Revised IGC-approvals for some types of legacy recorder

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 11:57:02 -0500, Todd Pattist
wrote:

Tim Newport-Peace ] wrote:


It was suggested:

A: All Purposes including World Records.
B: Badges and Diplomas
D: Badges up to Diamond


What is the rationale for distinguishing between levels B
and D? If I understand correctly, D was initially separated
from everything else because of concerns about cheating,
then B was shown to be hackable (Wedekind). If that's
correct, why wasn't B moved into group D? Or, more
preferably, why isn't D given the same privileges as B?

Instead of ratcheting up costs, why can't we just use our
Official Observers to control cheating? We relied on them
for decades before RSA/DSA and public/private key
encryption. If I hack an A level recorder (with a GPS
transmitter simulator and a pressure chamber or by opening
the case and inserting GPS code between the off-the-shelf
GPS receiver and the custom circuitry), can we just agree
that no security is perfect and group them all as imperfect,
but usable for all levels with appropriate monitoring by an
OO?
Todd Pattist - "WH" Ventus C
(Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.)


Far too sensible for GFAC , Todd and of course you, me and others like
Robert Danewid and Dave Starer pointed out all this in 1995-96.

Done a search for GPS simulators lately? Not only has PC technology
progressed in the last ten years but simulator technology has too. I
found several manufacturers quite easily in a few minutes.

Give the problem to a bunch of bright engineering students and I'll
bet in 12 months you not only have a nice GPS simulator that is driven
by a PDA but a nice commercial product too.

Knowing this I have doubts about many of the current crop of amazing
records which is a pity because they *might* even be real.

Engine noise level sensors are easy to fool. The technology is readily
available commercially from Headsets Inc.. Just organise your active
noise cancelling to put noise in during glides and noise cancelling
during climbs with engine running. I just put a kit in our headsets
for the BD4. Works great.

I heard a rumour yesterday that the IGC in fact have a motorglider
record they have doubts about because of vague engine noise levels.

The mickey mouse microswitch is also good for just the first time you
open a particular logger. I sell Volksloggers and have serviced two
and fooling the microswitch is truly child's play now. Any potential
World record or 1000 km diploma holders should contact me privately.
GFAC members need not apply.

I'm also told by some people who are actively seeking World Records
that some records have been set under some suspicious circumstances.
For records requiring declarations the trick is to carry multiple
loggers and choose the appropriate one after the fact with the
declaration for the flight you actually did. This is definitely
cheating so why should we be surprised at better efforts requiring
more organisation?

I believe that for World Records the following should apply:

At least 30 days notice to the IGC that records will be attempted.

Notice to include the serial numbers and type of logger being used
including spares and name of O.O being used and location.

No more than 2 loggers in the aircraft. Requires O.O. to be present
just before takeoff.

O.O to use his own PC to clear logger memory before takeoff then seal
the loggers in aircraft no more than 15 minutes before takeoff. O.O
notes takeoff and landing times.

O.O to take charge of loggers immediately after landing and download
them him or her self and send files to IGC. If landed at some other
place logger must stay sealed in aircraft until aircraft is brought to
O.O or O.O to aircraft. In this case any dataports must be sealed by
the O.O. and only unsealed by him.

IGC to reserve the right to substitute their own nominated O.O at any
time. Actually do this now and again.

Loggers used to be returned to manufacturer for examination as soon as
possible after record session ends before record is approved.

Yes it requires honest O.O's. If we don't have those then we don't
have anything do we?

Note none of the above requires any onerous electronic security on the
logger and the logger and GPS can be separate joined by a cable. As
Marc pointed out indirectly the RSA security drives the current
logger design.

We could also get real and eliminate the pressure sensor out of the
logger and start using geometric altitudes like the rest of aviation.
They are the same in an ISA standard atmosphere but near as I can tell
gliding assumes that pressure altitudes achieved were done in an ISA
atmosphere when this is most likely not the case. The differences are
quite serious for gold and diamond badges.

Mike Borgelt