ORIGINAL: klhoard


.
I think that the rule writers are chasing the wrong wild goose. As long as telemetry data is not used WITHIN the feedback loop WITHIN the airplane, it should all be legal.
.
For example, RPM. Everyone already has the perfect RPM readout gauge - stick position - so having the radio send down a number is just redundant. Yes, I know electric RPM changes as batts deplete, but their depletion rate is a known quantity. Also, knowing what RPM your prop is turning does NOT guarantee what airspeed your plane is moving. Another example would be altitude data. When you fly, you already use feedback from the model to control altitude - its visual relation to the horizon. Once again, having the radio send down a number quantifying that is just redundant. Some other types of data are more subtle, like using position data to determine if you're on the 150 meter line. I argue that if you have good visual acuity and have taken the time to be trained what your plane looks like at 150 meters, then GPS coordinates are just redundant. Is it a ''competitive advantage'' that the top fliers can do all of this without using telemetry? If so, then where do I file my protest!!!
.
If you start trying to list every single type of telemetry data that can or cannot be used then this section of the rules will be a never-ending battle. Different types of sensors will be coming out and each one will have to be evaluated for legality and then mentioned in the rulebook. Name any sensor and I can make arguments both for and against its ''competitiveness''. Also, what one flier considers a ''competitive advantage'' is truly a subjective issue and will be up for interpretation by individual CD's and flyers alike.
.
So. . . what am I getting at? The simple, important distinction is WHERE the processing of the data takes place. If telemetry data is fed back to the pilot, then the PILOT has to process the data and make corrections - that should be OK. However, if the data processing is taking place inside the airplane and the airplane is electronically making corrections then that should NOT be OK.
.
As for the issue of trim and mixing switches, as long as the timing is not dependent of any type of sensor data or processing within the airplane, it should be OK i.e. (Event #1, 1-second delay, Event #2, 1-second delay, Event #3. . .). I could even see this being OK if the PILOT decides that a 1.5 second delay between events is warranted and flips a second switch to adjust the timing from 1 second to 1.5 seconds. Notice the PILOT did the processing and made the decision and flipped the switch.
.
Now, if you have set it up so that the timing of the series of functions is affected by feedback from a sensor (Event #1, check airspeed, Event #2, check airspeed, Event #3) and that timing is changed based on some sort of processing within the airplane, then that should be illegal.
.
The bottom line is that I believe the rule should simply focus on WHERE within the feedback loop the processing of the data is performed, not WHAT or how much data is processed. That would lead to a simple, clean, easy to understand, interpret, and enforceable rule.
.