I was asked to comment, so here goes: I strongly believe that bringing appropriate levels of high technology into gliding is necessary to keep gliding a modern sport and attract Generation Y.
Yes, many gliding instruments on the market appear to be old technology and it was this perception that originally motivated me to do something about it. I hasten to add, though, that at the time new gliding instruments appear on the market, they are usually reasonably high-tech for that time --- don't forget that glider pilots were among the early technology adopters of GPS systems and even embedded microcomputers. The problem, as has been hinted at by Steve Trone, is that the glider market is quite small. This makes the development cost of any new instrument very high and difficult to recoup in sales. It is no wonder that most glider instrument manufacturers try to keep selling old products as long as they can. In the case of Triadis Engineering's Altair glide computer and Vega variomter/voice system, that company is leveraging on the open source development of XCSoar in order to reduce costs. As lead developer of XCSoar, I don't have to worry about getting financially compensated for each hour of work I put into it, and as a result, I am free to continually improve it. If it were developed in a commercial environment, the company would have frozen the features long ago. I also would like to point out that the paraglider/hanglider instruments on the market are not really technologically advanced. They can get away with much poorer resolution in their sensors and what strikes me about these handheld gps/varios the most is not what they can do, but rather that the companies can pay for expensive looking packaging (i.e. nice looking shell and custom LCD). But, returning to the theme of the original post, yes, I think having nice high-tech gizmos in the cockpit or on the gliding field is a good way to keep the sport's image relevant to younger generations. Naturally, the technology must be carefully applied so we don't have unnecessarily complicated systems (technology for its own sake): a well designed system should make the gliding experience more pleasant by increasing situational awareness, doing away with drudgery, improving confidence, and improving safety. >From time to time I receive emails from XCSoar users who say that even some of the program's more basic features like showing the "glide range footprint" and reachable airfields/landpoints visible on screen, as well as performance measures, has enabled them to fly cross country faster. That is, of course, a nice thing to hear. As to the question of what turns younger people off gliding, certainly the general inconveniences involved in the sport, and disappointment of not having good flying weather when one turns up, are in my view key issues. Technology can help in both areas: by having more automated business processes in the gliding field, duty-pilot bookwork can be reduced. Improved forecasts and the automatic compilation of thermal hotspots is a promising way of improving the chances that pilots can show up with greater confidence they can go XC and do so with diminished outlanding risk. On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 20:53 +1000, Gary wrote: > Emilis, > > I picked up on these same points. > > I would be interested to have your thoughts here. > > Once upon a time hang glider varios had no TE compensation, due to the > totally different dynamics of HG flight, as opposed to that of > sailplanes – even if such sailplanes were 25 years (or more), old. I > wonder if this is still the case? > > John Wharington (as one of several/many people involved in modern > soaring instrument design), might care to elucidate on at least the > “retro instruments” comment. > > > > Gary Stevenson > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Emilis Prelgauskas > Sent: Saturday, 1 September 2007 5:23 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [Aus-soaring] pause for thought > > > > The current (September 2007) Soaring Australia contains the following > comments by hang glider pilot John Clark (Ps. 6 - 8) > > > offered (somewhat truncated), without editorial, for thought : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There were 6 of us on the first few days of the (sailplane) course. > > > But by the end of the week there were just 2 of us. > > > For some, gliding didn't come easy enough. Their lack of immediate > success was a problem. > > > For the young, reared on computer games, with mates back home doing > something else, the commitment was too much and the goal too far away. > > > They expected to book, turn up & fly. > > > > > > A difference between gliding clubs & hang gliding is, the average age > of sailplanes is 25 years, many much older. I don't think I'd be > prepared to fly a 25 year old hang glider. > > > For pilots used to low cost modern varios with LCDs, integrated GPS, > loggers, glide computers, sailplane instruments are very retro. > > > > > > > > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.1/982 - Release Date: > 31/08/2007 5:21 PM > > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.13.1/982 - Release Date: > 31/08/2007 5:21 PM > > > _______________________________________________ > Aus-soaring mailing list > [email protected] > To check or change subscription details, visit: > http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring _______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
