in CIVL policy. Surprising, many of the changes that I have argued for have been subsequently enacted (perhaps because I wasn’t there to argue for them and upset people).

So I feel that I have been reasonably effective as an individual (check out Thomas Freeman, New York Times columnist on this issue of empowered individuals), in making changes to outdated and improper CIVL policies. I continue to work with a number of the CIVL delegates and subcommittee members on various issues of concern to the hang gliding community. No one has indicated that I am being ineffective with them. They all seem to appreciate the time and energy I put into the issues.

So perhaps the argument that I would not be effective as the USHGA’s CIVL delegate is a bit specious if we actually look at my record as a CIVL gadfly.

Is there anything at stake, other than personal feelings? Mine and theirs?

I speak bluntly. I speak the truth as I see it. I do this because basically I am too stupid to be able to keep track of the lies I might have to tell to be more politic. This is a basic American quality, at least out in the heartland, but is doesn’t play well (and is seen as naïve) in the centers power (such as they are). It would appear that I wasn’t European enough for the Eurocentric CIVL. I guess Don Rumsfeld and I have something in common.

Bill appointed me because he knew I was painfully honest and could be trusted to do what I say I’ll do. I agreed to represent the USHGA’s policy when I went to CIVL, like any good representative does.

I personally felt that the USHGA has not been represented well of late, basically because our previous (and now reappointed) CIVL representative had legitimately pressing concerns outside of the USHGA that distracted him and made it so he couldn’t devote the required mental energy needed to carry out his CIVL functions effectively. I attribute the narrow loss of the 2005 Flex wing Worlds to his misguided actions. It is my understanding, third hand, that his methods were not effective at CIVL. Well, I guess this is our common characteristic, at least in rumor and in people’s minds. ☺

Does it matter who the USHGA representative is? Not really. CIVL effects a very small world (although one in which I happen to spend a lot of time). The US may miss out on a few more opportunities for World meets, but someone will put them on and they will happen with or without our fullest participation. Continental championships will continue to be restricted to Europe. European pilots will continue to have an unfair advantage in World (read European ranking.) We may someday see a rational World Pilot ranking system. The GPS may be allowed for World Record verification. Who knows what will happen.

I’ll still be here plugging away at the misguided policies and erroneous directions and trying to get things changed for the better. Besides, I won’t have to go to Romania in February. ☺

Discuss CIVL at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "USHGA - disappointed once again" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Frontal pods

Thu, Jun 26 2003, 6:00:05 pm EDT

Garmin 12|GPS|Micke Wigstrand|picture|towing

Micke Wigstrand <micke.wigstrand@telia.com> writes:

I have in cooperation with the Swedish champ 2002, 2003 Mr. Peter Isacsson, developed a frontal pod. We decided to have it very thin and aerodynamic. We also decided to have inboard speed probe, covered by a carbon lid to minimize the risk of have it damaged by towing line.

It’s only for air foiled speed bars: Wills, Fast, Aeros etc. For the present fits Bräuniger IQ and Garmin 12. IQ& Garmin 76 is under construction.

Materials is carbon reinforced glassfibre, weight about 270g. Connection holes between vario and GPS. The picture shows a prototype without Velcro tabs. I also make conventional pods for IQ & G12 and IQ & 76.

Discuss instrument pods at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Frontal pods" at the Oz Report forum   link»

New instrument pods

Tue, Jun 24 2003, 2:03:06 pm EDT

Alejandro Isaza|Garmin GPS|GPS

http://soaringflight1.tripod.com/frontal_pod.htm

Alejandro Isaza <alejoisaza@geo.net.co> writes:

I just finished two new pods for the Garmin GPS 76 series, one for Brauniger varios and the other one for Flytec varios.

Discuss pods at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "New instrument pods" at the Oz Report forum   link»

FAI sectors

Sun, Jun 22 2003, 9:00:03 pm EDT

CIVL|competition|FAI|GPS|Martin Henry|record|track log|triangle|world record

The new CIVL/FAI Section 7 Sporting code has a new definition for turnpoint sectors that allows for the use of cylinders, for example, in a competition, for world record flight purposes:

1. 5.8.2 Turnpoints Sectors

A turnpoint cylinder may be specified by GPS coordinates and radius. The record distance will be the minimum distance it is possible to fly by entering the specified sectors.

World record holder Martin Henry replies:

I personal could care less about whether or not a cylinder or a FAI sector is used, but…

The use of the cylinder does pose an interesting scenario. Given that the actual measurement of the declaration is determined by the "nearest" point on the cylinder, it then becomes possible to cross the radius of the cylinder (and by definition, establish a valid cylinder "fix") and NOT have correctly established a traditional sector "fix" (the 90° area created by the course lines).

Additionally, the "fix" point in the cylinder may not fall within the geometry rules of the declaration (i.e.: the 28% rule) when for the sake of argument the closest point may fulfill the task requirement. Of course it is not likely that these few yards of discrepancy would result in an invalid task, but the potential exists.

Also, it’s not just a point of being picky about a few yards here or there, it is the principle of following the traditional elements of a declared task that is a record has been established by the completion of a task that has followed the precise control elements, elements that were used by the current record holder. (In other words, if a record established using the traditional sector rules is broken, the same 90° sector rule needs to be maintained.).

To make my point, several years ago, Mia Shokker (my life time flying partner, unfortunately for her) had declared a task. Her final glide into goal was extremely close. Fact is, she landed parallel to the course line, just short of the sector and past what would have been defined as the goal coordinates (no more than 100 yards from the goal). She easily would have crossed the radius but not attained the traditional "sector". Her record was denied, by the "1.5.8.2 Turnpoints Sectors" wordings her record would have been valid.

On the other hand, if the track log is being compared with the traditional sector rules, basing the sector positions on the "closest" cylinder "points" then the use of the cylinder is acceptable as a control factor, but very confusing. A pilot may fly into the cylinder only to find that a sector had not been attained.

For myself, I will stick with the traditional sectors they are straight forward and leave no possibility of being misinterpreted.

(editor’s note: The new rules seem quite reasonable and understandable to me, and I’m happy for their existence, otherwise my world record from yesterday wouldn’t have been valid. Luckily I made the triangle a little bigger than 50 km, so that the least distance was still greater than 50 km.)

Discuss world records at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "FAI sectors" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Yet another final glide discussion

Sat, Jun 21 2003, 2:03:01 pm EDT

altitude|Chris Arai|GPS|Oz Report|polar|safety|software|Steven "Steve" Pearson|tail|tracking|Wills Wing

I hope that interested readers will closely follow the arguments presented here as well as in the previous articles that address this issue.

Chris Arai, Arai Design <chris@araidesign.com> writes:

Thought I would chime in on the perennial topic of final glides and whether or not jumpy numbers matter. I have to admit that I don't know to what degree the numbers jump on a Brauniger deck, but I seem to recall that people say plus or minus more than 1000' in certain conditions. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'll use that figure for a point of reference. I'll also discuss (again) the why I believe that automated wind calculations for final glide actually reduce the usefulness of the final glide numbers.

(editor’s note: I wouldn’t characterize it as jumping around quite that much, but I’m sure at some points I have seen that level of jumpiness. It appears to be less now with the longer time constants.)

Jumpiness. Why does it matter? If the numbers are jumping up and down +/- 1000 feet, the safe thing to do is pick the most conservative number and climb to that level. Making the assumption that the mid point was the correct number, the safe pilot must climb an extra 1000'. At a nice climb rate of 500fpm that is two extra minutes. Two minutes might seem like nothing to the novice who is grateful to make goal, but anyone who as placed in the top 40 (50? 60?) of a major meet will tell you that 2 minutes is huge. Well 2 minutes becomes 3+ minutes if the climb rate is 300fpm, 5 minutes at 200fpm, and so forth and so on.

I believe Peter was saying that steady numbers are some how masking changes or are stale. Take this example. You’re gliding on final right on the path and suddenly the sink increases by 200fpm. Now assume that you had a 1000' margin built in for safety. It would take 5 minutes before that margin was completely eroded. That is a long time.

Tangent pilots know that by comparing the Altitude Required field with the Altitude field one can easily see if he or she is eroding the margin. Yes, time is required to do a calculation known amongst mathematicians as subtraction. (Most pilots are capable of this although sometimes I wonder when you see how short the collection of money can be when it's time to pay for dinner.)

Now consider using an instrument that the final glide info is jumping around by +/-500 feet (I'm being more lenient than the +/-1000' I said I was going to use.) How do you determine how your final glide is proceeding? One minute you are on the path, the next you have used up all of your 1000' margin. Your choice is to pick a number in the middle of the jumpy numbers or average them. I think either calculation uses far more of the pilot’s minimal bandwidth than subtraction.

Peter Brauniger said that "the quality of a final glide calculation can be measured by the stability of the displayed result is clearly a misconception." As a riposte to Peter I would suggest that what I am hearing from pilots (and from a little personal experience) is that stability seems to be more useful and causes less anxiety, even if it is of lower quality ;-) .

So why are the Brauniger instrument final glide numbers so jumpy? Peter Brauniger correctly points out the variables used in a final glide calc:

Variables: Pilot distance from goal, Pilot height above goal, Speed of wind (component in direction of flight), Airspeed of glider

Two of those variables, distance and altitude from goal are relatively slowly changing variables, perhaps only a few percent per minute.

Airspeed can and does change radically, as much as a factor of 3 (20 - 60mph).

Wind doesn't change quickly unless one of two things happen: first, a strong wind shear, which is rare in my experience. Second, the calculated wind changes due to calculation errors.

The airspeed and wind speed are the key. I'm not sure which has the greater contribution, but my guess is that it is airspeed. As Peter describes in Vol6, N38 of the Oz Report, his arrival height calculation is based upon wind, current altitude, distance, and current L/D. Current L/D is calculated from the polar and current airspeed. The problem with this method is that one’s airspeed will (and should) vary. True, the glide does change with airspeed, but we don't care about where the slope is pointing at any given instant, we only care about where the glide slope points in the long run.

So what airspeed do you use to calculate this L/D? I suspect that the Brauniger decks average the airspeed and that the jumpiness has calmed down as the time constant of that averager gets longer with each software revision. The problem I see with averaging the airspeed is that it may give you information that is too optimistic or pessimistic.

Let’s say you average the airspeed for 1 minute (probably longer than is done on the Braunigers.) After gliding through heavy sink for a minute your final glide calc is now saying that you will now arrive 1000' below goal. Yeah, Yeah, I know it doesn't use sink for the calculation, but it is a speed-to-fly (S2F) instrument right? And more sink means that it has told you to speed up and thus your L/D has been reduced.

That pessimistic estimate will slowly return to normal as you fly in less sinky or lifty air, but you have to chew your nails that whole time, when in reality you may have only lost a couple hundred feet of your margin. The real peril here is that it will tempt you to slow down to improve your glide. We all know that slowing down in sink is a cardinal sin in S2F theory. The optimistic scenario is exactly the reverse. Shortening the airspeed averaging time will add to the jumpiness of the arrival height numbers.

So although lift and sink are not used ("We never take into account a current or an average sink rate.") in the Brauniger decks, sink rate does have a direct effect on the arrival height numbers as shown in the above paragraph.

How does the Tangent avoid this morass? It doesn't use current airspeed at all to calculate the L/D. Instead, it uses the optimum airspeed based on the Speed Ring setting and Wind setting.

Since we all assume that the net airmass sink will be zero, why not calculate your gliding speed in zero airmass sink for a given speed ring and wind setting? Since the vario is telling you to fly the correct speed for those two parameters for any airmass movement, I make the assumption that the pilot will actually try to follow that speed. (Smart people shell out big bucks in the hopes that they can believe what the "instrument" is telling them. The rest are happy if it looks good.) If the airmass is zero in the long run as we assume, then the average speed will be close to that of the one calculated.

It may seem to those who have never used a Tangent that this method denies the pilot of critical information. It doesn't. If the Altitude Required is not tracking Altitude, then something is wrong: More lift or sink than "zero" or the wind estimate is not correct. If the wind speed seems different than the estimate, then change the estimate. If not, then there is too much lift or too much sink. If it's too much lift, then hooray, bump up the speed ring (if you believe the corresponding sink is not ahead.) If it's too much sink, it's time to alter your glide path to get out of the sink.

This brings us to the topic of automated wind vs manual wind in final glide calcs. I have discussed this before (see links below) so I'll just summarize (this is long winded enough, don't you think?) The problems with automated wind input are in two categories.

1. Errors in GPS wind measurement.

2. No ability to compensate for different winds at lower altitudes.

Item 1 can probably be reduced, but will always be a problem to some degree. If the wind measurements are noisy then the final glide calcs will reflect that noise.

Item 2 is important, and can only be done by a human. Although the automated wind will be correct (apart from item 1) at all altitudes, it may give false final glide calcs at the high altitude where final glide begins. If you calculate final glide based on a 20mph tail wind at 10,000' but it doesn't stay 20mph to the ground, you come up short.

More info on the final glide and the GPS wind problem can be found in the Tangent online manual. Go to http://www.araidesign.com and click on the "Manual" button. Then read these sections:

Why Doesn't the Tangent Automatically Use the GPS Wind in the Speed-to- Fly? The Final Glide Calculator Final Glide Techniques

Also see the previous Oz Report discussion on final glides at https://OzReport.com/toc.php?6.038 https://OzReport.com/toc.php?6.044

Steve Pearson at Wills Wing <Steve@willswing.com> writes:

We cleared that up a long time ago, and it's even addressed in Peter's last email. Peter absolutely positively does not use the algorithm Chris speculates about. I think it's grossly unfair to Brauniger to propagate a myth that the display alternately displays goal arrival +/- 1000'.

Discuss final glide at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Yet another final glide discussion" at the Oz Report forum   link»

IQ-Compeo version 2.13

Fri, Jun 20 2003, 2:03:02 pm EDT

Flavio Tebaldi|GPS|power|waypoints

Peter Brauniger has written:

IQ-Compeo version 2.13 will be ready next week. In the meantime I've prepared an instrument with the new GPS machine GH80 for Flavio Tebaldi. (Really better receiving quality and less power consumption.)

Changes for 2.13:

Enter and exit start cylinders. Choose which cylinder is the start cylinder. Choose waypoints for a route from an alphabetically ordered list of waypoints (instead of ordered by distance).

Discuss varios at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "IQ-Compeo version 2.13" at the Oz Report forum   link»

A steady Final Glide

Tue, Jun 17 2003, 2:03:04 pm EDT

altitude|flight instrument|GPS|polar|waypoints

Peter Brauniger writes:

In the recent discussions of hang gliding instrument function, some important basic ideas have become somewhat obscured. It might be useful to take a step back, and look at some of these ideas with a "beginner's mind."

The purpose of any flight instrument is actually quite simple: it is to give the pilot information that he can use to his advantage. How the instrument functions to achieve that purpose can become quite complex, but let's stay with the simple part for now.

There are two qualities of information that are important, and should not be confused:

1) Accuracy of information - whether the information is correct.

2) Usefulness of information - whether the information is in a form the pilot can use. This in turn relates to two other qualities of the information:

a) Timeliness - whether the pilot gets the information "in-time" to be useful

b) Stability - is the information sufficiently consistent over time that it makes sense to the pilot.

The biggest apparent confusion in many of the recent discussions is a tendency to confuse stability of information with accuracy of information - specifically the idea that an instrument that displays an unchanging calculation of final arrival height is therefore necessarily displaying a more accurate calculation. To see how this confusion can arise, let's look at the factors involved in a final glide calculation that an instrument makes. The instrument attempts to calculate the pilot's expected altitude of arrival over the goal by considering four changing variables and one fixed piece of information:

Variables: Pilot distance from goal, Pilot height above goal, Speed of wind (component in direction of flight), Airspeed of glider

Fixed: Polar of glider performance

Each of the four variables above is subject to change during the final glide, and any change in any variable can (and should) cause a change in the computed arrival height. That's exactly what the instrument is supposed to be doing. By the same token, if you remove one variable - such as wind speed, by making it a fixed (pilot entered, instead of instrument computed) quantity, you will improve the stability of the displayed calculation result, but you do not improve the accuracy - in fact, you make it worse. So the idea that the quality of a final glide calculation can be measured by the stability of the displayed result is clearly a misconception.

This is not to say that stability of information has no value - it does. In the original Brauniger IQ Comp-GPS instrument, the short sampling times for airspeed and groundspeed during final glide resulted in an erratic calculation of goal arrival height - and this made the information less useful. In the 2003 version, the sampling rate is still high, but the information is then averaged over a longer time period, resulting in a more stable, and more useful displayed calculation. At the same time, however, the information is still based on measured values of all of the important variables, so the accuracy and the timeliness of the information remain very high.

(Note: It has been speculated in some past discussions that the more erratic displayed computation result of the earlier Brauniger instruments was due to the instrument factoring in instantaneous changes in lift and sink along the route. This was not the case; the Brauniger instrument, like any instrument of this type, cannot foretell what lift or sink conditions will be encountered on the way to goal, and can only base its calculations on the assumption that lift and sink will average out to zero over the entire route. As a result, instantaneous changes in lift or sink along the route were never a factor in the calculation of final glide.)

A final point should be noted - and this is very important. No instrument can make a proper calculation of final glide without accurate airspeed information, or without an accurate stored polar. Both of these are absolutely fundamental to the computation. The Brauniger instruments include a very useful function - called Net Vario - for checking the accuracy of the stored polar.

The Net Vario function is designed to compute and digitally display the net upward or downward movement of the ambient air. This is very useful in gliding flight - if, for example, you are flying fast in sink between thermals, but too low for comfort, it would be very useful to be able to look over and see that even though your descent rate is 600 feet per minute, the air you are presently flying through is actually rising at 150 feet per minute. Perhaps you will want to stop and gain some altitude for a while.

But the other very useful function of the Net Vario is to check your stored polar - if you fly in completely calm air, and your polar is correct (and your airspeed properly calibrated), the Net Vario will read zero at every speed - because it is reading the rise of fall of the air itself. If it does not, you will know that you need to correct your polar data.

To fly most effectively, the pilot must take advantage of correct speed to fly theory. To do that, the pilot must have information from his instrument that is accurate, timely, and sufficiently stable to be useful, without sacrificing accuracy. This in turn requires an accurate calculation, based on accurate stored polar information and accurate data input that is correctly updated as variables like wind speed change during the flight, and processed through a well balanced, total energy compensation circuitry.

And the value of this information is not limited to the final glide to goal, but serves the same function with equal value when applied to intermediate waypoints along a route, providing you have an instrument that is capable of handling multiple waypoints, each with its corresponding altitude. All of this is what the Brauniger instruments are designed to provide.

(editor’s note: We thank Peter for his contribution to this ongoing discussion re final glide. I think everyone was clear that stability was not the same as accuracy. I think that most people were also aware that wildly varying values for the predicted height above goal while on final glide were not only not useful, but also not all of them could be accurate. And it was really hard to figure out which one of the many displayed values was the correct answer.

The current Brauniger IQ-Compeo displays predicted height above goal as well as height above best glide line. The predicted height above goal fluctuates quite a bit more than the height above the best glide slope. I have no idea which Peter thinks is more accurate, but he does provide both.

Pilots who are interested in this issue can find out more by reading https://OzReport.com/pub/Ozv6n38.htm and https://OzReport.com/pub/Ozv6n44.htm.

Discuss final glide at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "A steady Final Glide" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Airspeed/Windspeed

Mon, Jun 16 2003, 2:03:02 pm EDT

CompeGPS|GPS|IGC|record|SeeYou|software|tow|track log

I was lamenting the fact that I couldn’t get the airspeed value in SeeYou from my IQ-Compeo. I checked and sure enough I could get it in CompeGPS (www.compegps.com). The IGC file produced by the IQ-Compeo seems to record both the ground speed and the airspeed.

I had written to Andrej at TeamCu (www.seeyou.ws) about this and he wrote back:

We do care about the wind speed very much, of course. The problem is calculating in on the PC from an IGC file. In the air you get one reading per second. In an IGC file you get 1 reading per 4 seconds if you are lucky, 1 every 20 seconds if you are unlucky. It creates a big fault in measuring the wind. We've tried already, but we haven't found a reliable algorithm for calculating the wind from an IGC file. You can calculate something, but to calculate something useful is another thing.

Sure enough, when I looked at what I assume to be the calculated wind speeds for a number of recent flights in CompeGPS there was nothing there in the graph.

Now I’m recording the IGC file on the IQ-Compeo at 10 second intervals. The IQ-Compeo is gathering data at a rate of once per second. The display on the unit is probably being dampened over some small time interval, but is for sure being updated faster than once every ten seconds.

I wonder what would happen if I set the recording value to every second. I wonder if I would get a reasonable value for the wind speed and direction then.

Mike Tyron writes:

Set up the track log to log every second and tow up and fly for 15 minutes or so at a variety of speeds. Then download the log and see how smooth the track is. Depending on the software you use, you may be able to display groundspeed between each track point. If your GPS software won't do it you can always import it into Excel and have it figure it for you.

Discuss flight data recorders at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Airspeed/Windspeed" at the Oz Report forum   link»

IQ-Compeo Polars

Mon, Jun 16 2003, 2:03:01 pm EDT

altitude|GPS|harness|landing|Oz Report|Phillip "Phill" Bloom|polar

Phillip Knight <phillipknight@bigpond.com> writes:

I have been using the Galileo/Compeo for 6 months or so now (serial 222) and I also found that the final glide did have me landing somewhat earlier than expected (previous instrument was a Tangent). I checked the polar in the instrument that was used and there were some discrepancies in its calculated L/D compared to my measured L/D.

I would like to see a function for recording a polar during flights automatically so that you don't have to do it manually thus a personal polar is tailor made for you, your harness and flying position relative to airflow. I also found that I had to be spot on for entering the altitude above sea QNH at take off as I feel it had also played a part in landing prematurely.

I did used to just zero A2 and not check the A1 to much. Pressing the arrow buttons does give you the GPS altitude while booting up, but I found that it also was different to the reading on my Garmin legend.

Speaking of that it would also be nice to swap the positions of A1 and A2 around so that you have a choice of which altitude has the large font on the main screen. Speaking of new functions in version 2.12, what is the interpretation of the "second transparent arrow" in the compass rose? I am thinking it is pointing directly to the next waypoint without crosswind track adjustment.

Wish there were more explanatory in the new functions. I have included a polar calculator that I have made for myself but perhaps others might find it useful also. I notice you only use two sets of input in your calcs whereas I prefer the three. Horses, for courses, I guess.

(editor’s note: You can download Phillip’s very nice polar calculator from the Oz Report at https://OzReport.com/docs/polarcalc.exe)

Discuss varios at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "IQ-Compeo Polars" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Varios in sailplanes

Sun, Jun 15 2003, 2:03:01 pm EDT

battery|electric|GPS|Mike Ziaskas|sailplane

Mike Ziaskas <Mzsoar@aol.com> writes:

I've been using my Brauniger IQ comp connected to GPS in my sailplane (Apis) and find it works great. You can't use the airspeed function for obvious reasons, but the Brauniger gives you GPS ground speed and also calculates wind direction & wind speed when thermaling.

I use it in conjunction with a compensated electric sailplane vario. I haven't figured out how to use the two varios to an advantage (compensated with non-compensated) but it's nice to have two audio varios.

(battery went dead on the sailplane vario & thus the faulty reading).

Discuss varios at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Varios in sailplanes" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Flytec 5030/Brauninger IQ-Compeo – another look

Sat, Jun 14 2003, 2:03:02 pm EDT

certification|competition|FAI|Florida|Flytec 4030|Flytec 5030|GPS|IGC|Oz Report|record|SeeYou|software|track log|waypoints|world record|XC

www.brauniger.com

The last part of a multi-part review.

The IQ-Compeo helps you find the best track to goal (or waypoint) direction taking into account the wind speed and direction. With a reasonable wind component coming at an angle to your glide direction to the next waypoint, you need to aim your glider a bit to one side or the other (crab) to fly in the optimum direction. The display adds a few small arrows to your compass to show you that you are headed in the right direction.

When you create a Route on the IQ-Compeo a name is asked for. When you create a route on your GPS, the route name is automatically created from the names of the waypoints. Because it is somewhat difficult to type in a route name on the IQ-Compeo, I’d rather dispense with this requirement all together.

As it stands now, the easiest way for the user to deal with this typing problem is to just leave the default name (“xxxx”) for your single route. If you need to put in multiple routes, I can see them being named Xxxx, Yxxx, Zxxx.

Putting in the waypoints in a route is a bit more difficult than with the Garmin. On the IQ-Compeo, the waypoints are listed by distance from your current (or at least they were here) location. Because they are not listed alphabetically, it takes more time to scroll through the list and it is harder find the one you are going to.

On a Garmin you can scroll through the waypoints backwards and forwards to establish a route. You can only scroll in one direction (forward) through the list of waypoints on the IQ-Compeo.

Otherwise, the route function works quite well. You create your route in the Route menu, one of the many sub menus of the main setup menu. To display the route you hold down the Route button, use the up/down arrow keys to choose your route and the first waypoint is then displayed at the bottom of the display.

You can use the soft function keys to move back and forth between waypoints. There is much less button pushing than with a separate GPS.

The route doesn’t automatically and prematurely roll over to the next waypoint. The IQ-Compeo documentation states:

It is guaranteed that several track log points within the cylinder are stored in one second intervals in the memory of the Galileo, totally independent of what recording interval is saved during a standard flight.

While this appears to apply to the FAI route (a special route for FAI tasks), it appeared to me that additional track log points would be recorded every second when you were within a cylinder or near the circumference of the start circle. This appears not to be the case at all. The track log points inside the cylinders were recorded at the same 10 second interval as the standard setting for outside the cylinder. This is quite unfortunate.

Again the documentation about this point and the documentation about the FAI route is very confusing. It is also very disappointing that the IQ-Compeo doesn’t record points at one second intervals when near the edge of the start circle and when in the turnpoint point cylinders.

It appears as though the IQ-Compeo is not yet IGC-certified. The list of updates seems to indicate that it has been changed to allow for IGC-certification. We don’t have an indication if this is proceeding and when we might expect it.

It would be great if the IQ-Compeo were IGC-certified so that one could have a very compact datalogger/vario/GPS/flight computer for world record purposes. It definitely has a lot of promise.

You can’t enter the pilot’s name, glider type, glider class, and glider ID through SeeYou. You can painfully enter the pilot’s name, glider type and glider ID directly into the IQ-Compeo. It appears as thought you can use SeeYou to declare an FAI task, although I didn’t get that to work for me yet.

When I took the IQ-Compeo out for my first test flight I noticed that the tones emitted by the vario seemed to be less “urgent” then those expressed by the IQ/Comp. Perhaps the day was just filled with weak lift, but it seemed no weaker than the normally weak lift we get here in Florida.

The IQ-Compeo tones just seemed to be less excited about the day then I would normally have expected. I guess if I want it to get excited about a day that averaged 230 fpm, I should cranked it up a bit, if I could figure out just what that means.

The unit knows about start circles, waypoint radii, and allows you to set separate radii for each waypoint. There is also apparently a count down function that shows you when you are going to reach the circumference of the start circle. I haven’t tried this. This countdown function only works with start circles that you exit, not enter, apparently.

I can’t figure out how to get this to work. The manual has not been updated in English for the new functionality of version 2.12, and now that each waypoint can have its own radii, there is no field for the start time.

I adjusted my airspeed multiplier to 125%. It seemed a little slow when it was set to 100%. I guess it does depend on how well you place the unit into the air stream. I have put it back to 100% as the values it displayed seemed too fast. I’ll have to make further test to determine the correct setting. I tried 110% today and that seems reasonable. I’ll have to do a real test soon.

I haven’t discussed every feature of the IQ-Galileo. For example, the distance to last thermal feature that helps you find where that thermal you were in went to. I’ve just discussed the ones of most interest to me as a competition and XC pilot.

I like very much the fact that I can now use sophisticated software to download my 3-D tracklog from the IQ-Compeo. Hopefully in the future it will be an IGC-certified tracklog.

Overall I am very impressed with the IQ-Compeo. The manual could use a through rewrite, reorganization, and editing to make the English understandable, but who reads the manual anyway? I used as a reference it to answer (sometimes) specific questions.

Of course, we would all love to see the final glide calculations used by the Flytec 4030 Race incorporated into the IQ-Compeo. And it looks like they soon will be.

If you have any responses to the series of articles or wish to give Oz Report readers your take on this flight computer, please put together an article and send it to me at <davis@davisstraub.com>.

Discuss the Flytec 5030/IQ-Compeo at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Flytec 5030/Brauninger IQ-Compeo – another look" at the Oz Report forum   link»

16 channel GPS

Fri, Jun 13 2003, 2:03:03 pm EDT

antenna|competition|FAA|Flytec 4030|Flytec 5030|GPS|news|power|software

Tim Obrien <earthtouch@earthlink.net> writes with regard to the new GPS antenna that is going in the Flytec 5030:

I understand that from a marketing standpoint being able to say you can read 16 GPS satellites is a good idea since most people do not understand you only need 4-6 to get a good reading. I sell and integrate Trimble GPS solutions with software applications and I do hope that you are not giving up valuable CPU processing power to try and analyze 16 channels of L1 and L2 for your system.

Most of the time a user is lucky to get a minimum of 8 satellites in the US. If you have the ability to use the New WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation Service) provided by the FAA for one channel you need to get that news out there for the readers. It is my understanding that FAA is planning on putting up a third central correctional satellite within the next three years. All flying aircraft should be able to use the current WAAS system.

I would like to hear more about this if you are using WAAS. If you are not using WAAS is that a result of the GPS chip you elected to use? I don’t work for any competition of yours just a curious GPS salesmen and hang glider pilot.

My Flytec 4030 is still a great box!!! Now I wish I had the cash to look at a new 5030.

Discuss GPSes at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "16 channel GPS" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Flytec 5030 / Brauninger IQ-Compeo – another look

Thu, Jun 12 2003, 2:03:01 pm EDT

altitude|Bart Doets|Flytec 5030|GPS|internet|music|site

www.brauniger.com

The third part of a multi-part review.

A big improvement over the IQ/Comp is that the McCready function is turned on by default. You don’t have to turn it on each time you start up the IQ-Compeo.

Also, whether the McCready sound is on or off appears to default to your last setting. If you had turned it off, it is in off mode when you turn on your IQ-Compeo, unlike was the case with the IQ/Comp. This is a much appreciated improvement. You can easily turn it on by pressing the McCready speaker button.

It is great to see a detailed menu in the set up mode so that you have some general idea of what functions you are setting. The IQ/Comp requires the manual to understand (and all you get is a little understanding from the manual) about what you are doing. In spite of these improvements to the menu, the IQ-Compeo setup menu is still arcane and often the manual is required to understand the more precise meaning of the variables whose values you are setting.

Like in the previous IQ/Comp there is a multiplier for the speed sensor(s) that allow you to match your airspeed as measured by the sensors with your actual airspeed (say measured when you are driving in a car with the IQ-Compeo held out the window). This multiplier assumes that you can apply one linear value to the speed values coming out of the sensor and adjust them to be your actual (true or indicated) air speed.

You can display in the user-selected fields both your over the ground speed (taken from the built in GPS) and your airspeed and assuming that you are driving on a day with no wind, you adjust the multiplier until both values read the same value.

In section A6 of the manual, the settings for the vario and McCready sounds are described. I couldn’t understand what any of this meant with regard to how the tones actually sounded. Perhaps there could be a spot on the Brauniger web site where you could hear examples.

I know I could play the sounds on the IQ-Compeo, but I would rather hear it before I make any changes to these settings as you never know if you can get back to where you started. Besides, I want to hear it for a range of rates of climb.

Bart Doets <bart.doets@hetnet.nl> writes:

"user customizable vario audio excitement levels"? Hey, that opens a range of perspectives… Why always the simple "beep beep beep"?

Why not download your own vario tones from Internet? Climb in a strong thermal to the sound of Beethovens Fifth Symphony. "Stairway to Heaven" comes to mind but the music just doesn't cut it. Something by Queen? Or have a sink alarm that sounds like a toilet being flushed!

The IQ-Compeo will display the values of six user selected variables (from a list of 18 possible variables) in the lower half of the screen surrounding the compass rose. You can also switch to a second set of user selected variables, so you can display twelve in all (BTW, the manual calls these user-defined indicators. They aren’t user defined, and this is a strange use of the word indicator.).

This may seem like a lot of variables to display (in addition to the default ones) but remember you are trying to make up for a GPS (which has about five screens) and a vario screen with one instrument that combines both GPS and vario. You need at least two sets of six user-selected variables to display all the information you were getting previously. Even then you might have to give up displaying one or two variables that you previously were able to access. The plus side is you may get a few variables that you would have liked to display but couldn’t get before.

For example, with separate GPS, you could set up your GPS to display the distance from a waypoint and the time. This would let you know where the edge of the start circle is and when it was time to leave the start circle. So that is two variables. While on course, you also want to know the distance to the next waypoint, and perhaps its bearing. You’d also like to know your L/D over the ground, and altitude that you will arrive at the next waypoint.

You can display all these variables on the IQ-Compeo in one user selectable screen. But you will probably also want to know wind speed, speed over the ground, and the component of the wind speed along your track line. Now you need a separate screen as that is more than six variables.

When going into goal you will want to know your current altitude above or below your best glide slope, your altitude at goal, distance to goal, L/D required, your current L/D over the ground, wind speed, wind component, speed over the ground. Now you’ve got too many variables to display on two screens, so you’ve got to make some choices about which variables are most important to you.

Another problem is that the variable names themselves are too small to be able to read in flight. The values are displayed just large enough to read, but you have to remember which value goes with which position on the display. And, as you can change the location of the variable, and do when you have two separate sets of six variables, you have to remember which variable is displayed where for each of the two sets of variables. Possible, but difficult to remember which value is which in flight.

I suggest working on your user selectable displays until you get two sets of variables that make the most sense to you. I have a start/on course set of variables and a final glide set of variables.

Go to Goal? Unlike with the IQ/Comp there is no flashing go to goal target displayed by the IQ-Compeo when it is time to go to goal. There is also no indicator showing how much more one should climb in a good thermal to get the least time to goal. There is also a mixed up discussion in the manual that indicates how you are supposed to figure this out from what the IQ-Compeo does display.

Discuss the Flytec 5030/IQ-Compeo at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Flytec 5030 / Brauninger IQ-Compeo – another look" at the Oz Report forum   link»

SeeYou and the Hang Glider and Paraglider On-line contest

Wed, Jun 11 2003, 6:03:03 pm GMT

competition|GPS|HOLC|IGC|OLC|Oz Report|record|SeeYou|software|track log|waypoints|world record

www.seeyou.ws

You can use SeeYou to optimize your flight for the on-line contest (https://OzReport.com/compOnlineXC.php). You get to see how the optimization works before you send in your flight:

I’ve squashed down this screen to take up less bandwidth in the Oz Report, but you at full screen get to see which waypoints are used from your track log to come up with the optimal length of your flight. You can also choose which contest you are sending the IGC file in for.

I actually had a problem with a couple of extraneous tracklog points that were placed in the IGC file for the flight I had on the second day of the Midwestern Regionals competition. I was able to use to eliminate those bad tracklog points using G7toWinand then submit the file to the OLC via SeeYou.

The G record (which is a verification record) was eliminated from the IGC file by G7toWin when I deleted the two bad points, but the on-line contest accepted the IGC file, just noting that the G record was gone.

The original IGC file (with two bad data points) can still be submitted to your national aeroclub for national and world record validation, and they can see where the bad points were. Unlike in the case of the on-line contest, an actual human being determines how many points you get for flight when you submit it for world record purposes. (The national HOLC coordinator does check your flight on the on-line contest. But the score is determined automatically by the software and it doesn’t know about bad data points.)

Compe-GPS and other programs (some freeware) will also submit your files to the on-line contest (as well as perform many other functions). Go to https://OzReport.com/compOnlineXC.php and then to the on-line contest to find where you can download all this software.

Discuss flight analysis software at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "SeeYou and the Hang Glider and Paraglider On-line contest" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Flytec 5030/Brauninger IQ-Compeo – another look

Wed, Jun 11 2003, 2:03:01 pm EDT

battery|Flytec 5030|glide ratio|GPS|power|scooter|technology

www.brauniger.com

The second part of a multi-part review.

I was happy right away to see that the battery voltage is displayed in very small numbers right at the top of the display screen. I rely heavily on the battery voltage display on my GPS to tell me how well I charged the NimH batteries the night before. It is great to have a value that you can use to compare the charge every time you turn on the unit. There is also an hours left and percent charged display, and these are nice also. It’s great to have all three.

It doesn’t matter that the text used to display these values is very tiny, because you basically only need to see it before you start flying. It tells you if you need to recharge the unit or not.

Unlike Brauniger’s (and Flytec’s) previous varios, you don’t get 100 hours on a set of AA batteries. The rechargeable batteries are in the IQ–Compeo and you will probably want to recharge the vario every night (although it is not necessary unless you are going very big distances). Now for me having internal batteries brings back bad memories of having to charge the Ball GC vario every night and how great it was to go to the IQ/Comp where I was relieved of this responsibility.

The Ball Graphics Comp had really bad batteries, and this doesn’t appear to be the case at all with the IQ-Compeo. I’ve charged the IQ-Compeo many times now and it charges very quickly and easily. There is a yellow light that goes on when it is charging and you can unplug the unit after the light goes out. The battery technology is obviously much better than what I had with the Ball GC and I feel good about the ease with which I can charge the unit.

With the IQ-Compeo I’m charging one battery for the vario, GPS, and data logger and that is much easier on me than charging the 4 AA’s Garmin batteries, and the Pocket Power scooter battery for the Colibri data logger. After more than a month of use I very much appreciate the IQ-Compeo battery charging system, and as long as it is easy to replace the batteries if one goes bad, this looks like a great system.

I really like the dial vario on the Brauniger IQ/Comp, so I’m not instantly a big fan of the Flytec-like analog bars on the IQ-Compeo. There is a small (almost too small) McCready arrow to the left side of the rate of climb/sink bar which indicates the expected rate of climb that corresponds to your current air speed. There is an analog speed bar on the right side of the display.

Even with the display right next to my nose I can’t read the tiny numbers for the rate of climb/sink and airspeed on the bar graph displays (nor am I really supposed to be able to). Of course, the value for the averaged rate of climb (digital vario) and the current airspeed (digital speed) are displayed in big characters right in the middle of the display so all I have to do is look there.

I can see the bars filling up and that does give me an idea of my instantaneous rate of climb and airspeed, but bars by themselves are basically useless. The air speed bar is just a repeat of the digital air speed display. The analog rate of climb/sink bar is just a less damped version of the digital rate of climb value.

On my first flight I incorrectly left the averaging time value for the digital rate of climb at 1 second (instead of 20 seconds, which is what I normally use), so that the digitally displayed averaged rate of climb was about equal to the lightly dampened rate of climb anyway.

Yes, the analog vario display (the bars) and the audible vario sounds has an averager (dampener). It is a much smaller time period than the digital vario display. The factory setting is 12 (1.2 seconds) and you can set it between .6 and three seconds. The idea is to apply a little dampening to the sudden changes in lift (or apparent lift due to changes in your control bar position).

This averager is called the Vario-Speed-average in the basic setup menu. Perhaps analog vario averager (or dampener) would have been a better choice for a name for this variable. At first I thought that this was the name for the digital vario averager.

To the right of the analog air speed bar there is a small arrow shaped indicator labeled (in the manual) the Required Speed. The arrow indicates the speed of best glide (not optimum speed –to-fly). If you match the arrow and the top of the air speed bar you are flying at the best glide speed over the ground. You match the top of the airspeed bar and the Required Speed arrow by changing your airspeed until they match.

Personally, I like this feature though it is hard to see. I remember on the Ball Graphics Comp you had a big digital display of your current airspeed and right below it the same sized digital display of your best glide (or perhaps it was speed to fly) speed. You just had to match them up. (Of course, you could just use the McCready tones to tell you whether you should speed up or slow down, but I never liked listening to them.)

To the left of the analog vario are two arrow shaped indicators. One labeled the McCready Indicator and the other the “Day’s specific climb.” Hmm, never heard of that last one before.

The McCready Indicator works the same way that the McCready pointer worked on the IQ/Comp. It indicates what rate of climb you seem to be expecting in the next thermal based on your current air speed. For example, if you are in a slightly rising air mass, and flying fast, the McCready arrow will be shown high up on the along vario bar indicating that you expect to run into a very strong thermal.

Of course, this also might indicate to you that you are flying too fast if you think that you won’t be running into such a strong thermal and that you might want to slow down a bit and take advantage of the rising air that you are in by staying in it longer (going at a slower speed).

If you are flying at the Required Speed as indicated by the analog airspeed on the right side of the display, then the McCready indicator will be pointing at zero lift, i.e. you are flying at the best glide speed and assuming that you will not be running into any thermals.

If the McCready indicator is pointing at negative values for lift, you are flying too slow through the sink and you need to speed up to get the best glide ratio over the ground, or even higher to your best glide speed.

All these functions are the same ones used in the IQ/Comp which used slightly different indicators on a dial instead of arrows next to a bar.

The “Day’s specific climb” is actually the average climb rate for the last ten minutes (user selectable value) that you were climbing in rising air. This is a proxy for the average rate of climb for the day, and you might want to adjust your airspeed so that the McCready arrow is over the “Day’s specific climb” arrow.” This means that you are flying at an air speed that shows that you are assuming that you will encounter another thermal and that the rate of climb in that thermal is about equal to your rate of climb in the last thermal.

If you expect to encounter a thermal with a higher rate of climb than this last 10 minute average of your last climb then fly faster, and vice versa.

Discuss varios at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Flytec 5030/Brauninger IQ-Compeo – another look" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Flytec 5030 / Brauninger IQ-Compeo – another look

Tue, Jun 10 2003, 2:03:02 pm EDT

competition|control frame|FAI|Flytec 5030|Flytec USA|Garmin 12|GPS|IGC|maps|Oz Report|record|SeeYou|software|Steve Kroop|Steven "Steve" Pearson|waypoints|Wills Wing|world record

www.brauniger.com

You can see the announcement above. I’ll refer to the unit that I have tested as the Brauniger IQ-Compeo, because that’s the version I have tested.

The IQ-Compeo is a combined vario, GPS, full fledged flight computer, and datalogger/barograph. It is in the process of being certified as an IGC datalogger so it can be used for world record purposes.

The last time I reviewed this vario it was the Brauninger Galileo. A name change, a series of updates, and the availability of cables and software to download waypoints and I’m back at it.

https://OzReport.com/toc.php?Ozv6n73.shtml
https://OzReport.com/toc.php?Ozv6n74.shtml
https://OzReport.com/toc.php?Ozv6n75.shtml

Over a month ago Steve Kroop of Flytec USA loaned me the IQ-Compeo in order to provide him with feedback about the device. He knew that Flytec Switzerland was in negotiations with Brauniger regarding the IQ-Compeo and he wanted to see what other improvements he might suggest could be made to the unit.

Right then I decided to write a series of articles about the unit, but I waited as a courtesy to publish them until Steve received word of a final signed agreement between Flytec and Brauniger. I almost couldn’t wait as you can see from my earlier article (https://OzReport.com/toc.php?Ozv7n153.shtml) .

Disclaimer:

The articles that follow are based on my experiences with the IQ-Compeo over the last five weeks and on my understanding of what is in store for the future of this unit. They were written long before we came up with the idea of my editing the Flytec 5030 manual for Flytec USA.

I have reached an agreement with Steve to exchange writing and editing of the 5030 manual in exchange for a reduced price on the 5030. It was only because I liked the unit that I was willing to consider working on the manual in partial exchange for a unit.

Steve Pearson at Wills Wing, the USA distributor for Brauniger, also brought up a possible offer along these lines. Brauniger and Wills Wing also provided me with an update to my existing IQ/Comp and a loaner unit at no charge (My review of that update was not at all favorable.)

I believe that what I have written below has not been affected by my agreement with Steve to exchange writing/editing work on the Flytec 5030 manual for a reduced price for the unit. But that is up for you to decide.

When I first reviewed the Galileo last year it was incomplete and not quite ready for the end user (for example, there was only a German manual). It displayed only metric units and there were no cables to allow you to connect to a computer. There was no software to let you download waypoints or upload flights (well, perhaps Brauniger’s PC Graph was available). The tones were completely different than the Brauniger IQ/Comp, and I wondered how they could put out a new unit and not at least default to the tones of the previous unit.

The thing was squat and a bit ugly, not at all like the faired cases that we were surrounding our varios and GPS’s with. I thought, what was the point of trading in two screens (vario and GPS) with more capabilities for one screen with hard to read text? Unlike the Garmin map GPSes the Galileo’s GPS didn’t come with any ability to download maps so that you could identify where you were to your driver.

I don’t use the Garmin maps that often, and especially not in flight (I’ve got too much else to do), so the arrow and compass rose that the Galileo displayed was really fine by me. Still, when you land it is nice to have a few place names to help you locate your position. But, overall, I didn’t miss the maps.

Lately I’ve had the opportunity to try out the latest version of the IQ-Compeo and a lot has changed. I have a cable to connect the IQ-Compeo to my computer and I can download waypoints from SeeYou (www.seeyou,.ws) and Compe-GPS (www.compegps.com). I imagine that there is other software that works with the IQ-Compeo for waypoint management also (no doubt the PC Graph software that comes from Brauniger).

I can upload IGC formatted 3-D flight tracks from the IQ-Compeo to SeeYou and I assume to Compe-GPS also. I can download task declarations both for competition, casual flying, and FAI world record attempts (the IQ-Compeo is not IGC certified yet).

I now have the use of user –friendly English units for mph, feet, and fpm. Still, the tones are different that the IQ/Comp, and the manual doesn’t tell me how to change them to match the settings for that unit, which I perhaps unfortunately have been programmed to respond to. Now, I have to reprogram myself.

The unit looks the same as it did a year ago under the old name, still unaerodynamic, but now I’m comparing it to my base tube instrument pod which is even less aerodynamically shaped (https://OzReport.com/toc.php?Ozv7n75.shtml#3), instead of with the sleek units connected to my down tube or corner bracket. I put the IQ-Compeo (and my combined IQ/Comp and Garmin 12 MAP) on my base tube so that I could read the display a lot easier than I could when it was out on the corner bracket of the control frame.

It’s great to have the instruments a lot closer as I can now much more easily interact with them as well as read the displayed values. The IQ-Compeo is easier to mount on the base tube and much steadier than my combined instruments. It weighs a lot less than the combination of an instrument pod+IQ/Comp+Garmin 12 MAP, and therefore has no tendency to rotate around the basetube unlike the combined instruments.

So this is the first big benefit I see. The combined unit is a lot lighter and a lot easier to deal with than the combined units. If the unit was on the downtube or corner bracket this wouldn’t be quite as big a benefit.

Before I get into all the details, let me say that I am very happy flying with the IQ-Compeo. I really appreciate the fact that I can easily turn up and down the volume of the vario and that I could see lots of useful information at a glance (as long as the unit is on my base tube).

The manual is a big improvement over the Brauninger IQ/Comp’s manual. The level of English language proficiency of the writer (s)/translator(s) of the English version is often (although not always) much higher than in the previous vario’s manual. In addition, there is much more explanatory material to try to help you understand the functionality of the IQ-Compeo.

I have heard that in the IQ/Comp manual, Brauninger tried to hide how the vario worked because they felt that they didn’t want to reveal to Flytec (their main competition) how their firmware was programmed. Of course, this also hid from the users how the vario worked. While much of the explanation of how the IQ-Compeo works is again left out in this manual, it is an improvement.

Still the manual has lots of places where the English is completely incomprehensible, like when the author (authors?) tries to explain final glide. It makes no sense whatsoever. Sometimes the wrong English word is used to describe a function, for example (integrate instead of average). Sometimes parts of the explanation are left off.

Well, enough about the manual, how about the unit itself?

(This article will continue in the next Oz Report.)

Discuss varios at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Flytec 5030 / Brauninger IQ-Compeo – another look" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Flytec 5030 (Brauniger IQ-Compeo) »

Tue, Jun 10 2003, 2:03:01 pm EDT

art|flight instrument|Flytec 5030|Flytec USA|GPS|Steve Kroop

Steve Kroop at Flytec USA <flytec@earthlink.net> writes:

Flytec USA and Flytec Switzerland are pleased to announce a joint venture with Brauniger Flugelelectronic on the latest GPS integrated flight instrument. Flytec will be working with Brauniger to improve the instrument based on the feedback from top pilots. This new instrument is available through Flytec distributors as the Flytec 5030.

Some of the new features that are planed are:

improved display layout
new state-of-the-art 16 channel GPS receiver
addition of the new and very popular 4030Race final glide calculator
user customizable vario audio excitement levels
new and improved users manual.

More improvements are planned and will be made available as firmware upgrades.

Discuss flight computers at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Flytec 5030 (Brauniger IQ-Compeo)" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Brauniger IQ-Compeo

Sun, Jun 8 2003, 2:03:05 pm EDT

altitude|antenna|competition|David "Dave" Glover|David Glover|glide ratio|GPS|SeeYou|tow|triangle|waypoints

I’ve been flying with the Brauniger IQ-Compeo for the last month and for the first time in a competition yesterday. I’ll soon be publishing a series of articles about the IQ-Compeo, but I thought I would start off with a few observations. I’m really enjoying flying with it and perhaps you’ll be able to relate to why.

It’s a lightweight, easy to use package that performs the functions of a vario, GPS, and data logger, which previously I used three different instruments to accomplish. Because it is lightweight it is easy to connect it to my basetube and not have it rotate around the bar while on tow on when hitting turbulence.

David Glover came up with 211 way points for the Midwest Regionals, and the IQ-Compeo can handle “only” 200, so I lopped off the 11 that were furthest away and the least likely to be used. Of course, over 200 waypoints are rarely provided by a meet organizers, so this “limitation” is normally not approached.

The IQ-Compeo provides glide ratio values to each way point, so you’ll want to make sure that each waypoint has an associated altitude. This may not be the case with the waypoints provided by the organizer (unless the waypoints are taken from SeeYou) so you’ll want to go in and add this altitude data.

I’ve often added 4,000’ to waypoint altitudes to give me an idea of whether I can make the waypoint with at least 4,000’ AGL. Of course that depends on how far an individual waypoint is away from the goal.

I’ve got the IQ-Compeo on my base tube so that I can read the values displayed. Frankly it would be nice if the values were displayed in a bit larger font, but then pilots with younger eyes should be better able to read them without difficulty.

I like the fact that I can see the actual values of the required L/D to get to the waypoint (goal) and my current L/D over the ground. On the Brauniger IQ-Comp I had a very hard time seeing the bars that represented these values.

The IQ-Compeo lets you set the value of the radius around each turnpoint, just in case they are different. Well, they are, as the start point can have its own radius which will undoubtedly be different than the radius around a turnpoint or goal.

I still haven’t seen how to define two different radii for a single waypoint which would be your start point and goal in a triangle and out and return. I assume that you just make two way point names at the same location and give them the two different radii. Associating a radius with a way point is important because the IQ-Compeo will lay down track points at an accelerated rate when you get to a waypoint if you are inside the cylinder. No more Mark + Enter.

While racing the other day before the Midwest Regionals began, I noticed that I was losing contact with the satellites for a few seconds as the Speed over the ground went to zero and the number of satellites found went to zero. This was most likely due to the fact that the IQ-Compeo is on my base tube, and I was pulling in putting the unit under my head and shoulders. This blocked its access to the satellites.

I didn’t notice this problem when I was flying on the first day of the Regionals, most likely because I wasn’t pulling in at all given the light conditions. It is my understanding that Brauniger is coming out with a new model soon that has a new GPS antenna (http://www.furunogps.com/scripts/gh80.htm) that can connect to 16 satellites and apparently doesn’t have the problems I experienced. Perhaps upgrades will be available at reasonable rates.

Anyway, more on the IQ-Compeo soon.

Discuss flight instruments at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Brauniger IQ-Compeo" at the Oz Report forum   link»

X-MAX 2003

Thu, Jun 5 2003, 2:03:04 pm EDT

accident|Alessandro "Alex" Ploner|Alex Ploner|Angelo Crapanzano|Christian Ciech|CIVL|competition|FAI|Flavio Tebaldi|GPS|Icaro 2000|Ivan Twose|Manfred Ruhmer|Mino Bricoli|Olivier Burghelle|PWC|record|safety|scoring|site|space|triangle|Valerio Canestrelli|weather

Saskia at Icaro 2000 <staffbox@Icaro2000.com> sent me this reflection on the XMAX meet.

Icaro's yearly competition in Laveno (Italy) was a great success In 3 days the 26 Flex wings flew in the Alps 3.060 km and the 16 Paragliders km 738 !! The longest flight (km 178) has been made by Christian Ciech on Laminar MR

Flavio Tebaldi, director of the meeting (on the left) Manfred Ruhmer, winner of the flex wings Olivier Burguelle, the president of the CIVL (on the right) who was very thrilled by the X-MAX formula and promised its insertion in the international PWC competitions (Paragliding World Cup)

The X-Max is now a FAI recognized competition.

The 3rd edition of the X-MAX trophy has given the free flight fans three marvelous flying days. Amongst the flex wings there were all the best national pilots, and the World Champions Christian Ciech and Alex Ploner as well as the multi adorned Manfred Ruhmer, the winner of the last X-MAX edition.

Amongst the Paraglider pilots there were other prominent names like Patrucco, Bottegal, Berta and Dondi as well as other very good local pilots.

Sunday is definitively THE “X-MAX” day!

The sky is spangled with very nice streets of cumulus under which the thermals are very generous. In these conditions the pilots are able to show their flying skills.

The hang gliders fly in overall 3060 km, with an average of 110 km each! While the paragliders fly in overall 738 km, with an average of 57 km per pilot!

The new way of doing competitions.

Read the sky, choose the route, fly fast and go far.

(editor’s note: We’ve been doing this for years and years at the Chelan Cross Country Classic. Triangle and out and return routes are heavily promoted in the scoring system. You can even go out again to get more points.)

In any other competition the important thing is to fulfill the flight task, which is indicated by the competition director, in the shortest possible time.

To win the X-Max competition, you need much more!!Flight skill is important but you must use much more your brain:

Be able to interpret the evolution of the weather conditions, decide your take off window, choose how and where to fly, decide if it is more convenient to fly a free distance, a round trip, a triangle alone, or with other pilots

Angelo Crapanzano writes:

Finally we have a free distance competition without retrieval hassles. It's nice to see it's possible to fly, in competition, triangles from 100 to 170 km and get back to goal in normal days, instead of tasks of 80 km where the fast pilots get goal in just over two hours but many pilots land out and have to be retrieved.

With the X-MAX format, pilots are flying more against themselves than the opponents and some brain has to be used: one have to fly the longest distance, but needs to get back to score high points.

In this kind of competition it's useless to follow somebody else trying to beat him on the final glide; pilots do fly often alone and to choose the best route is as important of piloting skills.

During the X-MAX most pilots get back in goal and are often quite happy because they got the maximum they could achieve in that day (it's not by accident that both last year and this one, several pilots made their own personal record).

In case are not satisfied they can only blame themselves like I did in the last day where I was not confident going forward, and made a "V" shaped flight of 160 km (which has been scored like a 110 km triangle) instead of trying a true 170 km triangle :-(

You probably understood I like this competition format, mainly because some "new" flying skills (which are not so important in classic competitions), are required.

It's the pilot to choose when to takeoff… and he cannot blame conditions were not good enough

It's the pilot to choose his route and cannot blame the task setter if it was too difficult or too easy

It's the pilot to decide when to go back toward goal and cannot blame anybody if he lands short

Maybe some good pilots will find this difficult, after many years of flying controlling the opponents, but good pilots learn fast and the ranking proves the good ones are, more or less, still on top.

A competition like the X-MAX is also safe and very easy to organize:

Safe because any pilot can respect his own safety margins and is not pushed to fly a task above his skills

Easy because it's enough to have a good map on a wall (… which was missing at Laveno), plus a good weather forecast and a computer in the goal field. Pilots go on takeoff when they want and do whatever they want.

Having paragliders and hang gliders together was not at all a problem; it was even interesting to note the differences in performances and flying characteristics (just note Patrucco, the winning Paraglider, would have been 14th in the hang glider ranking). Even in takeoff, despite different needs and limited space, there were no problems staying together and everything went fine. In flight we had no crowding, even above takeoff.

The X-MAX format proved itself and Olivier Burguelle (CIVL President), who came to check it out, is now convinced to use it in the Paragliding World Cup too. He asked me to modify the formula (which have been designed specifically for Laveno) to adapt it formula to any flying site and to be able to have an "X-MAX" day within a classic competition format.

The second requirement is already made, while the first one will be very soon and Ivan Twose will implement it into the next version of Comp-GPS. We'll check everything on May 24th during the Valerio Albrizio Trophy (in Laveno again).

Just a quick note: Manfred won (like always) but the "old guys" (read Mino Bricoli and Angelo Crapanzano) proved the experience is not for nothing and did well against the youngs.

Discuss competition flying at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "X-MAX 2003" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Maxpunkte »

Mon, May 26 2003, 2:03:04 pm EDT

GPS|software|Ulf Arndt

Ulf Brech <Ulf.Brech@ch.sauter-bc.com> writes:

Dietrich has released a beta-version of Maxpunkte which supports Flytec 40xx barodata. You'll need Microsoft Directx 8.0 or higher and an interface DLL you can download from his homepage: http://www.flugplatz-beilrode.de/maxpunkte/MaxPunkte32.zip http://www.flugplatz-beilrode.de/maxpunkte/D3DX8ab.dll. There's also a version without Directx 8.0 (but it also needs the D3DX8ab.dll): http://www.flugplatz-beilrode.de/maxpunkte/MaxPunkteNoDX.zip.

Discuss GPS software at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Maxpunkte" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Mac OS X GPS freeware

Sat, May 24 2003, 2:03:05 pm EDT

3D|GPS|Patrick Schwitter|software|tracking

http://flighttrack.sourceforge.net/screenshots.html

Patrick Schwitter <flyhi@bluewin.ch> writes:

I just found this GPS freeware soft for Mac OS X, displaying 3 D views. It is so rare on Mac Os X that I thought it was good to point it: http://flighttrack.sourceforge.net/index.html.

Discuss GPS 3D tracking software at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Mac OS X GPS freeware" at the Oz Report forum   link»

PG World record flight

Fri, May 23 2003, 7:00:00 pm GMT

cloud|competition|Gary Osoba|GPS|landing|OLC|PG|record|site|weather|world record|Zapata

https://OzReport.com/toc.php?7.139#4

Jurij Franko <rpo@rpo.si> writes:

Let me explain conditions and area where the paragliding out and return world record was set. It is a mountain ridge starting 20km from my home town and with some gaps extends west to Italian Dolomites. The ridge is east/west between 1600 to 2100m high and there are almost no mountains protruding south of it.

The only problem with the area is there are parts of the ridge (parts 20-30 km long) with almost no landing places for hang gliders. I have flown the first part of the ridge out and return twice and I was not very happy about being low once or twice. There is no road on the top of Ratitovec mountain and you have to walk at least half an hour to get there (imagine yourself with a rigid wing hang glider on your back. ☺)

You can check the on line contest (OLC) web site (https://OzReport.com/compOnlineXC.php) and see that Marko was not alone in the air and the group of PG pilots (some did not even report their flight to OLC server) completed the same task.

The other PG flights on the same day:

http://www.onlinecontest.org/olcphp/2003/ausw_wertung.php?olc=holc-i&spr=en&dclp=e405d730db00bebade3bf242c8fa8791

Marko’s flight:

http://www.onlinecontest.org/olcphp/2003/ausw_fluginfo.php?ref1=35gmare1&ref2=2003-05-17%2021:06:55&ueb=N&olc=holc-i&spr=en&dclp=e405d730db00bebade3bf242c8fa8791

Marko’s OLC track is taken from a two dimensional GPS so it isn’t as valid for the OLC contest. This is no reflection on its validity for a world record as long as Marko has photos and a barograph.

This WR is a result of systematic exploration of the area for the last few years (check also paragliders results on 4th of May on OLC!).

Flights on May 4th:

http://www.onlinecontest.org/olcphp/2003/ausw_wertung.php?olc=holc-i&spr=en&dclp=e405d730db00bebade3bf242c8fa8791

The paraglider pilots have spent many days waiting for the right conditions and testing the area with shorter tasks. They have done the work Gary Osoba and the WRE did in Zapata by themselves and succeeded.

I was in the air on May 16th (the day that Marko set the world record) on my Aeros Stalker rigid wing and enjoyed the flight of my life (140 km in 3h15min) flying very defensively on the ridge about 30 km north of the PG ridge paralleling it. The day was excellent with no wind and high cloud bases and strong lift.

But on the 4th of May I was flying in the area where the paraglider pilots made 200 km on that day. I saw them passing behind my starting point early in the day. There were no clouds and I could not get over 2000m and therefore could not see over the ridge line. We hang glider pilots decided not to go cross country on that day given the poor conditions.

But the paraglider pilots completed a 189 km out and return task that day!!! (and 207km total distance ) !!! They usually start at 10:30 AM and fly all day long. All I can say is that after 30 years of HG I can only admire them.

In fact, cross country fever is an epidemic this year here in Slovenia. The weather is getting better and better and tasks get longer and longer. The online competition (OLC) is more and more popular here (even among hang glider pilots).

Discuss world records at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "PG World record flight" at the Oz Report forum   link»

The speed value in Race

Thu, May 22 2003, 2:00:07 pm EDT

GAP|GPS|landing|scoring|site

I asked Angelo Capanzano about this problem with the displayed speed in the Race scoring program output. He wrote:

If you use the last versions of RACE2003 (this is in beta and the Race web site says not to use it) and Compe-GPS the speed shown is the average speed over the Speed Section (from Start to Arrival). If you use old versions of Race you may get the average speed from takeoff or somehow wrong results (maybe different in Race and Compe).

In any case the speed score is calculated using the time from Start to Arrival and is always correct, so it's more a kind of "cosmetic" problem.

Start is last crossing of the Start circumference (when entering or when exiting, depending how the Start is defined) and is normally "rounded" to the previous imposed Start time (usually every 15 minutes). Arrival is when first crossing the goal line (virtual or physical) or the circumference of the Arrival cylinder (centred on a turnpoint or goal).

Older versions of RACE and Compe were using the correct Start and Arrival times but the wrong Speed Section distance (for example from takeoff to goal, forgetting the Start and eventual Arrival radius), thus leading to wrong average speed.

GAP scorings use the speed section times to calculate Speed Points thus results are always correct, regardless of the Race or Compe version used. GAP scorings use the total distance (from takeoff to landing or goal) to calculate distance points and results are always correct too.

Discuss Race at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "The speed value in Race" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Canadian Nationals »

Mon, May 19 2003, 2:00:01 pm EDT

Brett Hazlett|competition|cost|GPS|Tom Pierce|Will Gadd

http://www.dowsett.ca/cdnnats

The last two days of the Canadian Hang Gliding Nationals were blown/rained out. The results after five days are the final results with Brett Hazlett winning the nationals.

The paragliding nationals are now on, and the first day was rained/blown out. They should be flying on Monday.

Tom Pierce <tommyp_25@yahoo.com> ATOS pilot who competed in the Canadian Nationals writes:

Will Gadd (on a paraglider) kicked my butt, on day one, but not on day two.

Actually on day two I was first to goal. Unfortunately, we had a virtual goal, and I had my GPS set for a 400 meter radius, and was 50 meters wide of the 400 meter total width goal line. Oh well, I gained some experience at the cost of some points.

Will Gadd wrote of that day:

An interesting day--those who flew well got out on course, while those of us who didn't, well, didn't! Bit tricky getting up off launch, but I watched two people have flat-land style low saves off a brown field I was standing in--couldn't decide where to cheer or throw rocks as they thermaled over head, grin. Nice work, an Atos (Tom Pierce) and a red something.

Discuss competition at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Canadian Nationals" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Delorme puts out an inexpensive GPS

Thu, May 8 2003, 4:00:08 pm EDT

GPS

That will work in the car with a portable computer. $100. http://www.delorme.com/earthmate/default.asp

Discuss GPSes at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Delorme puts out an inexpensive GPS" at the Oz Report forum   link»

AIR ATOS newbie

Fri, May 2 2003, 4:00:04 pm GMT

altitude|cart|competition|control frame|equipment|gloves|GPS|harness|helmet|Peter Gray|polar|spin|tail|tow|tug|wheels

Peter Gray <peter@graynet.net> writes:

I hadn't flown a rigid wing since the early '80s, with the Fledgeling 2, a much higher-drag glider with hand-operated rudder controls. Last Sunday, we set up Johann's ATOS-C, 2003 competition version, with plans to take a morning sled ride, then later soar it in the afternoon.

The first thing we discovered was that there was no practical way to make my Wills pod work in the ATOS control frame, so I used Johann's Rotor harness. Since it was only going to be a sled ride, I brought minimal equipment: a vario, helmet, and T-shirt. No GPS, no gloves, no airspeed indicator.

Johann had advised me that the ATOS would lift its tail early in the ground roll, and would quickly support its own weight, but that I should stay on the cart a little longer than with a flex wing, until I lifted the wheels off the ground. Johann also told me about roll lag and responsiveness (or lack of), and the potential for roll-yaw PIO.

The tail-up effect didn't feel much different from a flex wing, and the take-off roll was about the same. If anything, the ATOS-C felt easier than a flex wing to keep at the correct elevation relative to the tug.

For the first 100 or so feet of climb, I found myself moving back and forth laterally more than necessary, but that gave me a quick feel for how the spoilers work, and it didn't lead to any PIO. It felt somewhat more sluggish in response, but considerably less likely to yaw or roll off the tow line, than what I've been used to. Also, the more efficient wing seemed to make the rigid quicker to climb to tug level if I got low.

I had been flying with half flaps on tow, and a little more for scratching under the clouds, and now I let the flaps up to zero. Wow! Pitch pressure dropped to nothing while the wing rapidly accelerated to 30-35 mph. It trimmed there, with light nose-down bar pressure and fairly heavy nose-up pressure.

It was immediately obvious that the ATOS has long legs. A moderate headwind felt like nothing. I had flown a late-model full-race Laminar MR13 a few days earlier; the ATOS-C has a much flatter glide and its advantage in glide retention at high speed felt even more dramatic.

By the time I found a workable thermal, I was down to 600 feet AGL, over the woods in gliding range of Wallaby. At first I flew in the kind of low-bank, stately circles that I've seen most rigid pilots use, and soon found that it worked better to fly a route through several nearby cores, than to try to stay in one small core.

My first instinct in roll, carried over from flexwings, was to "weight shift" excessively. Feedback from the spoilers is fairly light and subtle, and it wasn't immediately obvious when a spoiler hit the stops. Although I knew intellectually that going beyond the stops would have absolutely no effect on roll rate, it took some repetitions to train myself to be patient and not waste effort.

My main goal for a first flight was to tow safely and land gently, so I hadn't paid as much attention to what Johann told me about flap settings, and I probably thermaled with too much flap most of the time. One thing that became immediately clear was that the ATOS did not want to thermal with zero flaps. Or at least that's how it felt to me. I tried a few thermaling turns without flaps, but I wasn't inclined to find out whether it would stall at higher speed with flaps off than with a climb setting.

It was fun to just look out at such a different kind of wing while circling. The glider felt quite solid and predictable at a wide range of bank angles and speeds. With some patience, I climbed to a comfortable 3,000 feet, and later to 4,500 or so. That allowed me to range much farther from home than I could have in a comp flex wing, and quite a bit faster.

Although I had could make sensory estimates of speed, it would have been nice to have air and ground speed indicators, as well as net climb (although I didn't have an ATOS polar in my Brauniger IQ Comp anyway). To test energy retention, I flew several times in smooth air at what seemed like a fast glide (trim with flaps off), then pushed out enough to get the vario beeping, and rolled into a shallow turn. The glider could do almost a full, large, 360, climbing at 50-100 fpm, before slowing to near a stall.

Since the air was mostly smooth and balmy, I was tempted to put the wing through some high-banked turns, and practice a spin onset and recovery, but I remembered the warnings against spinning the ATOS, and decided to err on the side of caution.

I don't consider three and a half hours nearly enough to tune in to a really different type of wing, so more experience could change my mind, but the glider felt less versatile and capable than a flex wing for scratching in weak or inconsistent lift. I am used to being able to slip, skid, and continually adjust my turn to try for the best climb rate, and it felt odd at first not to be able to do that.

Now I'm beginning to understand why rigids usually thermal in such a stately manner. They don't have a very high roll rate, and whenever a spoiler is deployed, there is some loss to drag. However, the ability to glide to another source of lift with little altitude loss, combined with a lower sink rate, probably makes up for reduced maneuverability, in most conditions.

Back at the Ranch, I pulled on full flaps and followed Johann's advice to make a wide, gentle approach. In almost zero wind, I flared and landed normally with a couple of steps. It didn't seem noticeably more difficult to land than a high-performance flexwing, but I imagine it would be in rougher air. The main difference was that the wing stalled and dropped onto my shoulders a little more suddenly and heavily.

Discuss "AIR ATOS newbie" at the Oz Report forum   link»

More bad GPS coverage

Thu, May 1 2003, 6:00:08 pm GMT

antenna|flight park|Flytec Championships 2003|GPS|landing|power|Quest Air|Quest Air flight park|TV

During the Flytec Championship and Wallaby Open we had to deal with turnpoints and landing areas that had bad GPS coverage. We had experienced bad GPS coverage at these places before, but our recent experience has confirmed that these are not ephemeral events, but is an ongoing situation.

You experience bad GPS coverage at the Quest Air flight park when the rotating TV antenna is plugged into the power. It appears that the motor in the antenna puts out a signal that blocks GPS reception.

It would appear that there are other more powerful and extensive sources of interference in the vicinity of the Bok Tower (just to its northwest) and Cheryl airstrip just to the east of Bushnell.

Meet organizers need to plan for consistent areas of poor GPS coverage and place their turnpoints and goal accordingly.

Discuss "More bad GPS coverage" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Midwest regionals

Tue, Apr 29 2003, 12:00:07 pm EDT

aerotow|book|Brad Kushner|CIVL|competition|David "Dave" Glover|David Glover|Dragonfly|flight park|Garmin GPS|GPS|landing|magazine|NTSS|photo|Raven Sky Sports|safety|school|site|Swift|tandem|tow|USHGA|weather

Here is the official announcement that went to Hang Gliding Magazine. Brad Kushner at Raven Sky Sports <brad@hanggliding.com> writes:

June 7-14, 2003: 2003 Midwest Regional Hang Gliding Competition at Raven Sky Sports.

Purpose: to have a safe, fun and fair competition. Our focus is to have a relaxing and affordable meet that is a great time for everyone involved.

Dates: June 7 (Saturday) - June 14 (Saturday), 2003. Potentially an 8-day meet, weather permitting.

Sanction: USHGA Class B and CIVL / NTSS points Flex, Rigid, and Swift class.

Location: Raven Sky Sports Flight Park at Twin Oaks Airport. N463 County Road N, Whitewater, Wisconsin 53190.

Facility: World's first dedicated aerotow flight park. 4 Dragonfly tow planes are planned for this event. Additional aerotow vehicles may be added. We have 3 grass runways for launches in up to 6 possible directions. Days are 15 hours long with sunset around 8:30pm in June.

Meet format: cross-country race to goal with or without turnpoints.

Rules: 2003 USHGA Competition Rulebook, latest edition.

Registration: Begins March 12, 2003. Limit ~30-40 competitors (to be determined).

Entry Fee: $300, 50% deposit required to validate registration (add $50 after May 7).

To Enter: email: <comp@hanggliding.com> or by phone: (262)473-8800 or by fax: (262)473-8801.

Meet Organizer: Brad Kushner and Team Raven

Meet Director: David Glover

Safety Director: Bob Linebaugh

Score Keeper: To be determined.

Awards and Prizes: To be determined. Minimum will equal (# of contestants) times ($50), fairly distributed.

Mandatory Pilot Briefing: 5:15 pm - Friday, June 6, 2003.

Contingency Plans: No official rest days are planned. The meet will be up to 8 days in length, weather permitting. Sunday, June 15 will be a contingency day, to be added in the event that flight tasks are cancelled by the meet director on 4 or more days due to weather or other causes.

Other info: Welcome to our first-ever Regional/Points Meet, we aim to make it great. Volunteers will be greatly appreciated. Applications will be accepted in the order received until capacity is reached. Pilots who have not competed before must have approval of meet organizer, meet director and/or safety director. Prior experience in a USHGA aerotow competition is helpful, but not required. Pilots must have current USHGA Advanced ratings (or foreign equivalent) with aerotow and turbulence signoffs. Additional signoffs for restricted landing field and cross-country will be weighed favorably.

Intermediate rated pilots (with appropriate experience and skills) may be allowed at the discretion of the meet director. Foreign pilots will be required to have USHGA 90-day competition membership (available on site at time of contest). Approved Garmin GPS units may be required (to be determined). Aerotows for recreational flying and tandem lessons will be available every day, but will shut down (in favor of the competitors' needs) during the competition launch window.

Photo of airport (looking southeast) was one that you published last summer, showing our main runway N/S, and our shorter E/W runway (at bottom of photo), and our newest NE/SW runway, then under development…we seeded that runway in the autumn, and it's greening up nicely this spring.

Competitors can book reservations at the local AmeriHost Inn, only two miles from the flight park, at special discounted rates. There are also two other motels in Whitewater, but they have neither a swimming pool, nor a hang glider with mannequin to hang over it (photo). Purple and White are the school colors at UW-Whitewater.

Discuss competitions at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Midwest regionals" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Canadian On Line Contest

Sun, Apr 27 2003, 2:00:01 pm EDT

GPS|OLC|record|Stewart Midwinter

Stewart Midwinter <stewart@midtoad.homelinux.org> writes

Finally the first OLC claim from Canada, by Max Fanderl in Invermere, BC. Due to a huge dump of half a metre of snow in the Prairies, our spring has suddenly disappeared, but no doubt within a week it will be all gone and we can get back to some flying.

I have written up a detailed procedure to help pilots use their GPS to record their flights and then submit claims to the OLC. The procedure should apply to most countries. You can find it here: http://midtoad.homelinux.org/midwinter.ca/OLC/HowTo_GPS_OLC.htm

Discuss the on-line contest at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Canadian On Line Contest" at the Oz Report forum   link»

The 2003 Wallaby Open

Wed, Apr 23 2003, 4:00:01 pm EDT

Alessandro "Alex" Ploner|Alex Ploner|battens|Betinho Schmitz|Brett Hazlett|Bruce Barmakian|Christian Ciech|David Chaumet|Davis Straub|death|gaggle|GPS|Kraig Coomber|Leonardo Dabbur|Mike Barber|news|Swift|Wallaby Open 2003

http://www.wallaby.com/wallabyopen/2003/

Okay, the lead – Manfred doesn’t get to goal once again. What is the sound of Manfred not making goal? When is a nonevent news? Twice in two days. Yesterday he dropped to second place below Oleg. Today he tumbles further.

As I was breaking down my glider I saw that Manfred was the passenger in the car coming to pick up Alex and Christian at goal. Wow! Things are really open for someone else to win this meet.

Okay, if it hadn’t been for that the lead would have been the mid air. Out on course, in the air, in a thick gaggle, a glider landed on top of Leonardo Dabbur’s flex wing. He apparently bent some of the root battens, as Leonardo had trouble flying the glider after that. Finally he decided to land. We don’t know at the moment who the other pilot was.

But, what about the death gaggle just outside the start window? We had a 20 mile radius entry start window today centered on the first turnpoint. Do you think this would at least spread out the pilots? Well the lift was weak and with 80 pilots in the same or a nearby thermal it was almost impossible to stay in any “core.”

There was no separate start circle radius or whatever for the various classes, so that didn’t help at all. It was truly unbelievably ridiculous. I came very close to being hit or hitting (who knows which is which) three gliders. This was a common experience.

At first we were able to climb up over 3,500’ but as more and more pilots got into the air, it became more and more difficult to stay in the lift without endangering yourself and others. So we slowly began to sink as this chart shows (the red vertical line is when I leave to go on course) down to 2,300’. The last two humps before the red line are when I go inside the start circle (which in this case means I go out on course) to get away from the gaggles, and then I go back outside the start circle (to start) and only a few pilots are in the gaggle with me.

This graphic displays the hour that I spent in flight before I took the last start time at 2:45 PM:

I spent 70 percent of the hour turning and the average rate of climb was 90 fpm. Everyone else was in the same situation, trying to stay up in what seemed like weak lift because none of us could fly in the core.

Some went on course when the death gaggle just became too much. They became the rabbits for us to chase. Oleg went at 2:30 to get out of the death gaggle. I went with him, but went back to get the 2:45 clock.

Alex Ploner, Christian Ciech, David Chaumet, and Bruce Barmakian were high at 2:45 at the start circle. Kraig Coomber and Brett Hazlett left at 2:45 but were able to catch the 2:30 guys as they started high and raced to the Bok Tower where the earlier guys (Oleg, Antoine, Curt, Johnny, Carlos, and Betinho) were low.

What task you ask?

Down to Lake Wales, to a new turnpoint to the south of Bok Tower to keep us in GPS coverage, southwest to Larry to keep us near the orange groves and pasture lands and away from the swamps, and then down highway seventeen to Wauchula airport. With the north-northwest wind predicted to be about 10 mph today, and with moderate lift and no clouds, we were worried about being able to get off a reasonable task.

And talk about anxiety. The task committee is built to enhance anxiety. Mike Barber does not want to call a task until two minutes before the first pilot launches if then. There are so many different personalities going in so many different directions on the task committee that I just keep my mouth shut. They (we) call three task today before at the last minute we decide on the medium task (I want the long one).

So we are gliding south over the orange groves toward Lake Wales and thankfully there are plenty of folks out in front to show us the lift. Nice to have friends when there aren’t any clouds. My gaggle finds some good lift just northwest of the Bok Tower and get the highest that we are going to get at 4,300’.

It’s a short run to the turnpoint in Lake Wales and then we can see the lead gaggle to the west-southwest. Knowing that there is some lift ahead is a great benefit as we can pass up weak lift and go for the good stuff. Just before the turnpoint at Larry we have to crawl up from 1,600’, but that will be enough to get us to 4,100’ and high enough to pick and choose before we go on glide from 10 miles out at 4,000’.

I have a Swift way below and in front of me on final glide also. I figure that he is going to make it, so all I’ve got to do is keep him below me. I’m actually able to beat him to goal.

Plenty of pilots make it into goal.

In order:

Alex Ploner 14:45 16:38:12 1st rigid
David Chaumet 14:45 16:42:19
Christian Ciech 14:45 16:42:35
Burce Barmakian 14:45 16:43:45
Kraig Coomber 14:45 16:47:02 1st flex
Brett Hazlett 14:45 16:47:02
Antoine 14:30 16:47:18
Oleg 14:30 16:47:26
Curt, Jon 14:30 16:47:30
Carlos, Betinho 14:30 16:47:30
Heiner Beisel ? 16:51:08
Davis Straub 14:45 16:55:51

You might also try to find results at: http://www.elltel.net/peterandlinda/Wallaby_Open_2003/2003_Wallaby_Main.htm

Discuss "The 2003 Wallaby Open" at the Oz Report forum   link»

The 2003 Wallaby Open

Tue, Apr 22 2003, 4:00:01 pm EDT

Alessandro "Alex" Ploner|Alex Ploner|Belinda Boulter|cart|Christian Ciech|cloud|Florida|GPS|Jim Lee|maps|Oleg Bondarchuck|site|tail|Wallaby Open 2003|Wallaby Ranch|Wills Wing|Wills Wing Talon

http://www.wallaby.com/wallabyopen/2003/

It’s another beautiful day at the Wallaby Ranch in central Florida. The forecast is for winds 10 mph on the ground out of the west rising to 17 mph up near cloud base. The BLIPMAP shows better lift and higher cloud bases to the south east of us along the east coast. We do have a couple of goals over in that direction (River Ranch and Hibiscus), but I can’t get the task committee to go along with me.

The FSL MAP model is showing the possibility of towering cu’s, although thunderstorms are not in the forecast. There is a cold front to the north and it is forecast to come through sometime later in the evening. So far (at 7 PM) the surface maps still show it far to the north. Perhaps it is stalled.

We wrangled around in the task committee (with so many people involved many things can happen). Finally two tasks toward the south, southeast were proposed but later we have to add Bok Tower as there is still a sky diving contest at Lake Wales, and the course line would put us too near them.

The GPS will go out just north of Bok Tower so it’s hard to say just how they will handle this when they score the meet. Do we get the waypoint if it looks like we came close? I think so.

Just before we launch we do agree on a short task to Avon Park airport with a control point at the Bok Tower:

With a stuff breeze in the take off area it is a bumpy ride over the trees. Belinda said that there were a lot of reflights today from pilots that didn’t stick the first time. I find something at 1,100’ over the northwest corner of the Ranch and work up 220 fpm to 3,700’ cloud base.

All of us who get to cloud base work our way upwind to try to get on the west side of the ranch but to the south of Interstate 4, near the edge of the start circle. The gaggles are very small given all the wind at cloud base, and I’m hanging with three flex wings.

On the ground there’s lots of action. Jim Lee has chosen a cart that puts his nose at too high of a nose angle. There are plenty of carts with high tail holders here at Wallaby, and they are to be used by pilots whose gliders have long down tubes. They are painted a different color so you know to use them if you have a Wills Wing Talon, for example.

Jim didn’t use one of these carts.

Apparently Jim was in line with the wrong cart and when he asked for a different cart, he was told he needed to go to the end of the launch line and get a new cart. He chose to continue. Belinda and others witnessed what happened next.

Just like last year it was an immediate lock out with one wing high and a 180° turn. He took out one down tube. He quickly fixed that and was soon launched again (I assume with the correct cart).

Another pilot did something similar again with too high a nose angle. Pilots have got to recognize which cart works for them. Long down tubes equal painted cart.

Meanwhile it is getting toward 2 PM, which it seems will turn out to be the real start (Race) time. We didn’t start launching until 12:30, so 2 PM is really the first time that other than the first early launchers would want to get going.

I’ve pushed west on my own and I hook up with Oleg and Johnny Durand, Jr. and Kurt Warren. There is not another rigid wing in site. There are many gliders miles downwind to the east. We are the pilots furthest to the west.

We race south until Kurt and I find 500 fpm just east of Winter Haven to 4,200’ and cloud base. We then go on a long glide that takes us through the blue toward Bok Tower. At this point we should have gone downwind to the clouds, as that’s where the lift is, but having worked so hard to get upwind we are reluctant to do so.

We get low coming into Bok Tower and Curt turns back and lands. Looks like I’ve led him astray. I head over the tower as I see some pilots turning high, but I don’t catch anything until I’m down to 700’ AGL over the back of the tower amongst the orange groves.

Yesterday it was pleasant at 340’ AGL. Today with the wind it is quite rough near the ground and I’m holding on tighter than normal. Its a few thermals before I get back to 3,500’ and drifting 6 miles east of highway 27. I’ll miss the next thermal and land twelve miles from goal.

Other pilots will be able to keep themselves high and to the west of highway 27 after they get the Tower waypoint and drift slowly to the southeast in the winds that get up to 20 mph at cloud base.

The preliminary results are very preliminary. Oleg Bondarchuck wins the flex wing task today as Manfred goes down way early, even before Bok Tower. Christian Ciech goes down before the goal also, so the two leaders don’t make goal. Alex Ploner wins the day for rigid wings.

The preliminary results aren’t out yet (printed preliminary results for Class 1 with the incorrect distance was out at 8:30 PM), so hopefully there will be something up by the time you read this. You might also try: http://www.elltel.net/peterandlinda/Wallaby_Open_2003/2003_Wallaby_Main.htm

Discuss competitions at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "The 2003 Wallaby Open" at the Oz Report forum   link»

The 2003 Wallaby Open

Mon, Apr 21 2003, 8:00:01 pm GMT

Aeros Combat|Aeros Combat 2|aerotow|Alessandro "Alex" Ploner|Alex Ploner|altitude|antenna|Belinda Boulter|Betinho Schmitz|Brett Hazlett|Bruce Barmakian|cart|Christian Ciech|cloud|competition|control frame|David Chaumet|dolly|Eric Raymond|fire|flight park|Florida|Flytec Championships 2003|gaggle|game|GPS|Icaro Laminar MR|insurance|Jerz Rossignol|Kari Castle|Mike Barber|Moyes Litespeed|Oz Report|Paris Williams|Quest Air|Steven "Steve" Pearson|survival|transport|Wallaby Open 2003|Wallaby Ranch|Wills Wing|Wills Wing Talon

http://www.wallaby.com/wallabyopen/2003/

In the competition between the flight parks, 93 entrants at the Wallaby Open and 110 for the Flytec Championship. I guess that bragging rights (for quantity at least) goes to the Quest Air Flight Park (largest aerotow meet ever).

Here at Wallaby the rigid wing class was decimated with the number of pilots falling from 28 to 17. You’d think that once that got here with their difficult to transport rigid wings, they would continue flying in the Wallaby Open.

The launch line on the first day.

So the top two American flex wing pilots have taken themselves out of this premier US competition. Yesterday Mike Barber cut open his knee (the pictures were gross and I publish the least gross one – see below) down to (but not into) the ligament. Today Paris Williams bounced off the cart and smacked into the ground taking out his control frame. You’d think he would be familiar with dolly launching at aerotow parks in Florida. ☺

The story according to Belinda who watched it happen (and who spoke with other observers) is that the cart hit a bump while he was going plenty fast (just at the point where you would take off), the glider came off the cart (Paris wasn’t holding onto the rope), his hands slipped off the control bar, and the Aeros control frame dug into the ground in front of the cart. The glider pancaked into the ground. People rushed over and took the glider off Paris who was then up and walking around. He didn’t fly the task.

Mike Barber didn’t fly the task today either. He is on crutches and happy enough with the fact that he will make the US team without doing well in these meets and get to go to Brazil. Same for Paris.

Speaking of the task here it is:

There are two separate tasks today for flex wings and rigids. The rigids are to start from a start circle seven miles to the south on highway 27, then go through the Bok Tower control point (to keep us away from the sky diving contest at Lake Wales airport), next to Avon Park airport (25 miles miles further south) and then back (through Bok Tower waypoint) and on to Wallaby Ranch. With a five mile start circle radius this puts are start point twelve miles to the south of the Ranch. A total of 81 miles.

The flex wings will be starting behind us (to the north) in order to separate the classes. The assumption being that it is harder for the flex wings to catch the rigid wings rather than the other way around. Their start circle is centered one mile north of the Ranch but with a five mile radius they will in fact be starting four miles south of the Ranch, eight miles behind the rigid wings. A total of 89 miles (from the edge of the start circle).

To keep the two classes further separated, the rigid wings will be starting at 1:15 only and the flex wings fifteen minutes later at 1:30 PM. That’s right it’s a race start, as predicted/urged in the last Oz Report.

With launch opening at noon there is plenty of time to get everyone off in time for the single start time. Many of us will get to the edge of the start circle twenty minutes early, but eventually everyone will be there. The lift is diffuse enough so that we don’t get in each others way too much.

I hear from Oleg that the flex wing start gaggle is not too bad either. There are plenty of cu’s with 4,000’ bases to choose from so perhaps they spread themselves out in a sensible fashion.

It’s great to have a race start. No worrying about whether someone is behind you catching you. You get to see all your competition and the guy in front is winning the day.

We are at cloud base at 1:15 as the start window opens and everyone together takes off spreading out to find the next lift. I’m on the left side with Alex Ploner wandering about. He’s got a good glide, but it seems only slightly better than mine. David Chaumet doesn’t display any better glide either. Interesting how things change each day.

Staying to the left I get a little better line and then hit the first thermal 3.5 miles out. Christian Ciech and the other pilots behind me come and join me, while David, Alex and a few others continue on not knowing that we are climbing behind them. We get a thousand feet on them right away as they don’t find any lift.

I’m leaving with Christian trying to keep him from getting away from the group (or at least from me). I’m just a few hundred yards behind him as we glide and a hundred feet below him climb through Bok Tower and to Lake Wales.

It’s a long glide into Lake Wales and Christian finds something that I can’t seem to find right under him. I’m down to 1,800’ when I get under him but under a cloud with lots of sunshine around and I go looking around for the lift. I don’t find any for eight minutes.

I will spend the next seven minutes below 750’ AGL, getting down to 340’ AGL. That’s fifteen minutes of rescue time, getting myself out of a hole that I have dug and back in the game. I just didn’t want to go back home tonight having screwed up so early in the task.

Fortunately the light lift that I find is next to the only cleared field within gliding distance, so I can both feel the comfort of turning low to the ground knowing that if I don’t get up I can land safely. This lets me let the bar out a bit more and milk the broken weak lift down low.

As I climb out of there I keep my head down and concentrate on survival keeping thoughts about my stupidity at bay. Just enjoy that fact that the lift is weak and therefore not too turbulent. As I climb up it turns on strong and within fifteen minutes I’m back at base. Almost a half hour of slowing myself down. Now it’s time to race.

I make a point of going for the clouds as I don’t have any pilots to help out. I get back on the course line upwind to the east over the lakes and find lift, while most pilots follow highway 27 to the left with few clouds. I can hear from Johann that the lead gaggle (minus Christian who is way out ahead) is only five miles in front of me. I catch most of them by the time we get to Avon Park taking a completely different course to the east.

Now I head downwind to the west to the clouds as the ground gets shaded from the high overcast. They are working great and I’m getting high under them while all the other pilots have disappeared.

The overcast gets darker as we approach Lake Wales and the Bok Tower turnpoint. I stop over a fire finding 100 fpm. Its light lift like this for the next nine miles as we creep toward the tower and I spot the other rigids circling near it.

Fortunately one of them finds strong lift in the sun to the north a mile as the high overcast begins to break up. I hook up with Mark P., and Johann, with Alex Ploner and Bruce Barmakian over us.

There are still plenty of shaded areas with light lift in front of us but we are back high enough to give a few areas a look see to see where the best of the light lift is.

Eight miles out and at 3,400’ high the Brauninger IQ/Comp tells me I can just make it to goal. Belinda, at goal, says Alex and Bruce just came in low and Christian came in a while ago. Well I’ll get a chance to see if the new version Brauninger behaves any differently as I go on glide. Will it be more stable?

An article in https://OzReport.com/pub/Ozv7n106.shtml describes the changes to the Brauninger IQ/Comp.

The sky is dark and so is the ground so I don’t expect to find any more lift, but I also didn’t expect to find any bad sink. There iss no wind (a report from Belinda confirmed this) and I figure there will be net no sink or lift going to goal.

Mark P. and Johann are way off to the right working a bit more lift as I continue on glide. They want the extra insurance.

The go to goal target showed up on the Brauninger, but I couldn’t tell if it was more stable than the previous version. It seemed that way but it was hard to tell for sure. Steve Pearson sent in the description that said a distance above your MacCready altitude would be displayed, but it wasn’t. This was perhaps because the go to goal symbol never flashed while I was climbing. Who knows?

I just saw that the vario said I could make it. I saw that my sink rate was 200 to 400 fpm. I saw how far out I was and how fast I was flying and could calculate how many minutes it would take to get to goal and whether I would still be in the air for that time period. It looked good to me.

I just kept the glider at less than 40 mph for the first six miles just to keep the needle at the best glide over the ground speed as I knew I was close to not making it. When I got within two miles at 1,200,’ I could go sixty mph with ease.

Fortunately our group was able to make it in before Manfred smoked the course starting eight miles and fifteen minutes behind us.

So Alex Ploner won the first day and Christian Ciech won the second day. At the moment David Chaumet’s Tsunami looks mortal, about the same as Christian and Alex.

It seems to me that pilot skills are really being tested here (and maybe a bit of the drag of harnesses and other bits). The gliders are very close to each other (with or without tails) and David’s may or may not be that much better. Alex and Christian are just much better pilots than the rest of us (at least that is my tentative conclusion based on my scraps of observations). Maybe I’ll get more relevant observations later.

One interesting twist was the fact that we had to go by the Bok Tower which is a place where we know that under some circumstances your GPS loses coverage. This is probably due to some nearby antenna that overpowers the GPS signal. Piltos were told that if their GPS coverage goes out but that their track showed them headed for the tower, they would get the turnpoint.

I’m thinking that if you get low near Chalet Suzanne (near Bok) your GPS signal goes out, but not if you are high. Mine does go out on the way back when I’m low, but I get a Mark Enter in the .25 mile circle just before I lose it completely. What luck.

It’s easy to see the Bok Tower so there is no problem flying close to it to get the waypoint. Hopefully all pilots will do this.

The story I heard from the flex wings is that on the way back it got very iffy near Lake Wales with light lift. Just the same as we experienced. The lead gaggle was low over the Orange Juice factory, and Manfred was climbing better than the rest of the group in the lift broken stuff.

He gets high enough to go search for better lift. Brett Hazlett who doesn’t get high enough goes with him and doesn’t make goal. The rest of the flex wing pilots know their place and work the light stuff until they do get high enough to move along.

Very preliminary results for day two:

Flex wings:

1 RUHMER, Manfred Icaro Laminar MR AUT 13:30:00 17:03:05 3:33:05
2 WOLF, Andre Moyes Litespeed 4 BRA 13:30:00 17:04:46 3:34:46
3 SCHMIDT, Betinho Moyes Litespeed 4 BRA 13:30:00 17:06:49 3:36:49
4 BONDARCHUK, Oleg Aeros Combat 2 UKR 13:30:00 17:10:20 3:40:20
5 WALBEC, Richard Moyes Litespeed 4 FRA 13:30:00 17:10:57 3:40:57
6 BOISSELIER, Antoine Moyes Litespeed 4 FRA 13:30:00 17:11:28 3:41:28
7 WARREN, Curt Moyes Litespeed 4 USA 13:30:00 17:12:02 3:42:02
8 MULLER, Chris Wills Wing Talon 150 CAN 13:30:00 17:12:23 3:42:23
9 CAUX, Raymond1 Moyes Litespeed 4 FRA 13:30:00 17:16:32 3:46:32
10 DURAND, Jon Jr., 49 Moyes Litespeed 4 AUS 13:30:00 17:38:42 4:08:42
11 GUILLEN, Bruno, 57 Moyes Litespeed 4 FRA 13:30:00 17:40:55 4:10:55
12 ALONZI, Mario, 23 Aeros Combat 2 FRA 13:30:00 17:42:28 4:12:28
13 DE LA HORIE, Geoffory Aeros Combat 2 FRA 13:30:00 17:43:02 4:13:02
14 CASTLE, Kari, 15 Icaro Laminar MR700 USA 13:30:00 17:44:15 4:14:15
15 ROSSIGNOL, Jerz, 14 Icaro Laminar USA 13:30:00 17:44:35 4:14:35

Totals so far:

1 RUHMER, Manfred, 85 Icaro Laminar MR AUT 2000
2 BOISSELIER, Antoine, 31 Moyes Litespeed 4 FRA 1842
3 WARREN, Curt, 13 Moyes Litespeed 4 USA 1764
4 WOLF, Andre, 97 Moyes Litespeed 4 BRA 1764
5 DURAND, Jon Jr., 49 Moyes Litespeed 4 AUS 1762
6 WALBEC, Richard, 94 Moyes Litespeed 4 FRA 1715
7 SCHMIDT, Betinho, 30 Moyes Litespeed 4 BRA 1684
8 BONDARCHUK, Oleg, 33 Aeros Combat 2 UKR 1675
9 ALONZI, Mario, 23 Aeros Combat 2 FRA 1588
10 CAUX, Raymond, 51 Moyes Litespeed 4 FRA 1574
11 CASTLE, Kari, 15 Icaro Laminar MR700 USA 1471
12 LEE, Jim, 20 Wills Wing Talon 150 USA 1418
13 OHLSSON, Andreas, 108 Moyes Litespeed 5 SWE 1397
14 BESSA, Carlos, 16 Wills Wing Talon USA 1370
15 HAZLETT, Brett, 59 Moyes Litespeed 4 CAN 1368

Rigid wings:

1 CIECH, Christian Icaro Stratos ITA 13:15:00 16:23:24 3:08:24
2 PLONER, Alex Air Atos C ITA 13:15:00 16:47:27 3:32:27
3 CHAUMET, David La Mouette Tsunami FRA 13:15:00 16:50:45 3:35:45
4 YOCOM, Jim Air Atos C USA 13:15:00 16:50:47 3:35:47
5 BIESEL, Heiner Air Atos C USA 13:15:00 16:55:12 3:40:12
6 POSCH, Johann Air Atos C AUT 13:15:00 17:00:39 3:45:39
7 STRAUB, Davis Air Atos C USA 13:15:00 17:00:43 3:45:43
8 POUSTINCHIAN, Mark Air Atos C USA 13:15:00 17:03:03 3:48:03
9 BRANDT, David Air Atos USA 13:15:00 17:04:57 3:49:57
10 PAQUETTE, Eric Air Atos CAN 13:15:00 17:12:52 3:57:52
11 GLEASON, Ron Air Atos USA 13:15:00 17:19:27 4:04:27

Totals after two days:

1 CIECH, Christian, 114 Icaro Stratos ITA 1781
2 PLONER, Alex, 121 Air Atos C ITA 1687
3 CHAUMET, David, 113 La Mouette Tsunami FRA 1511
4 POSCH, Johann, 122 Air Atos C AUT 1343
5 BIESEL, Heiner, 3 Air Atos C USA 1326

Discuss competitions at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "The 2003 Wallaby Open" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Brauninger final glide update

Sat, Apr 19 2003, 5:00:05 pm EDT

altitude|competition|GPS|safety|Steven "Steve" Pearson|XC

Steve Pearson <Steve@WILLSWING.com> sent me the following information about the Brauninger update:

The owner's manual indicates that the instrument gets its wind direction and velocity only during circling flight. This is correct. The final glide calculator does sample the wind component while climbing to let you know when it's time to go to goal, and the instrument also automatically updates the wind component continuously on your final glide.

(wind component = groundspeed - airspeed)

The original Brauniger IQ Competition would sample the air speed, and compare it with the ground speed from the GPS once each second. Depending on the baud rate of the GPS, the values for ground speed would be updated every 1 or 2 seconds but because of the long time constant of the GPS receiver these values have a delay of 3 to 4 seconds. The different time constants between the GPS and IQ Comp caused the final glide calculated values to be fairly unstable and erratic.

Brauniger IQ Comp XC - Final glide computation.

The newly released XC version of the IQ Competition also samples the airspeed and ground speed every second but the instrument now averages the wind component over a fifteen second period and compares the airspeed to the air speed minus averaged wind component to give more stable information on your final glide.

When the go to goal symbol begins to flash on and off during your climb it indicates that you will arrive at goal (or turn point) plus your selected safety altitude margin above it at best glide speed assuming the lift and sink cancel each other out. At the same time a number appears with a minus sign to indicate how much more you need to climb to reach the height required to go to goal (plus your selected safety altitude margin) flying at McCready speed to fly.

When the go to goal symbol stops flashing, it indicates that you have reached the necessary height to fly McCready speed to goal. The number at the upper right is continuously updated to let you know how high above or below your McCready glide slope you are so you can slow down or fly even faster to goal.

To upgrade your Brauninger IQ/Comp, follow these instructions:

The upgrade normally costs about 45eu.

(1) Never send repair instruments by UPS, FedEx or similar services. Send only by normal post air mail parcel.

(2) Do not state any value of products. If you have to state a product value, state only an amount of max DM 50 or equivalent!

(3) On the international green customs sticker state clearly "FOR REPAIR!" If you do not follow these steps, your repair will be delayed and we will have to charge substantial customs duty and carrier fees to you.

Send to:

BRAUNIGER Flugelectronic GmbH
Dr.Karl Slevogt Str.5
D-82362 Weilheim / Germany

I'll be checking the new Brauninger final glide display in the upcoming Wallaby Open.

Discuss final glide and varios at OzReport.com/forum/phpBB2

Discuss "Brauninger final glide update" at the Oz Report forum   link»

The 2003 Flytec Championship

Fri, Apr 18 2003, 6:00:02 pm GMT

Aeros Combat|Aeros Combat 2|Airborne Climax|Alessandro "Alex" Ploner|Alex Ploner|Christian Ciech|cloud|competition|Curt Warren|Dave Carr|David "Dave" Glover|David Chaumet|David Glover|Florida|Flytec Championships 2003|gaggle|GPS|Icaro Laminar MR|job|Kraig Coomber|Moyes Litespeed|Paris Williams|sailplane|Steve Kroop|tug|waypoints|weather

The scores:

http://www.flytec.com/flytec_champ_03/scores.html

We called a 66 mile out and return task to the northwest in order to take advantage of the forecasted convergence. The rigids had to go 5 miles longer than the flex wings, just to keep the two classes on separate routes.

We chose a turnpoint at a little grass airstrip just to the west of Interstate 75 10 miles north of Wildwood. It sure was great to use the Florida sailplane outlanding database for our turnpoints as the task committee had a lot more to choose from.

David Glover and I massaged that database and added quite a few points to it to come up with 171 waypoints and goals for the Flytec Championship. No one had to enter any new coordinates in their GPS, which was our goal. With all the extra waypoints, the task committee had plenty of options in every direction which made it much easier to define a task based on the weather and the Race parameters.

Speaking of David and Steve Kroop, they have been very responsive to our concerns about the meet format. For a week in advance of the meet many pilots went over the proposed local rules and made numerous helpful comments that were incorporated into the rules to make the competition that much more fun and interesting.

During the meet they are also very flexible and made changes when pilots saw that things could be better or the weather changed. I appreciate their support of the task committee, and while I think we did a good job, I only wish we had done even a better job.

Seven days of flying. Strong tasks which really demanded a lot from pilots on a couple of days especially. Also some fun tasks that everyone enjoyed.

Great organization on the ground, with twenty tug pilots and very little waiting. Of course, I launched early everyday, so I never had to wait. It’s a little trick I’ll let you in on. ☺

It took about 45 minutes or less for the ground crew and tugs to get everyone in the air. There are well over a hundred pilots here. Pretty smooth.

The rigid wing pilots were hanging out north of Groveland by highway 19 waiting for the perfect start time today. We were all near or right at cloud base, and the cloud kept forming in the perfect spot at the northwest edge of the start circle. It was like so easy to stay in the perfect spot.

I had an opportunity to circle for about 10 minutes with David Chaumet on his Tsunami. He was just below me so I got a real good feel for how well he climbs. Essentially he gained about 6 inches every 360 on me. Like I said I got to watch this for a long time.

We were in light lift, and we were just hanging out waiting and waiting for yet another start time, so I got a very good view, and I can say that while David flies very well and makes very good decisions, the climb rate of his glider is about equal to mine and other ATOS-C’s and Stratoses.

Of course, later I got to see him glide. We tried to drag everyone out with us at 2 PM, but they were not to be dragged. There were about 17 rigid wings in this gaggle in the start circle, and it was hard to get them going. The start time opened at 1:15, but as the clouds to the north started late, unlike yesterday, so everyone wanted to wait to the optimum time.

Johann and I agreed to go at 2:15 and I made a dramatic move at 2:15 to get everyone to come with me. I’m relying on my reading of the studies of herd behavior, and a start circle full of rigid wing hang gliders is nothing if not a herd. Everyone goes with me.

I do glide with David, but soon he gets ahead and in front. Alex Ploner (ATOS-C) and Christian Ciech (Stratos) are with him, so it isn’t like he is totally cleaning everyone’s clock, but it is still obvious that he has the best glide.

I head northwest toward the prisons while the fastest four rigids head on a more northerly course line. I can see a gaggle of flex wings (who started 5 miles in front of us) over the prison so I don’t want to go in any other direction. The rigid guys who took the route to the right do come join us there and everyone gets up, even the guys who first get there low.

The lift is strong and this is a hard racing day. No time to wonder, just find the next strong thermal and go. Of course, a strong thermal in Florida this year averages 400 fpm.

But wait, to the north it looks shaded, dark, overcast, and devoid of cu’s along the course line. The fast guys in front are heading straight on the course line into the gloom. But on the west side of the course, two miles to the west of I-75, I see a set of obvious convergence clouds.

Now I’m thinking, maybe these guys will find really weak lift along the course line. Maybe they won’t find any lift at all. Maybe the only lift will be these clouds. I’m a couple of minutes behind, so I head for them quickly hoping to outsmart the smart guys in front.

The clouds are working. I find a thermal at 1,600’ and right away I’m joined by a hawk that knows something about clouds (or at least lift) and he really helps out finding the best parts of the lift. As I climb out I look off to the east and there is the lead gaggle, getting up okay. But getting up when I was hoping they would be groveling in the shade.

I move deeper into the convergence area and get even stronger lift before dashing back to the northwest to get the turnpoint at the Savanna grass airstrip. Pilots who’ve made the turnpoint in front of me are coming back to the convergence clouds and I come back with them for more of that good lift to 6,000’. The forecast is holding true.

Now the race is really on and it’s a quick run back to the prisons for that good lift over the concrete. It’s still there and every second counts. The fast guys can’t be caught and don’t get stuck.

I get a long glide into the prison area next to Johnny Carr on a Stalker2, the very one that I have flown. It seemed to me that his glide was almost exactly equal to mine. I then circled with him and his climb rate was also very close. I didn’t see any of the hatcheting that I had seen in Texas at the US Open. There was no yawing back and forth, just a very smooth thermaling. This was true of all the Stalker2’s that I saw during the meet. Of course, I mentioned this earlier when test flying the Stalker2.

After the prison. I race as hard as possible, get a little low 7 miles out and have to waste 5 minutes getting back up. I should have kept going as the next seven miles were nothing but lift. Almost all the rigids and over 50 of the flex wing pilots make it back to goal.

Rigid Results:

1 CIECH Christian Icaro Stratos ITA 5823
2 CHAUMET David La Mouette Top Secret FRA 5721
3 PLONAR Alex AIR Atos ITA 5195
4 BARMAKIAN Bruce AIR Atos USA 4765
5 YOCOM James AIR Atos C USA 4467

Flex Results:

1 RUHMER Manfred Icaro Laminar MR AUT 5625
2 BONDARCHUCK Oleg Aeros Combat UKR 5519
3 COOMBER Kraig Moyes Litespeed 4 AUS 5457
4 HAZLETT Brett Moyes Litespeed 4 CAN 5265
5 WALBEC Richard Airborne Climax 2 - 14 FRA 5039
6 DURAND Jon Jr. Moyes Litespeed 4 AUS 4999
7 ALONZI Mario Aeros Combat 2 FRA 4909
8 OLSSON Andreas Moyes Litespeed 5 SWE 4811
9 WILLIAMS Paris Aeros Combat 2 USA 4796
10 WARREN Curt Moyes Litespeed 4 USA 4752

Curt Warren won the day by having a fast time and leaving when most everyone else did. It was a very competitive meet with a strong battle for first place in both rigid and flex wings. It’s obvious that the best pilots in the world are here.

Discuss "The 2003 Flytec Championship" at the Oz Report forum   link»

The 2003 Flytec Championship

Mon, Apr 14 2003, 5:00:02 pm GMT

ballast|Brett Hazlett|cloud|David Chaumet|Flytec 4030|Flytec Championships 2003|gaggle|GPS|Hansjoerg Truttmann|harness|Johann Posch|Kraig Coomber|Mark Bolt|Paris Williams|picture|radio|Ron Gleason|Timothy "Tim" Ettridge|Timothy Ettridge|tow|track log

The scores when they are done will be at:

http://www.flytec.com/flytec_champ_03/scores.html

Yesterday Bo was able to grab the bag that David was holding up at goal for $50. David said he could see him aiming at him from 3 miles out.

Photos by Timothy Ettridge (as was the camel picture yesterday)

There was an inversion at about 1,000’ and it didn’t break until a little after 1 PM. Mark Bolt and Bo gave it a try at 12:30 and both came down and then relaunched. The second time they stuck, but Bo had to circle up from about 300’ at the west end of the runway.

I had been waiting in the ready line waiting to see if anyone stuck. As we watched Bo slowly climb out pilots began to get ready. I just waited here the front of the ready line until there was pressure from behind to get going and launched at 1:25 PM. That meant that 95% of the pilots now had to get launched in 35 minutes if they wanted to get in the air by the first start time. What it really meant is that the first start time would probably not be the favored start time.

Amazingly it looked like only a couple of wings were still on the ground at 2 PM. Pilots must have pinned off low to get the tugs back on the ground so quick for the next tow.

It was a strong climb to 3,500’ and then a slow steady climb thereafter to over 6,000’ and cloud base. It was great to be bundled up in warm clothing which I made sure that everyone knew they might need today.

I was on the radio with Johann Posch and watching David Chaumet climb up to cloud base with us from a later launch. We let the 2 PM start time go by even though we were high as it didn’t look like anyone wanted to go. David headed west (downwind) and Johann and I followed him to keep him in our sites. We were again at cloud base at 2:15 PM and it looked like David wasn’t going to go. Then he did and we were right there with him.

I always want to fly with the fastest pilots and here was David off by himself and I wanted to be sure I was sticking with him today. We didn’t have any of the other fast guys, but they were starting also from cloud base to our east, upwind.

We were right on a line for more clouds (there were less to the northeast) so this looked like the hot spot in spite of the fact that we were a bit downwind of the course line. We were hitting the clouds right as we went north so that looked good.

David has a superior glide. Johann was slightly out gliding me, but David was going faster and staying even with us as he moved out ahead. At first we were all together going in the mid thirties speed wise and I couldn’t see any difference between us. When we started flying in the mid forties, then he pulled ahead and still had the same glide.

I was carrying 22 pounds of ballast (hook in weight of 222 with ballast). Either he carries more ballast, or his glider/harness has less drag than the ATOS-C with me or Johann on it. He is a skinny guy.

We were able to keep up with David by finding the cores faster and climbing quickly. His climb rate was about the same are ours. No dramatic difference there. The question is is this a one of a kind La Mouette Tsunami or are the others like this one? We haven’t seen another Top Secret (Tsunami) perform this well at all, so it is hard to know if this is a production model. It seems to be the same glider he had at the worlds in Chelan.

We came in under Hansjoerg by the prisons (surprise, there is a new prison going up next to the other two southeast of Coleman) and got back to cloudbase. Then off to Wildwood for the next cu. We joined up with Jim Yokum there who had started from a position to our east. We could see flex wing gliders also to our east.

Gliding toward the first turnpoint, I got out in front, a little lower and in the wrong position and the wrong tape went off in my head (the I can get ahead and find lift under these clouds even though I’m getting low tape). I tried to save my sorry ass at 1,000’ but just couldn’t stay with the weak lift drifting fast to the west.

Johann, Jim and David got up in the strong one that I refused to go back to (part of that bad tape), and got high before going into the turnpoint where they also found good lift. I was scratching too low one mile to the west and couldn’t chance going up wind to find that thermal.

There had been blue holes and clouds on the way north, but the blue hole got bigger as pilots headed south to Center Hill. Jim and Ron Gleason fell back to the west and got up to 7,200; over highway 75 quite a bit to the west, while Johann plowed through the blue and landed just south of Center Hill.

The flex wings were gaggling up and helping each other out more. By starting at 2:45 Bo, with Paris, Brett Hazlett, Johnny Durand, Jr. and Kraig Coomber, they were able to catch the 2:15 and 2:30 starters. Manfred started at 2:30 PM.

With a big lead gaggle they made their way through the blue hole and then at the second and last turnpoint 12 miles out from Quest were able to make it back against the head wind.

Bo won the day followed by Paris, Johnny Durand, Brett and Kraig. Johnny Durand had his GPS go out on him and he saw Bo and Paris go for it. He said that he wished he had a Flytec 4030 Race for this final glide.

Christian won the day starting a half hour after David. David was second.

To see how the top pilots did check the URL above and click Top Tracks. The animated track log for Sunday for rigids is at http://www.flytec.com/flytec_champ_03/top5/rigidtracksat.HTML (ignore the paraglider symbol).

You’ll need http://www.flytec.com/flytec_champ_03/comprigid.html to know who is who. Go to the scores URL above and click competitors to get their numbers.

Discuss "The 2003 Flytec Championship" at the Oz Report forum   link»

World wide site guide »

Tue, Apr 8 2003, 2:00:07 pm EDT

Florida|GPS|job|Robert "Bob" Franklin|Rob Jacobs|site|travel

Rob Jacobs <Mailways1@aol.com> writes:

Just over three years ago, I conceived an idea for a comprehensive world wide site guide for those of us who like to travel to far off lands, and go flying. After soliciting volunteers from the Hang Gliding Digest to design the site, and implement it's programming, Bob Franklin of Hawaii stepped forward and has truly given his all. Some 500 hours of programming already.

The site is designed to be maintained in a specific format by "locals", including clubs and organizations world wide. Local club officers, or designees will sign on, post all the pertinent information, including any available pictures, links, rules, GPS co-ordinates, and even local businesses - thus making plans for a flying trip a lot easier for those of us who can't stay put. We will then go back to them with other "fill in the blank" questions commonly asked of visiting pilots - in case anything is left out. It will be an ongoing maintenance job to be sure…

Though the concept isn't a new one, the site once rolled out will be by far the most in depth information of its kind ever offered to our flying brethren from sea to shining sea. Bob has worked for over 3 years in his spare time and against all odds to put the site together…

There will be 2 or 3 domain names used to access the sites - all using redirects to it's primary location on the net - it wont be easy to forget!. Soon we will be going back to the Hang Gliding digest on Yahoo, which represents some 40 countries, various local forums, and other outlets to seek out the dozens, and perhaps hundreds of volunteers to provide site information - our first request for these volunteers showed an overwhelming response when first conceived.

Once Bob is ready, we'll announce the domain names after securing enough accurate information to post. We will solicit volunteers once again for its future maintenance. Some web forms are still being tested and cleaned up, and some live data being added as a guide for locals to follow. Bob is enroute to Florida as we type, and will be putting a few more finishing touches before rolling it out.

There was some "mixed" reaction to creating such a site which "invites" people to fly unknown sites - well rest easy - this site has all the rules that the locals have - so pilots don't just show up expecting to fly, then land in Mrs. Jones backyard and kill her prize turkey. Local flying fees and contacts will be updated from a local level - so it's up to the home site folks to decide what gets posted and maintained.

It will also act as a deterrent for home sites which require special skills, ratings, or contacts. I had several discussions with groups of locals, and with Bob early on to determine what should be addressed. If anyone has other ideas, I'm sure Bob is open to them, but Email me at so I can respond while he's on the road. (<Mailways1@aol.com>). If your local site is closed for mud season, too many wuffos, or for any other reason - a simply update from the locals, which is all password protected can be made in a few minutes and posted immediately.

As we progress, an announcement will be made, we'll keep you posted.

Discuss "World wide site guide" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Remote sensing in flight

Mon, Mar 31 2003, 7:00:04 pm GMT

APRS|balloon|camera|GPS|radio|Stewart Midwinter

http://speed.vpizza.org/~jmeehan/balloon

Stewart Midwinter <dukha@midtoad.homelinux.org> writes:

This is a story about a flight that was recorded by a GPS, a digital camera and an on-board computer, with current position broadcast to the retrieval crew by ham radio and APRS. The amount of detailed planning and design that went into it is amazing.

Discuss "Remote sensing in flight" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Aircotec XC trainer

Wed, Mar 26 2003, 9:00:10 pm GMT

Achim Hagemann|Aircotec|GPS|XC

You know, I got this information before and somehow I misplaced it. I’m sorry that I didn’t publish it then. Achim Hagemann, Aircotec USA, at Fly Hawaii <hagemann@ilhawaii.net> writes:

Aircotec's new XC Trainer is coming out in July. It does not replace the Top Navigator, but it is much smaller and has a 16 Channel GPS receiver and costs only half of what the Top Navigator costs. ($699). It is a vario, altimeter, datalogger, and 16 channel GPS

Aircotec USA Flight Instruments <aircotec@yahoo.com> www.aircotec.net

Discuss "Aircotec XC trainer" at the Oz Report forum   link»

eTrex Legend

Wed, Mar 19 2003, 9:00:15 pm GMT

Garmin eTrex Legend|Garmin eTrex Vista|GPS|Peter Gasparovic

http://www.garmin.com/support/agree.jsp?id=25

Peter Gasparovic <pegasp@orangemail.sk> writes:

As only eTrex Vista was mentioned that will have bigger capacity, I was surprised that new firmware for eTrex Legend also enables 10,000 points in tracklog. Very good information, if you want to buy something cheaper then Vista.

Discuss "eTrex Legend" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Frontal instrument pod

Wed, Mar 19 2003, 9:00:04 pm GMT

Aeros Discus|Alejandro Isaza|ATOS|bridle|Flytec 4030|Garmin 12|gear|GPS|Jim Yocom|vario

http://www.geocities.com/soaringflight/frontal_pod.htm

Jim Yocom <jim@yocom-mckee.com> writes:

I have been meaning to send you my opinion of the Frontal Pod made by Alejandro Isaza, that was first mentioned in the Oz Report Ozv6n233, Friday, November 15th, 2002.

Over the years I have used several varios and various instrument enclosures. My current varios include a Ball Graphics Comp, a Digifly Gravitar, Flytec 4030 and Flytec 4030 Race. I have mounted the instruments on the downtubes, but found I prefer them on the basetube, right in front of my face. Last year I purchased Flytec's new instrument pod and flew with it and a Garmin 12 Map GPS throughout the season. As is my preference, I mounted it on my basetube.

Features of the Flytec Racing pod:

1. Enclosed windspeed turbine protects and streamlines.

2. Overall aerodynamic shape.

Shortcomings of the Flytec pod:

1. Over 20 inches long (see the ruler is 18 inches). Hard to read the GPS when thermalling and even on glide flying my Atos.

2. Long lever arm results in frequent drooping during flight.

3. Plastic case tends to warp in direct sunlight.

4. I have to disassemble the pod to connect a cable to download flights from the vario.

5. Aerotowing with this long pod on the basetube is a challenge. I modified the clamp to allow the pod to swing over my basetube, but it still was somewhat in the way of the tow bridle.

6. Price: $189 plus the 4030 case must be disassembled and vario glued to pod.

Features of the Frontal Pod :

1. 8 inches long, easy to read when on the basetube.

2. Short lever arm - no drooping.

3. Easy access to vario and GPS.

4. Nice thick plastic, no warping in the sun.

5. Price: $75.

Shortcomings of the Frontal Pod:

1. Goofy metal cover plate. I removed the plate. It is just extra weight and something else to flop around.

2. Velcro strap comes without stretchy velcro. To hold the pod securely, the strap needs stretchy velcro. I sewed this to my strap and this solved all movement issues.

3. Routing the windspeed and GPS cables was tricky. I drilled additional holes and enlarged others so the cables could be routed inside the housing. The small holes would not allow the cable ends to pass. Be very careful when enlarging the holes. Be too aggressive with a large drill bit and you can crack the plastic pod casing!

4. Overall fit & finish is not as nice as the Flytec Racing Pod. I put pinstripe tape over the crack between the top an bottom of the Frontal Pod.

I have a couple hours of flying the Frontal Pod and intend to use it at the competitions in Florida in April. I can see the instrument better and it doesn't droop. I think it is aerodynamically efficient, mainly because it is right in front of my face on the basetube. A drooping Flytec Racing Pod presents a lot of surface area!

For pilots mounting their instruments on a downtube, the long arm of the Flytec Racing Pod can be braced with a limiting string. The pod configuration may even be easier to read than the Frontal Pod on a downtube.

For me, mounting the Frontal Pod on the basetube is the preferable setup. Of course I will have my Flytec Racing Pod with me in Florida as a backup just in case ; )

(editor’s note: I flew for the first time with the pod today. I love it because it puts the instruments right next to me where I can see and hear them. I was flying a Target and a Discus and the instruments were out in front of me, so I wasn’t disturbing the air flow around the turbine. I don’t know what I will think when I try them on an ATOS. Jim has an ATOS.

I used the standard Velcro that came with the pod. It held fine for me on the round base tube, but I wasn’t hitting any lift or turbulence (well, the tows were pretty exciting). On the Target I had glued a piece of inner tube a few hours previously with Shoe Goop to the round base tube. This provides extra friction and I think that this is a good idea.

On the Aeros Discus (liked the glider, btw) I attached to the bare round base tube. It flipped down once, but really, it held pretty darn good.

Like Jim I cut off the extraneous metal cover.

I didn’t enlarge the holes, and all the cables and ends fit through them with a little work. I glued the pieces of Velcro to the pod, but one came off tonight when I took the Brauninger IQ/Comp vario out. Looks like I’ll need something other than household cement for that.

I had to add a piece of Velcro to the turbine to get it to fit snuggly in the hole provided. It was difficult to get the main Velcro through the hole in the pod, and I needed needle nose pliers to do it. More instructions would have helped.

I have no idea how aerodynamic it is, but I like the instruments being close enough that I can actually read them and easily punch the buttons.)

Discuss "Frontal instrument pod" at the Oz Report forum   link»

Correction re: GPS chart

Mon, Mar 17 2003, 6:00:10 pm GMT

Flavio Tebaldi|GPS

https://OzReport.com/Ozv7n70.shtml

The MLR has 8000 track log points, not 12,000 as Flavio reported.

Discuss "Correction re: GPS chart" at the Oz Report forum   link»