The SSA-OLC

I heartily thank Doug Haluza and Paul Remde and the others involved with
SSA-OLC governance for upholding the integrity of the contest in the
USA, for protecting the accomplishments of those pilots who fly within
the rules of the FAA and the OLC, and for helping us to weed out those
who are non-compliant and disrespectful of both the contest and of their
fellow pilots.

I regret the fact that there will always be a few who resist doing the
right thing, apparently simply because they can. The OLC is like any of
us -- growing, changing, and with the help of others, improving. I know
from my own experience that our OLC reps have helped the OLC to become
more responsive and less opaque to its participants.

I support the efforts of our SSA-OLC Committee to maintain and improve
the contest experience. I detest the often unreasonable and occasionally
vituperative exchanges on this list generated by those with no real ax
to grind except that which apparently arises from some personal
emotional difficulty more properly dealt with in private counseling.


Jack

Tom,

"5Z" wrote in message
oups.com...

Some of these people may indeed get interested in looking at various
flights, and I really don't want them stumbling on questionable ones.

In every case that has been mentioned here as an alleged violation it would
be quite simply impossible to "stumble" on it on OLC.

(1), OLC does not show the barogram with enough resolution to judge whether
18K has been exceeded -- at least I have never heard of a Class A violation
so gross that it would be noticeable on the OLC barogram.

(2), OLC shows neither landing time nor local sunset time, so a flight that
finishes a task before sunset and then lands shortly after sunset would not
"look bad" even to someone who knows local sunset times by heart and to the
minute.

It takes scrutiny -- a detailed analysis of a downloaded trace with a tool
like SeeYou and USNO charts -- to detect those violations. It's hard to
imagine that a casual observer or even non-soaring pilot would go into all
the troubles. Why would they? It really only matters to those hell-bent on
contest rules among us.

Please don't get me wrong -- I do not approve violations that are "too
small". It's just that many arguments for sanitizing the OLC are so wrong.

-Tom
--
Yuliy

Yuliy Gerchikov wrote:

In every case that has been mentioned here as an alleged violation it would
be quite simply impossible to "stumble" on it on OLC.

(2), OLC shows neither landing time nor local sunset time, so a flight that
finishes a task before sunset and then lands shortly after sunset would not
"look bad" even to someone who knows local sunset times by heart and to the
minute.

It takes scrutiny -- a detailed analysis of a downloaded trace with a tool
like SeeYou and USNO charts -- to detect those violations.

It only takes:

http://www.mindspring.com/~cavu/sunset.html

and the departure and finish times published on the OLC flight page.

It does not require any expenditure for software.

The contest has simple rules. It is enough that the contestants know how
to determine a violation, for either airspace or time. In some cases a
violation can also be determined easily even by a non-contestant.

Do you object to the fact that flights exhibiting probable violations
are reportable by other participants and that these flights, if
determined to be in violation, can be disallowed?


Jack

Yuliy-

May I make a suggestion? About a million posts ago
you started bitching and moaning about the OLC not
being fun for you. Okay, don't participate. I will
still have fun whether you post flights or not.
For that matter, put all your energy in starting the
Yuliy-OLC-group...members can bust FAR's to their hearts'
content.

Doug and the other volunteers who made the effort to
run the thing, along with myself and many others...are
not going to condone cheaters who post. You can split
hairs about the degree of cheating that will be allowed,
but if it means you are not having fun...move on buddy.
I am not interested in the fact that some FAR's such
as ridge clearance cannot be enforced the way airspace
and sunset times are...violations are violations.

"Stewart Kissel" wrote in
message ...
I am not interested in the fact that some FAR's such
as ridge clearance cannot be enforced the way airspace
and sunset times are...

violations are violations.

Precisely. Just some are OK on OLC, and some are not. And your point is?...

Yuliy Gerchikov wrote:
"Stewart Kissel" wrote in
message ...
I am not interested in the fact that some FAR's such
as ridge clearance cannot be enforced the way airspace
and sunset times are...

violations are violations.

Precisely. Just some are OK on OLC, and some are not. And your point is?...

And what is your point Yuliy? That if we can't see every possible
violation, we should ignore the ones that are obvious?

Is your position that you don't care about flying past sunset, and
nobody else should either?

It's obvious that you have come here to r.a.s full of sour grapes after
being called out for flying well past sunset in an unlighted glider.
Instead of just taking pot shots at others, why don't you state your
own stand-alone position? How do you suggest that we handle complaints
about flight claims that are padded with extra points from flights past
sunset?

Ignoring the problem is not an option. Not only have the flights from
years past raised awareness, this public discussion has spread the
issue far and wide. So yearn all you like for the good-old-days, but
you can't go back.

So how about it. No more personal attacks, No baseless accusations. No
changing the subject. No straw men, or rediculous situations. What
would you do if you got the complaint, checked, and confirmed it?