Ian Strachan wrote in message ...
In article , Andy
Durbin writes
Ian Strachan wrote in message
...
From: Chairman, IGC GNSS Flight Recorder Approval Committee (GFAC)

Subject: Date of effect now 1 April 2004 for revised IGC-approval
conditions for certain legacy types of GNSS flight recorder.

3. No immediate manufacturer support (out of production and the
original manufacturer either no longer exists or is no longer dealing
with them).

Would you please explain why lack of manufacturer support has any
bearing on the security of a flight recorder or the validity of a
flight log.

In the event of an anomaly in recording or in the IGC file data, advice
from the recorder manufacturer has proved vital in the past in
explaining to the validating authority what is likely to have happened.

Several world records have been saved as a result of manufacturer advice
and tests where otherwise they would have been lost.

Sometimes the recorder has been returned to the manufacturer for tests
so that the anomaly can be explained. In at least one case, after
manufacturer tests indicated a line of investigation, further flight
tests were carried out by GFAC with that recorder and resulted in
several World Records being validated. Without this process it would
not have been.

You can argue that this should equally apply to badge flights, but world
records are particularly important and a line has to be drawn somewhere.

Ian,

Thanks for the reply.

I can certainly understand that using a recorder with no manufacturer
support would put the record claim at risk if an anomaly is
experienced.

I cannot understand that use of an unsupported, but previously
approved, recorder should be disallowed. The circumstance in which an
unexplained anomaly is observed in the log could be covered in the
rules. No explanation then no record.

(I am not actively seeking world records but my CAI model 25 is now
disallowed and I don't have great confidence that my 302 will survive
under this rule)


Andy (GY)