If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
altitude record
I'm thinking of claiming a record. I have a valid IGC trace aquired recently
in the Pyrenees during which I climbed to 79275' ( yes seventy nine thousand two hundred and seventy five feet ) after taking off at 8228' - a 71000 plus gain of height. The logger was sealed in the glider, a nimbus 3 t, and still is as is the trace, the flight was witnessed. Although only dressed in shorts and t shirt I suffered no high altitude effects and the EDS O2 system worked perfectly. Lift was frequently over 30 m/s although I'm damned if I can remember it being that good. Anyone interested in the trace can mail me for a copy ( 40 kb ) Regards Ian |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
tango4 wrote:
I'm thinking of claiming a record. I have a valid IGC trace aquired recently in the Pyrenees during which I climbed to 79275' ( yes seventy nine thousand two hundred and seventy five feet ) after taking off at 8228' - a 71000 plus gain of height. The logger was sealed in the glider, a nimbus 3 t, and still is as is the trace, the flight was witnessed. Although only dressed in shorts and t shirt I suffered no high altitude effects and the EDS O2 system worked perfectly. Lift was frequently over 30 m/s although I'm damned if I can remember it being that good. Anyone interested in the trace can mail me for a copy ( 40 kb ) Regards Ian Something wrong here. You would have died from your blood boiling over about 53,000 feet !!! (Unless you were in a pressurised glider...) I suspect the logger has gone walkabout. Cheers, John G. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
tango4 wrote:
I'm thinking of claiming a record. I have a valid IGC trace aquired recently in the Pyrenees during which I climbed to 79275' ( yes seventy nine thousand two hundred and seventy five feet ) after taking off at 8228' - a 71000 plus gain of height. The logger was sealed in the glider, a nimbus 3 t, and still is as is the trace, the flight was witnessed. Although only dressed in shorts and t shirt I suffered no high altitude effects and the EDS O2 system worked perfectly. Lift was frequently over 30 m/s although I'm damned if I can remember it being that good. Anyone interested in the trace can mail me for a copy ( 40 kb ) Regards Ian You would not have used one of those little old vacuum pump things to prove a point would you? ;-) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Absolutely not. This is a genuine trace from my logger! The logger is in the
glider, still sealed in position ready for inspection. I go on holiday with a lot of equipment but a vacuum pump is not one of them! The GPS altitude echoes the pressure altitude in a similar manner but on a scale of perhaps 1:10 Ian "Bruce Greeff" wrote in message ... tango4 wrote: I'm thinking of claiming a record. I have a valid IGC trace aquired recently in the Pyrenees during which I climbed to 79275' ( yes seventy nine thousand two hundred and seventy five feet ) after taking off at 8228' - a 71000 plus gain of height. The logger was sealed in the glider, a nimbus 3 t, and still is as is the trace, the flight was witnessed. Although only dressed in shorts and t shirt I suffered no high altitude effects and the EDS O2 system worked perfectly. Lift was frequently over 30 m/s although I'm damned if I can remember it being that good. Anyone interested in the trace can mail me for a copy ( 40 kb ) Regards Ian You would not have used one of those little old vacuum pump things to prove a point would you? ;-) |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ian
Surely you are not telling us all that the GPS accurately recorded your true height but the barometric logger got it wrong. This cannot be, and a valid trace as well, this is blasphemy, the ICG sacred cow, the barometric height widget has failed, the world will end. Don ASW17 401 At 10:24 06 August 2004, Tango4 wrote: Absolutely not. This is a genuine trace from my logger! The logger is in the glider, still sealed in position ready for inspection. I go on holiday with a lot of equipment but a vacuum pump is not one of them! The GPS altitude echoes the pressure altitude in a similar manner but on a scale of perhaps 1:10 Ian 'Bruce Greeff' wrote in message ... tango4 wrote: I'm thinking of claiming a record. I have a valid IGC trace aquired recently in the Pyrenees during which I climbed to 79275' ( yes seventy nine thousand two hundred and seventy five feet ) after taking off at 8228' - a 71000 plus gain of height. The logger was sealed in the glider, a nimbus 3 t, and still is as is the trace, the flight was witnessed. Although only dressed in shorts and t shirt I suffered no high altitude effects and the EDS O2 system worked perfectly. Lift was frequently over 30 m/s although I'm damned if I can remember it being that good. Anyone interested in the trace can mail me for a copy ( 40 kb ) Regards Ian You would not have used one of those little old vacuum pump things to prove a point would you? ;-) |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Don Johnstone
writes Ian Surely you are not telling us all that the GPS accurately recorded your true height but the barometric logger got it wrong. This cannot be, and a valid trace as well, this is blasphemy, the ICG sacred cow, the barometric height widget has failed, the world will end. There will always be occasional failures in systems needed for flight verification. Cameras, barographs, GPS, pilots and OOs sometimes fail to record what they are supposed to (I deliberately include human factors as well as technical ones!). The questions are, how often do problems occur, can they be easily seen for what they are, and what "checks and balances" are there to prevent false data from being used in validated claims. In more detail: (1) Is the failure obvious or is it difficult to detect? In this case what seems to be a failure in pressure altitude recording is easy to pick up. A gross error is easy to see, a small one is difficult. I understand that this particular anomaly was due to the use of a high input voltage to the recorder unit (up to 16.5 volts). The anomaly is understood to have ceased when a 12 volt DC input was used. Correspondence is taking place with the manufacturer and an announcement giving more detail may be made shortly. Meanwhile users are advised to be cautious in using battery inputs other than the large range of 12V sealed lead-acid "gel" calls that are available worldwide. and, (2) Independent sources of data. The merit of being able to compare the figures from two independent altitude sensors (GPS above ellipsoid and ICAO ISA pressure altitude) is clearly shown in the example. Relying on only one system, either pressure or GPS, would lessen the chance of any anomalies being detected. and, (3) Rate of anomalies found in IGC files. How many significant anomalies are found in proportion to the total number of IGC files looked at? Particularly, what is the "anomaly rate" of electronic pressure altitude transducers and recording in IGC files, compared to the recording of GPS altitudes in IGC files? In my experience of analysing thousands of IGC files over the last 10 years, the ratio is of the order of 1 to 10 in favour of pressure altitude figures. In other words, anomalies do occur, of course, but the large majority of anomalies in terms of altitude figures in IGC files are in GPS altitude compared to baro. Baro altitude is generally very reliably recorded, GPS altitude in IGC files has a higher anomaly rate with unexplained "spikes" both up and down and unlocks both with and without simultaneous lat/long recording. ---------------------- Finally, pilots are advised to use high voltage inputs with caution where equipment designed primarily for 12 volts DC is concerned. As indicated above, up to 16.5 volts seems to have been used in the case concerned and almost certainly caused this problem. Please report any other suspected anomalies by email to me, including the IGC file concerned as an attachment. The situation can then be looked at and we can correspond with the manufacturer if this seems to be required. -- Ian Strachan Chairman IGC GFA Committee |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
A Cambridge logger with low voltage?
At 05:12 09 August 2004, Tango4 wrote: Sorry you seem to have missed the point. My fully legal and observed flight using and IGC logger has provided a trace showing a climb to a barometric pressure altitude of nearly 80000'. I appear to have exposed a weakness in a brand of loggers that could be exploited quite simply. This was done accidentally by the way. Ian 'jorgie' wrote in message ... Why would you only think of claiming the record, accepting of course that you didn't only get the 7,100 feet as suggested by another post. If I thought I had a valid claim I'd be getting it certified pronto. -- jorgie ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------- Posted via OziPilots Online [ http://www.OziPilotsOnline.com.au ] - A website for Australian Pilots regardless of when, why, or what they fly - |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
No, a Colibri
"John Galloway" wrote in message ... A Cambridge logger with low voltage? At 05:12 09 August 2004, Tango4 wrote: Sorry you seem to have missed the point. My fully legal and observed flight using and IGC logger has provided a trace showing a climb to a barometric pressure altitude of nearly 80000'. I appear to have exposed a weakness in a brand of loggers that could be exploited quite simply. This was done accidentally by the way. Ian 'jorgie' wrote in message ... Why would you only think of claiming the record, accepting of course that you didn't only get the 7,100 feet as suggested by another post. If I thought I had a valid claim I'd be getting it certified pronto. -- jorgie ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------- Posted via OziPilots Online [ http://www.OziPilotsOnline.com.au ] - A website for Australian Pilots regardless of when, why, or what they fly - |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Parachute fails to save SR-22 | Capt.Doug | Piloting | 72 | February 10th 05 05:14 AM |
Pressure Altitude and Terminology | Icebound | Piloting | 0 | November 27th 04 09:14 PM |
What's minimum safe O2 level? | PaulH | Piloting | 29 | November 9th 04 07:35 PM |
GPS Altitude with WAAS | Phil Verghese | Instrument Flight Rules | 42 | October 5th 03 12:39 AM |
GPS Altitude with WAAS | Phil Verghese | Piloting | 38 | October 5th 03 12:39 AM |