Backup Flight Data Recorder?

The GPSMAP 76S has the barometric sensor, at least OLC thinks so,
according to the online flight display.

Or is it the straight 76 that you bought?

I bought the GPSMAP 76 (there's also a straight GPS 76 but it's not
suitable for our purposes: not enough trackpoints, for one thing). The
GPSMAP 76S does have the baro sensor (as well as an electronic compass
sensor) but I'm not sure whether it's evident from the track log
whether the user locked out the auto-calibrate feature that slowly
adjusts the altimeter to GPS altitude to account for pressure changes.
I'm also not sure whether the track log records both pressure and GPS
altitudes. If the answer to these questions is yes (i.e., it's evident
if auto calibration is turned off and it records pressure altitude),
then the extra money for the GPSMAP 76C might be worth it. It's still
not an IGC $ecure flight recorder but it's the next best thing...at 1/5
or 1/6 the price.

Erik Mann (Papa3) was a great help during my evaluation of backup
flight recorders and is a lot more conversant with this subject (he's
even interacted with Garmin). As I mentioned earlier, I'm really
impressed with how much functionality you get for $150.

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"

wrote:
The GPSMAP 76S has the barometric sensor, at least OLC thinks so,
according to the online flight display.

Or is it the straight 76 that you bought?

I bought the GPSMAP 76 (there's also a straight GPS 76 but it's not
suitable for our purposes: not enough trackpoints, for one thing). The
GPSMAP 76S does have the baro sensor (as well as an electronic compass
sensor) but I'm not sure whether it's evident from the track log
whether the user locked out the auto-calibrate feature that slowly
adjusts the altimeter to GPS altitude to account for pressure changes.
I'm also not sure whether the track log records both pressure and GPS
altitudes. If the answer to these questions is yes (i.e., it's evident
if auto calibration is turned off and it records pressure altitude),
then the extra money for the GPSMAP 76C might be worth it. It's still
not an IGC $ecure flight recorder but it's the next best thing...at 1/5
or 1/6 the price.

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"

The answers to the two questions a

- No, the 76S unit records only 1 altitude. All of the recreational
Garmin units (at least through early this year) logged a fairly limited
subset of the available NMEA data (understandably, since the average
recreational user needs only time, position, and altitude).

- As to which altitude it is storing, that depends. The basic
"altitude" in the 76S is the barometric altitude. The auto-calibrate
feature compares the barometric altitude to the GPS altitude and
periodically adjusts the barometric altitude. Exactly how it does
that (ie. average delta over n number of fixes, how it determines
whether to discard a fix, etc.) is not public domain. But, I have had
correspondence with Garmin engineers who pointed out that the algorithm
means that you essentially end up with GPS altitude but smoothed by the
barometric altitude to take care of any individual GPS altitude fixes
that might have been degraded (at least that's my current
understanding). If you turn off auto-calibrate, then only the
barometric altitude is stored. There is no way to tell from the
output record whether auto-calibrate was on or off.

Given the above, I'm not convinced yet that the 76S is necessarily
"better", though I do think it might actually be a long-term solution
if we can come up with a complete understanding of the auto-calibration
algorithm(s).

P3

Papa3 wrote:
All of the recreational
Garmin units (at least through early this year) logged a fairly limited
subset of the available NMEA data (understandably, since the average
recreational user needs only time, position, and altitude).

- As to which altitude it is storing, that depends. The basic
"altitude" in the 76S is the barometric altitude. The auto-calibrate
feature compares the barometric altitude to the GPS altitude and
periodically adjusts the barometric altitude.

Exactly how it does
that (ie. average delta over n number of fixes, how it determines
whether to discard a fix, etc.) is not public domain.

But, I have had
correspondence with Garmin engineers who pointed out that the algorithm
means that you essentially end up with GPS altitude but smoothed by the
barometric altitude to take care of any individual GPS altitude fixes
that might have been degraded (at least that's my current
understanding).

If you turn off auto-calibrate, then only the
barometric altitude is stored. There is no way to tell from the
output record whether auto-calibrate was on or off.

From Ian Strachan, the other side of "the Pond":
Very interesting, Papa 3. Further questions a to what zero-altitude
datum are the altitude figures:
(1) displayed on screen and
(2) recorded for later download.

I doubt whether recreational GPS units will be set to the ICAO ISA MSL
datum of 1013.2 mb (29.92 inches of Hg) that is the worldwide aviation
pressure setting for all "Flight Levels".

So, is it supposed to be a "mean sea level" datum? If so, how is it
achieved? (another proprietory algorithm, I suppose). The "64kdollar
question" is, how does it relate to spot heights and contours on maps?

The initial datum for GPS altitude is the selected ellipsoid, WGS84 and
local variants. But this is nowhere near MSL except in small areas by
sheer co-incidence. I understand that differences between the WGS84
ellipsoid and local MSL vary by some +65m S of Iceland to -102m S of
India, a total of 167m (548ft).

I suspect that these recreational GPS units have an electronic look-up
table that changes altitudes above the ellipsoid to what the WGS84
source document calls "an equipotential surface". As I understand it,
this worldwide equipotential surface is approximately, but not exactly,
equivalent to local mean sea levels. For instance, in UK mapping, Mean
Sea Level is taken as the average tide at a place in the SW of England
called Newlyn, I guess because it has regular and reliable tides. I
imagine that the mapping authorities in other countries have a similar
system, they have to have an MSL "zero datum" on which to base heights.

These are tricky issues if altitude figures downloaded after flight are
to be accurate and meaningful. At least you know where you are with
altitudes based on the aviation-standard 1013/29.9" sea level datum.
These 1013-based altitudes can then be converted after download into
others using public-domain formulas (the balloonists do this, I
understand, to get a sort of true height for the day rather than just
using the ICAO ISA as IGC does).

But with unknown algorithms applied before download, you do not know
exactly what you are dealing with. This is not a problem in the
recreational area, but may be in ours if accurate altitude is to be
used in a performance claim or to defend a pilot against a possible
airspace violation or other situation where a flight record wiuld be
useful. Then there is the issue of the general reliability of pressure
altitude compared to the sometimes erratic figures for GPS altitude
recorded in a proportion of IGC flight data files ...

Ian Strachan
Lasham Gliding Centre, UK

Ian Strachan wrote:
Papa3 wrote:
All of the recreational
Garmin units (at least through early this year) logged a fairly limited
subset of the available NMEA data (understandably, since the average
recreational user needs only time, position, and altitude).

- As to which altitude it is storing, that depends. The basic
"altitude" in the 76S is the barometric altitude. The auto-calibrate
feature compares the barometric altitude to the GPS altitude and
periodically adjusts the barometric altitude.

Exactly how it does
that (ie. average delta over n number of fixes, how it determines
whether to discard a fix, etc.) is not public domain.

But, I have had
correspondence with Garmin engineers who pointed out that the algorithm
means that you essentially end up with GPS altitude but smoothed by the
barometric altitude to take care of any individual GPS altitude fixes
that might have been degraded (at least that's my current
understanding).

If you turn off auto-calibrate, then only the
barometric altitude is stored. There is no way to tell from the
output record whether auto-calibrate was on or off.

From Ian Strachan, the other side of "the Pond":
Very interesting, Papa 3. Further questions a to what zero-altitude
datum are the altitude figures:
(1) displayed on screen and
(2) recorded for later download.

I doubt whether recreational GPS units will be set to the ICAO ISA MSL
datum of 1013.2 mb (29.92 inches of Hg) that is the worldwide aviation
pressure setting for all "Flight Levels".

So, is it supposed to be a "mean sea level" datum? If so, how is it
achieved? (another proprietory algorithm, I suppose). The "64kdollar
question" is, how does it relate to spot heights and contours on maps?

The initial datum for GPS altitude is the selected ellipsoid, WGS84 and
local variants. But this is nowhere near MSL except in small areas by
sheer co-incidence. I understand that differences between the WGS84
ellipsoid and local MSL vary by some +65m S of Iceland to -102m S of
India, a total of 167m (548ft).

I suspect that these recreational GPS units have an electronic look-up
table that changes altitudes above the ellipsoid to what the WGS84
source document calls "an equipotential surface". As I understand it,
this worldwide equipotential surface is approximately, but not exactly,
equivalent to local mean sea levels. For instance, in UK mapping, Mean
Sea Level is taken as the average tide at a place in the SW of England
called Newlyn, I guess because it has regular and reliable tides. I
imagine that the mapping authorities in other countries have a similar
system, they have to have an MSL "zero datum" on which to base heights.

These are tricky issues if altitude figures downloaded after flight are
to be accurate and meaningful. At least you know where you are with
altitudes based on the aviation-standard 1013/29.9" sea level datum.
These 1013-based altitudes can then be converted after download into
others using public-domain formulas (the balloonists do this, I
understand, to get a sort of true height for the day rather than just
using the ICAO ISA as IGC does).

But with unknown algorithms applied before download, you do not know
exactly what you are dealing with. This is not a problem in the
recreational area, but may be in ours if accurate altitude is to be
used in a performance claim or to defend a pilot against a possible
airspace violation or other situation where a flight record wiuld be
useful. Then there is the issue of the general reliability of pressure
altitude compared to the sometimes erratic figures for GPS altitude
recorded in a proportion of IGC flight data files ...

Ian Strachan
Lasham Gliding Centre, UK

All good questions. What we know at present:

- Garmin describes the altitude feature as an "altimeter". In fact,
it can be set to local station pressure OR local Altitude. The manual
actually encourages this. So:
- If Auto-Calibrate is off, then subsequent altitude readings assume
ISA . So, if Altitude is initially referenced to QNH, subsequent
readings are against the datum used for the local survey. In the US,
I think (don't know for sure) that this is WGS84.
- If Auto-Calibrate is on, then subsequent altitude readings are, in
effect, GPS Altitude. From a closer read of the manual, it appears
that the unit compares the GPS Altitude to the Pressure Altitude
continuously and changes the displayed "altitude" when the delta
between Pressure Altitude and GPS Altitude changes based on some moving
average. Thus, the reference is the chosen ellipsoid (WGS84 by
default in the Garmin)

What's still not 100% clear is what value(s) are in the track log.
There's a tantalizing reference in the manual to the Pressure Plot
which states that this is maintaned separately from the Track Log.
In the ideal world:

- We could set the built in "altimeter" to local station pressure.
- We could turn off Auto Calibrate.
- The primary track log would contain GPS Altitude.
- The pressure plot would contain Barometric Pressure.
- Marrying the two would provide a complete B Record (more or less
:-))

I'm still hazy on what level of precision we're trying to achieve. In
the "real world" of gliding barometry, we live with a lot of
uncertainty. Whether it's accurate cross-reference to local station
pressure (and just how local is local), adjusting for pressure
changes over time during a flight, field elevation changes (15M
difference between the SW and NE ends of my home airport), etc. it
seems to me that we already live with a 10M-20M variability between two
identical flights documented by different OOs on the same day. I
think that the Garmin may provide enough data for post-flight review to
be at least as good as what we did with an old-fashioned barograph.

Erik Mann
LS8-18 P3

On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 03:53:42 -0700, Ian Strachan wrote:


From Ian Strachan, the other side of "the Pond":
Very interesting, Papa 3. Further questions a to what zero-altitude
datum are the altitude figures:
(1) displayed on screen and
(2) recorded for later download.

But with unknown algorithms applied before download, you do not know
exactly what you are dealing with. This is not a problem in the
recreational area, but may be in ours if accurate altitude is to be
used in a performance claim or to defend a pilot against a possible
airspace violation or other situation where a flight record wiuld be
useful. Then there is the issue of the general reliability of pressure
altitude compared to the sometimes erratic figures for GPS altitude
recorded in a proportion of IGC flight data files ...

Is this really a problem?

In the old days we were happy to accept a paper baragraph trace without
any attempt to "zero" the altitude. The procedure required the pilot to
scribe a "base line" on the chart at the known local airfield altitude
before start and the official observer measured all other significant
altitudes (start height etc) relative to this this height. Of course
for height gain tasks you only need to measure the difference between a
"low point" and a "high point".

So all we are left with is knowing whether the recorded altitude is from a
GPS engine, a pressure sensor or a mangled proprietary combination of
the two.

Pressure altitude is obviously acceptable. I believe GPS altitude, without
SA, is probably just as useful but it does not comply with the current
rules. The combination is probably the most accurate, but as the algorithm
is undefined and hence not reproducible, the data may not be acceptable.

The are only two significant difference between these GPS units and an
approved Flight Recorder:

1) The the mechanical tamper proof switch is missing. This the security of
the "private key" required to encrypt the trace before it is downloaded
is not protected. I am sure the only reason Garmin and others don't
include encrypted downloads in their software is because we would not
accept them without being assured of the security of their keys.

2) The price difference. Approved flight recorders being about 5x more
costly.


Regards

Ian

(another Ian, from the other side of the equator)