Cheap GPS Loggers for FAI Badges - Status?

Janos Bauer wrote in message . ..
Todd Pattist wrote:
stephanevdv
wrote:


[discussing OLC contests] the use of an approved FR allows one to be completely
free of paperwork and OO's. In most European countries, this freedom
has done much more for the generalization of cross-country flying than
the badge system itself.

A Canadian answer

As some of you may know, the National organisation of Canada
presented a
request for IGC to approve some COTS GPS/Recorders (such as the Garmin
Etrex Plus and 76S, both of which have WAAS based accuracy of position
and height).
This was shot down at the annual meeting in March.
Garmin is now trying to have their units tested with revised
software made to comply with so called "reduced" security requirements
for the purpose of FAI badge proof of achievement.
It seems to take a lot of time to even have the IGC/GNSS agree to
accept
Garmin's offer and have this company send the units for testing and I
am beginning to think that there is an urgent need to review the
obstacles put in place by that body's rule making, not to mention the
lack of personnell and time etc etc. After all, we ARE a sport and
99.999% honest pilots participate!!
IGC has decided to be unflexible on the security issue rule making
and mostly by- passing the Official Observer function, all based on
required uncontestable proof of records and international competitions
etc. Why must Garmin jump through the same hoops when it is only
seeking approval for FAI badge flight recording? Why are the records
already filed in OLC not accepted by 25% of countries (mostly in
Europe)who insist on IGC approved recordings only? 75% of countries
have seen the benefit of COTS units and accept the sport of it.
Is it possible that IGC has just gone a little bit overboard? Are
there "other" interests present who don't want this to happen?
I welcome your opinions,

John Bisscheroux

I wish to set the record straight of where we are with respect to COTS

1) Height recordings....WAAS corrects barometric and satellite
readings with
an accuracy not found in barographs. I tested the position changes
and
recorded an hour with a stationary Garmin Etrex Vista (latest
software versi
version) Is 9 square meters accurate enough? I compared the
altitudes
recorded with the maximum altitude altimeter readings and, again,
spot on!
Don't forget that we know of at least one diamond climb approval on
the basis
of a photograph of the (certified)altimeter in the pilot's cockpit.

2) Garmin has been in touch with me ever since the IGC threw out the
Canadian
request for approval of certain COTS units. This company is ready
to send
any number of units for testing purposes by IGC subcommittee.
There appears to be an inordinate time taken by IGC/GFAC reps to
reply to
Garmin. Garmin has been extraordinarily gracefull to me going over
all the obstacles thrown at them by the IGC rep. even to the tune
of
going over the same ground over and over again. Don't forget; the
IGC wrote
the rules, including that only manufacturers can apply for approval
of a
unit.

3) There was mentioned "a reduced standard of security for FAI badge
applications" but Garmin is required to meet the existing stringent
standards.

4) Official Observers are being left out of the security process to
the degree
that they may as well not be there. For example; how many OO's
understand
the Sporting Code rules concerning the use of IGC approved FDR's??

5) I am very disappointed in those among us who think that we are
surrounded by
cheats and that we must AT ALL COSTS (C$1300 IGC FDR v.s C$450
COTS) prevent
these villains to get theirs!! I heard of two or three cases, so
what!!!!!

6) I come from an airforce background where it is important to be safe
(aircraft maintenance)but I also have received training to be
flexible enough
not to unneccessarily ground an aircraft when it can accomplish its
mission.
Are we not too presumptious as to be holier than thou and that the
IGC gospel
is the only true one? Come on guys, IT IS A SPORT and that is the
short of
it.

7) I receive the impression that at least one member of the gFAC
committee is
not being kept abreast of the Garmin correspondence with the
chairman GFAC.
If any of you wish to be kept informed of what Garmin is doing, I
will be
happy to copy you in.

I am very disappointed in the complex mountain built by IGC just to
curb a few bad eggs. In sports it does not matter, since there are
very few and it is no skin off my back. I will not loose my joy in
having accomplished a 450 k flight with my "illegal" Garmin Etrex
Vista recorder. I know I have done the flight and bugger the gospel
thumpers.

John Bisscheroux

The IGC/FAI are dragging their feet needlessly on COTS
approval.

There is no reason that the process of documenting basic
badge flights (through Gold) flight should be as difficult
or expensive as it currently is. (This proposal would not
apply to national or world records where we would certainly
want to comply with the more rigorous standards.)

Let's keep a bit of perspective. These badges are primarily
a record of personal achievement, very little more. No one
cares who has Silver badge # 5526 (me) or when I got it
(years ago), except me. When someone goes to great lengths
to cheat by faking a flight record, I view it as the
cheater's personal problem, not mine, and not the sports. It
certainly does not devalue my first 50k, the memories of
which I still warmly cherish.

I don't see the need to make the process of Silver and Gold
badge documentation as difficult as the flight itself. The
soaring community is faced with declining membership and
diminishing interest in cross country flight and this is an
unnecessary obstacle.

I also think that there is great additional value in
capturing more flight records for analysis. Having just
reviewed a flight record of a relatively new pilot, I was
able to discern where the pilot got a little too close to
the edge of the safety margin. Going over the flight with
the pilot was an eye-opener for him and he learned something
from the instant replay that he missed while he was in the
air. It was a good lesson, a lesson that would have been
just as valuable with a COTS unit as with an IGC approved unit

Any device other than a COTS recorder will never bring the
price down sufficiently to make these readily affordable for
most pilots because the size of the glider pilot market is
just too small to achieve the economies of scale for a
purpose built device, IGC approved device. More pilots
will more readily use cheaper units and I think that is
beneficial.

To the extent that others agree, we all need to put pressure
on our respective national organizations to get the FAI/IGC
to respond.


Pete Brown


--

Peter D. Brown
http://home.gci.net/~pdb/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/akmtnsoaring/

On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 17:53:17 -0800, Pete Brown wrote:

..../...


Let's keep a bit of perspective. These badges are primarily
a record of personal achievement, very little more. No one
cares who has Silver badge # 5526 (me) or when I got it
(years ago), except me. When someone goes to great lengths
to cheat by faking a flight record, I view it as the
cheater's personal problem, not mine, and not the sports. It
certainly does not devalue my first 50k, the memories of
which I still warmly cherish.

This may be the case in your local patch. In other parts of the world
the Silver C is NOT "primarily a record of personal achievement".

In fact I'd say the Silver C is a carefully designed set of tasks for
determining when a pilot is capable of solo xc flights. Think about
it. Height gain means you can find and centre a decent thermal.
Duration means you can stay up long enough to fly a few hundred km.
Distance means you can navigate.

As such it is also regarded as a standardised pilot skill benchmark.
In most European countries and NZ the Silver C is a recognised
qualification and you WILL be asked about having it if you want to fly
solo at a club you're visiting and your answer WILL be used, along
with a check ride, to assess whether you'll be allowed to fly a single
seater.

Kindly think about how the rest of the world works before you push for
world wide changes that could devalue the Silver C as a piloting
qualification.

Any device other than a COTS recorder will never bring the
price down sufficiently to make these readily affordable for
most pilots because the size of the glider pilot market is
just too small to achieve the economies of scale for a
purpose built device, IGC approved device. More pilots
will more readily use cheaper units and I think that is
beneficial.

A little perspective may be called for here. An EW logger represents a
one off cost of around 13% of a season's flying in the UK. Add a COTS
GPS and you're still looking at under 20% of a season's flying costs.
That's a one-off cost for FR and nav. kit that will last you a good
decade. Given that COTS GPS units are cheaper in the USA than here and
flying costs are higher, the relative cost of buying the kit will be
15% of a season's flying at the outside. Do you really think that an
additional cost of under 2% per year (20% spread over 10 years) is
even remotely significant in the greater scheme of things? I bet you
spend more on after-flying beers every season without even thinking
about it.


--
martin@ : Martin Gregorie
gregorie : Harlow, UK
demon :
co : Zappa fan & glider pilot
uk :

Martin Gregorie wrote:

Kindly think about how the rest of the world works before you push for
world wide changes that could devalue the Silver C as a piloting
qualification.

How does it devalue the Silver C? It's just another way of documenting
it...

A little perspective may be called for here. An EW logger represents a
one off cost of around 13% of a season's flying in the UK.

Would you be surprised if I state that the price of one EW logger
(let's stay with this cheapest solution) is about 2-300% of the average
flying season cost in my club? Maybe if we would sell one of our SZD30
Pirats we could buy 3-4 loggers from it...
90% of the club members are students. They would be happy with another
cheap solution...

/Janos

We recently increased dues in our club some 30%-40% after a long period of
having them frozen. This was due to increasing insurance costs, tiedown
costs, maintenance costs, etc. The actual dollar amount was less than
$100 for the average member, but that was enough to lose several people who
are struggling with layoffs, kids going to college, etc.

It's this type of attitude, "Oh, just another couple hundred bucks" (or
Pounds, or Euros) that continues to drive folks away. At least here in the
US, there is no government subsidy or support, so every dime we save is a
dime that we have left to put back into the sport.

Erik Mann


"Martin Gregorie" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 17:53:17 -0800, Pete Brown wrote:

.../...


Let's keep a bit of perspective. These badges are primarily
a record of personal achievement, very little more. No one
cares who has Silver badge # 5526 (me) or when I got it
(years ago), except me. When someone goes to great lengths
to cheat by faking a flight record, I view it as the
cheater's personal problem, not mine, and not the sports. It
certainly does not devalue my first 50k, the memories of
which I still warmly cherish.

This may be the case in your local patch. In other parts of the world
the Silver C is NOT "primarily a record of personal achievement".

In fact I'd say the Silver C is a carefully designed set of tasks for
determining when a pilot is capable of solo xc flights. Think about
it. Height gain means you can find and centre a decent thermal.
Duration means you can stay up long enough to fly a few hundred km.
Distance means you can navigate.

As such it is also regarded as a standardised pilot skill benchmark.
In most European countries and NZ the Silver C is a recognised
qualification and you WILL be asked about having it if you want to fly
solo at a club you're visiting and your answer WILL be used, along
with a check ride, to assess whether you'll be allowed to fly a single
seater.

Kindly think about how the rest of the world works before you push for
world wide changes that could devalue the Silver C as a piloting
qualification.

Any device other than a COTS recorder will never bring the
price down sufficiently to make these readily affordable for
most pilots because the size of the glider pilot market is
just too small to achieve the economies of scale for a
purpose built device, IGC approved device. More pilots
will more readily use cheaper units and I think that is
beneficial.

A little perspective may be called for here. An EW logger represents a
one off cost of around 13% of a season's flying in the UK. Add a COTS
GPS and you're still looking at under 20% of a season's flying costs.
That's a one-off cost for FR and nav. kit that will last you a good
decade. Given that COTS GPS units are cheaper in the USA than here and
flying costs are higher, the relative cost of buying the kit will be
15% of a season's flying at the outside. Do you really think that an
additional cost of under 2% per year (20% spread over 10 years) is
even remotely significant in the greater scheme of things? I bet you
spend more on after-flying beers every season without even thinking
about it.


--
martin@ : Martin Gregorie
gregorie : Harlow, UK
demon :
co : Zappa fan & glider pilot
uk :

How does it devalue the Silver C? It's just another
way of documenting
it...

Your silver, as it stands at the moment, says to an
insurance company that, with an amount of certainty,
that you have a certain level of competence neccesary
for the silver badge, introducing COTS loggers for
the silvers cannot help but reduce that level of certainty,
as cannot be avoided that it is easier to hack these
devices (due to there being easier ways to manipulate
files these devices, I'm not saying current loggers
are immune to hacking, but COTS systems certainly lower
the bar).

Hypothetically, taken to it's extreme, if silver paperwork
became a self declaration job, involving you to simply
self declare you completed the task, with no OO or
logger evidence, we would not expect an insurance company
to take it seriously as a measure of competance, as
there is no worthwhile evidence.

If we allow COTS units, we lower the standard of proof
neccesary for badges, we devalue the Silver badge etc
in the eyes of the insurance companies...

I'd be careful before lowering the bar... few people
may cheat, but insurance companies don't always act
rationally....

J

Jamie,

Prove your statement? Assume, for a moment, that a document exists which
gives specific (simple) pre/post flight requirements to the OO for dealing
with a couple of approved COTS units (same as we have today for photographic
and barogroph validation). For instance:

1. Validate that track logs are cleared prior to flight. This is done
by... Or, identify existing track logs prior to flight. This is done
by...

2. Observe dowload of track log post flight. This is done by...

I have it on pretty good authority from folks that have actually spent a lot
of time working with COTS units that this perceived decrease in security is
a complete, total farce. Since I'm in the US, I'll use the standard of
innocent until proven guilty - in other words, COTS is no less secure if OO
procedures are followed.

I think this idea that we're going from some iron-clad proof of validity to
basically self-certifying is a joke. How did your insurance companies know
that the OO was not in complicity with a pilot when, for example, certifying
that the barograph was sealed or a fresh roll of film was inserted under
his/her observation. Etc.




"Jamie Denton" wrote in
message ...


If we allow COTS units, we lower the standard of proof
neccesary for badges, we devalue the Silver badge etc
in the eyes of the insurance companies...

On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 13:22:00 +0200, Janos Bauer
wrote:

Martin Gregorie wrote:

Kindly think about how the rest of the world works before you push for
world wide changes that could devalue the Silver C as a piloting
qualification.

How does it devalue the Silver C? It's just another way of documenting
it...

Sure, if there's a proper paper trail - by that I mean with some sort
of approved FR and the paper work inspected, checked and signed off by
an OO then no problem. COTS is OK if they get type approval and/or the
IGC publish an FR requirements spec and mandate that the pilot must
demonstrate that his FR can match or exceed that spec.

What I was getting at is that if all the North American ****ing and
moaning about cheaper FRs and drastically over simplified checking
procedures should be introduced, let alone an unpoliced honour system,
then that would completely stuff the way the rest of the world
currently works.

A little perspective may be called for here. An EW logger represents a
one off cost of around 13% of a season's flying in the UK.

Would you be surprised if I state that the price of one EW logger
(let's stay with this cheapest solution) is about 2-300% of the average
flying season cost in my club? Maybe if we would sell one of our SZD30
Pirats we could buy 3-4 loggers from it...
90% of the club members are students. They would be happy with another
cheap solution...

Sounds like I should come and fly with you! Ranking the relatively few
places I've flown in descending order gives:

- USA
- Germany
- NZ
- UK

Seriously, all the agitation seems to be coming from North American
shores, home of the cheapest electronic kit and some of the more
expensive glider flying in the world. My comments about the relative
costs of FRs vs. gliding were addressed entirely to them.


--
martin@ : Martin Gregorie
gregorie : Harlow, UK
demon :
co : Zappa fan & glider pilot
uk :

Uhh, last time I checked, Sweden is in Europe and Australia is a continent
of its own (lucky *******). Both of these countries have significant COTS
movements. I also seem to recall folks from Poland weighing in...

The reason you may find that the US and possibly Canada are different is
that there is absolutely NO government support or subsidy of soaring. Every
time I read an article about some soaring camp in the Alps with full-time
instructors and government buildings or how the local group of RAF Cadets
did xyz, I just have to laugh. Over here, we have many bare-bones
operations with a couple of ratty gliders, a part-time tow pilot, and a few
folks that show up on weekends to take tows if the weather is good. I am
personally aware of 3 clubs in my immediate area that are struggling to stay
ahead of bills. Their entire capital improvement budget for the year is
$1,000, so a flight recorder is out of the question. On the other hand,
many of these folks already own a handheld which they can take from their
car to the glider for zero incremental cost. See the point?


"Martin Gregorie" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 13:22:00 +0200, Janos Bauer
wrote:


Seriously, all the agitation seems to be coming from North American
shores, home of the cheapest electronic kit and some of the more
expensive glider flying in the world. My comments about the relative
costs of FRs vs. gliding were addressed entirely to them.


--
martin@ : Martin Gregorie
gregorie : Harlow, UK
demon :
co : Zappa fan & glider pilot
uk :