View Full Version : Happy March from Tony Condon
MNLou
March 2nd 17, 12:40 AM
Did everyone see that Tony celebrated March 1 by heading downwind for over 500 km?
I think his latest RAS post was probably from on the ground NE of Dallas.
Lou
Frank Whiteley
March 2nd 17, 01:12 AM
On Wednesday, March 1, 2017 at 5:40:32 PM UTC-7, MNLou wrote:
> Did everyone see that Tony celebrated March 1 by heading downwind for over 500 km?
>
> I think his latest RAS post was probably from on the ground NE of Dallas.
>
> Lou
Paris, TX
Tony[_5_]
March 2nd 17, 05:18 AM
It was a fun flight. Clouds are for wimps.
http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/flightinfo.html?flightId=-1925269465
Note:trace is from my phone tracker. The low points weren't THAT low.
On Wednesday, March 1, 2017 at 9:18:15 PM UTC-8, Tony wrote:
> It was a fun flight. Clouds are for wimps.
>
> http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/flightinfo.html?flightId=-1925269465
>
> Note:trace is from my phone tracker. The low points weren't THAT low.
Was wondering a couple of days ago if that would be happening.
SGS,
Jim
Matt Herron Jr.
March 2nd 17, 02:53 PM
On Wednesday, March 1, 2017 at 9:18:15 PM UTC-8, Tony wrote:
> It was a fun flight. Clouds are for wimps.
>
> http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/flightinfo.html?flightId=-1925269465
>
> Note:trace is from my phone tracker. The low points weren't THAT low.
79m AGL and you got away??? Twice! Impressive!
Steve Leonard[_2_]
March 2nd 17, 03:13 PM
On Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 8:53:53 AM UTC-6, Matt Herron Jr. wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 1, 2017 at 9:18:15 PM UTC-8, Tony wrote:
> > It was a fun flight. Clouds are for wimps.
> >
> > http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/flightinfo.html?flightId=-1925269465
> >
> > Note:trace is from my phone tracker. The low points weren't THAT low.
>
> 79m AGL and you got away??? Twice! Impressive!
No, Matt. Notice that launch is from below ground from the trace (phone tracker). As it was happening, it looked to me like lowest spot was around 1200 feet AGL. Still, that is low enough.
Tony[_5_]
March 2nd 17, 08:24 PM
On Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 9:13:30 AM UTC-6, Steve Leonard wrote:
> On Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 8:53:53 AM UTC-6, Matt Herron Jr. wrote:
> > On Wednesday, March 1, 2017 at 9:18:15 PM UTC-8, Tony wrote:
> > > It was a fun flight. Clouds are for wimps.
> > >
> > > http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/flightinfo.html?flightId=-1925269465
> > >
> > > Note:trace is from my phone tracker. The low points weren't THAT low.
> >
> > 79m AGL and you got away??? Twice! Impressive!
>
> No, Matt. Notice that launch is from below ground from the trace (phone tracker). As it was happening, it looked to me like lowest spot was around 1200 feet AGL. Still, that is low enough.
Yea, about 1200 AGL twice. You're right, plenty low. Updated the file so it shows properly:
http://www.onlinecontest.org/olc-2.0/gliding/flightinfo.html?flightId=-1867582778
Soartech
March 2nd 17, 08:32 PM
Tony,
Great flight! Why does OLC show legs 4 - 6 with zero thermals and no circling when the graph shows many big climbs?
Tony[_5_]
March 2nd 17, 08:45 PM
On Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 2:32:33 PM UTC-6, Soartech wrote:
> Tony,
> Great flight! Why does OLC show legs 4 - 6 with zero thermals and no circling when the graph shows many big climbs?
legs 4-6 were basically my traffic pattern at Paris. Legs 1-3 were the flight there.
Soartech
March 2nd 17, 09:54 PM
That is odd. I thought OLC split the flight up into 6 equal times. I guess they screwed up on this one.
> legs 4-6 were basically my traffic pattern at Paris. Legs 1-3 were the flight there.
Tony[_5_]
March 2nd 17, 10:13 PM
On Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 3:54:07 PM UTC-6, Soartech wrote:
> That is odd. I thought OLC split the flight up into 6 equal times. I guess they screwed up on this one.
> > legs 4-6 were basically my traffic pattern at Paris. Legs 1-3 were the flight there.
no they optimize the distance in 6 legs. equal time has nothing to do with it
On Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 5:13:58 PM UTC-5, Tony wrote:
> On Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 3:54:07 PM UTC-6, Soartech wrote:
> > That is odd. I thought OLC split the flight up into 6 equal times. I guess they screwed up on this one.
> > > legs 4-6 were basically my traffic pattern at Paris. Legs 1-3 were the flight there.
>
> no they optimize the distance in 6 legs. equal time has nothing to do with it
The leg after that 5.6 knot thermal showed 94 mph! Wow! 21 knot tailwind and TAS were speeding you along faster than some power planes. Great job. I wish I had my Cirrus out there to tag along on some of those epic flights. Great job.
Lane
XF
Tony[_5_]
March 3rd 17, 02:43 AM
I was usually seeing groundspeeds in the 90-100 mph range during the flight. I think I saw as high as 140mph before I crossed the finish line.
On Wednesday, March 1, 2017 at 4:40:32 PM UTC-8, MNLou wrote:
> Did everyone see that Tony celebrated March 1 by heading downwind for over 500 km?
>
> I think his latest RAS post was probably from on the ground NE of Dallas.
>
> Lou
dang son you just pointed it south and hauled butt.
Soartech
March 5th 17, 03:28 PM
> no they optimize the distance in 6 legs. equal time has nothing to do with it
Tony,
Since you seem to understand this and OLC offers no explanation for any of their calculations that I can find please explain what is meant by "optimize the distance". Why isn't the distance split into 6 segments?
Tony[_5_]
March 5th 17, 04:10 PM
From the rules:
4.3.1 OLC Classic Course
After the flight, a departure point, up to five turn points and a finish point are positioned on the recorded flight path in such a way that the raw point score, from the departure point round the turn points to the finish point, is a great as possible and the departure altitude is no more than 1000m above the finish altitude.
My flight was split into 6 segments, it's just that the first three were really long and the last three really short. Breaking a straight line into segments doesn't make it longer.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.