Excellent! After hundreds of posts, a straight statement of policy (or
at least one well-connected individual's version of policy) - that a
data recording device, sealed by and OO, placed in the glider and
removed from the glider by an OO - whether that device is a camera, a
barograph or a simple GPS engine - is not good enough. That implies
the technical people working to support our sport seized on the new
digital world as the opportunity to solve a problem, to deal with an
unsatisfactory situation.

Perhaps we need to debate that proposition.

Bruce

Marc Ramsey wrote:

Graeme Cant wrote:

Since a sealed-by-an-OO barograph is accepted by the IGC as
completely adequate security for all purposes, why do we need
heightened security for GPS loggers used for those same purposes?


A sealed barograph has not been acceptable for world records for a
number of years, and is only acceptable with additional evidence
(i.e., photographs and/or landing statements) for badge distance
legs. The additional security required of approved flight recorders
was a direct response to the perceived insecurity of barograph/camera
documentation for world records (the result of a number of known
cheating incidents).

Marc