task not completed ClearNavII

[BobWa43]

I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start to first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie produced task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case said no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could help.Thanks ,
BobW

[kinsell]

On 5/14/20 8:04 AM, BobWa43 wrote:
> I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start to first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie produced task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case said no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could help.Thanks ,
> BobW
>

Possibly the infamous backwards time jump that's been discussed at
length? Both LXNav and ClearNav use funky GPS modules that take forever
to get the time right, which causes a backwards jump minutes after
achieving lock.

Try powering on the unit, wait for lock, then wait 10 minutes before
taking off.

-Dave

[[email protected]]

I see you also posted the question on the clear nav forum. You'll get some help.
I was frustrated with mine when I first started using it, until I slowly started learning how it worked and what was going on.
You'll get there, and probably like it when you do.

[Tango Eight]

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 10:04:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
> I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start to first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie produced task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case said no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could help.Thanks ,
> BobW

CN doesn't give a task complete message. I guess the developers thought the typical user wouldn't need that announcement :-).

There is an issue with GPS time offsets as Dave mentions. It doesn't take anything like ten minutes to get the proper time, but it's good practice to have the computer on for at least 5 minutes before flight. The work around in the event of a problem log due to the time jump is to D/L again at 4 second interval. The thing that's coughing up errors in the analysis is an out of sequence time stamp.

best,
Evan Ludeman

[[email protected]]

If you put the "time since start" or the "time to finish" box on your screen you know the task completed when they stop counting.

[BobWa43]

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 10:04:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
> I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start to first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie produced task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case said no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could help.Thanks ,
> BobW

Thanks to all who have responded. I do not understand the time stamp problem. Could some one discuss this issue in more detail or point me to the previous discussion.

[kinsell]

On 5/14/20 12:57 PM, BobWa43 wrote:
> On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 10:04:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
>> I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start to first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie produced task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case said no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could help.Thanks ,
>> BobW
>
> Thanks to all who have responded. I do not understand the time stamp problem. Could some one discuss this issue in more detail or point me to the previous discussion.
>

There was a big discussion "Implausible Time Records" here a year ago.

The gps module (made by U-Blox) gets the time from satellites as soon as
it has position lock, but a few minutes later, a leap second correction
factor is received and makes the time jump backwards a few seconds.
Doesn't seem like a big deal, but causes some of the analysis software
to go bonkers. OLC can show bizarre plots where the entire flight is
compressed into a small portion of the time vs altitude graph for example.

Marotta started that discussion, he was also getting apparent GPS
jamming on parts of his flights, which complicated things.

-Dave

[BobWa43]

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 11:14:57 AM UTC-4, Tango Eight wrote:
> On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 10:04:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
> > I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start to first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie produced task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case said no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could help.Thanks ,
> > BobW
>
> CN doesn't give a task complete message. I guess the developers thought the typical user wouldn't need that announcement :-).
>
> There is an issue with GPS time offsets as Dave mentions. It doesn't take anything like ten minutes to get the proper time, but it's good practice to have the computer on for at least 5 minutes before flight. The work around in the event of a problem log due to the time jump is to D/L again at 4 second interval. The thing that's coughing up errors in the analysis is an out of sequence time stamp.
>
> best,
> Evan Ludeman

" I guess the developers thought the typical user wouldn't need that announcement" Are snide comments like this really necessary?

[Tango Eight]

On Friday, May 15, 2020 at 8:26:43 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
> On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 11:14:57 AM UTC-4, Tango Eight wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 10:04:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
> > > I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start to first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie produced task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case said no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could help.Thanks ,
> > > BobW
> >
> > CN doesn't give a task complete message. I guess the developers thought the typical user wouldn't need that announcement :-).
> >
> > There is an issue with GPS time offsets as Dave mentions. It doesn't take anything like ten minutes to get the proper time, but it's good practice to have the computer on for at least 5 minutes before flight. The work around in the event of a problem log due to the time jump is to D/L again at 4 second interval. The thing that's coughing up errors in the analysis is an out of sequence time stamp.
> >
> > best,
> > Evan Ludeman
>
> " I guess the developers thought the typical user wouldn't need that announcement" Are snide comments like this really necessary?

Snide? No....

It's pretty /obvious/ to most of us when we finish a task! Putting an announcement on the device is at best a video game like distraction (you're probably busy with your airport arrival & landing).

The purpose of the Nav device is to give the pilot useful information in flight. Whether or not you task is valid, complete and suitable for the record books or daily win is the stuff of post flight analysis.

Evan Ludeman

[MNLou]

Sorry Evan but I disagree.

I fly with an Oudie 2. It tells me when I finish a task and the average speed on the task upon crossing the finish line. I really like that feature.

I'm not knocking ClearNav for not having it but I do think it would be an improvement to add it.

Lou

[[email protected]]

Could this discussion be the problem with a recent flight? At the end of a two hour flight, OLC recording stopped about ten miles from closing my triangle. There was no power interruption and the ClearNav screen never blanked out. Any thoughts here?

[Tango Eight]

On Friday, May 15, 2020 at 11:01:54 AM UTC-4, MNLou wrote:
> Sorry Evan but I disagree.
>
> I fly with an Oudie 2. It tells me when I finish a task and the average speed on the task upon crossing the finish line. I really like that feature.
>
> I'm not knocking ClearNav for not having it but I do think it would be an improvement to add it.
>
> Lou

CN retains speed & distance stats IIRC.

E.

[kinsell]

On 5/15/20 9:07 AM, wrote:
> Could this discussion be the problem with a recent flight? At the end of a two hour flight, OLC recording stopped about ten miles from closing my triangle. There was no power interruption and the ClearNav screen never blanked out. Any thoughts here?
>

Not likely to be related. The time glitch can be seen in the igc file,
the time stamp would be a backward jump of a few seconds in the data
several minutes into the file. If you took off before the glitch
occurred, that's what causes the problems in the analysis. If the
recording actually stopped before the flight ended, that would be a
different problem. Maybe OLC is just not displaying the flight correctly.

A pointer to the file on OLC would be useful.

[[email protected]]

Without an email, don’t know how to point at it.

[kinsell]

On 5/15/20 10:48 AM, wrote:
> Without an email, don’t know how to point at it.
>

If you post your name and date of the flight, then anybody could
download from OLC and take a look.

For RAS, I use which is visible
to some people, depending on how they read messages.

-Dave

[Tango Eight]

On Friday, May 15, 2020 at 5:30:16 PM UTC-4, Nick Kennedy wrote:
> T8
> You would remember way back in day the CAI 302/303 would give you 2 announcements.
> 1. You were approaching the finish.
> 2. You finished.
> I still use that system and appreciate it and don't find it distracting.
> Nice to know after a long day you completed your task!
> Just saying
> Nick
> T

I'm guessing you have no CN2 time to speak of. CN2 SHOWS you exactly where you are w.r.t. the finish and your predicted finish height over minimum & your predicted time to finish, all the way in. The only thing it doesn't do is give you an "attaboy" screen and text all your friends about it. You guys are inventing problems that simply do not exist.

best,
Evan

[Nick Kennedy[_3_]]

Whatta mean the CN2 doesn't text all my friends that I finished my task?
What kinda BS flight computer is that??
Do you live in a cave?
Its 2020 if you haven't noticed.
Nick
T

[kinsell]

On 5/15/20 6:25 PM, Tango Eight wrote:
> On Friday, May 15, 2020 at 5:30:16 PM UTC-4, Nick Kennedy wrote:
>> T8
>> You would remember way back in day the CAI 302/303 would give you 2 announcements.
>> 1. You were approaching the finish.
>> 2. You finished.
>> I still use that system and appreciate it and don't find it distracting.
>> Nice to know after a long day you completed your task!
>> Just saying
>> Nick
>> T
>
> I'm guessing you have no CN2 time to speak of. CN2 SHOWS you exactly where you are w.r.t. the finish and your predicted finish height over minimum & your predicted time to finish, all the way in. The only thing it doesn't do is give you an "attaboy" screen and text all your friends about it. You guys are inventing problems that simply do not exist.
>
> best,
> Evan
>

Ever heard that phrase about the customer always being right? Didn't
think so.

[[email protected]]

> Ever heard that phrase about the customer always being right? Didn't
> think so.

Well, after 20+ years of trying to provide glider related accessories, I can think of more than a few instances of the customer NOT being right. (Or reasonable. Or was calling from some parallel universe.)

- There was the guy that wanted a "lightweight trailer" that he could tow with his mini-motorhome. But he wanted:
-Room for a small car that he could use to commute while leaving his motorhome parked.
-Also, a way to hoist the glider and the wings high enough so he could have a workshop underneath.
-Also, he didn't see too much problem with having the trailer engineered so that the glider would be self-rigging without having to lift things that were too heavy, as he anticipated being in a wheelchair pretty soon due to his physical condition, which was deteriorating rapidly.
-Also, did I know of any flight schools that could teach him how to fly the glider he was thinking about buying, in the limited time frame he had left to live?
-And finally, he was trying to decide between (NO JOKE!) an SGS 1-26 and an ASH-26, because he "always liked the number 26," because it was the number of letters in Jesus's alphabet.

I have a few other "special request" stories that come close but this one definitely took First Place.

[Tango Eight]

On Friday, May 15, 2020 at 9:10:38 PM UTC-4, kinsell wrote:
> On 5/15/20 6:25 PM, Tango Eight wrote:
> > On Friday, May 15, 2020 at 5:30:16 PM UTC-4, Nick Kennedy wrote:
> >> T8
> >> You would remember way back in day the CAI 302/303 would give you 2 announcements.
> >> 1. You were approaching the finish.
> >> 2. You finished.
> >> I still use that system and appreciate it and don't find it distracting.
> >> Nice to know after a long day you completed your task!
> >> Just saying
> >> Nick
> >> T
> >
> > I'm guessing you have no CN2 time to speak of. CN2 SHOWS you exactly where you are w.r.t. the finish and your predicted finish height over minimum & your predicted time to finish, all the way in. The only thing it doesn't do is give you an "attaboy" screen and text all your friends about it. You guys are inventing problems that simply do not exist.
> >
> > best,
> > Evan
> >
>
> Ever heard that phrase about the customer always being right? Didn't
> think so.

If you want to be effortlessly "right", then this ain't your sport, sport.

T8

[Craig Reinholt]

After 40 years in retail, this commonly circulated statement is probably the greatest piece of horse manure ever created.
Craig

> Ever heard that phrase about the customer always being right? Didn't

[BobWa43]

On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 10:04:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
> I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start to first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie produced task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case said no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could help.Thanks ,
> BobW

One mystery solved another found. It seems as though my ClearNav2 has suddenly started randomly recording high levels of engine noise, sometimes even when it is sitting on the ground. SeeYou gave me credit for an engine run in the middle of the flight thus changing the soaring start time to well after the task start time. Anyone experience similar behavior from their ClearNav2? Any explanation other than the usual vent noise, etc? Nano near ClearNav did not record any significant noise. Another good reason to restore the utility allowing downloads from Cambridge 302 through ClearNav.

[Tango Eight]

On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 8:45:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
> On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 10:04:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
> > I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start to first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie produced task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case said no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could help.Thanks ,
> > BobW
>
> One mystery solved another found. It seems as though my ClearNav2 has suddenly started randomly recording high levels of engine noise, sometimes even when it is sitting on the ground. SeeYou gave me credit for an engine run in the middle of the flight thus changing the soaring start time to well after the task start time. Anyone experience similar behavior from their ClearNav2? Any explanation other than the usual vent noise, etc? Nano near ClearNav did not record any significant noise. Another good reason to restore the utility allowing downloads from Cambridge 302 through ClearNav.

No, it's not supposed to do that. In the worst case, it's a hardware fault that will have to be corrected.

I answered the initial query here because it seemed like something that might have been of more general interest. I should have made clear that we typically do online customer support here https://clearnav.net/forum/index.php

best regards,
Evan Ludeman for CNi

[kinsell]

On 5/17/20 7:25 AM, Tango Eight wrote:
> On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 8:45:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
>> On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 10:04:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
>>> I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start to first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie produced task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case said no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could help.Thanks ,
>>> BobW
>>
>> One mystery solved another found. It seems as though my ClearNav2 has suddenly started randomly recording high levels of engine noise, sometimes even when it is sitting on the ground. SeeYou gave me credit for an engine run in the middle of the flight thus changing the soaring start time to well after the task start time. Anyone experience similar behavior from their ClearNav2? Any explanation other than the usual vent noise, etc? Nano near ClearNav did not record any significant noise. Another good reason to restore the utility allowing downloads from Cambridge 302 through ClearNav.
>
> No, it's not supposed to do that. In the worst case, it's a hardware fault that will have to be corrected.
>
> I answered the initial query here because it seemed like something that might have been of more general interest. I should have made clear that we typically do online customer support here https://clearnav.net/forum/index.php
>
> best regards,
> Evan Ludeman for CNi
>

He posted on the support forum first, got no solution, so then he posted
here.

I looked at his log, he also has a bizarre issue with B records having
duplicate time stamps. Sounds like flakey hardware that needs to be
replaced.

-Dave

[Tim Newport-Peace[_6_]]

At 14:01 17 May 2020, kinsell wrote:
>On 5/17/20 7:25 AM, Tango Eight wrote:
>> On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 8:45:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
>>> On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 10:04:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
>>>> I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using
>the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start
to
>first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish
>but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my
>Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task
>finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the
>flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie
produced
>task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case
said
>no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does
>ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very
>frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be
>happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could
>help.Thanks ,
>>>> BobW
>>>
>>> One mystery solved another found. It seems as though my ClearNav2 has
>suddenly started randomly recording high levels of engine noise,
sometimes
>even when it is sitting on the ground. SeeYou gave me credit for an
engine
>run in the middle of the flight thus changing the soaring start time to
>well after the task start time. Anyone experience similar behavior from
>their ClearNav2? Any explanation other than the usual vent noise, etc?
>Nano near ClearNav did not record any significant noise. Another good
>reason to restore the utility allowing downloads from Cambridge 302
through
>ClearNav.
>>
>> No, it's not supposed to do that. In the worst case, it's a hardware
>fault that will have to be corrected.
>>
>> I answered the initial query here because it seemed like something that
>might have been of more general interest. I should have made clear that
we
>typically do online customer support here
>https://clearnav.net/forum/index.php
>>
>> best regards,
>> Evan Ludeman for CNi
>>
>
>He posted on the support forum first, got no solution, so then he posted
>here.
>
>I looked at his log, he also has a bizarre issue with B records having
>duplicate time stamps. Sounds like flakey hardware that needs to be
>replaced.
>
>-Dave
>
When recording at 1 second intervals, with a 1 second resolution, this can
happen. When it does. download again at (say) 4 second intervals.

Tim.

[kinsell]

On 5/17/20 9:20 AM, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:
> At 14:01 17 May 2020, kinsell wrote:
>> On 5/17/20 7:25 AM, Tango Eight wrote:
>>> On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 8:45:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
>>>> On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 10:04:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
>>>>> I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using
>> the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start
> to
>> first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish
>> but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my
>> Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task
>> finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the
>> flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie
> produced
>> task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case
> said
>> no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does
>> ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very
>> frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be
>> happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could
>> help.Thanks ,
>>>>> BobW
>>>>
>>>> One mystery solved another found. It seems as though my ClearNav2 has
>> suddenly started randomly recording high levels of engine noise,
> sometimes
>> even when it is sitting on the ground. SeeYou gave me credit for an
> engine
>> run in the middle of the flight thus changing the soaring start time to
>> well after the task start time. Anyone experience similar behavior from
>> their ClearNav2? Any explanation other than the usual vent noise, etc?
>> Nano near ClearNav did not record any significant noise. Another good
>> reason to restore the utility allowing downloads from Cambridge 302
> through
>> ClearNav.
>>>
>>> No, it's not supposed to do that. In the worst case, it's a hardware
>> fault that will have to be corrected.
>>>
>>> I answered the initial query here because it seemed like something that
>> might have been of more general interest. I should have made clear that
> we
>> typically do online customer support here
>> https://clearnav.net/forum/index.php
>>>
>>> best regards,
>>> Evan Ludeman for CNi
>>>
>>
>> He posted on the support forum first, got no solution, so then he posted
>> here.
>>
>> I looked at his log, he also has a bizarre issue with B records having
>> duplicate time stamps. Sounds like flakey hardware that needs to be
>> replaced.
>>
>> -Dave
>>
> When recording at 1 second intervals, with a 1 second resolution, this can
> happen. When it does. download again at (say) 4 second intervals.
>
> Tim.
>

He had downloaded at 2 second intervals and was getting this. Very
peculiar pattern to it, if the number of seconds ended in "3", then that
time stamp tended to be repeated, but with slightly different position
data, so it was a new reading. Occasionally other time stamps would be
repeated. Seems like electrical noise, or a bad chip to me.

I've asked for a 1 second interval download to see what that looks like.

[5Z]

On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 8:30:04 AM UTC-7, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:
> When recording at 1 second intervals, with a 1 second resolution, this can
> happen. When it does. download again at (say) 4 second intervals.
>

Properly designed software would validate the output it produces.

If the spec for an IGC file stipulates that the timestamps on each record must be different and increasing, then why doesn't the FR drop those? There's already various algorithms in there massaging the data, so why isn't there logic to ensure the file is correctly formatted?

5Z

[Tango Eight]

On Monday, May 18, 2020 at 11:25:50 PM UTC-4, 5Z wrote:
> On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 8:30:04 AM UTC-7, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:
> > When recording at 1 second intervals, with a 1 second resolution, this can
> > happen. When it does. download again at (say) 4 second intervals.
> >
>
> Properly designed software would validate the output it produces.
>
> If the spec for an IGC file stipulates that the timestamps on each record must be different and increasing, then why doesn't the FR drop those? There's already various algorithms in there massaging the data, so why isn't there logic to ensure the file is correctly formatted?
>
> 5Z

There have been plenty of cases of valid IGC files coughing up hairballs on OLC. "Properly designed software" applies to more than the flight recorder.