Cheap GPS Loggers for FAI Badges - Status?

Bingo - so why continue to require pressure altitude?

In terms of the other requirements, folks here are using Garmin and other
devices on a daily basis to successfully document claims. Why are they not
"technically adequate."?


"Martin Gregorie" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 25 May 2004 03:03:03 GMT, "Papa3"
wrote:


I'm not that bothered by security, but I do think that the majority of
COTS GPS systems are not technically adequate for the task in terms of
.... and/or presence of a pressure sensor. See an
earlier post for details.

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

On Wed, 26 May 2004 16:41:57 GMT, "Papa3"
wrote:

Bingo - so why continue to require pressure altitude?

That's not the problem - there are pressure sensors in both eTrex and
Geko models for not much money, but would you want to use either model
for task navigation (buttons on the edge of the eTrex, tiny screen on
Geko)?

Or, are you talking about using a map and/or another GPS for
navigation while leaving the one used as a logger in the side pocket
or behind your head? In which case, ignore the last comment.

In terms of the other requirements, folks here are using Garmin and other
devices on a daily basis to successfully document claims. Why are they not
"technically adequate."?

Mainly relatively small track-log space. If you want to record an
entire day at 4 secs/point you'll need 10,000 points to deal with 11
hours. Changing the sample rate, e.g. up for turn points and then down
again is pretty fiddly - I'd not want to do it while flying and
keeping a lookout, so you're stuck with the 4 sec rate for the whole
flight. Now what about something like a soaring camp over a long
weekend? It would not be sensible IMO to rely on having a download
computer along, but if you don't have one then the ability to record
24 hours or so of logger files would be a big help.

Last but not least, if you run out of track log space the Garmins I've
looked at manuals for will silently overwrite the oldest tracklogs
and, if there's only one big one in memory, the start of it gets
stomped on. Not good behaviour for a flight recorder!


"Martin Gregorie" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 25 May 2004 03:03:03 GMT, "Papa3"
wrote:


I'm not that bothered by security, but I do think that the majority of
COTS GPS systems are not technically adequate for the task in terms of
.... and/or presence of a pressure sensor. See an
earlier post for details.

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



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

Martin,

All good points. However, I think (for example) the issue of the number of
data points is something for the market to decide. I'm sure there are
plenty of folks for whom an 11 hour trace is more than sufficient. At the
end of the day, once the standards are "reasonable" (let's not worry exactly
what that means for a moment) , market forces will dictate what is
available.

Here in the US, a lot of folks are using the Garmin 76 very successfully.

Erik


"Martin Gregorie" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 May 2004 16:41:57 GMT, "Papa3"
wrote:

Bingo - so why continue to require pressure altitude?

That's not the problem - there are pressure sensors in both eTrex and
Geko models for not much money, but would you want to use either model
for task navigation (buttons on the edge of the eTrex, tiny screen on
Geko)?

Or, are you talking about using a map and/or another GPS for
navigation while leaving the one used as a logger in the side pocket
or behind your head? In which case, ignore the last comment.

In terms of the other requirements, folks here are using Garmin and other
devices on a daily basis to successfully document claims. Why are they
not
"technically adequate."?

Mainly relatively small track-log space. If you want to record an
entire day at 4 secs/point you'll need 10,000 points to deal with 11
hours. Changing the sample rate, e.g. up for turn points and then down
again is pretty fiddly - I'd not want to do it while flying and
keeping a lookout, so you're stuck with the 4 sec rate for the whole
flight. Now what about something like a soaring camp over a long
weekend? It would not be sensible IMO to rely on having a download
computer along, but if you don't have one then the ability to record
24 hours or so of logger files would be a big help.

Last but not least, if you run out of track log space the Garmins I've
looked at manuals for will silently overwrite the oldest tracklogs
and, if there's only one big one in memory, the start of it gets
stomped on. Not good behaviour for a flight recorder!


"Martin Gregorie" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 25 May 2004 03:03:03 GMT, "Papa3"
wrote:


I'm not that bothered by security, but I do think that the majority of
COTS GPS systems are not technically adequate for the task in terms of
.... and/or presence of a pressure sensor. See an
earlier post for details.

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



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

Papa3 wrote:
Martin,

All good points. However, I think (for example) the issue of the number of
data points is something for the market to decide. I'm sure there are
plenty of folks for whom an 11 hour trace is more than sufficient. At the
end of the day, once the standards are "reasonable" (let's not worry exactly
what that means for a moment) , market forces will dictate what is
available.

And we are talking about using it for badge claims, anyway. Presumably,
the OO would take possession of it after the flight until the trace had
been downloaded, so an 11 hour recording time should be plenty!


--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

Papa3 wrote:

Martin,

All good points. However, I think (for example) the issue of the number of
data points is something for the market to decide. I'm sure there are
plenty of folks for whom an 11 hour trace is more than sufficient. At the
end of the day, once the standards are "reasonable" (let's not worry exactly
what that means for a moment) , market forces will dictate what is
available.


I don't agree these are good points. I did all my distance badges using a
Volkslogger for documentation, while I was using my good old Garmin 12 for
navigation, except the silver distance, for which I used a camera and a
barograph. For all these flights the old Garmin 12 would have been fairly suffcient.
It is configured with a recorded point every 30 seconds, which allows for
more than 8 hours, no flight reached this duration. As I didn't knew
how the Volkslogger detects that I passed a turn point, I checked it
on my Garmin 12, so spending at least 30 seconds in the observation
zone. I found it a very acceptable penalty. As for the overwriting
of the track log on the Garmin, this is a selectable feature, you
can also choose to stop recording when the memory is full. Anyway
I don't understand why you would want to keep several flights
recorded in the unit when trying a badge distance, if your last
flight is a success, you want to download it immediately, just in order
to verify it is really a success, otherwise, if you know it was not
a success (e.g . you didn't round some turn point), there is no
problem with overwriting this track log. And the argument about
uploaded fake track logs is defeated by the fact that each recorded
point has a time stamp, while uploaded tracks logs have their
time stamps zeroed. So I think that even the sealed box is not
necessary.