[NSRCA-discussion] Food For Thought - Pattern and Gyros

[John Ferrell]

When Gyros were legal at the TOC competitions most competitors chose not 
to use them. Not only did the added complexity bring its own failures 
but most of the successful pilots felt they wanted absolute control.

The general consensus in the past has been that contest is about pilots 
and not technology. The extreme view has led to Senior Pattern and 
Ballistic Pattern, etc.  While those ideas have been good, they failed 
to gain enough popularity to attract enough contestants to form a self 
sustaining critical mass.

I believe the current competitors prefer to keep things as they are and 
adhere to FAI rules. Those who feel otherwise have departed to pursue 
other challenges.

There have been amazing strides the availability and the costs of 
microcomputers in the last few years. One example is the Arduino system. 
Perhaps the off the shelf stuff is too big & too heavy, but it is only a 
little more expensive to get what you want in a tiny package. All for 
less than the price of one good servo!

I suspect that a properly programmed onboard computer might make an old 
Focus competitive with today's equipment at a fraction of the cost.

Current Precision Aerobatics is not yet a One-Design contest but the 
rules have left very few choices in aircraft: Electric/fuel, Single 
wing/multi wing .  That is OK because it has been the choices made by 
those interested enough to keep the sport alive.

I don't consider myself a has - been, I am a never - was, but no one 
ever had more fun than me!


On 9/15/2012 6:57 AM, Ron Hansen wrote:
>
> At last weekend's contest I asked several pretty experienced judges 
> whether a gyro that told a pilot whether his wings were level and/or 
> his nose was pitching down was legal in pattern.  I know the rules say 
> gyros that automatically adjust for pitch and yaw are illegal.  I also 
> believe any other device that tells the pilot the orientation of the 
> plane so that the pilot can manually adjust is also not in the spirit 
> of the sport.
>
> I got some interesting responses.
>
> In my opinion this type of feedback has been technically feasible for 
> many years.  It may not have been through direct communication between 
> the receiver and the transmitter but it was certainly doable through a 
> tone in an ear piece or similar feedback mechanism.  I'm surprised the 
> rules never anticipated this.  Why did we have to wait for telemetry 
> capable radios?
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus 
> signature database 7481 (20120915) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

-- 
John Ferrell W8CCW
"During times of universal deceit,
   Telling the TRUTH becomes a revolutionary act"
      George Orwell

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20120915/a19fb024/attachment.html>