What Is Wrong With OLC? [Archive]

Dan Daly[_2_]

January 29th 17, 01:50 AM

On Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 8:47:02 PM UTC-5, Dan Daly wrote:
> On Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 7:43:42 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
> > I've been trying for over a year to get the OLC people to fix my login.
> > I've filled out their help forms too many times to count and they don't
> > reply and they don't fix the problem. As it stands now, I can not
> > upload my flights to OLC. When I log in I get a message that states (in
> > German) that my email address is not valid. But it is valid. And I am
> > logged on successfully. Then, when I select to upload a flight, I get
> > the same message stating that my email address is invalid.
> >
> > Is there anyone listening at OLC? Is there anyone in Europe who can
> > contact them on my behalf? My email address is
> > . It is a valid address.
> >
> > Since I can no longer upload flights, I won't be providing financial
> > support any more unless it's fixed. Too bad, since I'm currently number
> > 1 at Moriarty and number 14 in the USA.
> >
> > --
> > Dan, 5J
>
> Have you done your annual update of your Registration? Go to the list of competitors. Find your name. Go to the right hand side of the form; just past the link to your flights, icon for "contest registration update". Must be done annually. All your info can be correct, but if you don't submit it annually, you aren't valid. Just checking that it is all still correct is not sufficient.

I googled SSA OLC administrator and this was there:
at https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.aviation.soaring/xjxyhRaIYLE :
"About

This is the home of the SSA OLC Committee. The OLC Committee handles all OLC related items and coordinates with the FAI and other committees as needed..

The SSA has a Memorandum of Understanding with the OLC that grants us exclusive rights to the OLC in the US. The purpose of this agreement is to provide OLC a point of contact in the US for rules changes, to deal with problems that may arise and to collect money to fund the OLC.

For help with submitting a claim contact us at ."

Tony[_5_]

January 29th 17, 02:58 AM

I have never updated my membership in OLC.

Dan - it seems they just don't like you.

krasw

January 29th 17, 06:55 AM

What's really wrong with OLC is that they do not separate pure glider performance from motorglider flights, and that they use DAeC handicaps that are not designed to handicap different classes, in addition of doing crappy job of handicapping anything at all.

Jim White[_3_]

January 29th 17, 09:56 AM

What is wrong with OLC - You don't have to declare a task first! Couldn't
resist.

Dan Marotta

January 29th 17, 04:25 PM

I was unaware of that! So I followed your instructions and, voila:

An Error has occurred!

A Competitor with this name and birthday already exists.Forgot your
password? <http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/wrongLogin.html>

Several times I've tried to update my email address by following
different links on their website. The links have always taken me to the
so called update page and always with similar results. There's always
some sort of error. When I try the "forgot password" link, I'm told
that I already exist. Why not just send me a link via my already given
email address?

I could delete my account and create a new one but then I'd lose all my
history.

On 1/28/2017 6:47 PM, Dan Daly wrote:
> On Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 7:43:42 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
>> I've been trying for over a year to get the OLC people to fix my login.
>> I've filled out their help forms too many times to count and they don't
>> reply and they don't fix the problem. As it stands now, I can not
>> upload my flights to OLC. When I log in I get a message that states (in
>> German) that my email address is not valid. But it is valid. And I am
>> logged on successfully. Then, when I select to upload a flight, I get
>> the same message stating that my email address is invalid.
>>
>> Is there anyone listening at OLC? Is there anyone in Europe who can
>> contact them on my behalf? My email address is
>> . It is a valid address.
>>
>> Since I can no longer upload flights, I won't be providing financial
>> support any more unless it's fixed. Too bad, since I'm currently number
>> 1 at Moriarty and number 14 in the USA.
>>
>> --
>> Dan, 5J
> Have you done your annual update of your Registration? Go to the list of competitors. Find your name. Go to the right hand side of the form; just past the link to your flights, icon for "contest registration update". Must be done annually. All your info can be correct, but if you don't submit it annually, you aren't valid. Just checking that it is all still correct is not sufficient.

--
Dan, 5J

Dan Marotta

January 29th 17, 04:34 PM

Email sent with igc file attached. Thanks for the info.

Dan

On 1/28/2017 6:50 PM, Dan Daly wrote:
> On Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 8:47:02 PM UTC-5, Dan Daly wrote:
>> On Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 7:43:42 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
>>> I've been trying for over a year to get the OLC people to fix my login.
>>> I've filled out their help forms too many times to count and they don't
>>> reply and they don't fix the problem. As it stands now, I can not
>>> upload my flights to OLC. When I log in I get a message that states (in
>>> German) that my email address is not valid. But it is valid. And I am
>>> logged on successfully. Then, when I select to upload a flight, I get
>>> the same message stating that my email address is invalid.
>>>
>>> Is there anyone listening at OLC? Is there anyone in Europe who can
>>> contact them on my behalf? My email address is
>>> . It is a valid address.
>>>
>>> Since I can no longer upload flights, I won't be providing financial
>>> support any more unless it's fixed. Too bad, since I'm currently number
>>> 1 at Moriarty and number 14 in the USA.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dan, 5J
>> Have you done your annual update of your Registration? Go to the list of competitors. Find your name. Go to the right hand side of the form; just past the link to your flights, icon for "contest registration update". Must be done annually. All your info can be correct, but if you don't submit it annually, you aren't valid. Just checking that it is all still correct is not sufficient.
> I googled SSA OLC administrator and this was there:
> at https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.aviation.soaring/xjxyhRaIYLE :
> "About
>
> This is the home of the SSA OLC Committee. The OLC Committee handles all OLC related items and coordinates with the FAI and other committees as needed.
>
> The SSA has a Memorandum of Understanding with the OLC that grants us exclusive rights to the OLC in the US. The purpose of this agreement is to provide OLC a point of contact in the US for rules changes, to deal with problems that may arise and to collect money to fund the OLC.
>
> For help with submitting a claim contact us at ."

--
Dan, 5J

jfitch

January 29th 17, 05:02 PM

On Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 10:55:31 PM UTC-8, krasw wrote:
> What's really wrong with OLC is that they do not separate pure glider performance from motorglider flights, and that they use DAeC handicaps that are not designed to handicap different classes, in addition of doing crappy job of handicapping anything at all.

They should also separate flights with ground crew and those without.

Dan Marotta

January 29th 17, 05:06 PM

Skylines is so much better, with a much more user friendly site.
Unfortunately it's not as well used so there is not as much opportunity
to compare with others and, hopefully, learn something.

Either that or they just don't like me...

On 1/29/2017 2:56 AM, Jim White wrote:
> What is wrong with OLC - You don't have to declare a task first! Couldn't
> resist.
>

--
Dan, 5J

krasw

January 29th 17, 05:53 PM

On Sunday, 29 January 2017 19:02:40 UTC+2, jfitch wrote:
> On Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 10:55:31 PM UTC-8, krasw wrote:
> > What's really wrong with OLC is that they do not separate pure glider performance from motorglider flights, and that they use DAeC handicaps that are not designed to handicap different classes, in addition of doing crappy job of handicapping anything at all.
>
> They should also separate flights with ground crew and those without.

Why is that? You think flying motorglider/sustainer compares to being 200km from home in pure glider at 6 o'clock?

[email protected]

January 29th 17, 06:09 PM

Have you checked that the link that you've bookmarked is not the 2016 version? I had similar issues with not being on the current year as the link changes every year. Granted it is mostly veiwing daily results but worth looking at.

Dan Marotta

January 29th 17, 06:47 PM

When I click on "Daily Score" it comes up with today's date. I don't
see anything in my bookmarked link
(http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/plainJsp.html?prefix_jsp=rules_olc)
which indicates for which year it is meant. Can you supply your link?
I'd be happy to give it a shot.

On 1/29/2017 11:09 AM, wrote:
> Have you checked that the link that you've bookmarked is not the 2016 version? I had similar issues with not being on the current year as the link changes every year. Granted it is mostly veiwing daily results but worth looking at.

--
Dan, 5J

[email protected]

January 29th 17, 10:13 PM

On Sunday, January 29, 2017 at 8:25:07 AM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
> I was unaware of that!Â* So I followed your instructions and, voila:
>
>
>
> An Error has occurred!
>
>
>
>
>
> A Competitor with
> this name and birthday already exists.Â*Forgot
> your password?
>
>
>
>
>
>
If you are positive you have the correct email, wouldn't this error message mean that you are using the wrong user name? "This name" referring to your pilot name. Just a guess...

Andreas Maurer

January 29th 17, 10:36 PM

On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 11:47:07 -0700, Dan Marotta
> wrote:

>When I click on "Daily Score" it comes up with today's date. I don't
>see anything in my bookmarked link
>(http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/plainJsp.html?prefix_jsp=rules_olc)
>which indicates for which year it is meant. Can you supply your link?
>I'd be happy to give it a shot.

Hi Dan,

I see all your flights up to Jan 12th, 2017.

http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/flightbook.html?st=olcp&rt=olc&pi=44325&sp=2017

jfitch

January 30th 17, 12:36 AM

On Sunday, January 29, 2017 at 9:53:15 AM UTC-8, krasw wrote:
> On Sunday, 29 January 2017 19:02:40 UTC+2, jfitch wrote:
> > On Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 10:55:31 PM UTC-8, krasw wrote:
> > > What's really wrong with OLC is that they do not separate pure glider performance from motorglider flights, and that they use DAeC handicaps that are not designed to handicap different classes, in addition of doing crappy job of handicapping anything at all.
> >
> > They should also separate flights with ground crew and those without.
>
> Why is that? You think flying motorglider/sustainer compares to being 200km from home in pure glider at 6 o'clock?

Do you think being 200 km from home at 6 o'clock with no retrieve crew compares to being there with a full crew in chase?

A motorglider flown responsibly has only two advantages over a pure glider, both conveniences and neither a performance advantage: 1) No need to wait for your turn for the tow plane, and 2) no need to enlist a chase crew for flights with the possibility of a landout. Against these is the very real and substantial performance handicap of not being able to vary wing loading as much or at all.

Sorry to have to hijack the thread to rehash the tired old arguments yet again. Hire (or marry and spawn) a chase crew or buy a motorglider and stop whining. I am happy to have OLC lump those two together, separate from those leaving home with a pure glider, naked, if you like.

Dan Marotta

January 30th 17, 12:49 AM

Nice guess, but I've been using the same username and password for about
4 years. I simply type the letter "d" in the username field and the
rest of my username and password are filled in automatically. I get
logged in, but can not claim flights.

Maybe they've come to dislike Chrome? I'll try Firefox or that new
browser that comes with Windows 10.

On 1/29/2017 3:13 PM, wrote:
> On Sunday, January 29, 2017 at 8:25:07 AM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
>> I was unaware of that! So I followed your instructions and, voila:
>>
>>
>>
>> An Error has occurred!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> A Competitor with
>> this name and birthday already exists. Forgot
>> your password?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> If you are positive you have the correct email, wouldn't this error message mean that you are using the wrong user name? "This name" referring to your pilot name. Just a guess...

--
Dan, 5J

Dan Marotta

January 30th 17, 12:50 AM

Correct. I was not able to claim those flights in the usual way. I had
to use the claim pull down, WHILE NOT LOGGED IN, enter my name and date
of birth, igc file and complete the claim. Until yesterday that would
work. Now not even that works.

On 1/29/2017 3:36 PM, Andreas Maurer wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 11:47:07 -0700, Dan Marotta
> > wrote:
>
>> When I click on "Daily Score" it comes up with today's date. I don't
>> see anything in my bookmarked link
>> (http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/plainJsp.html?prefix_jsp=rules_olc)
>> which indicates for which year it is meant. Can you supply your link?
>> I'd be happy to give it a shot.
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> I see all your flights up to Jan 12th, 2017.
>
> http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/flightbook.html?st=olcp&rt=olc&pi=44325&sp=2017

--
Dan, 5J

Dan Marotta

January 30th 17, 01:42 AM

Tried it with Microsoft Edge and got identical results. It logs me in
but won't let me do anything.

On 1/29/2017 5:49 PM, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Nice guess, but I've been using the same username and password for
> about 4 years. I simply type the letter "d" in the username field and
> the rest of my username and password are filled in automatically. I
> get logged in, but can not claim flights.
>
> Maybe they've come to dislike Chrome? I'll try Firefox or that new
> browser that comes with Windows 10.
>
> On 1/29/2017 3:13 PM, wrote:
>> On Sunday, January 29, 2017 at 8:25:07 AM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
>>> I was unaware of that! So I followed your instructions and, voila:
>>>
>>>
>>> An Error has occurred!
>>>
>>> A Competitor with
>>> this name and birthday already exists. Forgot
>>> your password?
>>>
>> If you are positive you have the correct email, wouldn't this error
>> message mean that you are using the wrong user name? "This name"
>> referring to your pilot name. Just a guess...
>

--
Dan, 5J

[email protected]

January 30th 17, 04:44 AM

On Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 6:43:42 PM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
> I've been trying for over a year to get the OLC people to fix my login.
> I've filled out their help forms too many times to count and they don't
> reply and they don't fix the problem. As it stands now, I can not
> upload my flights to OLC. When I log in I get a message that states (in
> German) that my email address is not valid. But it is valid. And I am
> logged on successfully. Then, when I select to upload a flight, I get
> the same message stating that my email address is invalid.
>
> Is there anyone listening at OLC? Is there anyone in Europe who can
> contact them on my behalf? My email address is
> . It is a valid address.
>
> Since I can no longer upload flights, I won't be providing financial
> support any more unless it's fixed. Too bad, since I'm currently number
> 1 at Moriarty and number 14 in the USA.
>
> --
> Dan, 5J

I had the exact same problem and a frustratingly similar experience until I was given a tip, there's an issue using our Earthlink.net e-mail addresses on OLC (I use one also). Register for a free gmail address, change your OLC account to use that address and you'll be in business within 5 minutes. While I'd far prefer to use my earthlink address like I do for everything else, OLC doesn't seem to support them or say anything about this issue in their FAQs. Make the change and you'll be good to go.

Chuck

krasw

January 30th 17, 06:44 AM

On Monday, 30 January 2017 02:36:14 UTC+2, jfitch wrote:
>
> Do you think being 200 km from home at 6 o'clock with no retrieve crew compares to being there with a full crew in chase?
>
> A motorglider flown responsibly has only two advantages over a pure glider, both conveniences and neither a performance advantage: 1) No need to wait for your turn for the tow plane, and 2) no need to enlist a chase crew for flights with the possibility of a landout. Against these is the very real and substantial performance handicap of not being able to vary wing loading as much or at all.
>
> Sorry to have to hijack the thread to rehash the tired old arguments yet again. Hire (or marry and spawn) a chase crew or buy a motorglider and stop whining. I am happy to have OLC lump those two together, separate from those leaving home with a pure glider, naked, if you like.

I do not have crew ready, I just call airfield and hope for some fellow pilot to retrieve me as everyone else does here. Our country's gliding history tells that no glider has ever been left to outlanding field, so odds are in my favour.

Flying glider with engine means that you can skip all the hassle and pain included in outlanding, crew chasing or not. That makes it childs play to push for extra 100 km at evening. Everyone knows and understands this. 100 extra points for OLC for every flight.

[email protected]

January 30th 17, 01:50 PM

Try typing your user name and password out
instead of autotype.

Sean Fidler

January 30th 17, 02:02 PM

Even OLC produces arguments about rules and fairness. I love it!

This is the problem with OLC and this is why I stopped contributing my flights regularly. It's fairly meaningless. I have lost interest. Comparing flights in two locations has zero objective value. Comparing flights on the same day (same location) in which one pilot tries N and the other S (for example) is meaningless. Comparing a flying site with a ridge or a "big air" western location vs a midwestern flatland location is meaningless. Pilots who launch early are going to get more miles obviously. Pilots who have a motor-glider can take more risk with potentially less hassle and fly father, later, no doubt.

But who cares?

This is why organized contests are so nice. Contest are the only means available to "level set" the many variables and make the flight comparisons between pilots valuable. Contest come in many flavors of objective value (FAI, US rules, Grand Prix). OLC is quite counter to the idea of objective measurement. It was fun for me a season or so until I realized that it was fairly pointless. No I almost never bother to upload a flight. What is the point? What is the value of uploading a flights to OLC? What does it prove. The only value for me was a logbook really. For me, just knowing for myself how the flight went (what went well, what I missed, what was learned) is enough. To share it on OLC or compare it with a pilot in TX or "wherever" (even a pilot flying at my home site on the same day) means little to nothing.

In terms of technical issues, I have never had any issues adding a flight or with my account although I do support the site with the recommended annual donations (smiley). Maybe that helps...

I think OLC is fine (a form of soaring social media really) but the comparisons made between individual flights or comparing annual "flying site mileage," etc are fairly (leaning towards completely) meaningless.

Online Contest? Not really. Not at all in fact. Online NON CONTEST. Or Online "not objective in any way." These are more fitting names. I have heard OLC referred to as "online pointlessness." Yes, I laughed.

I think a new, improved website that has better rules and requirements (such as a set task each day for each location and with a set or coordinated start times) would be much more interesting and far more valuable to the sport of soaring.

OLC has always felt intellectually lazy to me. I think so much more is possible. I'm many ways OLC has done damage.

Sean
7T

Renny[_2_]

January 30th 17, 02:45 PM

On Monday, January 30, 2017 at 7:02:34 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Even OLC produces arguments about rules and fairness. I love it!
>
> This is the problem with OLC and this is why I stopped contributing my flights regularly. It's fairly meaningless. I have lost interest. Comparing flights in two locations has zero objective value. Comparing flights on the same day (same location) in which one pilot tries N and the other S (for example) is meaningless. Comparing a flying site with a ridge or a "big air" western location vs a midwestern flatland location is meaningless. Pilots who launch early are going to get more miles obviously. Pilots who have a motor-glider can take more risk with potentially less hassle and fly father, later, no doubt.
>
> But who cares?
>
> This is why organized contests are so nice. Contest are the only means available to "level set" the many variables and make the flight comparisons between pilots valuable. Contest come in many flavors of objective value (FAI, US rules, Grand Prix). OLC is quite counter to the idea of objective measurement. It was fun for me a season or so until I realized that it was fairly pointless. No I almost never bother to upload a flight. What is the point? What is the value of uploading a flights to OLC? What does it prove. The only value for me was a logbook really. For me, just knowing for myself how the flight went (what went well, what I missed, what was learned) is enough. To share it on OLC or compare it with a pilot in TX or "wherever" (even a pilot flying at my home site on the same day) means little to nothing.
>
> In terms of technical issues, I have never had any issues adding a flight or with my account although I do support the site with the recommended annual donations (smiley). Maybe that helps...
>
> I think OLC is fine (a form of soaring social media really) but the comparisons made between individual flights or comparing annual "flying site mileage," etc are fairly (leaning towards completely) meaningless.
>
> Online Contest? Not really. Not at all in fact. Online NON CONTEST. Or Online "not objective in any way." These are more fitting names. I have heard OLC referred to as "online pointlessness." Yes, I laughed.
>
> I think a new, improved website that has better rules and requirements (such as a set task each day for each location and with a set or coordinated start times) would be much more interesting and far more valuable to the sport of soaring.
>
> OLC has always felt intellectually lazy to me. I think so much more is possible. I'm many ways OLC has done damage.
>
> Sean
> 7T

Sean - First, great job in Benalla under very difficult conditions! I also appreciated your various updates from the contest.

Second, I agree with many of your thoughts on the OLC. Just one question, I have also thought that there were some real negative effects of the OLC that people do not talk about and I was wondering in what ways you believe it has done damage. Please tell us your thoughts on this!
Thanks again - Renny

Dan Marotta

January 30th 17, 03:05 PM

Thanks.

Hannes from OLC got back to me and told me there was a "big fat bug" and
that he would fix it. He did! I'll still take your advice and switch
to a gmail address.

Thanks to all who had advice to try.

Dan

On 1/29/2017 9:44 PM, wrote:
> On Saturday, January 28, 2017 at 6:43:42 PM UTC-6, Dan Marotta wrote:
>> I've been trying for over a year to get the OLC people to fix my login.
>> I've filled out their help forms too many times to count and they don't
>> reply and they don't fix the problem. As it stands now, I can not
>> upload my flights to OLC. When I log in I get a message that states (in
>> German) that my email address is not valid. But it is valid. And I am
>> logged on successfully. Then, when I select to upload a flight, I get
>> the same message stating that my email address is invalid.
>>
>> Is there anyone listening at OLC? Is there anyone in Europe who can
>> contact them on my behalf? My email address is
>> . It is a valid address.
>>
>> Since I can no longer upload flights, I won't be providing financial
>> support any more unless it's fixed. Too bad, since I'm currently number
>> 1 at Moriarty and number 14 in the USA.
>>
>> --
>> Dan, 5J
> I had the exact same problem and a frustratingly similar experience until I was given a tip, there's an issue using our Earthlink.net e-mail addresses on OLC (I use one also). Register for a free gmail address, change your OLC account to use that address and you'll be in business within 5 minutes. While I'd far prefer to use my earthlink address like I do for everything else, OLC doesn't seem to support them or say anything about this issue in their FAQs. Make the change and you'll be good to go.
>
> Chuck

--
Dan, 5J

[email protected]

January 30th 17, 05:13 PM

On Monday, January 30, 2017 at 8:02:34 AM UTC-6, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Even OLC produces arguments about rules and fairness. I love it!
>
> This is the problem with OLC and this is why I stopped contributing my flights regularly. It's fairly meaningless. I have lost interest. Comparing flights in two locations has zero objective value. Comparing flights on the same day (same location) in which one pilot tries N and the other S (for example) is meaningless. Comparing a flying site with a ridge or a "big air" western location vs a midwestern flatland location is meaningless. Pilots who launch early are going to get more miles obviously. Pilots who have a motor-glider can take more risk with potentially less hassle and fly father, later, no doubt.
>
> But who cares?
>
> This is why organized contests are so nice. Contest are the only means available to "level set" the many variables and make the flight comparisons between pilots valuable. Contest come in many flavors of objective value (FAI, US rules, Grand Prix). OLC is quite counter to the idea of objective measurement. It was fun for me a season or so until I realized that it was fairly pointless. No I almost never bother to upload a flight. What is the point? What is the value of uploading a flights to OLC? What does it prove. The only value for me was a logbook really. For me, just knowing for myself how the flight went (what went well, what I missed, what was learned) is enough. To share it on OLC or compare it with a pilot in TX or "wherever" (even a pilot flying at my home site on the same day) means little to nothing.
>
> In terms of technical issues, I have never had any issues adding a flight or with my account although I do support the site with the recommended annual donations (smiley). Maybe that helps...
>
> I think OLC is fine (a form of soaring social media really) but the comparisons made between individual flights or comparing annual "flying site mileage," etc are fairly (leaning towards completely) meaningless.
>
> Online Contest? Not really. Not at all in fact. Online NON CONTEST. Or Online "not objective in any way." These are more fitting names. I have heard OLC referred to as "online pointlessness." Yes, I laughed.
>
> I think a new, improved website that has better rules and requirements (such as a set task each day for each location and with a set or coordinated start times) would be much more interesting and far more valuable to the sport of soaring.
>
> OLC has always felt intellectually lazy to me. I think so much more is possible. I'm many ways OLC has done damage.
>
> Sean
> 7T

Come on now, Sean. You are writing from your newly anointed lofty position as a World Championship competitor (my kudos, btw.). Why **** on the parade of all the happy pilots who feel emboldened and cheered on by the recognition of their peers after posting a string of or a single great flight? OLC has done more to promote x-country flying around the world than any single other vehicle, including badges, contests, what-have-you. Our sport would be poorer without it and your comment does make it in fact poorer. I would also like to hear where the damage and carnage is in having the option of posting one's flight to OLC. In my experience OLC is a path to contest flying for many new pilots and it makes them naturally becoming interested in going to Regionals. Calling the contest and with it the participants "intellectually lazy" is quite arrogant.
Herb, J7

[email protected]

January 30th 17, 06:12 PM

OLC regards IGC files as their intellectual property. This means they are sitting on a very large basis for numerical analysis, and nobody can use it.

This is why I got involved with Skylines. I run a backup for the IGC files. Anyone wanting a dump, can contact me.

[email protected]

January 30th 17, 07:32 PM

On Monday, January 30, 2017 at 12:12:48 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> OLC regards IGC files as their intellectual property. This means they are sitting on a very large basis for numerical analysis, and nobody can use it.
>
> This is why I got involved with Skylines. I run a backup for the IGC files. Anyone wanting a dump, can contact me.

I can download any OLC trace that is of interest to me. It may be time consuming to get large numbers of files but how many of us are really affected by this? Have you tried to get file dumps from Facebook or Google? Good luck with that. If you get a free service these days better be prepared for restrictions.
Herb

jfitch

January 30th 17, 11:42 PM

On Monday, January 30, 2017 at 10:12:48 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> OLC regards IGC files as their intellectual property. This means they are sitting on a very large basis for numerical analysis, and nobody can use it.
>
> This is why I got involved with Skylines. I run a backup for the IGC files. Anyone wanting a dump, can contact me.

The characterization of OLC as social media is accurate, and where's the harm? I like being able to download other's flights in the area on the day, to see what else I might have done. It isn't a race in the traditional use of the word, but then neither are most sailplane competitions (including Bernalla) which most sports would call a time trial.

Downloading the entire library of IGC files from OLC can be done with a number of readily available tools, or you could write your own with 20 minutes work.

Sean Fidler

January 31st 17, 12:07 AM

Please don't take my observations the wrong way. The idea of OLC was a great one but it is, IMO, very incomplete. It has not improved and is stagnant. It also has some perhaps undesirable side effects.

Just flying for mileage (free distance) is not really very challenging when you sit down and really think about it. It's fine, very fun at times, but don't we want some constraint capability from time to time in our fun flying?

One idea I have is that OLC or "SMFOnlineCommunitySoaring v1.0" would allow the local pilots to create a library of set tasks. Based on the weather forecast (weather would be tightly integrated into this new application) and the competing gliders performance, certain tasks can be automatically recommended or manually enabled. Imagine 100, 200 and 300km N,S,E,W. And so on. On a given day a group of pilots at a flying site could agree on and declare a task, then go try and fly it. Maybe the new application would also include a start open time to make the flight comparison more objective. Example, last glider in the group launched at 1pm, therefore no start valid before 1pm. A basic rule of set task flying which can be enabled or disabled.

Additionally, all forms of record flights and badges should/could be completed thru this new online system (declare task, submit documents witness, approve, etc). All online. All easy with beautiful functionality in a browser or via a very high quality mobile app.

The new system could also extract basic data from all uploaded flights (such as climb average) and automatically compare your flights with others globally who flew in similar conditions. Say 3-4 knot average climbs vs 6-7 and so on. Obviously, a flight with 10k AGL top of lift would yield easier distance than a flight with 4k top of lift. Or ridge or wave flights vs flatland. All of this would be considered in the comparison, categorization, conditions handicapping algorithm based on all the flights submitted over at a flying site on a given day.

I think that OLC is just way to simple (lazy) and what we all basically get, from a comparison of flights regionally, nationally or internationally perspective, leaves much to be desired. Almost worthless and highly subjective. This has resulted in many losing interest in OLC and the potential of the community is therefore fairly limited. Some form of automated "conditions handicapping" to better categorize flights flown in similar conditions (regionally, nationally and internationally) would be a great improvement. How can we begin to compare a flight in Mifflin vs. a flight in Uvalde or Minden or Chicago? We must first categorize the flight based on lift strength, top of lift, type of lift, etc. In many ways we simply cannot compare flights in these locations. A comparison has no relevance. That's the first step, flight conditions categorization would be very helpful, fairly easy to do and much more fun and interesting for all users.

I think a basic set of tasking tools to provide some objectivity to the flight scoring would be fantastic and would bring this concept to a new level. Free distance would be only one aspect of the new system in combination with basic set tasking and records. Perhaps even simple contest scoring could be added so that clubs and friends could run fun contests very easily. Also, interacted weather and automatic tasking recommendations based on skill level.

Yes, I do think that OLC has made some of us a little lazy. Many place huge importance on OLC statistics. I'm not sure why. Also, we now have fewer pilots taking the time to plan out declared tasks (area, assigned or FAI records). With OLC, it's just too easy to simply go flying and get your generic OLC "score.?" But what does that score really mean relative to another flight even at the same site were each pilot flew in a different time and/or airmass and around different turn points (let alone another distant flying site)? We also have far less US record attempts I imagine. Many gleam about "the OLC!" Because of OLC now much easier to just go out and fly "the easiest way." This results in many pilots flying much less challenging, entirely undefined cross country OLC "distance" flights (simply following the best clouds, and turning towards something better whenever the easiest path ends or weakens). The only game for most pilots now is to simply try to rack up all the easy miles available.

All this means that the idea of participating in an SSA contest (or even a fun club contest) with set area tasks (heaven forbid a MAT or Racing task) is going to be quite a shock. OLC may actually make the pilots who focus on OLC style flying a little "soft." Flying a set task requires much more problem solving skills and is often much more rewarding. We learn more. With set tasking we must figure out how to achieve the turn points (or areas), cross more holes, cross and reconnect with more lines of lift (rather than simply running straight up the most ideal area). With a set task the pilot must deal more challenges (the ideal OLC flight avoids all challenges as much as possible!). With set tasks we must learn how to change gears more, manage altitude, height bands and associated "trap" risk much more critically. Flying OLC all the time also gets pretty boring (for me at least). I feel more reward flying a set task of half the distance possible in OLC style flying on a given day.

I get it, OLC is easier and many don't care about contests or set tasks. That's a bummer. They just want to "use the day" and fly in the easiest, juiciest sky as much as possible. That's fine. But try describing this concept to someone unrelated to soaring someday and see what they find more interesting (set task or free distance). I offer that flying set tasks, once in awhile at least, might be a nice challenge (or at least a change of scenery, so to speak) and I feel it develops a "more complete" cross country soaring pilot. I think set tasks are also much more attractive to youth pilots. Set tasks are more comprehensive, more inline with international youth pilot focus and develops more skills, faster. It also prepared the kid for future contest or record soaring.

Sean

[email protected]

January 31st 17, 01:39 AM

Sean's comments denigrating the value or significance of OLC logged flights is not surprising, considering his repeated statements that seem to imply that anyone who does not fly "Real" competition, as defined by him, is somehow deficient in intellect and/or soaring skill.

Hate to tell you, Sean, but only about 2% of soaring pilots worldwide enter gliding competitions. Most of us (the "other" 98%) just don't get off on the cutthroat gaggles, scheduled grid times, crappy weather (but are still forced to fly), obnoxious personalities (few, but always annoying), cost and general inconvenience of entering a soaring contest.

The OLC is mostly a neat way to see your flight in comparison to the other pilots who flew from your home site on the same day. Much can be learned by seeing their flight trace and comparing it to what you did. Maybe you can learn something about technique at the home 'drome.

Plus, you can pull up details about amazing flights made in other locations worldwide. Before the OLC, we were completely ignorant of a 1,000 km flight made in Australia, Namibia, Morocco or anywhere else. There is a vast amount of information available to determine the best season and potential for thousands of flying sites worldwide. Also names of pilots you might want to contact for advice.

The OLC does, however, limit the amount of embellishment that used to be such a large part of "hangar flying." To quote a great Arizona Soaring Association T-Shirt, "If it isn't on the OLC, it didn't happen."

Ron Gleason

January 31st 17, 01:46 AM

On Monday, 30 January 2017 18:39:15 UTC-7, wrote:
> Sean's comments denigrating the value or significance of OLC logged flights is not surprising, considering his repeated statements that seem to imply that anyone who does not fly "Real" competition, as defined by him, is somehow deficient in intellect and/or soaring skill.
>
> Hate to tell you, Sean, but only about 2% of soaring pilots worldwide enter gliding competitions. Most of us (the "other" 98%) just don't get off on the cutthroat gaggles, scheduled grid times, crappy weather (but are still forced to fly), obnoxious personalities (few, but always annoying), cost and general inconvenience of entering a soaring contest.
>
> The OLC is mostly a neat way to see your flight in comparison to the other pilots who flew from your home site on the same day. Much can be learned by seeing their flight trace and comparing it to what you did. Maybe you can learn something about technique at the home 'drome.
>
> Plus, you can pull up details about amazing flights made in other locations worldwide. Before the OLC, we were completely ignorant of a 1,000 km flight made in Australia, Namibia, Morocco or anywhere else. There is a vast amount of information available to determine the best season and potential for thousands of flying sites worldwide. Also names of pilots you might want to contact for advice.
>
> The OLC does, however, limit the amount of embellishment that used to be such a large part of "hangar flying." To quote a great Arizona Soaring Association T-Shirt, "If it isn't on the OLC, it didn't happen."

Thanks Mark, touche!

Tony[_5_]

January 31st 17, 02:02 AM

On Monday, January 30, 2017 at 6:07:41 PM UTC-6, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Please don't take my observations the wrong way. The idea of OLC was a great one but it is, IMO, very incomplete. It has not improved and is stagnant. It also has some perhaps undesirable side effects.
>
> Just flying for mileage (free distance) is not really very challenging when you sit down and really think about it. It's fine, very fun at times, but don't we want some constraint capability from time to time in our fun flying?
>
> One idea I have is that OLC or "SMFOnlineCommunitySoaring v1.0" would allow the local pilots to create a library of set tasks. Based on the weather forecast (weather would be tightly integrated into this new application) and the competing gliders performance, certain tasks can be automatically recommended or manually enabled. Imagine 100, 200 and 300km N,S,E,W. And so on. On a given day a group of pilots at a flying site could agree on and declare a task, then go try and fly it. Maybe the new application would also include a start open time to make the flight comparison more objective. Example, last glider in the group launched at 1pm, therefore no start valid before 1pm. A basic rule of set task flying which can be enabled or disabled.
>
> Additionally, all forms of record flights and badges should/could be completed thru this new online system (declare task, submit documents witness, approve, etc). All online. All easy with beautiful functionality in a browser or via a very high quality mobile app.
>
> The new system could also extract basic data from all uploaded flights (such as climb average) and automatically compare your flights with others globally who flew in similar conditions. Say 3-4 knot average climbs vs 6-7 and so on. Obviously, a flight with 10k AGL top of lift would yield easier distance than a flight with 4k top of lift. Or ridge or wave flights vs flatland. All of this would be considered in the comparison, categorization, conditions handicapping algorithm based on all the flights submitted over at a flying site on a given day.
>
> I think that OLC is just way to simple (lazy) and what we all basically get, from a comparison of flights regionally, nationally or internationally perspective, leaves much to be desired. Almost worthless and highly subjective. This has resulted in many losing interest in OLC and the potential of the community is therefore fairly limited. Some form of automated "conditions handicapping" to better categorize flights flown in similar conditions (regionally, nationally and internationally) would be a great improvement.. How can we begin to compare a flight in Mifflin vs. a flight in Uvalde or Minden or Chicago? We must first categorize the flight based on lift strength, top of lift, type of lift, etc. In many ways we simply cannot compare flights in these locations. A comparison has no relevance. That's the first step, flight conditions categorization would be very helpful, fairly easy to do and much more fun and interesting for all users.
>
> I think a basic set of tasking tools to provide some objectivity to the flight scoring would be fantastic and would bring this concept to a new level. Free distance would be only one aspect of the new system in combination with basic set tasking and records. Perhaps even simple contest scoring could be added so that clubs and friends could run fun contests very easily. Also, interacted weather and automatic tasking recommendations based on skill level.
>
>
> Yes, I do think that OLC has made some of us a little lazy. Many place huge importance on OLC statistics. I'm not sure why. Also, we now have fewer pilots taking the time to plan out declared tasks (area, assigned or FAI records). With OLC, it's just too easy to simply go flying and get your generic OLC "score.?" But what does that score really mean relative to another flight even at the same site were each pilot flew in a different time and/or airmass and around different turn points (let alone another distant flying site)? We also have far less US record attempts I imagine. Many gleam about "the OLC!" Because of OLC now much easier to just go out and fly "the easiest way." This results in many pilots flying much less challenging, entirely undefined cross country OLC "distance" flights (simply following the best clouds, and turning towards something better whenever the easiest path ends or weakens). The only game for most pilots now is to simply try to rack up all the easy miles available.
>
> All this means that the idea of participating in an SSA contest (or even a fun club contest) with set area tasks (heaven forbid a MAT or Racing task) is going to be quite a shock. OLC may actually make the pilots who focus on OLC style flying a little "soft." Flying a set task requires much more problem solving skills and is often much more rewarding. We learn more. With set tasking we must figure out how to achieve the turn points (or areas), cross more holes, cross and reconnect with more lines of lift (rather than simply running straight up the most ideal area). With a set task the pilot must deal more challenges (the ideal OLC flight avoids all challenges as much as possible!). With set tasks we must learn how to change gears more, manage altitude, height bands and associated "trap" risk much more critically. Flying OLC all the time also gets pretty boring (for me at least). I feel more reward flying a set task of half the distance possible in OLC style flying on a given day.
>
> I get it, OLC is easier and many don't care about contests or set tasks. That's a bummer. They just want to "use the day" and fly in the easiest, juiciest sky as much as possible. That's fine. But try describing this concept to someone unrelated to soaring someday and see what they find more interesting (set task or free distance). I offer that flying set tasks, once in awhile at least, might be a nice challenge (or at least a change of scenery, so to speak) and I feel it develops a "more complete" cross country soaring pilot. I think set tasks are also much more attractive to youth pilots. Set tasks are more comprehensive, more inline with international youth pilot focus and develops more skills, faster. It also prepared the kid for future contest or record soaring.
>
> Sean

almost all of our clubs annual travelling trophies require a declared task. we like it that way and you still get some nice OLC points to boot.

Sean Fidler

January 31st 17, 02:07 AM

Ok Mark. You know it all If appears.

[email protected]

January 31st 17, 02:45 AM

On Monday, January 30, 2017 at 7:07:41 PM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Just flying for mileage (free distance) is not really very challenging when you sit down and really think about it. It's fine, very fun at times, but don't we want some constraint capability from time to time in our fun flying?

How about the time constraint of "daylight" - what could be more challenging than using the full day to its maximum potential than contests that just use the easiest 2-4 hours?

I like doing declared tasks but so many pilots are all turned off by all the complicated paperwork and requirements. It is hard to convince them to spend hours filing paperwork, and chasing down observers - this is where OLC is great - the convenience of just submitting an IGC file because that is 90% as good as a declared task.

Chris

January 31st 17, 04:28 AM

On Monday, January 30, 2017 at 6:45:56 PM UTC-8, wrote:
>
> I like doing declared tasks but so many pilots are all turned off by all the complicated paperwork and requirements. It is hard to convince them to spend hours filing paperwork, and chasing down observers - this is where OLC is great - the convenience of just submitting an IGC file because that is 90% as good as a declared task.
>
> Chris

Hello, Fred... Fred Drift, was it?
There is no paperwork to declare and fly a task. It is done in the IGC file..
But on OLC there is no reward for flying a declared task rather than making it up as you go along.
On crosscountry.aero there is a declared task score.
Jim

[email protected]

January 31st 17, 03:31 PM

On Monday, January 30, 2017 at 6:07:41 PM UTC-6, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Please don't take my observations the wrong way. The idea of OLC was a great one but it is, IMO, very incomplete. It has not improved and is stagnant. It also has some perhaps undesirable side effects.
>
> Just flying for mileage (free distance) is not really very challenging when you sit down and really think about it. It's fine, very fun at times, but don't we want some constraint capability from time to time in our fun flying?
>
> One idea I have is that OLC or "SMFOnlineCommunitySoaring v1.0" would allow the local pilots to create a library of set tasks. Based on the weather forecast (weather would be tightly integrated into this new application) and the competing gliders performance, certain tasks can be automatically recommended or manually enabled. Imagine 100, 200 and 300km N,S,E,W. And so on. On a given day a group of pilots at a flying site could agree on and declare a task, then go try and fly it. Maybe the new application would also include a start open time to make the flight comparison more objective. Example, last glider in the group launched at 1pm, therefore no start valid before 1pm. A basic rule of set task flying which can be enabled or disabled.
>
> Additionally, all forms of record flights and badges should/could be completed thru this new online system (declare task, submit documents witness, approve, etc). All online. All easy with beautiful functionality in a browser or via a very high quality mobile app.
>
> The new system could also extract basic data from all uploaded flights (such as climb average) and automatically compare your flights with others globally who flew in similar conditions. Say 3-4 knot average climbs vs 6-7 and so on. Obviously, a flight with 10k AGL top of lift would yield easier distance than a flight with 4k top of lift. Or ridge or wave flights vs flatland. All of this would be considered in the comparison, categorization, conditions handicapping algorithm based on all the flights submitted over at a flying site on a given day.
>
> I think that OLC is just way to simple (lazy) and what we all basically get, from a comparison of flights regionally, nationally or internationally perspective, leaves much to be desired. Almost worthless and highly subjective. This has resulted in many losing interest in OLC and the potential of the community is therefore fairly limited. Some form of automated "conditions handicapping" to better categorize flights flown in similar conditions (regionally, nationally and internationally) would be a great improvement.. How can we begin to compare a flight in Mifflin vs. a flight in Uvalde or Minden or Chicago? We must first categorize the flight based on lift strength, top of lift, type of lift, etc. In many ways we simply cannot compare flights in these locations. A comparison has no relevance. That's the first step, flight conditions categorization would be very helpful, fairly easy to do and much more fun and interesting for all users.
>
> I think a basic set of tasking tools to provide some objectivity to the flight scoring would be fantastic and would bring this concept to a new level. Free distance would be only one aspect of the new system in combination with basic set tasking and records. Perhaps even simple contest scoring could be added so that clubs and friends could run fun contests very easily. Also, interacted weather and automatic tasking recommendations based on skill level.
>
>
> Yes, I do think that OLC has made some of us a little lazy. Many place huge importance on OLC statistics. I'm not sure why. Also, we now have fewer pilots taking the time to plan out declared tasks (area, assigned or FAI records). With OLC, it's just too easy to simply go flying and get your generic OLC "score.?" But what does that score really mean relative to another flight even at the same site were each pilot flew in a different time and/or airmass and around different turn points (let alone another distant flying site)? We also have far less US record attempts I imagine. Many gleam about "the OLC!" Because of OLC now much easier to just go out and fly "the easiest way." This results in many pilots flying much less challenging, entirely undefined cross country OLC "distance" flights (simply following the best clouds, and turning towards something better whenever the easiest path ends or weakens). The only game for most pilots now is to simply try to rack up all the easy miles available.
>
> All this means that the idea of participating in an SSA contest (or even a fun club contest) with set area tasks (heaven forbid a MAT or Racing task) is going to be quite a shock. OLC may actually make the pilots who focus on OLC style flying a little "soft." Flying a set task requires much more problem solving skills and is often much more rewarding. We learn more. With set tasking we must figure out how to achieve the turn points (or areas), cross more holes, cross and reconnect with more lines of lift (rather than simply running straight up the most ideal area). With a set task the pilot must deal more challenges (the ideal OLC flight avoids all challenges as much as possible!). With set tasks we must learn how to change gears more, manage altitude, height bands and associated "trap" risk much more critically. Flying OLC all the time also gets pretty boring (for me at least). I feel more reward flying a set task of half the distance possible in OLC style flying on a given day.
>
> I get it, OLC is easier and many don't care about contests or set tasks. That's a bummer. They just want to "use the day" and fly in the easiest, juiciest sky as much as possible. That's fine. But try describing this concept to someone unrelated to soaring someday and see what they find more interesting (set task or free distance). I offer that flying set tasks, once in awhile at least, might be a nice challenge (or at least a change of scenery, so to speak) and I feel it develops a "more complete" cross country soaring pilot. I think set tasks are also much more attractive to youth pilots. Set tasks are more comprehensive, more inline with international youth pilot focus and develops more skills, faster. It also prepared the kid for future contest or record soaring.
>
> Sean

Sean, disagree with you on a lot of your points. OlC scores pilots in SSA Regions which are typically similar regarding geography and weather. Comparisons between pilots inside a Region are meaningful when looked at over a season. OLC has a Speed score portion that allows you to find the speed for the fastest 2.5 hours of a given flight. Speed Champions are determined for each Region and nationally.
Finally, OLC strongly encourages FAI triangles via a bonus point system. You will be badly beaten by a pilot flying a valid triangle vs your much longer flight using all allowed 6 legs (5 turn points) and just meandering around. Maybe you should look a bit deeper into the rules (you love rules, don't you?). I know a lot of non-lazy pilots who enjoy long challenging flights and like the instant scoring available in the evening.

Herb

[email protected]

January 31st 17, 08:06 PM

Well, the bonus for FAI triangles is still a bonus for a free triangle, not a declared one. Moreover, in my country, flying an FAI triangle is near to impossible due to airspace restrictions.

It would indeed be fine to get a bonus for a declared task, even if not FAI.. Most decentralized competitions I know and participate in (apart from OLC) do have such a feature. Example: the French Netcoupe (http://www.netcoupe..net) has a 20% bonus for a (completed) declared task.

Daniel Sazhin[_2_]

January 31st 17, 10:52 PM

Sean,

You're comparing apples and oranges. OLC is not a competition for most people in the classic sense unless you really want to treat it as such. It's mostly a positive reinforcement to put your flights into an online logbook, plus a little pat on your shoulder if you had a particularly long flight relative to whatever else has been going on in your area. Most people just like collecting their experiences and sharing them with others.

I enjoy distance flying and it is motivating to work towards having six really big flights. True distance flying uses similar flight optimization skills as contest flying. If you fly faster, you make more miles. It's incredibly fun to launch into the first cloud in the sky and breathe a sigh of relief when you hit final glide altitude under the last dying one.

I also learned a tremendous amount by studying other flights. I have looked at every OLC track originated from Blairstown since 2007. It helped to learn all different styles, techniques, routes, etc rather than having to reinvent the wheel for myself.

It helps to not take it too seriously. I will admit to having done several laps on my ridge too many for the sake of OLC points, but it is largely a secondary motivator to just getting out there and wanting to make a nice long distance flight.

Best Regards,
Daniel

(PS: Yo Erik, dig up your comparison of OLC versus Contest pilots for laughs!)

Sean Fidler

February 1st 17, 05:09 AM

I'm not sure why I'm being included in this conversation again and again. You boys are never going to convince me that OLC is meaningful or cool. It's not. But knock yourselves out trying. Keep focusing on uploading free distance flights. Keep morphin US contest tasking (global laughing stock) into the same boring non-sport. Clearly, many here are highly sensitive and even personally offended by my criticisms of OLC. Not my intention not my problem. I simply think OLC is bad for soaring. It's creating bad pilots who complain unless they are free to only follow the best clouds all afternoon.

OLC has, IMO, has created some very poor attitudes about what soaring is as a sport

This thread is aptly titled "What's wrong with OLC." Yes, I know this was in regards to account issues. Perhaps a better title could be "What's the value of a soaring website that pretends to score completely unrelatable free distance cross country glider flights worldwide and why do people actually care about this?"

How OLC became one of the most popular websites in soaring is curious to me.. I find its content (scoring) to be very low quality (random follow best clouds flying). It feels
like the lowest common denominator. We should be challenging ourselves more. Not just flying OLC. For me, and many others, OLC is so boring. It feels like a wasted opportunity to do something useful and challenging with a soaring day. It borders on being completely useless. This remains my opinion.

Sorry if this upsets you, but I feel we should try and get more out of cross country flying at least some significant portion of our flights. OLC lowers the common denominator.

Here is a little comedy relief. OLC is like shopping at the gap for all your clothes. Remember the movie "Crazy, Stupid Love?" Take a deep breath and watch this clip: https://youtu.be/-KsoPAXS0ME

Be better than than OLC. BE BETTER THAN THE GAP! There is so much more to soaring Than following the easiest possible path.

Sean

krasw

February 1st 17, 06:23 AM

On Wednesday, 1 February 2017 07:09:21 UTC+2, Sean Fidler wrote:
> I'm not sure why I'm being included in this conversation again and again.
> Sean

Possibly because you wrote to this thread?

jfitch

February 1st 17, 07:15 AM

On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 9:09:21 PM UTC-8, Sean Fidler wrote:
> I'm not sure why I'm being included in this conversation again and again. You boys are never going to convince me that OLC is meaningful or cool. It's not. But knock yourselves out trying. Keep focusing on uploading free distance flights. Keep morphin US contest tasking (global laughing stock) into the same boring non-sport. Clearly, many here are highly sensitive and even personally offended by my criticisms of OLC. Not my intention not my problem. I simply think OLC is bad for soaring. It's creating bad pilots who complain unless they are free to only follow the best clouds all afternoon.
>
> OLC has, IMO, has created some very poor attitudes about what soaring is as a sport
>
> This thread is aptly titled "What's wrong with OLC." Yes, I know this was in regards to account issues. Perhaps a better title could be "What's the value of a soaring website that pretends to score completely unrelatable free distance cross country glider flights worldwide and why do people actually care about this?"
>
> How OLC became one of the most popular websites in soaring is curious to me. I find its content (scoring) to be very low quality (random follow best clouds flying). It feels
> like the lowest common denominator. We should be challenging ourselves more. Not just flying OLC. For me, and many others, OLC is so boring. It feels like a wasted opportunity to do something useful and challenging with a soaring day. It borders on being completely useless. This remains my opinion.
>
> Sorry if this upsets you, but I feel we should try and get more out of cross country flying at least some significant portion of our flights. OLC lowers the common denominator.
>
> Here is a little comedy relief. OLC is like shopping at the gap for all your clothes. Remember the movie "Crazy, Stupid Love?" Take a deep breath and watch this clip: https://youtu.be/-KsoPAXS0ME
>
> Be better than than OLC. BE BETTER THAN THE GAP! There is so much more to soaring Than following the easiest possible path.
>
> Sean

"why do people actually care about this?" I for one don't. But you are taking one narrow aspect of soaring and raising it above all others. I don't much care about the results in the WGC either. What you are saying is kind of like saying, "if you don't play football with an oblong ball, it's not football." When to most of the world it is. If popularity is the gage, OLC is the answer, not Grand Prix, not WGC. They are very different, sure, but is one a better way to spend your afternoon than the other? I say we do this for fun, not money, so whatever turns your prop. One could as easily criticize WGC tasking as reality TV - made up artificial tasks with no purpose. Do what you want. Don't criticize others for doing what they want. If you have the magic formula that will attract tens of thousands of participants, by all means, organize it. Whining does not accomplish that.

[email protected]

February 1st 17, 01:57 PM

Sometimes the arrogance shown on RAS is absolutely astounding. Over 14,000 pilots worldwide disagree with our self-appointed arbiter of "what is and is not soaring."

I fly gliders to experience the thrill of using the atmosphere and its energy in my lifelong quest to avoid yardwork. I don't like competition, but admire those that do compete. It would be nice if Sean at least recognized that others might not share his competitive desire.

And I am sure that he was dropped on this earth with a full-blown set of competition skills, and never took a flight that did not involve a "task."

[email protected]

February 1st 17, 03:51 PM

On Wednesday, February 1, 2017 at 5:58:01 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> Sometimes the arrogance shown on RAS is absolutely astounding. Over 14,000 pilots worldwide disagree with our self-appointed arbiter of "what is and is not soaring."

Agreed! It is shocking how so many of us these days in all sorts of media conflate our opinions and preferences into some absolute that is best and right for all. And equally shocking how opinions expressed by others have absolutely no affect on others perspectives. Rather, it's the opposite, the more opinions expressed the further people dig in. Considering a different perspective doesn't mean you have to change yours, jesus, go crazy give it a whirl... I once declared loudly to all in band class that Rush was the best band ever. I was 13. At some point since then I've realized that might not be true, and not that wise...

So, nothing that happens on OLC or in any race anywhere in the world has much if any affect on soaring for me so I'm not sure how either could wreck, or make great, soaring. I do like to use OLC, think there is some value to it for me (strangely the same pilots routinely log the longest and fastest flights out of the area they fly, how do they do it?), and I like following contests real time and otherwise.

OTOH, get ready to hold two thoughts in your head at once (hint, "OLC flying" (proof itself that you don't get it) and contest flying is good). I'd rather be shot in the gut than fly a contest on a great soaring day. But I totally get it and if I had all summer to fly would love to add contest flying to it all. I might even find that I like it more than "flying OLC contests", I don't f%#*^ing know. However, I get maybe 4 good soaring days in the glider each year, days that really interest me. I want to see how far I can go, in a single direction, a new area I haven't been before, a declared task for a state record, or following my buddies around. Or I might get "distracted by a great cloud or something" like Gleb.

[email protected]

February 1st 17, 03:54 PM

On Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 9:09:21 PM UTC-8, Sean Fidler wrote:
> I'm not sure why I'm being included in this conversation again and again. You boys are never going to convince me that OLC is meaningful or cool. It's not. But knock yourselves out trying. Keep focusing on uploading free distance flights. Keep morphin US contest tasking (global laughing stock) into the same boring non-sport. Clearly, many here are highly sensitive and even personally offended by my criticisms of OLC. Not my intention not my problem. I simply think OLC is bad for soaring. It's creating bad pilots who complain unless they are free to only follow the best clouds all afternoon.
>
> OLC has, IMO, has created some very poor attitudes about what soaring is as a sport
>
> This thread is aptly titled "What's wrong with OLC." Yes, I know this was in regards to account issues. Perhaps a better title could be "What's the value of a soaring website that pretends to score completely unrelatable free distance cross country glider flights worldwide and why do people actually care about this?"
>
> How OLC became one of the most popular websites in soaring is curious to me. I find its content (scoring) to be very low quality (random follow best clouds flying). It feels
> like the lowest common denominator. We should be challenging ourselves more. Not just flying OLC. For me, and many others, OLC is so boring. It feels like a wasted opportunity to do something useful and challenging with a soaring day. It borders on being completely useless. This remains my opinion.
>
> Sorry if this upsets you, but I feel we should try and get more out of cross country flying at least some significant portion of our flights. OLC lowers the common denominator.
>
> Here is a little comedy relief. OLC is like shopping at the gap for all your clothes. Remember the movie "Crazy, Stupid Love?" Take a deep breath and watch this clip: https://youtu.be/-KsoPAXS0ME
>
> Be better than than OLC. BE BETTER THAN THE GAP! There is so much more to soaring Than following the easiest possible path.
>
> Sean

To prove my points, just flip it around and it's easy to realize the meaninglessness and ridiculousness of the both sides of it. And, I think it's funny.

"You boys are never going to convince me that contest flying is meaningful or cool. It's not. But knock yourselves out trying. Keep focusing on directly comparing each other based on obscure rules that ignore most of the soaring day. Keep morphin US contest flying (global laughing stock) into the same boring non-sport. Clearly, many here are highly sensitive and even personally offended by my criticisms of contest flying. Not my intention not my problem. I simply think contest flying is bad for soaring. It's creating bad pilots who complain unless they are free to only follow the rules all afternoon.

Contest flying has, IMO, has created some very poor attitudes about what soaring is as a sport

This thread is aptly titled "What's wrong with contest flying." Yes, I know this was in regards to account issues. Perhaps a better title could be "What's the value of a soaring contest that pretends to score completely unrelatable tasked glider flights contest wide and why do people actually care about this?"

How the contest results page became one of the most popular websites in soaring is curious to me. I find its content (scoring) to be very low quality (random following of obscure contest rules). It feels
like the lowest common denominator. We should be challenging ourselves more. Not just flying contests. For me, and many others, contest flying is so boring. It feels like a wasted opportunity to do something useful and challenging with a soaring day. It borders on being completely useless. This remains my opinion.

Sorry if this upsets you, but I feel we should try and get more out of contest flying at least some significant portion of our flights. Contest flying lowers the common denominator."