"Todd Pattist" wrote...
We have to wonder how many still don't have access due to
the cost of approved loggers versus inexpensive handhelds,
and how much interest in the badge system and our sport has
been lost due to the early decision that a handheld GPS in
an Official Observer sealed box is not sufficient for even
the lowliest FAI badge.

We tend to forget that, up until 3 years ago or so, the most popular
low-cost handheld GPS units didn't record altitude or time in their track
logs. Those that did record altitude often had little control when fixes
were recorded, so it was difficult to reliably record flights of more than 3
hours duration. The end result would have been that it would have been
necessary to fly with a sealed barograph, as well as a sealed handheld, and
the official observer would have needed to have a fair bit of knowledge of
the GPS unit to ensure that it was set up properly (and the track memory
cleared) prior to sealing. A written flight declaration would also be
needed, and the observer data handling would need to be fairly stringent to
maintain even a moderate level of integrity. It's not clear to me that
there would be any advantage over simply using a camera.

Speaking of cameras, they have continued to be acceptable evidence for all
badges and diplomas. I don't remember the exact figures, but the percentage
of badge claims made using cameras worldwide has declined to very low
levels. If the expense and complication of flight recorders was as much of
a factor as is being suggested, I don't think this would be the case...

Marc