Submitting flights to the OLC

Agree with this and the other posters that have said PDA downloads have
been accepted and are indistinguishable. However the OLC rules state
approved software must be used. Someone new to OLC may go the hard way
to get a file accepted just becuase the rules are more restrictive than
they need to be.


Andy

I think that when using a PDA to download utilizing the CAI utility program you ARE using approved software. Am I mistaken???

Bob Caldwell wrote:
I think that when using a PDA to download utilizing the CAI utility
program you ARE using approved software. Am I mistaken???

The only software required (and therefore approved by) the IGC are the
short DOS program (data-cam.exe), and the Windows DLL (igc-cai.dll, when
Cambridge gets around to providing it). If you use some other software
to download, it is perfectly acceptable for badge and record purposes (I
can't speak for the OLC), as long as the resulting file can be properly
verified by the approved validation software (vali-cam.exe, or
igc-cai.dll when available). If in doubt, try running vali-cam, if it
fails, download again using data-cam...

Marc

Actually, you don't need a secure data logger for OLC. Mobile SeeYou
works just fine, as do a number of other flight software programs (some
are even free).

You're point is well taken. There is no more need for secure data
loggers in OLC than for secure data loggers for (most?) badges.
Nevertheless, you have to play by whatever rules the rulemakers decide
on.

Doug

(saving up my pennies for a 302, that's a lot of pennies)


Greg Arnold wrote:
Lorry wrote:
I have had great difficulty successfully downloading flights from my
Cambridge Model 25 data logger to the OLC. Apparently, my "Cambridge
file does not contain a G-record or the G-record file is not suited for
validation with the FAI supplied software" (quoted from Official
Comment from OLC). Their recommendtion is to use a special software
(for each submition) which involves 7 steps which, for me at least, is
far from straight forward. I am trying to do this through "SeeYou"
which was a snap last year but not now! I am only one of several
pilots submitting flights from the Senior Contest who are experiencing
this problem. Does anyone know of a practicle solution?

Lorry (LJ)


Now that the SSA is affiliated with the OLC, maybe we can get the SSA to
pressure the OLC to go back to the way it was last year, when you didn't
need a secure logger to get credit for your flight. The OLC security
requirements are a solution in search of a problem -- there aren't many
pilots who are going to fake a flight trace just to get a few more OLC
points. The OLC's love of pointless technology is well illustrated by
the 5 numbers you now must type in when you want to view a flight log.

Incidentally, the 7-step-song-and-dance for CAI 20/25 files actually
takes less than 5 minutes once you get the hang of it, though for the
last week the OLC software seems unable to validate such files.

As for the issue of the G record, I agree that until it's proven that
someone is actually cheating, an "insecure" log should just be flagged
as such, and not denied.

-Tom


I finally got my old HP-14 flying last summer. I was looking forward to
participating in the OLC this; however, my data logger is an EW Model D. It
doesn't produce a "G" record.

Here in the US I can use the EW Model D for badges up through diamond and,
to the best of my knowledge, all SSA sanctioned contest. It is disheartening
to realize that I have to upgrade to a "secure" system to participate in the
US OLC.

I was looking forward to adding a few points the Seattle Glider Council's
total.

Isn't the object of this contest to get pilots to fly more cross-country?
Aren't these suppose to be "fun flights?" Didn't this all start as an
informal contest? I can see where this is going. Next thing you know, I
will have to install equipment worth half the value of my sailplane to
participate.

Someone please tell me that I have misunderstood this thread.

Wayne
HP-14 N990 "6F"
http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder

I should do my research prior to posting.

After reading the OLC contest documentation, I review the IGC file from one
of my flights last summer. I was mistaken, the EW Model D IGC files do have
a "G-records."

So, I guess I am in luck and will soon start posting my flights.

Wayne
HP-14 N990 "6F"
http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder/HP-14/N990/N990.html

"Wayne Paul" wrote in message
...
As for the issue of the G record, I agree that until it's proven that
someone is actually cheating, an "insecure" log should just be flagged
as such, and not denied.

-Tom


I finally got my old HP-14 flying last summer. I was looking forward to
participating in the OLC this; however, my data logger is an EW Model D.
It
doesn't produce a "G" record.

Here in the US I can use the EW Model D for badges up through diamond and,
to the best of my knowledge, all SSA sanctioned contest. It is
disheartening
to realize that I have to upgrade to a "secure" system to participate in
the
US OLC.

I was looking forward to adding a few points the Seattle Glider Council's
total.

Isn't the object of this contest to get pilots to fly more cross-country?
Aren't these suppose to be "fun flights?" Didn't this all start as an
informal contest? I can see where this is going. Next thing you know, I
will have to install equipment worth half the value of my sailplane to
participate.

Someone please tell me that I have misunderstood this thread.

Wayne
HP-14 N990 "6F"
http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder

The Legacy Cambridge recorders, models 10, 20 and 25, produce an
intermediate binary format file with a CAI suffix. This is then
converted to the IGC format. The presence of an intermediate binary
format is no problem to IGC, several other recorder systems use this
method. It leads to quicker downloads from the recorder because a
binary file wil be smaller in byte count than the ASCII-based IGC
format.

The problem with the three legacy Cambridge models is that the
IGC-required Validation program only works withe the CAI binary file
and not with the IGC file. This is the VALI-CAM.exe program file
available free from the IGC GNSS web site.

I suspect this is the source of your problem, although I have no direct
contact with the OLC people myself and the problem may well be
something else.

It is a matter of record that flight validation for several badge and
record flights has been lost when using Cambridge models 10, 20 and 25
becuse the IGC file has been kept but the CAI file for the flight has
been lost.

Analysis programs listed on the IGC web page are those capable of using
the IGC format itself, IGC does not list any that read any binary files
unless they also read the IGC format.

I also recall that the three Cambridge legacy recorders continue to use
the Garmin dead reckoning (forward prediction) system that has been
banned for IGC-approved recorders since 1997 and is not used in any
other IGC-approved types of recorders.

Finally, the Cambridge 10, 20 and 25 recorders do not use
public/private key encryption that is now used by other IGC-approved
recorders and has been embedded in the IGC Specification document since
its issue in 1997.

As these three types had "Grandfather Rights" after their initial
IGC-approval in January 1996, these points have been brought to the
attention of Cambridge several times, but because of Grandfathering,
they was under no obligation to make changes. The later Cambridge 300
series has all of these features, of course.

Finally, as announced after the 2005 IGC plenary meeting, the Legacy
Cambridges are now no longer eligible to be used for world record
flights. The current IGC-approval document for Models 10, 20 and 25
says:

"(ii) IGC-approval levels .... On 15 March 2006 the IGC-approval level
becomes "all IGC/FAI badge and distance Diploma flights", that is,
excluding evidence for World Record flights. This is in accordance
with a decision of the IGC Plenary meeting on 5 March 2005 on types of
recorders without public/private key security systems such as RSA and
equivalents. Approval levels are listed in para 1.1.3.3 of Annex B to
the Sporting Code for gliding (SC3B)."


Ian Strachan
Chairman IGC GFA Committee

Most of the PDA programs that log flights are in fact perfectly
acceptable for the OLC. These rules for what logged flights can be
submitted haven't gotten more restrictive but in fact or less
restrictive this year. They do not get a green "V" but they also do
not get the dreaded red "V". Instead, they will receive the
intermediate blue "V". The OLC has a list of "Approved Software" which
you should not (but probably are) confuse with the IGC's list of
"Approved Loggers". I'd provide the link to the list but the OLC site
is down right now. It is in the rules area. All "Approved Loggers"
are on the OLC's "Approved Software" list. However, so are several
other programs such as SoarPilot (I am one of the developers), SeeYou
Mobile, etc. Last time I looked though, I don't think WinPilot's logs
were accepted though. In fact, you can use just about any Garmin
handheld GPS that has enough memory to log your whole flight, then use
something like SeeYou or G7ToWin to download the flight. Both these
programs then output the flight into IGC format with accompaning "G"
security sentences at the end. The OLC will then give these flights a
nice blue "V".

What has made things a little more complicated is that there are two
scoring methods for the OLC. The old way is called OLC Classic. The
additional method applies the FAI triangle rules. Again, I wish I
could look at the rules, but I believe, at least for the US rules, I'm
remembering that the FAI triangle scoring DOES require an IGC approved
logger. But the OLC Classic does not. But please check that out for
yourself.

Finally, I am still using SeeYou 2.82 (final 2.X version) with the OLC
2006 patch applied. I have been able to successfully upload about 6
different flights with SeeYou. There is one small issue that I am
running into. Every one of the submits have hit the same error. You
must now provide/select the takeoff location. SeeYou 2.82 doesn't seem
to be submitting that correctly/acceptably so I get the little error
button on the submit window. Clicking this brings up the flight on the
OLC site where it tells me in red that I must select the takeoff
location. Once, this is done, and the "Check Flight" button is
selected, the flight is accepted without problem.

Later!

-Mark
Ian Strachan wrote:
The Legacy Cambridge recorders, models 10, 20 and 25, produce an
intermediate binary format file with a CAI suffix. This is then
converted to the IGC format. The presence of an intermediate binary
format is no problem to IGC, several other recorder systems use this
method. It leads to quicker downloads from the recorder because a
binary file wil be smaller in byte count than the ASCII-based IGC
format.

The problem with the three legacy Cambridge models is that the
IGC-required Validation program only works withe the CAI binary file
and not with the IGC file. This is the VALI-CAM.exe program file
available free from the IGC GNSS web site.

I suspect this is the source of your problem, although I have no direct
contact with the OLC people myself and the problem may well be
something else.

It is a matter of record that flight validation for several badge and
record flights has been lost when using Cambridge models 10, 20 and 25
becuse the IGC file has been kept but the CAI file for the flight has
been lost.

Analysis programs listed on the IGC web page are those capable of using
the IGC format itself, IGC does not list any that read any binary files
unless they also read the IGC format.

I also recall that the three Cambridge legacy recorders continue to use
the Garmin dead reckoning (forward prediction) system that has been
banned for IGC-approved recorders since 1997 and is not used in any
other IGC-approved types of recorders.

Finally, the Cambridge 10, 20 and 25 recorders do not use
public/private key encryption that is now used by other IGC-approved
recorders and has been embedded in the IGC Specification document since
its issue in 1997.

As these three types had "Grandfather Rights" after their initial
IGC-approval in January 1996, these points have been brought to the
attention of Cambridge several times, but because of Grandfathering,
they was under no obligation to make changes. The later Cambridge 300
series has all of these features, of course.

Finally, as announced after the 2005 IGC plenary meeting, the Legacy
Cambridges are now no longer eligible to be used for world record
flights. The current IGC-approval document for Models 10, 20 and 25
says:

"(ii) IGC-approval levels .... On 15 March 2006 the IGC-approval level
becomes "all IGC/FAI badge and distance Diploma flights", that is,
excluding evidence for World Record flights. This is in accordance
with a decision of the IGC Plenary meeting on 5 March 2005 on types of
recorders without public/private key security systems such as RSA and
equivalents. Approval levels are listed in para 1.1.3.3 of Annex B to
the Sporting Code for gliding (SC3B)."


Ian Strachan
Chairman IGC GFA Committee

Bob Fidler wrote:
I believe you can download a log from a 302 to a pda using the Cambridge
Utility software, use that log to submit a flight to OLC and it will be
accepted. A few pilots in Florida this winter has used that method and the
flights have been accepted.

Downloads from a Model 20/25 are a different problem.

I use mobile SeeYou and have been using ConnectMe to dowload my flights
from my Cambridge GPS/NAV 25 and then submitting them without problem to
the OLC (Australia).

Robert

So what's to stop someone from setting up and "flying" a task in Condor
Simulator and capturing the flight in SeeYou Mobile or other software on the
PDA? Do you get a valid G-record that way?

"Doug LS4" wrote in message
oups.com...
Actually, you don't need a secure data logger for OLC. Mobile SeeYou
works just fine, as do a number of other flight software programs (some
are even free).

You're point is well taken. There is no more need for secure data
loggers in OLC than for secure data loggers for (most?) badges.
Nevertheless, you have to play by whatever rules the rulemakers decide
on.

Doug

(saving up my pennies for a 302, that's a lot of pennies)


Greg Arnold wrote:
Lorry wrote:
I have had great difficulty successfully downloading flights from my
Cambridge Model 25 data logger to the OLC. Apparently, my "Cambridge
file does not contain a G-record or the G-record file is not suited for
validation with the FAI supplied software" (quoted from Official
Comment from OLC). Their recommendtion is to use a special software
(for each submition) which involves 7 steps which, for me at least, is
far from straight forward. I am trying to do this through "SeeYou"
which was a snap last year but not now! I am only one of several
pilots submitting flights from the Senior Contest who are experiencing
this problem. Does anyone know of a practicle solution?

Lorry (LJ)


Now that the SSA is affiliated with the OLC, maybe we can get the SSA to
pressure the OLC to go back to the way it was last year, when you didn't
need a secure logger to get credit for your flight. The OLC security
requirements are a solution in search of a problem -- there aren't many
pilots who are going to fake a flight trace just to get a few more OLC
points. The OLC's love of pointless technology is well illustrated by
the 5 numbers you now must type in when you want to view a flight log.

Incidentally, the 7-step-song-and-dance for CAI 20/25 files actually
takes less than 5 minutes once you get the hang of it, though for the
last week the OLC software seems unable to validate such files.