Cost of flight loggers

What a nonsense, Ian. In the ancient times, people

wanting to get a badge needed to buy a barograph and

a camera, and if I recall correctly, they weren't
cheap -
typically more expensive than a logger today.
So, what changed is the technology, not the price
tag.

But the comparison ought to be between the cost of
a logger that's approved, and one that isn't. To produce
a flight log, it isn't necessary to spend more than
a hundred dollars. The technology is available, and
it's cheap, but we aren't allowed to use it.

Jim Beckman (NJ)

Not true - no-one said you can't use the $100 GPS for all the most useful
functions. (Navigation and flight analysis.) There are just restrictions on
using them for FAI awards where there is a higher standard of proof demanded.
Regrettably this is so because there have been documented cases of fraud in
badge and record claims. Proof that there is scum in every pond I suppose.

Now whether the design of IGC logger security is efective at preventing that is
another question.

Bruce

Jim Beckman wrote:
What a nonsense, Ian. In the ancient times, people

wanting to get a badge needed to buy a barograph and

a camera, and if I recall correctly, they weren't
cheap -
typically more expensive than a logger today.
So, what changed is the technology, not the price
tag.

But the comparison ought to be between the cost of
a logger that's approved, and one that isn't. To produce
a flight log, it isn't necessary to spend more than
a hundred dollars. The technology is available, and
it's cheap, but we aren't allowed to use it.

Jim Beckman (NJ)

CHeap??? Check this out!
http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/pro...oducts_id=8301

cheers
FIsh

On Feb 13, 12:19*am, Bruce wrote:
Not true - no-one said you can't use the $100 GPS for all the most useful
functions. (Navigation and flight analysis.) There are just restrictions on
using them for FAI awards where there is a higher standard of proof demanded.
Regrettably this is so because there have been documented cases of fraud in
badge and record claims. Proof that there is scum in every pond I suppose.

Now whether the design of IGC logger security is efective at preventing that is
another question.

Bruce



Jim Beckman wrote:
What a nonsense, Ian. In the ancient times, people

wanting to get a badge needed to buy a barograph and

a camera, and if I recall correctly, they weren't
cheap -
typically more expensive than a logger today.
So, what changed is the technology, not the price
tag.

But the comparison ought to be between the cost of
a logger that's approved, and one that isn't. *To produce
a flight log, it isn't necessary to spend more than
a hundred dollars. *The technology is available, and
it's cheap, but we aren't allowed to use it.

Jim Beckman (NJ)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What seems to repeatedly get lost in the discussions is that the IGC
Approved logger STILL requires that you trust the OO. Once you've
made that conceptual leap, the case for COTS becomes clear. There
are simple and effective manual procedures which provide equivalent
security under a COTS scenario. So, statements that COTS somehow
inherently provides a lower level of security are just wrong. It IS
true that there are a few more manual procedures required, such as
sealing access to the data port, taking control of the recorder during
download and applying a little more scrutiny during flight analysis.
IF these procedures are followed, an equivalent level of security can
be achieved.

Why is the OO required for an IGC Approved logger? For example, I own
an LS8-18. I'm going to try for a record flight in Standard
Class. Who confirms that the glider was appropriately configured
for the flight claimed? The OO. Just one of dozens of
examples.

If anyone wants to understand this more, please see the below:

http://home.netcom.com/~pappa3/files...rity_draft.pdf

On Feb 13, 1:50 am, Fish wrote:
CHeap??? Check this out!http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/pro...oducts_id=8301

cheers
FIsh

I wonder, what are the differences that makes the EW logger worth
nearly $1000.00 and the little GeoChron logger less than $150.00.
Anyone know?

thanks

Mike

"mike" wrote in message
...
On Feb 13, 1:50 am, Fish wrote:
CHeap??? Check this
out!http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/pro...oducts_id=8301

cheers
FIsh

I wonder, what are the differences that makes the EW logger worth
nearly $1000.00 and the little GeoChron logger less than $150.00.
Anyone know?


Mike,

Does the GeoChron record pressure altitude as well as GPS altitude? The
cost difference is mainly due to amortizing R&D, production overhead, etc.
over the limited number of units required by the soaring community.

About 15 years ago I purchase a new barograph for $400. At the time badges
required a time stamp on the turnpoint photo. I found a Fuji camera with
that capability for $150. (I didn't pay much for the EW Model D/Garmin 12
setup.)

Wayne
HP-14 "6F"
http://www.soaridaho.com/Flights/6F_Gold_Distance.html

I agree absolutely....!
if someone wants to cheat they can...no question, no seal on a black box
will prevent this....
what is to stop me from handing a secure logger to some other pilot in an
ETA and letting them fly and turn in the log with my name on it and tell the
world the flight was in a K8...absolutely nothing...
The point is....Badges are personal..... it's more important to the holder
than to me or anyone else..if you can lie to yourself and be proud of it
then you have bigger issues than how the badge was claimed....
and ....not to make light of anyone's accomplishments...the ABC, Bronze,
Silver and even gold badges if you like could still be documented and
"officially observed" with a camera, barograph or a simple and cheap
handheld GPS, PDA or one of the many new personal data-loggers just as well
as they can be "proven" on an IGC "approved" data-logger..
Now especially for newer pilots who would like to get into the badge
thing...eliminating barographs and cameras as proof simply takes away one
more incentive for them to try...we have in our club and I'm sure nearly
every club has, someone who has an old barograph or camera they would make
available for free to help them make the attempts.. would it be so terrible
to let someone fly 5 hours in a club glider with a wind up barograph as
proof of their accomplishment? Would anyone feel cheated because they didn't
have to buy the badge with a $1000 logger?
And......there were quite literally Thousands! (plural) of barographs sold
through the years...they are still out there....and I bet Kodak sold more
than a dozen or so cameras too...
tim
Please visit the Wings & Wheels website at www.wingsandwheels.com

"Papa3" wrote in message
...
On Feb 13, 12:19 am, Bruce wrote:
Not true - no-one said you can't use the $100 GPS for all the most useful
functions. (Navigation and flight analysis.) There are just restrictions
on
using them for FAI awards where there is a higher standard of proof
demanded.
Regrettably this is so because there have been documented cases of fraud
in
badge and record claims. Proof that there is scum in every pond I suppose.

Now whether the design of IGC logger security is efective at preventing
that is
another question.

Bruce



Jim Beckman wrote:
What a nonsense, Ian. In the ancient times, people

wanting to get a badge needed to buy a barograph and

a camera, and if I recall correctly, they weren't
cheap -
typically more expensive than a logger today.
So, what changed is the technology, not the price
tag.

But the comparison ought to be between the cost of
a logger that's approved, and one that isn't. To produce
a flight log, it isn't necessary to spend more than
a hundred dollars. The technology is available, and
it's cheap, but we aren't allowed to use it.

Jim Beckman (NJ)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What seems to repeatedly get lost in the discussions is that the IGC
Approved logger STILL requires that you trust the OO. Once you've
made that conceptual leap, the case for COTS becomes clear. There
are simple and effective manual procedures which provide equivalent
security under a COTS scenario. So, statements that COTS somehow
inherently provides a lower level of security are just wrong. It IS
true that there are a few more manual procedures required, such as
sealing access to the data port, taking control of the recorder during
download and applying a little more scrutiny during flight analysis.
IF these procedures are followed, an equivalent level of security can
be achieved.

Why is the OO required for an IGC Approved logger? For example, I own
an LS8-18. I'm going to try for a record flight in Standard
Class. Who confirms that the glider was appropriately configured
for the flight claimed? The OO. Just one of dozens of
examples.

If anyone wants to understand this more, please see the below:

http://home.netcom.com/~pappa3/files...rity_draft.pdf

On Feb 13, 12:19*am, Bruce wrote:
Not true - no-one said you can't use the $100 GPS for all the most useful
functions. (Navigation and flight analysis.) There are just restrictions on
using them for FAI awards where there is a higher standard of proof demanded.
Regrettably this is so because there have been documented cases of fraud in
badge and record claims. Proof that there is scum in every pond I suppose.

Now whether the design of IGC logger security is efective at preventing that is
another question.

Bruce



Jim Beckman wrote:
What a nonsense, Ian. In the ancient times, people

wanting to get a badge needed to buy a barograph and

a camera, and if I recall correctly, they weren't
cheap -
typically more expensive than a logger today.
So, what changed is the technology, not the price
tag.

But the comparison ought to be between the cost of
a logger that's approved, and one that isn't. *To produce
a flight log, it isn't necessary to spend more than
a hundred dollars. *The technology is available, and
it's cheap, but we aren't allowed to use it.

Jim Beckman (NJ)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I thought this got posted earlier, so if this turn out to be a
duplicate, my apologies.

The oft repeated claim that a COTS solution is somehow inherently less
secure than the expensive IGC logger just doesn't hold water... IF you
agree that the OO is critical to either technology. So, do we trust
the OO?

The OO still matters in the IGC Approved logger context because there
are tasks that need to be performed outside of electronic security and
logging security. For example, I own an LS8-18. I'd like to go
after a state record in the Standard Class. Somebody has to make
sure that I didn't sneak around the course with the long wingtips -
ie. the OO. That's just one example.

In order to achieve equivalent security, COTS requires additional
manual steps which replace some of the costly technology. It's
definitely a tradeoff, but it's not a compromise.

Anyone who is interested in reading up on this, please see the
following:

http://home.netcom.com/~pappa3/files...rity_draft.pdf

Cheers,
Erik Mann
LS8-18 P3
Chair, SSA FAI Badges and Records Committee

Quoted from Tim Mara
" I'm sure nearly
every club has, someone who has an old barograph or camera they would
make
available for free to help them make the attempts.. would it be so
terrible
to let someone fly 5 hours in a club glider with a wind up barograph
as
proof of their accomplishment? Would anyone feel cheated because they
didn't
have to buy the badge with a $1000 logger? "

Tim, the same can be said for a IGC Logger, surely someone in your
club has a Colibri or EW or LX20 the could let you borrow! No
difference! " 2 of our wealthier clubmembers bought Colibri`s as
backup and make those available to someone who needs a logger for a
badge.

Bob

actually....no.....in our smallish club with 20 or so members I know of only
one data-logger equipped glider (LX21) and it can't easily be just carried
along in any glider since it still requires external power connection and
the owner has the antenna more or less permanently mounted.....moving it
would not be a spur of the moment thing...and besides, if it's there the
owners there and wants to fly his glider (or he would stay home) and it runs
GPS data to his PDA ......we do however have at least 2-3 Replogel
barographs always on hand and nearly every other private owned glider (we
have at last count 14 gliders in the club all but 2 privately owned) has a
(I think we have 7 with this) PDA set-up with FlywithCE Navigator and simple
GPS (non-IGC type)....
so....loaning a logger isn't for us an option but loaning a PDA with GPS or
a Barograph is.....or would be unless these are not acceptable...
and in a situation like our club (many small clubs are just the same) not
many really care that much about badges beyond ABC and Silver and no one
here really has any interest in trying to set world records... but take away
any incentive to do the minor badges goes against trying to train new glider
pilots and give them some encouragement to try to step away from the home
field... there is a certain amount of bragging among students and new pilots
competing for these badges....but none of them would pay $1000 just to get
one line of print in Soaring magazine.
tim
" wrote in message
...
Quoted from Tim Mara
" I'm sure nearly
every club has, someone who has an old barograph or camera they would
make
available for free to help them make the attempts.. would it be so
terrible
to let someone fly 5 hours in a club glider with a wind up barograph
as
proof of their accomplishment? Would anyone feel cheated because they
didn't
have to buy the badge with a $1000 logger? "

Tim, the same can be said for a IGC Logger, surely someone in your
club has a Colibri or EW or LX20 the could let you borrow! No
difference! " 2 of our wealthier clubmembers bought Colibri`s as
backup and make those available to someone who needs a logger for a
badge.

Bob