Red V symbol (log file not valid) after OLC upload.

On Nov 23, 7:02*pm, Cliff Hilty
wrote:
Im still trying to figure out why any of the files have to be "secure" !
Security is an illusion. I thought the intent of the OLC was to promote
more people flying and friendly competition. Still scratching my head with
all of this regulatory crap. After all, we are all in it for the money and
the girls right? If they want to cheat that bad let them. Its been my
experience that the cheaters are found out and rightly ostersized out of
the sport anyway. Just my .2 cents worth. And while Im at it that goes the
same for badge and record flights. AFAIC KISS principal applies. What are
we testing after all, how good am I at flying or following recording
procedures. Jumping off the soap box now and flame sheilds on!

CH

Can't agree more. These requirements are nonsense. Logger security is
an illusion.. There are easier ways to fake a flight. You can just
take your secure logger in a power plane and claim a wave flight. Or
stay on tow for the whole flight and manipulate the start and end of
the flight in the claim form. I've seen many flights with land outs
and aero retrieve all included in the flight since the pilot did not
turn off the logger until after the aero retrieve. I believe it is
also possible to hook condor to a PDA and generate a valid IGC file.
Someone posted such a flight once as an experiment.
We need to put pressure on OLC to drop these requirements.

A PDA file may have the .IGC suffix, but it isn't a valid file for any
Badge, Record or OLC claim (no pressure data).

At 06:24 25 November 2011, Ramy wrote:
I believe it is
also possible to hook condor to a PDA and generate a valid IGC file.
Someone posted such a flight once as an experiment.
We need to put pressure on OLC to drop these requirements.

Peter Purdie wrote:
A PDA file may have the .IGC suffix, but it isn't a valid file for any
Badge, Record or OLC claim (no pressure data).

A PDA file is valid for OLC. OLC approved quite a few PDA
applications (including XCSoar and most/all commercial ones).

And it is trivial to fool any PDA software by sending fake NMEA data
into its serial port (Condor or fully synthesized). That NMEA stream
may include fake pressure data and even fake ENL data.

Max

So OLC will accept a totally insecure PDA file but reject a Cambridge 20
one because it CAI verification is done on the raw data file? They must
have some logic to it ;-)

At 08:10 25 November 2011, Max Kellermann wrote:
Peter Purdie wrote:
A PDA file may have the .IGC suffix, but it isn't a valid file for any
Badge, Record or OLC claim (no pressure data).

A PDA file is valid for OLC. OLC approved quite a few PDA
applications (including XCSoar and most/all commercial ones).

And it is trivial to fool any PDA software by sending fake NMEA data
into its serial port (Condor or fully synthesized). That NMEA stream
may include fake pressure data and even fake ENL data.

Max

Peter Purdie wrote:
So OLC will accept a totally insecure PDA file but reject a Cambridge 20
one because it CAI verification is done on the raw data file? They must
have some logic to it ;-)

Easy to fix: feed your Cambridge 20 IGC file to a PDA, and let the PDA
sign it with its software key .. ;-)

Max

On Nov 25, 3:04*am, Max Kellermann wrote:
Peter Purdie wrote:
So OLC will accept a totally insecure PDA file but reject a Cambridge 20
one because it CAI verification is done on the raw data file? *They must
have some logic to it ;-)

Easy to fix: feed your Cambridge 20 IGC file to a PDA, and let the PDA
sign it with its software key .. ;-)

Max

This will work for those who fly pure gliders, but motorgliders can
not use PDA as loggers since they do not produce ENL record. As such,
the alternative is to to change to the non notorized version in the
OLC claim to be able to use PDA generated IGC files. A solution that
quiet a few motorglider pilots use. Another proof that OLC requirement
for secure files is nonesense.

Ramy

On Nov 25, 1:10*am, Max Kellermann wrote:
Peter Purdie wrote:
A PDA file may have the .IGC suffix, but it isn't a valid file for any
Badge, Record or OLC claim (no pressure data).

A PDA file is valid for OLC. *OLC approved quite a few PDA
applications (including XCSoar and most/all commercial ones).

But you cannot use the XCsoar file for the league score. Is it so
high profile that persons would be more inclined to cheat? We have
many pilots at our field using XCsoar because we love the program and
for the ease of claiming a flight from the SD card. Last year I used
XCsoar for all flights except league weekends where I was forced to
use the Cam Nav20 and upload the igc file generated by SeeYou. Many
use XCsoar on the IPAQ310 and cannot compete in the league speed
scoring.

Randy "AV8"

On Nov 24, 11:24*pm, Ramy wrote:
On Nov 23, 7:02*pm, Cliff Hilty

wrote:
Im still trying to figure out why any of the files have to be "secure" !
Security is an illusion. I thought the intent of the OLC was to promote
more people flying and friendly competition. Still scratching my head with
all of this regulatory crap. After all, we are all in it for the money and
the girls right? If they want to cheat that bad let them. Its been my
experience that the cheaters are found out and rightly ostersized out of
the sport anyway. Just my .2 cents worth. And while Im at it that goes the
same for badge and record flights. AFAIC KISS principal applies. What are
we testing after all, how good am I at flying or following recording
procedures. Jumping off the soap box now and flame sheilds on!

CH

Can't agree more. These requirements are nonsense. Logger security is
an illusion.. There are easier ways to fake a flight. You can just
take your secure logger in a power plane and claim a wave flight. Or
stay on tow for the whole flight and manipulate the start and end of
the flight in the claim form. I've seen many flights with land outs
and aero retrieve all included in the flight since the pilot did not
turn off the logger until after the aero retrieve. I believe it is
also possible to hook condor to a PDA and generate a valid IGC file.
Someone posted such a flight once as an experiment.
We need to put pressure on OLC to drop these requirements.

Real shame that OLC is changing these requirements. I do not see the
benefit. Time to ask for a change

Ron Gleason

Ron Gleason wrote:
Real shame that OLC is changing these requirements. I do not see the
benefit. Time to ask for a change

Time to ask for an OLC successor. The OLC has denied access to its
databases for scientific projects in the past, effectively hindering
scientific progress. And the OLC has tried to shut down free speech:
Reiner Rose (the CEO and owner of the company that runs the OLC) has
threatened to remove XCSoar from the list of approved software after I
criticized the OLC (I happen to be a XCSoar developer). Critical
pilot comments are being deleted from the web site.

Eventually, the XCSoar project and its volunteers will build a public
and truly free web site for live tracking and flight upload, fully
integrated into our software. There will be no limit on the number of
IGC files one may download.

Max

Am sort of wondering if the most recent "support" that was done had
its own Y2K issue? Meaning that the conversion program to make a
valid file was only going to create one named correctly for that
year. My understanding was that Carl Ekdahl's program would work if
you went back and changed the name of the .igc file it created to
match the year convention that the OLC validation program was looking
for. In other words, Carl's program had its own "Y2K" sort of issue,
as well. All of which has me waiting until January 1 to make a log
file, convert it using the program that works right now, see the name
the program gives the file, alter it if necessary, and try to upload
it and see what comments I get back from them.

I hope that they simply took an easier way out when the latest
conversion program was made, and that the older Model 10/20/25 files
can still be uploaded for full OLC "Green" status by using the same
program we currently use and then jumping through yet one more hoop
before uploading and hoping it will "take" on the first attempt. I
certainly don't like all the extras those of us with Original GPS
Equipment have to go through. But, I am an insane child of the
Microsoft Generation. Keep doing the same thing over again long
enough, and it will work. If not, hit the start button to shut the
system down, and try again. Isn't it wonderful?

Anyone willing or able to ask the OLC folks if the above might be
true? I mean, if there is a program that can make an acceptable igc
file from a cai file now, what is changing in the igc file format
effective 1-1-12 that would make that same program no longer work?
Sounds like they don't want to spend time fixing a Y2K sort of issue
with a cai to igc conversion program.

Any better theories?

Steve Leonard
(still got a boat load of them Cambridge Loggers)