Cheap GPS Loggers for FAI Badges - Status?

Papa3 wrote:

...snip snip
I actually think I'm now heading down the path of creating additional
complexity, but I do think it is worth looking into alternatives to
encryption-based pre-emptive security.

Yes!!

The trouble is that the GFAC is a committee of geeks and they take a
geek approach to security. Their paradigm is a geek paradigm. They
understand machines so they try to build smarter machines to defeat
cheats. Most security breaches in any system though are related to
people problems. Incompetence, corruption and ill-will are the main
problems.

When my local under-8 soccer team play on Saturday morning, any
mother/father with an idea of the rules is co-opted to referee. When
the under-8s play their finals, someone who's refereeed before is
usually found.

When the National League plays its finals, the ref is someone who has
had a course of training, is from a neutral state/club, referees
regularly at that level and has done for some time and is paid for doing
the job.

So let us have a new paradigm based on the idea of a logger in a
lunchbox. For a C badge or silver, a club-based OO would be fine. For
a diamond, let's make sure they have done a national course and have
observed, say, 20 silver and Gold badge flights. And so on up to World
Championships and World records. Or any other set of appropriately
graded standards.

All along the way, the same $200 GPS in the same 50c lunch box with a
50c seal would be fine. The security level is being enhanced as
required in a non-technological way.

Subvert the dominant paradigm!

Graeme Cant

"Marc Ramsey" wrote in message
om...
Graeme Cant wrote:
snip
Do understand, however, that the security requirements for approval of
badge-only flight recorders are pretty minimal. What makes these units
cost more than you or I might like are non-security related issues, such
as the pressure altitude recording requirement. None of the COTS GPS
units on the market record pressure altitude in a fashion that will
allow repeatable results. And, we can't eliminate pressure altitude
from the system, unless the IGC decides to accept geometric altitude.

Marc

I can at least understand arguments for keeping pressure recording a
requirement for altitude badges and records, if only for consistency with
the past. But I see no good reason for requiring the use of pressure
altitude solely to show contituity of flight for distance and goal badge
claims, and distance and speed records.

Why not at least, promptly, drop the pressure recording requirement from ALL
non-altitude claims?

X-no-archive: yes
In article , Graeme Cant
writes
The trouble is that the GFAC is a committee of geeks and they take a
geek approach to security. Their paradigm is a geek paradigm. They
understand machines so they try to build smarter machines to defeat
cheats. Most security breaches in any system though are related to
people problems. Incompetence, corruption and ill-will are the main
problems.

If you think that about the people who give up their time to further the
sport, don't expect anyone to notice you are there, or pay any attention
to your ranting.

GOODBYE!

Tim Newport-Peace

"Indecision is the Key to Flexibility."

Graeme Cant wrote:


So let us have a new paradigm based on the idea of a logger in a
lunchbox. For a C badge or silver, a club-based OO would be fine. For
a diamond, let's make sure they have done a national course and have
observed, say, 20 silver and Gold badge flights. And so on up to World
Championships and World records. Or any other set of appropriately
graded standards.

All along the way, the same $200 GPS in the same 50c lunch box with a
50c seal would be fine. The security level is being enhanced as
required in a non-technological way.

I like the COTS idea, but I don't think this is the way to do it. I
suspect most pilots would find it easier to buy, borrow, or rent an
approved logger than to find an "approved OO"! So, be careful what you
wish for, in case you get it.

For pilots that don't operate out of large club, the approved logger is
a god send, because getting an experienced OO when you need one can be
impossible. The approved logger makes the OO's task much easier,
especially if it's used sealed to the glider.

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

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

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

Even if Garmin do build a suitable COTS device, what makes you think
it will be appreciably cheaper than existing FRs or as cheap as
existing Garmin GPS units? Who else, apart from us, would buy it in
sufficient quantities to pull the price down to, say that of a GPSmap
296 let alone a GPS 76S ?

I bought a Garmin 12XL 6 years ago for less than $100. Paired w/an OO and
declaration it would be sufficient for badges IMHO. Such a device is
accepted in Regional Competitions in the US.

303pilot wrote:
I bought a Garmin 12XL 6 years ago for less than $100. Paired w/an OO and
declaration it would be sufficient for badges IMHO. Such a device is
accepted in Regional Competitions in the US.

The Garmin 12XL does not record altitude. All badge claims (with the
exception of 5 hour duration) require altitude documentation. It can't
be used in regional or national contests which require altitude
recording capability, as do almost all sanctioned contests west of the
Mississippi...

Regards,
Marc

Janos Bauer wrote:

How? Does this guy check all club, plane, pilot logbook if there is any
mismatch?

Actually, for many years, it's been a "she" (was Arleen Coleson). She
examined the documents submitted (pictures, barograph trace, file, claim
forms, whatever was used) for completeness and errors. If Pilot A
submitted a flight file with Pilot B's name in it, she'd quickly
discover that. Other possibilities would be a declared task not matching
the badge claimed, a file with too large of a bad section in it, an OO
that doesn't meet the qualifications, height loss too great, and so on.


Originally OLC was established to show the high level of sport activity
to convince governments. Now you are not allowed to load your IGC file
unless it comes from an IGC approved logger... It is true only for
gliding. Hanggliders and paragliders can load eg. soaringpilot tracklog.
For me requiring a secure logger doesn't meet with the full "honor
system".

I agree. It's a good step up from someone simply submitting a claim with
no documentation, but still basically "unobserved".

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

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." - Ralph Waldo
Emerson.

Michael, we're on the same side here, so take it in the spirit intended. But
exactly what "consistency with the past" are we truly talking about. In
years gone by, people flying K-6s had to identify easily photographed
landmarks with smoked foil barographs. Now, we can hop in our ASW-27, pick
a geographically conveniented point in space and hit "go" on our GPS. Had
we felt the need to maintain the sanctity of prior records or achievements,
we would have never allowed GPS or fiberglass gliders or beer cans with flip
tabs (the latter being potentially the most important safety enhancement to
glider pilots in the last half-century). Face it - how can we possibly
justify the fact that we were able to very rapidly make the decision to go
to GPS recording for World competitions but we can't then muster the
gumption to make a change from one arbitrary standard for measuring altitude
to another?

P3


"Michael McNulty" wrote in message
news5mtc.170$JB.160@fed1read03...

I can at least understand arguments for keeping pressure recording a
requirement for altitude badges and records, if only for consistency with
the past.

Eric Greenwell wrote:

I like the COTS idea, but I don't think this is the way to do it. I
suspect most pilots would find it easier to buy, borrow, or rent an
approved logger than to find an "approved OO"! So, be careful what you
wish for, in case you get it.

For pilots that don't operate out of large club, the approved logger is
a god send, because getting an experienced OO when you need one can be
impossible. The approved logger makes the OO's task much easier,
especially if it's used sealed to the glider.


The whole COTS is about those few thousands of "poor" club member
pilots. Who owns a glider, and operates it "alone" probably can afford a
FAI logger.
It's strange to read all these posts. There seems to be slight
objection against this idea (even Marc seems to agree with it) but still
we can't use a system like this...

/Janos

Marc Ramsey writes:

303pilot wrote:

I bought a Garmin 12XL 6 years ago for less than $100. Paired w/an
OO and declaration it would be sufficient for badges IMHO. Such a
device is accepted in Regional Competitions in the US.

The Garmin 12XL does not record altitude. All badge claims (with
the exception of 5 hour duration) require altitude documentation.
It can't be used in regional or national contests which require
altitude recording capability, as do almost all sanctioned contests
west of the Mississippi...

For badge flights, the requirment for pressure logging could be
deathed with a spat over the amount, if any, to add to the
heights. GPS alt is good enough.

For altitude record flights, of gain of height a good argument exists
to keep using pressure altitude.

--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.