Update on CAI flight recorder repairs from CNi (GPS Date problems)

[Tango Eight]

We've had to change tactics slightly to deal with the Cambridge flight recorder GPS date problems recently discussed here on r.a.s.

Here's the latest:

Cambridge 302 needs a new GPS card to fix this the right way. Simply soldering in a new battery won't get your 302 through Winter storage (which is where *my* 302 vario is right now). Few people will want to remove a vario for the Winter to maintain the GPS date.

This problem will be repaired under our existing CAI 302 flat rate policy: we fix (almost) any 302 and provide a 1 year warranty and fresh barograph calibration for $350.

Cambridge model 10/20/25 flight recorders were always intended to be mounted in an easily removable fashion, so we feel that the battery only fix is better economy for these older units. CNi will replace the GPS date battery, fix your date problem and calibrate the barograph for $125. It will be up to you to maintain the battery by powering up the flight logger for a few hours every 3 months or you will lose the date... there will be a warning/reminder label on your returned unit to this effect.

Gary Kammerer handles all of our CAI service, please find contact info for Gary on our website.

Best regards and Good Soaring in 2015,

Evan Ludeman for ClearNav Instruments
www.ClearNav.net
please join our forum for discussion of all things ClearNav
http://clearnav.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php

[Ian Reekie]

At 19:48 11 December 2014, Tango Eight wrote:
>We've had to change tactics slightly to deal with the Cambridge flight
>reco=
>rder GPS date problems recently discussed here on r.a.s.
>
>Here's the latest:
>
>Cambridge 302 needs a new GPS card to fix this the right way. Simply
>solde=
>ring in a new battery won't get your 302 through Winter storage (which is
>w=
>here *my* 302 vario is right now). Few people will want to remove a
vario
>=
>for the Winter to maintain the GPS date.
>
>This problem will be repaired under our existing CAI 302 flat rate
policy:
>=
>we fix (almost) any 302 and provide a 1 year warranty and fresh barograph
>c=
>alibration for $350.
>
>Cambridge model 10/20/25 flight recorders were always intended to be
>mounte=
>d in an easily removable fashion, so we feel that the battery only fix is
>b=
>etter economy for these older units. CNi will replace the GPS date
>battery=
>, fix your date problem and calibrate the barograph for $125. It will be
>u=
>p to you to maintain the battery by powering up the flight logger for a
>few=
> hours every 3 months or you will lose the date... there will be a
>warning/=
>reminder label on your returned unit to this effect.
>
>Gary Kammerer handles all of our CAI service, please find contact info
for
>=
>Gary on our website.
>
>Best regards and Good Soaring in 2015,
>
>Evan Ludeman for ClearNav Instruments
>www.ClearNav.net
>please join our forum for discussion of all things ClearNav
>http://clearnav.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php
>

With regards to the older Cambridge loggers ie model 25.
Is it feasible to mod the logger such that the GPS internal real time clock
is powered off the same user replaceable 3v higher capacity lithium battery
that provides the loggers seal ?
I was stupidly thinking of a wire and a low V drop diode ? (Would this mod
mess up the GPS by injecting interference/noise into the screened receiver
?)

[David Kinsell[_2_]]

On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 09:19:24 +0000, Ian Reekie wrote:

> At 19:48 11 December 2014, Tango Eight wrote:
>>We've had to change tactics slightly to deal with the Cambridge flight
>>reco=
>>rder GPS date problems recently discussed here on r.a.s.
>>
>>Here's the latest:
>>
>>Cambridge 302 needs a new GPS card to fix this the right way. Simply
>>solde=
>>ring in a new battery won't get your 302 through Winter storage (which
>>is w=
>>here *my* 302 vario is right now). Few people will want to remove a
> vario
>>=
>>for the Winter to maintain the GPS date.
>>
>>This problem will be repaired under our existing CAI 302 flat rate
> policy:
>>=
>>we fix (almost) any 302 and provide a 1 year warranty and fresh
>>barograph c=
>>alibration for $350.
>>
>>Cambridge model 10/20/25 flight recorders were always intended to be
>>mounte=
>>d in an easily removable fashion, so we feel that the battery only fix
>>is b=
>>etter economy for these older units. CNi will replace the GPS date
>>battery=
>>, fix your date problem and calibrate the barograph for $125. It will
>>be u=
>>p to you to maintain the battery by powering up the flight logger for a
>>few=
>> hours every 3 months or you will lose the date... there will be a
>>warning/=
>>reminder label on your returned unit to this effect.
>>
>>Gary Kammerer handles all of our CAI service, please find contact info
> for
>>=
>>Gary on our website.
>>
>>Best regards and Good Soaring in 2015,
>>
>>Evan Ludeman for ClearNav Instruments www.ClearNav.net please join our
>>forum for discussion of all things ClearNav
>>http://clearnav.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php
>>
>>
> With regards to the older Cambridge loggers ie model 25.
> Is it feasible to mod the logger such that the GPS internal real time
> clock is powered off the same user replaceable 3v higher capacity
> lithium battery that provides the loggers seal ?
> I was stupidly thinking of a wire and a low V drop diode ? (Would this
> mod mess up the GPS by injecting interference/noise into the screened
> receiver ?)

There already is an aux power input for that battery at the interface,
4-35 volts, so obviously goes to a regulator. A better technical
solution would be for the firmware to use a few bits of the non-volatile
memory on board to prevent the time from going backwards, but that's not
going to happen.

Given that the old GPS-NAV models never have produced valid IGC files, I
would expect the cost of trying to do hardware modifications would exceed
any reasonable valuation of what they're currently worth. The brain
damage of trying to get OLC to accept the files has to be figured in
there somewhere.

Similarly, the 302 has had chronic data corruption issues in the flash
that were never fixed, so dropping $350+ today to swap out engines is
really hard to justify. But there's credible information that the black-
case models of those already have the newer engine, and may well be good
for a number of additional years.

-Dave

[Pierre Vav]

You should update your web site ...

[Ventus2NZ]

On Saturday, December 13, 2014 1:27:35 AM UTC+13, David Kinsell wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 09:19:24 +0000, Ian Reekie wrote:
>
> > At 19:48 11 December 2014, Tango Eight wrote:
> >>We've had to change tactics slightly to deal with the Cambridge flight
> >>reco=
> >>rder GPS date problems recently discussed here on r.a.s.
> >>
> >>Here's the latest:
> >>
> >>Cambridge 302 needs a new GPS card to fix this the right way. Simply
> >>solde=
> >>ring in a new battery won't get your 302 through Winter storage (which
> >>is w=
> >>here *my* 302 vario is right now). Few people will want to remove a
> > vario
> >>=
> >>for the Winter to maintain the GPS date.
> >>
> >>This problem will be repaired under our existing CAI 302 flat rate
> > policy:
> >>=
> >>we fix (almost) any 302 and provide a 1 year warranty and fresh
> >>barograph c=
> >>alibration for $350.
> >>
> >>Cambridge model 10/20/25 flight recorders were always intended to be
> >>mounte=
> >>d in an easily removable fashion, so we feel that the battery only fix
> >>is b=
> >>etter economy for these older units. CNi will replace the GPS date
> >>battery=
> >>, fix your date problem and calibrate the barograph for $125. It will
> >>be u=
> >>p to you to maintain the battery by powering up the flight logger for a
> >>few=
> >> hours every 3 months or you will lose the date... there will be a
> >>warning/=
> >>reminder label on your returned unit to this effect.
> >>
> >>Gary Kammerer handles all of our CAI service, please find contact info
> > for
> >>=
> >>Gary on our website.
> >>
> >>Best regards and Good Soaring in 2015,
> >>
> >>Evan Ludeman for ClearNav Instruments www.ClearNav.net please join our
> >>forum for discussion of all things ClearNav
> >>http://clearnav.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php
> >>
> >>
> > With regards to the older Cambridge loggers ie model 25.
> > Is it feasible to mod the logger such that the GPS internal real time
> > clock is powered off the same user replaceable 3v higher capacity
> > lithium battery that provides the loggers seal ?
> > I was stupidly thinking of a wire and a low V drop diode ? (Would this
> > mod mess up the GPS by injecting interference/noise into the screened
> > receiver ?)
>
> There already is an aux power input for that battery at the interface,
> 4-35 volts, so obviously goes to a regulator. A better technical
> solution would be for the firmware to use a few bits of the non-volatile
> memory on board to prevent the time from going backwards, but that's not
> going to happen.
>
> Given that the old GPS-NAV models never have produced valid IGC files, I
> would expect the cost of trying to do hardware modifications would exceed
> any reasonable valuation of what they're currently worth. The brain
> damage of trying to get OLC to accept the files has to be figured in
> there somewhere.
>
> Similarly, the 302 has had chronic data corruption issues in the flash
> that were never fixed, so dropping $350+ today to swap out engines is
> really hard to justify. But there's credible information that the black-
> case models of those already have the newer engine, and may well be good
> for a number of additional years.
>
> -Dave

Is there an updated gps engine we can fit in the 302ddv to keep these units going as an fai logger?

-Alan.

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 01:32:54 -0800, Ventus2NZ wrote:

> Is there an updated gps engine we can fit in the 302ddv to keep these
> units going as an fai logger?
>
Since FAI issues approvals for each individual model of logger, does this
modification mean that the logger is no longer an approved model and
hence no longer valid for badges, records, etc?

I genuinely don't know if this would be the case: can somebody who is up
to speed with GNSS approvals comment?


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

[Tim Newport-Peace[_2_]]

At 11:40 14 December 2014, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 01:32:54 -0800, Ventus2NZ wrote:
>
>> Is there an updated gps engine we can fit in the 302ddv to keep these
>> units going as an fai logger?
>>
>Since FAI issues approvals for each individual model of logger, does this

>modification mean that the logger is no longer an approved model and
>hence no longer valid for badges, records, etc?
>
>I genuinely don't know if this would be the case: can somebody who is up
>to speed with GNSS approvals comment?
>
>
>--
>martin@ | Martin Gregorie

You are right. When approval is first given, each manufacturer agrees to
certain conditions, which are listed in the Specification Document. Amongst
these is:
/*
Notification of any intended change to hardware, firmware or software must
be made by the manufacturer or applicant to the Chairman of GFAC so that a
decision can be made on any further testing which may be required. This
includes changes of any sort, large or small.
*/

GFAC may decide that further testing is required, or may just revise the
approval document to reflect the change. I do not speak for GFAC.

However, there may be a further difficulty. The firmware may need to be
changed so that the correct GPS engine type apprears in the IGC file. I am
not sure that the source files for the firmware are accessable any longer.

Tim.

[David Kinsell[_2_]]

On Sun, 14 Dec 2014 01:32:54 -0800, Ventus2NZ wrote:

> On Saturday, December 13, 2014 1:27:35 AM UTC+13, David Kinsell wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 09:19:24 +0000, Ian Reekie wrote:
>>
>> > At 19:48 11 December 2014, Tango Eight wrote:
>> >>We've had to change tactics slightly to deal with the Cambridge
>> >>flight reco=
>> >>rder GPS date problems recently discussed here on r.a.s.
>> >>
>> >>Here's the latest:
>> >>
>> >>Cambridge 302 needs a new GPS card to fix this the right way. Simply
>> >>solde=
>> >>ring in a new battery won't get your 302 through Winter storage
>> >>(which is w=
>> >>here *my* 302 vario is right now). Few people will want to remove a
>> > vario
>> >>=
>> >>for the Winter to maintain the GPS date.
>> >>
>> >>This problem will be repaired under our existing CAI 302 flat rate
>> > policy:
>> >>=
>> >>we fix (almost) any 302 and provide a 1 year warranty and fresh
>> >>barograph c=
>> >>alibration for $350.
>> >>
>> >>Cambridge model 10/20/25 flight recorders were always intended to be
>> >>mounte=
>> >>d in an easily removable fashion, so we feel that the battery only
>> >>fix is b=
>> >>etter economy for these older units. CNi will replace the GPS date
>> >>battery=
>> >>, fix your date problem and calibrate the barograph for $125. It
>> >>will be u=
>> >>p to you to maintain the battery by powering up the flight logger for
>> >>a few=
>> >> hours every 3 months or you will lose the date... there will be a
>> >>warning/=
>> >>reminder label on your returned unit to this effect.
>> >>
>> >>Gary Kammerer handles all of our CAI service, please find contact
>> >>info
>> > for
>> >>=
>> >>Gary on our website.
>> >>
>> >>Best regards and Good Soaring in 2015,
>> >>
>> >>Evan Ludeman for ClearNav Instruments www.ClearNav.net please join
>> >>our forum for discussion of all things ClearNav
>> >>http://clearnav.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php
>> >>
>> >>
>> > With regards to the older Cambridge loggers ie model 25.
>> > Is it feasible to mod the logger such that the GPS internal real time
>> > clock is powered off the same user replaceable 3v higher capacity
>> > lithium battery that provides the loggers seal ?
>> > I was stupidly thinking of a wire and a low V drop diode ? (Would
>> > this mod mess up the GPS by injecting interference/noise into the
>> > screened receiver ?)
>>
>> There already is an aux power input for that battery at the interface,
>> 4-35 volts, so obviously goes to a regulator. A better technical
>> solution would be for the firmware to use a few bits of the
>> non-volatile memory on board to prevent the time from going backwards,
>> but that's not going to happen.
>>
>> Given that the old GPS-NAV models never have produced valid IGC files,
>> I would expect the cost of trying to do hardware modifications would
>> exceed any reasonable valuation of what they're currently worth. The
>> brain damage of trying to get OLC to accept the files has to be figured
>> in there somewhere.
>>
>> Similarly, the 302 has had chronic data corruption issues in the flash
>> that were never fixed, so dropping $350+ today to swap out engines is
>> really hard to justify. But there's credible information that the
>> black-
>> case models of those already have the newer engine, and may well be
>> good for a number of additional years.
>>
>> -Dave
>
> Is there an updated gps engine we can fit in the 302ddv to keep these
> units going as an fai logger?
>
> -Alan.

There was a GPS15 that superceeded the GPS25, physically smaller but
drops in with a physical adapter. Ian Macphee in Australia has claimed
that these were used in back-case 302's. I have a black-case unit, it's
still good, and the igc file says GPS25. I've heard of other black-case
units also being good. Perhaps if people posted their results with the
two different case types that would be helpful. Or I expect ClearNav
could shed light on the issue. Ian works on Cambridge units in Australia
and should fully aware of the situation.

If GPS15's have been used in some units, perhaps they ought to be
grandfathered at this point, much the same way the whole GPS-NAV line was
grandfathered without producing valid IGC files in the first place.

-Dave

[Tango Eight]

Well the rumor mill is hot today!

The whole point of the exercise is to preserve the utility of the 302 as a secure flight recorder. Thought that was sort of obvious....

The GPS card in the 302 vario was changed twice that I know of during production. The CNi fix uses the same GPS 15 unit as the most recent 302 production.

best regards,
Evan Ludeman for CNi

[[email protected]]

I took my 302 out of my glider this week because it is not good. It has a black case and a GPS25. Was bought in 2007.

[Ramy[_2_]]

My 302 was purchased new in 2008 and has the black case. I fly often which may helped the GPS battery to stay charged longer, not sure.
I just checked the NMEA sentence on the ground (no IGC log since I didn't fly or drive with it) and the NMEA sentence $GPRMC has the string 141214 after the coordinates. Today was 12/14/2014 and from what I gather this confirms my date is still correct.

Ramy

[Dan Marotta]

You should see that same date string at the beginning of the B records,
as well. But I guess those would only happen if you were moving?


On 12/14/2014 8:13 PM, Ramy wrote:
> My 302 was purchased new in 2008 and has the black case. I fly often which may helped the GPS battery to stay charged longer, not sure.
> I just checked the NMEA sentence on the ground (no IGC log since I didn't fly or drive with it) and the NMEA sentence $GPRMC has the string 141214 after the coordinates. Today was 12/14/2014 and from what I gather this confirms my date is still correct.
>
> Ramy

--
Dan Marotta

[[email protected]]

On Monday, December 15, 2014 9:12:13 AM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
> You should see that same date string at the beginning of the B
> records, as well.* But I guess those would only happen if you were
> moving?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 12/14/2014 8:13 PM, Ramy wrote:
>
>
>
> My 302 was purchased new in 2008 and has the black case. I fly often which may helped the GPS battery to stay charged longer, not sure.
> I just checked the NMEA sentence on the ground (no IGC log since I didn't fly or drive with it) and the NMEA sentence $GPRMC has the string 141214 after the coordinates. Today was 12/14/2014 and from what I gather this confirms my date is still correct.
>
> Ramy
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dan Marotta

My latest 302 file is from October and the date is fine. It shows this line in the record:

HFGPS:GARMIN,LVS-25,12,18000

Does anyone know if this is one of the affected GPS engines?
With the 302 installed in my glider (which sits in my basement) I don't have a good way to test the unit.
Herb

[David Kinsell[_2_]]

On Mon, 15 Dec 2014 07:53:51 -0800, herbkilian wrote:

> On Monday, December 15, 2014 9:12:13 AM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
>> You should see that same date string at the beginning of the B
>> records, as well.Â* But I guess those would only happen if you were
>> moving?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12/14/2014 8:13 PM, Ramy wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> My 302 was purchased new in 2008 and has the black case. I fly
>> often which may helped the GPS battery to stay charged longer,
>> not sure.
>> I just checked the NMEA sentence on the ground (no IGC log since I
>> didn't fly or drive with it) and the NMEA sentence $GPRMC has the
>> string 141214 after the coordinates. Today was 12/14/2014 and from what
>> I gather this confirms my date is still correct.
>>
>> Ramy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Dan Marotta
>
> My latest 302 file is from October and the date is fine. It shows this
> line in the record:
>
> HFGPS:GARMIN,LVS-25,12,18000
>
> Does anyone know if this is one of the affected GPS engines?
> With the 302 installed in my glider (which sits in my basement) I don't
> have a good way to test the unit.
> Herb

Yes, the 25 is the unit in question. However, that's likely just
hardcoded in the Cambridge firmware, so it doesn't mean anything. Even a
unit build in 2010 showed that string, and it almost certainly has the
GPS15 in it.

I was able to read the time from my unit before and after satellite lock
by looking at a tablet interfaced to the unit. Since the time before
lock had just drifted a bit from real time, I concluded the clock hadn't
lost power and the date almost certainly is still good.

-Dave

[Ramy[_2_]]

Looks like people are looking at different indicators to determine if the date is valid. Can anyone confirm which NMEA sentence holds the year and in what format?

Ramy

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Mon, 15 Dec 2014 22:25:11 -0800, Ramy wrote:

> Looks like people are looking at different indicators to determine if
> the date is valid. Can anyone confirm which NMEA sentence holds the year
> and in what format?
>
Its in two of the header records: the H record starting with HFDTE and
the first C record. In both cases the date is held as six digits: DDMMYY

You can find full details here:

http://www.fai.org/component/phocadownload/category/855-
technicalspecifications?download=8455:igc-fr-spec-with-al3-2014-6-30a



--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |