Power FLARM as logger

I always tell my employees that the only stupid question is the one that is not asked, so..

I am re-configuring my cockpit over the winter and am looking at buying a Nano and a Power FLARM and was wondering, why isn't Power FLARM approved as a logger for all records?

On Monday, December 3, 2012 7:30:54 AM UTC-8, Lucky812 wrote:
I am re-configuring my cockpit over the winter and am looking at buying
a Nano and a Power FLARM and was wondering, why isn't Power FLARM
approved as a logger for all records?

The first thing to be aware of is that the PowerFLARM isn't an IGC approved flight recorder for anything, at this moment.

Second, those of us on the IGC GNSS Flight Recorder Approval Committee put together a Technical Specification for GNSS Flight Recorders, which lays out the requirements for a flight recorder design to be approved for all badge flights, diplomas, and records. A manufacturer may choose to design a device that meets all of these requirements. Or, for cost and/or complexity reasons, to meet only a subset of the requirements, which makes the device eligible for lesser levels of approval, either all badges and diplomas, or all badges up to Diamonds. When the device is submitted for testing, the manufacturer states what level of approval is desired, and we examine the design, perform tests, require firmware or hardware modifications, as needed, then issue the approval document when the device is deemed suitable for approval at the requested level. So, the answer to your question is that the PowerFLARM will be approved for whatever level of approval FLARM requests, when it meets the relevant requirements.

Lastly, members of GFAC are volunteers, just like the SSA Rules Committee, and some of the members who post here (not myself), put a tremendous amount of time and effort into examining and testing each and every device that is submitted for approval, and have been doing so for upwards of 15 years. While the FAI was kind enough recently to give GFAC a "Group Diploma of Honour", all we ever get from rec.aviation.soaring is grief for not automatically approving any GPS receiver that someone finds in a Cracker Jacks box. Where are the bouquets of flowers and boxes of chocolates? ;^)

Marc

On Monday, December 3, 2012 7:30:54 AM UTC-8, Lucky812 wrote:
I am re-configuring my cockpit over the winter and am looking at buying
a Nano and a Power FLARM and was wondering, why isn't Power FLARM
approved as a logger for all records?

The first thing to be aware of is that the PowerFLARM isn't an IGC approved flight recorder for anything, at this moment.

Second, those of us on the IGC GNSS Flight Recorder Approval Committee put together a Technical Specification for GNSS Flight Recorders, which lays out the requirements for a flight recorder design to be approved for all badge flights, diplomas, and records. A manufacturer may choose to design a device that meets all of these requirements. Or, for cost and/or complexity reasons, to meet only a subset of the requirements, which makes the device eligible for lesser levels of approval, either all badges and diplomas, or all badges up to Diamonds. When the device is submitted for testing, the manufacturer states what level of approval is desired, and we examine the design, perform tests, require firmware or hardware modifications, as needed, then issue the approval document when the device is deemed suitable for approval at the requested level. So, the answer to your question is that the PowerFLARM will be approved for whatever level of approval FLARM requests, when it meets the relevant requirements.

Lastly, members of GFAC are volunteers, just like the SSA Rules Committee, and some of the members who post here (not myself), put a tremendous amount of time and effort into examining and testing each and every device that is submitted for approval, and have been doing so for upwards of 15 years. While the FAI was kind enough recently to give GFAC a "Group Diploma of Honour", all we ever get from rec.aviation.soaring is grief for not automatically approving any GPS receiver that someone finds in a Cracker Jacks box. Where are the bouquets of flowers and boxes of chocolates? ;^)

Marc

On Monday, December 3, 2012 4:29:03 PM UTC-5, wrote:

When the device is submitted for testing, the manufacturer states what level of approval is desired, and we examine the design, perform tests, require firmware or hardware modifications, as needed,

Are you at liberty to tell us what the status of the PowerFLARM approval is?
Has it been submitted, is it being evaluated?

Would approval at some point extend to previously sold hardware versions?

On Monday, December 3, 2012 2:21:10 PM UTC-8, David Reitter wrote:
Are you at liberty to tell us what the status of the PowerFLARM approval is?

If you supply a bouquet of flowers and a box of chocolates, perhaps. Otherwise, you'll likely get farther by asking FLARM...

Marc

On Monday, December 3, 2012 5:21:10 PM UTC-5, David Reitter wrote:
Are you at liberty to tell us what the status of the PowerFLARM approval is?

I'd prefer some nice coffee to chocolates.
Maybe some nice Hawaiian whole bean.
Or a Starbucks card ;-)

See ya, Dave "YO electric"

On Monday, December 3, 2012 1:29:03 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Monday, December 3, 2012 7:30:54 AM UTC-8, Lucky812 wrote:

I am re-configuring my cockpit over the winter and am looking at buying

a Nano and a Power FLARM and was wondering, why isn't Power FLARM

approved as a logger for all records?



The first thing to be aware of is that the PowerFLARM isn't an IGC approved flight recorder for anything, at this moment.



Second, those of us on the IGC GNSS Flight Recorder Approval Committee put together a Technical Specification for GNSS Flight Recorders, which lays out the requirements for a flight recorder design to be approved for all badge flights, diplomas, and records. A manufacturer may choose to design a device that meets all of these requirements. Or, for cost and/or complexity reasons, to meet only a subset of the requirements, which makes the device eligible for lesser levels of approval, either all badges and diplomas, or all badges up to Diamonds. When the device is submitted for testing, the manufacturer states what level of approval is desired, and we examine the design, perform tests, require firmware or hardware modifications, as needed, then issue the approval document when the device is deemed suitable for approval at the requested level. So, the answer to your question is that the PowerFLARM will be approved for whatever level of approval FLARM requests, when it meets the relevant requirements.



Lastly, members of GFAC are volunteers, just like the SSA Rules Committee, and some of the members who post here (not myself), put a tremendous amount of time and effort into examining and testing each and every device that is submitted for approval, and have been doing so for upwards of 15 years. While the FAI was kind enough recently to give GFAC a "Group Diploma of Honour", all we ever get from rec.aviation.soaring is grief for not automatically approving any GPS receiver that someone finds in a Cracker Jacks box. Where are the bouquets of flowers and boxes of chocolates? ;^)



Marc

Marc, slightly of topic, but can you explain why some flight recorders can be approved for badges but not diplomas? I can understand world records with all their fame and groupies that follows them may have more strict requirements, but what is the difference between diamond and 1000km diploma? I mean, who else cares but me if I have diamond or 1000km diploma?? Other than the IGC and flight recorder manufactures, does anyone else think that we need "approved" flight recorders for badges and diplomas? Anyone?
It is time to end this nonsense.

Ramy

On Monday, December 3, 2012 6:57:47 PM UTC-8, Ramy wrote:
Marc, slightly of topic, but can you explain why some flight recorders can be approved for badges but not diplomas? I can understand world records with all their fame and groupies that follows them may have more strict requirements, but what is the difference between diamond and 1000km diploma? I mean, who else cares but me if I have diamond or 1000km diploma?? Other than the IGC and flight recorder manufactures, does anyone else think that we need "approved" flight recorders for badges and diplomas? Anyone?

It is time to end this nonsense.

I take it I should not be expecting any flowers or chocolate from you.

Flight recorders exist at various approval levels, as some achievements are considered more noteworthy than others, so a higher level of flight documentation security would seemingly be called for in those cases. Rather than having everyone one buy a flight recorder with all of the required bells and whistles for world record use, lesser options are available for those who choose to save a few bucks.

Make a proposal to your IGC delegate to initiate the two year process needed to make this sort of alteration to the Sporting Code. Perhaps a return to cameras and barographs?

On Monday, December 3, 2012 8:39:03 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Monday, December 3, 2012 6:57:47 PM UTC-8, Ramy wrote:

Marc, slightly of topic, but can you explain why some flight recorders can be approved for badges but not diplomas? I can understand world records with all their fame and groupies that follows them may have more strict requirements, but what is the difference between diamond and 1000km diploma? I mean, who else cares but me if I have diamond or 1000km diploma?? Other than the IGC and flight recorder manufactures, does anyone else think that we need "approved" flight recorders for badges and diplomas? Anyone?



It is time to end this nonsense.



I take it I should not be expecting any flowers or chocolate from you.



Flight recorders exist at various approval levels, as some achievements are considered more noteworthy than others, so a higher level of flight documentation security would seemingly be called for in those cases. Rather than having everyone one buy a flight recorder with all of the required bells and whistles for world record use, lesser options are available for those who choose to save a few bucks.



Make a proposal to your IGC delegate to initiate the two year process needed to make this sort of alteration to the Sporting Code. Perhaps a return to cameras and barographs?

Marc, you deserve flowers and chocolate regardless :-)
But in case it wasn't clear, my proposal is not to get rid of flight recorders all together, but to just get rid of the approval requirements for badges and diplomas which are just personal achievements.

Ramy

Are you at liberty to tell us what the status of the PowerFLARM approval is?

Has it been submitted, is it being evaluated?


This question still begs an answer. Going "all in" with my doughnuts, I'll bet the PowerFLARM logger has not been submitted for approval.