IGC-approval levels for some types of Flight Recorders

I agree with you, I just added this short clarification.
Actually I would be happy even with the COTS solution...

/Janos

Andrew Warbrick wrote:
That's my understanding too. However, it does not mean
that a determined cheat couldn't, in theory, compromise
the security of their own logger and secure a world
record.

I think the point I was trying to make is that the
system isn't bulletproof, I don't consider my Colibri
to be much more secure than a Cambridge model 10, and
if I was a Cambridge logger owner I'd be cheesed off.


After all, these guys were the 'early adopters' who
got the whole secure logger system kickstarted and
paid more for the privilege. Without these 'early adopters'
we'd still be smoking barographs and losing claims
when the photo developers cut the negative.

At 13:00 18 March 2005, Jancsika wrote:

As I know every unit has it's own unique key (at least
should). So if
you manage to open a logger box without clearing the
key, you can create
fake logs only for that unit.

/Janos

Apart from WR claims, I would be quite interested in
some progress and discussion on allowing COTS GPS
to validate Silver and perhaps Gold badge flights.

At least allowing a COTS GPS to be used in conjunction with
a barograph for Silver distance flights (like an
out and return).

Anything to make the Silver Badge easier to
validate would really help encourage pilots to transition
to X-C, in my opinion.

I know a LOT of pilots who have done Silver distance, but
not officially, due to the silly equipment requirements.
If we can get away from the "calibration"
garbage and grant some validity (even with a large margin of
error) to GPS altitudes, I think a fourfold reduction
in GPS price would really help this area.

Just because we "have" outdated rocket science doesn't mean we
need to "use" outdated rocket science. Pressure altitude
was useful because that was all they had. These days
it is an antique, a quaint reminder of a primitive time...

In article ,
Jancsika wrote:

I agree with you, I just added this short clarification.
Actually I would be happy even with the COTS solution...

/Janos

Andrew Warbrick wrote:
That's my understanding too. However, it does not mean
that a determined cheat couldn't, in theory, compromise
the security of their own logger and secure a world
record.

I think the point I was trying to make is that the
system isn't bulletproof, I don't consider my Colibri
to be much more secure than a Cambridge model 10, and
if I was a Cambridge logger owner I'd be cheesed off.


After all, these guys were the 'early adopters' who
got the whole secure logger system kickstarted and
paid more for the privilege. Without these 'early adopters'
we'd still be smoking barographs and losing claims
when the photo developers cut the negative.

At 13:00 18 March 2005, Jancsika wrote:

As I know every unit has it's own unique key (at least
should). So if
you manage to open a logger box without clearing the
key, you can create
fake logs only for that unit.

/Janos









--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd

I think it is reasonnable that World Records are
subjected to a higher level of scrutiny than badge,
competition and ladder flights.

There was the case of the spurious British World
Altitude claim in ? the 60s / 70s.

There was a flight log that would have been a world
record (if claimed and validated), mentioned on this
forum, last year. I looked at the trace. It was
clearly not valid, but what had gone wrong was not
clear to me.

----------------

I would support a proposition that tracings for all
world record claims, and for all badge claims were
made accessible to all on the Internet. Logger files
are required for the BGA ladder and AeroKurier Online
Contest. It is not beyond the capabilities of the
authorities to make all world record and badge claim
flights available online. The issue of private
information is a non-issue, because the individual is
making a claim for their performance during a flight,
and a not unreasonnable requirement is for that claim
to be available to scrutiny.

If all such claims were available on the internet,
then I expect that the wider gliding community might
well be able to pick up on and alert the authorities
to a falsified logger.

There are obvious opportunites outside the logger to
falsify a claim eg if a standard class and open class
glider perform a task, and then the logger trace from
the open class glider is submitted as coming from the
standard class glider.

Rory

X-no-archive: yes
In article , Rory O'Conor REMOVE_TO_REP
writes
I think it is reasonnable that World Records are
subjected to a higher level of scrutiny than badge,
competition and ladder flights.

There was the case of the spurious British World
Altitude claim in ? the 60s / 70s.

There was a flight log that would have been a world
record (if claimed and validated), mentioned on this
forum, last year. I looked at the trace. It was
clearly not valid, but what had gone wrong was not
clear to me.

I think Rory has hit the nail on the head. This only effect World
Records. It does not effect any other aspect of Gliding.

How many of the contributors to this thread have attempted a world
record?

Tim Newport-Peace

"Indecision is the Key to Flexibility."

How many of the contributors to this thread have attempted a world
record?

Every single flight! And if it wasn't for poor weather, a lousy glider,
no crew, not enough water and sandwiches, and the need to pee, I'd
have dozens of World Records! :PPPP


Tim Newport-Peace

"Indecision is the Key to Flexibility."


--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd