On Feb 18, 9:03*pm, "Paul Remde" wrote:

I am very much in favor of the idea to make it possible to use lower cost
units. However, I fear that passing the responsibility for approving units down to
each country is making this all very complicated - which is unfortunate.

However, in accordance with current Sporting Code procedures, the IGC
GFA Committee is "in the loop" as a collecting point for Position
Recorder information, for checking that the Sporting Code rules for
the devices proposed are indeed followed, for recommending standard
Approval Document formats (as on the IGC Position Recorder web page)
and finally, to put the agreed Approval Documents on the IGC PR Web
page.

That is what happens at the moment, but the annual IGC Plenary meeting
is from 5-6 March and the PR situation will be discussed. Maybe some
changes will be made.

For instance, the situation could be simplified. Particular IGC
Position Recorder Approval documents could be turned into universal
Approvals without the need for many national bodies to copy the same
document. These could be published by GFAC in the same way as the
higher-level IGC-approval documents for secure flight recorders. Such
documents should conform to the format on the IGC PR web page, and it
should also be clear how the equipment concerned complies with the
provisions of the Sporting Code for PRs.

In the other direction, there is also a resolution on the IGC agenda
from a National Body to the effect that GFAC should be taken out of
the loop, and that National bodies should have complete freedom to
issue Position Recorder approvals without any co-ordination by an IGC
body. Or interference, if you take that view!

What do people think of these points, or any other aspect of the new
IGC Position Recorder procedures? They have only been in since 1
October 2009, so we are all learning!

BTW, the IGC Plenary agenda is available at: http://www.fai.org/gliding/igc_plenary10

Ian Strachan