On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 18:24 +0200, Ramy Yanetz wrote: > After using XCSoar for a while I am very impressed with it but at the > same time surprise that it assumes that everybody fly according to MC > theroy and with pre defined tasks. Most pilots I know, which are > serious XC pilots, do not set tasks. > Interesting: at my club its the exact opposite. Serious XC pilots always declare a task if the day looks XC-able and expect to fly as much of it as possible if the day turns out to be not so good. There's a good reason for this: we are required to declare the task on the launch list, along with a phone number and who is crewing (we often arrange mutual retrieves) so people will know where to look if we don't get back and haven't phoned in.
If the weather isn't XC-able, but we still intend to fly, we declare the task as 'local soaring' and stay within glide range of home. > and do not fly according to MC theory, which is way overrated. > Sort of agree: I don't know anybody you follows it as if carved in stone. Where we fly in the UK its generally accepted that you're asking for a land out if you set MC above 4 and that settings between 1 and zero are a waste of time. Personally, not being particularly competitive, I never set MC to more than "cloudbase/2000" where cloudbase is measured in feet. This works well here. This year that meant a max. MC setting of 1.8 - 2.5. Martin ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d _______________________________________________ Xcsoar-user mailing list Xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user
