View Full Version : OLC comment, MOP logging deactivated
Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion 6.83 and it installed ok.
We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC system declare: Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.
I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include " ENL ".
Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
André Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m " DB "
Dan Daly[_2_]
May 22nd 20, 03:17 AM
On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 9:26:44 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion 6.83 and it installed ok.
> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC system declare: Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.
> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include " ENL ".
>
> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
>
> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
>
> André Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m " DB "
Hi André - did you do a FES run before T/O for the FLARM to 'see'?
Dan
kinsell
May 22nd 20, 04:48 AM
On 5/21/20 7:26 PM, wrote:
> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion 6.83 and it installed ok.
> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC system declare: Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.
> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include " ENL ".
>
> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
>
> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
>
> André Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m " DB "
>
Looking at your file on IGC Webview, it shows no significant ENL
readings, just a small amount of noise. Maybe your Flarm isn't picking
up the frequencies generated by your motor, or mmaybe the hardware is
broken?
Hmm I can clearly see an engine noise run at about 2 hrs into the flight near Williamsburg. I used Seeyou desktop.
Also from OLC FAQs.
1.18 FES aircraft with invalid logger recording, what can I do?
- For aircraft with a too low noise level, for example all aircraft with front electric sustainer (FES), the MOP level must also be recorded.
- Only the MOP2 sensor from LXNAV is approved by the OLC.
Tim Newport-Peace[_6_]
May 22nd 20, 10:09 AM
At 03:48 22 May 2020, kinsell wrote:
>On 5/21/20 7:26 PM, wrote:
>> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion
6.83
>and it installed ok.
>> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC
>system declare: Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP
logging
>deactivated.
>> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include
"
>ENL ".
>>
>> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
>>
>> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
>>
>> André Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m " DB "
>>
>
>Looking at your file on IGC Webview, it shows no significant ENL
>readings, just a small amount of noise. Maybe your Flarm isn't picking
>up the frequencies generated by your motor, or mmaybe the hardware is
>broken?
>
MOP and ENL are not the same thing. MOP is provided by an external sensor.
For FES, it is a current tranformer over the supply wire to the motor, for
a Jet it is a suitably filtered noise sensor filtered for jet noise, placed
close to the jet pipe.
OLC is now requiring you buy a MOP sensor for electric gliders where previously an ENL sensor was allowed - this is despite, as I understand it, ENL sensors picking up the FES just fine, and being allowed in world competitions.
On Friday, May 22, 2020 at 3:26:44 AM UTC+2, wrote:
> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion 6.83 and it installed ok.
> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC system declare: Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.
> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include " ENL ".
>
> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
>
> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
>
> André Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m " DB "
Dave Springford
May 22nd 20, 08:23 PM
To expand upon Tim's note:
ENL = Engine Noise Level
MOP = Means of Propulsion
IGC does not allow ENL to be used for electric or Jet engines, they must use MOP sensors.
ENL may be used for gas powered engines. This is not a new change for the IGC, but I think the OLC has just implemented the change in their software.
Many FES owners have been using ENL for years, but it is my understanding that this is no longer allowed by IGC as sufficient proof the FES was not used.
Eric Greenwell[_4_]
May 22nd 20, 09:50 PM
wrote on 5/22/2020 12:19 PM:
> OLC is now requiring you buy a MOP sensor for electric gliders where previously an ENL sensor was allowed - this is despite, as I understand it, ENL sensors picking up the FES just fine, and being allowed in world competitions.
>
> On Friday, May 22, 2020 at 3:26:44 AM UTC+2, wrote:
>> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion 6.83 and it installed ok.
>> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC system declare: Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.
>> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include " ENL ".
>>
>> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
>>
>> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
>>
>> Andr Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m " DB "
>
Does "just fine" include an FES that is flying level at the minimum sink rate? or,
say, at best L/D with sufficient power to double the best L/D?
--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
Tim Newport-Peace[_6_]
May 22nd 20, 10:42 PM
At 19:23 22 May 2020, Dave Springford wrote:
>To expand upon Tim's note:
>
>ENL = Engine Noise Level
>MOP = Means of Propulsion
>
>IGC does not allow ENL to be used for electric or Jet engines, they must
>use MOP sensors.
>
>ENL may be used for gas powered engines. This is not a new change for
the
>IGC, but I think the OLC has just implemented the change in their
software.
>
>Many FES owners have been using ENL for years, but it is my understanding
>that this is no longer allowed by IGC as sufficient proof the FES was not
>used.
>
It gets better! The LX MOP2 sensor can only be used with specified LXV
Flight Recorders.
Tim Newport-Peace[_6_]
May 23rd 20, 03:29 PM
At 19:23 22 May 2020, Dave Springford wrote:
>To expand upon Tim's note:
>
>ENL = Engine Noise Level
>MOP = Means of Propulsion
>
>IGC does not allow ENL to be used for electric or Jet engines, they must
>use MOP sensors.
>
>ENL may be used for gas powered engines. This is not a new change for
the
>IGC, but I think the OLC has just implemented the change in their
software.
>
>Many FES owners have been using ENL for years, but it is my understanding
>that this is no longer allowed by IGC as sufficient proof the FES was not
>used.
>
Dave,
Can you point to a current reference for IGC only allowing MOP sensors for
FES please.
SC3C says:
11.2ENL figures –engine on
An ENL of over 700 is expected when the engine is running at climb power.
Over 900 is typical for a two-stroke engine, and over 700 for a
nose mounted 4-stroke. Values of 999 have been recorded with a
two-stroke engine runningat full power, and over 900 for a Forward Electric
System (FES) with the FR close behind it. These high ENLs are
produced for a significant time during a climb and can therefore be
attributed to engine running.
SC3B says:
1.4.2EngineRecordingSystems - General.
Enginerecording is by IGCENL and MOP systems that are designed to
differentiate between conditions of forward thrust from the engine system,
and gliding flight without the use of engine. The low frequency IGC
Environmental Noise Level (ENL) system uses a sensor inside the FR and is
most sensitive to acoustic noise between100and 200Hz. It was originally
designed to record the operation of two-strokepistonengines, but may also
record reasonable ENL numbers with Forward Electric Systems (FES) if the FR
is installed just behind the engine and its retractible propeller (subject
to testing to show this). Where the ENL system does not produce high
enough readings with certain types of engine an d FR installations, either
the FR location must be changed or an additional sensor under the MOP code
must be fitted so that three high MOP numbers are produced in each IGC file
fix line in addition to ENL. Difficult cases for Engine recording are in
1.4.2.2- 1.4.2.5 below, and more detailis in SC3Annex C (SC3C) Chapter 11,
and Chapter 5 of the FR Specification.
Which seems to be saying "Fit a MOP Sensor where ENL is not Satisfactory"
it does not seem to be mandating it in all cases.
kinsell
May 23rd 20, 04:18 PM
On 5/23/20 8:29 AM, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:
> At 19:23 22 May 2020, Dave Springford wrote:
>> To expand upon Tim's note:
>>
>> ENL = Engine Noise Level
>> MOP = Means of Propulsion
>>
>> IGC does not allow ENL to be used for electric or Jet engines, they must
>> use MOP sensors.
>>
>> ENL may be used for gas powered engines. This is not a new change for
> the
>> IGC, but I think the OLC has just implemented the change in their
> software.
>>
>> Many FES owners have been using ENL for years, but it is my understanding
>> that this is no longer allowed by IGC as sufficient proof the FES was not
>> used.
>>
> Dave,
>
> Can you point to a current reference for IGC only allowing MOP sensors for
> FES please.
>
> SC3C says:
> 11.2ENL figures –engine on
> An ENL of over 700 is expected when the engine is running at climb power.
> Over 900 is typical for a two-stroke engine, and over 700 for a
> nose mounted 4-stroke. Values of 999 have been recorded with a
> two-stroke engine runningat full power, and over 900 for a Forward Electric
> System (FES) with the FR close behind it. These high ENLs are
> produced for a significant time during a climb and can therefore be
> attributed to engine running.
>
> SC3B says:
> 1.4.2EngineRecordingSystems - General.
> Enginerecording is by IGCENL and MOP systems that are designed to
> differentiate between conditions of forward thrust from the engine system,
> and gliding flight without the use of engine. The low frequency IGC
> Environmental Noise Level (ENL) system uses a sensor inside the FR and is
> most sensitive to acoustic noise between100and 200Hz. It was originally
> designed to record the operation of two-strokepistonengines, but may also
> record reasonable ENL numbers with Forward Electric Systems (FES) if the FR
> is installed just behind the engine and its retractible propeller (subject
> to testing to show this). Where the ENL system does not produce high
> enough readings with certain types of engine an d FR installations, either
> the FR location must be changed or an additional sensor under the MOP code
> must be fitted so that three high MOP numbers are produced in each IGC file
> fix line in addition to ENL. Difficult cases for Engine recording are in
> 1.4.2.2- 1.4.2.5 below, and more detailis in SC3Annex C (SC3C) Chapter 11,
> and Chapter 5 of the FR Specification.
>
> Which seems to be saying "Fit a MOP Sensor where ENL is not Satisfactory"
> it does not seem to be mandating it in all cases.
>
>
Current OLC rules, dated Feb 23, say this:
" Flights, which are performed with motorized gliders, have to be
documented with a recording of the motor's operating time (ENL)..
For aircraft with too low noise level, for example all aircraft with a
front electric sustainer (FES), the MOP level must be recorded in
addition to above."
I just looked at a self-launching twin jet glider, its ENL values during
the launch were only about 100. Wonder if OLC is going to be enforcing
MOP for jets also?
Dave Springford
May 23rd 20, 04:31 PM
Hi Tim,
Sorry, I paraphrased too briefly, but the net effect of the code is that FES typically doesn't meet the noise threshold and that MOP is therefore necessary, per your last statement.
As Eric asked above, will ENL "hear" an FES that is running at low enough power to double your L/D or reduce your sink rate in a thermal?
Anecdotal evidence suggests that it can not and some electric engine gliders have been seen assisting themselves with power that is not being recorded in an IGC file by ENL.
However, thanks to @kinsell for reading the OLC rules we now know why OLC is rejecting FES claims without MOP.
Tim Newport-Peace[_6_]
May 23rd 20, 05:57 PM
At 15:31 23 May 2020, Dave Springford wrote:
>Hi Tim,
>
>Sorry, I paraphrased too briefly, but the net effect of the code is that
>FES typically doesn't meet the noise threshold and that MOP is therefore
>necessary, per your last statement.
>
>As Eric asked above, will ENL "hear" an FES that is running at low enough
>power to double your L/D or reduce your sink rate in a thermal?
>
>Anecdotal evidence suggests that it can not and some electric engine
>gliders have been seen assisting themselves with power that is not being
>recorded in an IGC file by ENL.
>
>However, thanks to @kinsell for reading the OLC rules we now know why OLC
>is rejecting FES claims without MOP.
>
I very much suspect that the ENL values with a FES are dependent on where
the recorder is mounted. If it is close to the engine then ENL may be
satisfactory, but if it is panel-mounted then maybe not so.
Good news for the two LX companies however as I believe they are the only
manufacturers of MOP boxes.
kinsell
May 24th 20, 03:14 PM
On 5/23/20 9:31 AM, Dave Springford wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
> Sorry, I paraphrased too briefly, but the net effect of the code is that FES typically doesn't meet the noise threshold and that MOP is therefore necessary, per your last statement.
>
> As Eric asked above, will ENL "hear" an FES that is running at low enough power to double your L/D or reduce your sink rate in a thermal?
>
> Anecdotal evidence suggests that it can not and some electric engine gliders have been seen assisting themselves with power that is not being recorded in an IGC file by ENL.
>
> However, thanks to @kinsell for reading the OLC rules we now know why OLC is rejecting FES claims without MOP.
>
And now, by some miracle, Andre is getting credit for his flight on the
21st. In fact double credit, as the flight was submitted twice. It's
easy to delete flights if you need to resubmit, but only within the two
day time limit.
Tim Newport-Peace[_6_]
May 25th 20, 11:39 AM
At 14:14 24 May 2020, kinsell wrote:
>On 5/23/20 9:31 AM, Dave Springford wrote:
>> Hi Tim,
>>
>> Sorry, I paraphrased too briefly, but the net effect of the code is
that
>FES typically doesn't meet the noise threshold and that MOP is therefore
>necessary, per your last statement.
>>
>> As Eric asked above, will ENL "hear" an FES that is running at low
enough
>power to double your L/D or reduce your sink rate in a thermal?
>>
>> Anecdotal evidence suggests that it can not and some electric engine
>gliders have been seen assisting themselves with power that is not being
>recorded in an IGC file by ENL.
>>
>> However, thanks to @kinsell for reading the OLC rules we now know why
OLC
>is rejecting FES claims without MOP.
>>
>
>And now, by some miracle, Andre is getting credit for his flight on the
>21st. In fact double credit, as the flight was submitted twice. It's
>easy to delete flights if you need to resubmit, but only within the two
>day time limit.
>
I just love a Happy Ending...
kinsell
May 27th 20, 05:41 AM
On 5/25/20 4:39 AM, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:
> At 14:14 24 May 2020, kinsell wrote:
>> On 5/23/20 9:31 AM, Dave Springford wrote:
>>> Hi Tim,
>>>
>>> Sorry, I paraphrased too briefly, but the net effect of the code is
> that
>> FES typically doesn't meet the noise threshold and that MOP is therefore
>> necessary, per your last statement.
>>>
>>> As Eric asked above, will ENL "hear" an FES that is running at low
> enough
>> power to double your L/D or reduce your sink rate in a thermal?
>>>
>>> Anecdotal evidence suggests that it can not and some electric engine
>> gliders have been seen assisting themselves with power that is not being
>> recorded in an IGC file by ENL.
>>>
>>> However, thanks to @kinsell for reading the OLC rules we now know why
> OLC
>> is rejecting FES claims without MOP.
>>>
>>
>> And now, by some miracle, Andre is getting credit for his flight on the
>> 21st. In fact double credit, as the flight was submitted twice. It's
>> easy to delete flights if you need to resubmit, but only within the two
>> day time limit.
>>
> I just love a Happy Ending...
>
>
Well they haven't changed the rules, so not clear just what the ending
is going to be. Maybe just another delay in enforcement.
I flew with an FES and an LX9000 with regular ENL logging today, and I can confirm even on minimum power the FES is clearly visible on the trace ENL. It's electric, but it's far from silent, and louder than any cockpit source of noise.
kinsell
June 26th 20, 08:01 PM
On 6/26/20 11:35 AM, wrote:
> I flew with an FES and an LX9000 with regular ENL logging today, and I can confirm even on minimum power the FES is clearly visible on the trace ENL. It's electric, but it's far from silent, and louder than any cockpit source of noise.
>
Look at the Jeffrey Banks posting May 29. Said he tested a low power
setting, and I can't see any indication of that.
On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 9:26:44 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion 6.83 and it installed ok.
> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC system declare: Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.
> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include " ENL ".
>
> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
>
> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
>
> André Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m " DB "
I posted a July 9 flight to OLC. My glider is a Ventus 3F. The flight log was recorded on a LXNav S10 with MOP2 sensor, which is working. The MOP is referenced on the I record and shows on all the B records. MOP numbers correspond to ENL numbers when viewed on SeeYOu. Despite all that, I got the Autocomment: Aircraft a FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated. Sent email to OLC, but of course, no response... Anybody have an idea what is going on here? Tim Welles
kinsell
July 10th 20, 05:58 PM
On 7/10/20 10:22 AM, wrote:
> On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 9:26:44 PM UTC-4, wrote:
>> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion 6.83 and it installed ok.
>> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC system declare: Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.
>> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include " ENL ".
>>
>> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
>>
>> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
>>
>> André Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m " DB "
>
> I posted a July 9 flight to OLC. My glider is a Ventus 3F. The flight log was recorded on a LXNav S10 with MOP2 sensor, which is working. The MOP is referenced on the I record and shows on all the B records. MOP numbers correspond to ENL numbers when viewed on SeeYOu. Despite all that, I got the Autocomment: Aircraft a FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated. Sent email to OLC, but of course, no response... Anybody have an idea what is going on here? Tim Welles
>
Interesting that the map hasn't been rendered yet, like something
crashed before completion. Have you tried deleting the submission and
resubmitting?
Eric Greenwell[_4_]
July 10th 20, 06:20 PM
kinsell wrote on 7/10/2020 9:58 AM:
> On 7/10/20 10:22 AM, wrote:
>> On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 9:26:44 PM UTC-4, wrote:
>>> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion 6.83 and it
>>> installed ok.
>>> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC system
>>> declare:* Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.
>>> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include " ENL ".
>>>
>>> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
>>>
>>> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
>>>
>>> Andr Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m* " DB "
>>
>> I posted a July 9 flight to OLC. My glider is a Ventus 3F.* The flight log was
>> recorded on a LXNav S10 with MOP2 sensor, which is working.* The MOP is
>> referenced on the I record and shows on all the B records.* MOP numbers
>> correspond to ENL numbers when viewed on SeeYOu.* Despite all that, I got the
>> Autocomment: Aircraft a FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.* Sent email to
>> OLC, but of course, no response...* Anybody have an idea what is going on here?
>> Tim Welles
>>
>
> Interesting that the map hasn't been rendered yet, like something crashed before
> completion.* Have you tried deleting the submission and resubmitting?
Jeff Banks Silent Electro (no MOP) also does not get a map on his postings. I'm
guessing that is intentional for people that don't have an MOP.
--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
On Friday, July 10, 2020 at 12:58:32 PM UTC-4, kinsell wrote:
> On 7/10/20 10:22 AM, wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 9:26:44 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> >> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion 6.83 and it installed ok.
> >> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC system declare: Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.
> >> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include " ENL ".
> >>
> >> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
> >>
> >> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
> >>
> >> André Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m " DB "
> >
> > I posted a July 9 flight to OLC. My glider is a Ventus 3F. The flight log was recorded on a LXNav S10 with MOP2 sensor, which is working. The MOP is referenced on the I record and shows on all the B records. MOP numbers correspond to ENL numbers when viewed on SeeYOu. Despite all that, I got the Autocomment: Aircraft a FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated. Sent email to OLC, but of course, no response... Anybody have an idea what is going on here? Tim Welles
> >
>
> Interesting that the map hasn't been rendered yet, like something
> crashed before completion. Have you tried deleting the submission and
> resubmitting?
Yes, I did delete and resubmit the flight. Same result.
On Friday, July 10, 2020 at 1:20:56 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> kinsell wrote on 7/10/2020 9:58 AM:
> > On 7/10/20 10:22 AM, wrote:
> >> On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 9:26:44 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> >>> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion 6..83 and it
> >>> installed ok.
> >>> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC system
> >>> declare:* Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.
> >>> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include " ENL ".
> >>>
> >>> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
> >>>
> >>> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
> >>>
> >>> André Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m* " DB "
> >>
> >> I posted a July 9 flight to OLC. My glider is a Ventus 3F.* The flight log was
> >> recorded on a LXNav S10 with MOP2 sensor, which is working.* The MOP is
> >> referenced on the I record and shows on all the B records.* MOP numbers
> >> correspond to ENL numbers when viewed on SeeYOu.* Despite all that, I got the
> >> Autocomment: Aircraft a FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.* Sent email to
> >> OLC, but of course, no response...* Anybody have an idea what is going on here?
> >> Tim Welles
> >>
> >
> > Interesting that the map hasn't been rendered yet, like something crashed before
> > completion.* Have you tried deleting the submission and resubmitting?
> Jeff Banks Silent Electro (no MOP) also does not get a map on his postings. I'm
> guessing that is intentional for people that don't have an MOP.
>
> --
> Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
> - "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
Maybe so, but I do have a the MOP2. Tim
Tom Kelley #711
July 10th 20, 07:03 PM
On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 7:26:44 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion 6.83 and it installed ok.
> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC system declare: Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.
> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include " ENL ".
>
> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
>
> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
>
> André Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m " DB "
Tim, OLC saw your "legs"....enough said. :>). #711.
Tim Newport-Peace[_6_]
July 10th 20, 08:30 PM
At 18:03 10 July 2020, Tom Kelley #711 wrote:
>On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 7:26:44 PM UTC-6, wrote:
>> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion
6.83
>=
>and it installed ok.
>> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC
>sys=
>tem declare: Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging
>dea=
>ctivated.
>> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include
"
>=
>ENL ".
>>=20
>> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
>>=20
>> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
>>=20
>> Andr=C3=A9 Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m " DB "
>
>Tim, OLC saw your "legs"....enough said. :>). #711.
>
It has to be realised that MOP is completely separate from ENL.
MOP2 uses a current transformer to record any energy transfer to the motor
as MOP.
Any environmental noise will be recorded separately as ENL.. They are not
alternatives.
As far as I am aware, MOP is only available from LX.
Tim.
Eric Greenwell[_4_]
July 10th 20, 08:43 PM
wrote on 7/10/2020 10:58 AM:
> On Friday, July 10, 2020 at 1:20:56 PM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
>> kinsell wrote on 7/10/2020 9:58 AM:
>>> On 7/10/20 10:22 AM, wrote:
>>>> On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 9:26:44 PM UTC-4, wrote:
>>>>> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion 6..83 and it
>>>>> installed ok.
>>>>> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC system
>>>>> declare:* Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.
>>>>> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include " ENL ".
>>>>>
>>>>> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
>>>>>
>>>>> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
>>>>>
>>>>> Andr Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m* " DB "
>>>>
>>>> I posted a July 9 flight to OLC. My glider is a Ventus 3F.* The flight log was
>>>> recorded on a LXNav S10 with MOP2 sensor, which is working.* The MOP is
>>>> referenced on the I record and shows on all the B records.* MOP numbers
>>>> correspond to ENL numbers when viewed on SeeYOu.* Despite all that, I got the
>>>> Autocomment: Aircraft a FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.* Sent email to
>>>> OLC, but of course, no response...* Anybody have an idea what is going on here?
>>>> Tim Welles
>>>>
>>>
>>> Interesting that the map hasn't been rendered yet, like something crashed before
>>> completion.* Have you tried deleting the submission and resubmitting?
>> Jeff Banks Silent Electro (no MOP) also does not get a map on his postings. I'm
>> guessing that is intentional for people that don't have an MOP.
>>
>> --
>> Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
>> - "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
>> https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
>
> Maybe so, but I do have a the MOP2. Tim
>
I meant to say "where the OLC does not recognize an MOP"
--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
swinkelj
July 10th 20, 10:17 PM
Op vrijdag 10 juli 2020 21:45:04 UTC+2 schreef Tim Newport-Peace:
> At 18:03 10 July 2020, Tom Kelley #711 wrote:
> >On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 7:26:44 PM UTC-6, wrote:
> >> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion
> 6.83
> >=
> >and it installed ok.
> >> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC
> >sys=
> >tem declare: Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging
> >dea=
> >ctivated.
> >> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include
> "
> >=
> >ENL ".
> >>=20
> >> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
> >>=20
> >> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
> >>=20
> >> Andr=C3=A9 Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m " DB "
> >
> >Tim, OLC saw your "legs"....enough said. :>). #711.
> >
> It has to be realised that MOP is completely separate from ENL.
> MOP2 uses a current transformer to record any energy transfer to the motor
>
> as MOP.
>
> Any environmental noise will be recorded separately as ENL.. They are not
> alternatives.
>
> As far as I am aware, MOP is only available from LX.
>
> Tim.
It seems that OLC is sponsored by LX.
If you're implying LX gets some kind of special treatment for their sponsorship, that seems unsupported by the recent events with their devices being blocked from uploading traces?
swinkelj
July 11th 20, 06:14 PM
Op zaterdag 11 juli 2020 12:15:22 UTC+2 schreef :
> If you're implying LX gets some kind of special treatment for their sponsorship, that seems unsupported by the recent events with their devices being blocked from uploading traces?
LX is the only company who has devices for putting flights into OLC if you have a FES system. The others don't have. My logger does have an engine detection system, which perfectly detects my FES, but it is not accepted by OLC since this year. This is a bit suspicious in my opinion.
> LX is the only company who has devices for putting flights into OLC if you have a FES system.
I think LX is also the only company that offers an ENL suitable for turbine (jet) engines. The audible frequency of jets sometimes does not register with a standard ENL that is optimized for a piston/propeller installation.
Tim Newport-Peace[_6_]
July 12th 20, 10:09 AM
At 01:17 12 July 2020, wrote:
>> LX is the only company who has devices for putting flights into OLC if
>you have a FES system.
>
>I think LX is also the only company that offers an ENL suitable for
turbine
>(jet) engines. The audible frequency of jets sometimes does not register
>with a standard ENL that is optimized for a piston/propeller
installation.
>
I think you may mean a MOP type 1b box, which filters to a frequency more
common with Jet engines.
ENL is always internal to the recorder, but MOP is usually a remote sensor.
With a Jet, the main noise is from the Jet Pipe(s), so the sensor needs to
be (ideally) mounted in a suitable place to the rear of the piles, which
usually mounting the sensor at the rear of the engine bay. Hard to put a FR
there as it usually requires removing the engine to gain access.
If LXV is the only company to invest in designing, building and gaining
approval for a MOP box, it is not the fault of LXV. These are commercial
decisions by themselves and their competitors.
Also, it is OLC's decision to require a MOP type2 recorder for FES, not
IGC's.
>
Yes, the jet MOP is a separate unit built by LX. I mistakenly referred to it as an ENL.
We installed four of them on the Jet Arcus gliders we built a few years ago. (See the January/February 2017 of Gliding International.)
kinsell
July 12th 20, 01:05 PM
On 7/12/20 3:09 AM, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:
> At 01:17 12 July 2020, wrote:
>>> LX is the only company who has devices for putting flights into OLC if
>> you have a FES system.
>>
>> I think LX is also the only company that offers an ENL suitable for
> turbine
>> (jet) engines. The audible frequency of jets sometimes does not register
>> with a standard ENL that is optimized for a piston/propeller
> installation.
>>
> I think you may mean a MOP type 1b box, which filters to a frequency more
> common with Jet engines.
>
> ENL is always internal to the recorder, but MOP is usually a remote sensor.
>
>
> With a Jet, the main noise is from the Jet Pipe(s), so the sensor needs to
> be (ideally) mounted in a suitable place to the rear of the piles, which
> usually mounting the sensor at the rear of the engine bay. Hard to put a FR
> there as it usually requires removing the engine to gain access.
>
> If LXV is the only company to invest in designing, building and gaining
> approval for a MOP box, it is not the fault of LXV. These are commercial
> decisions by themselves and their competitors.
>
> Also, it is OLC's decision to require a MOP type2 recorder for FES, not
> IGC's.
>>
>
Looking at LX Navigation (as opposed to LX Nav), they claim to have the
"Worlds first standalone MOP flight recorder with IGC approved sensor
for gliders equipped with jet or electric engines". That makes it sound
like the same hardware is usable for FES or jets. Which seems unlikely.
Withe the ear-splitting noise from a jet engine, you'd think they could
come up with a panel mounted ENL system that was suitable for jets.
Of course FES doesn't cover all all electric gliders, I suppose OLC will
have to change their rules again when the AS 34 and GP-15's start
flooding the market. Any day now.
kinsell
July 12th 20, 01:08 PM
On 7/12/20 6:05 AM, kinsell wrote:
> On 7/12/20 3:09 AM, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:
>> At 01:17 12 July 2020, wrote:
>>>> LX is the only company who has devices for putting flights into OLC if
>>> you have a FES system.
>>>
>>> I think LX is also the only company that offers an ENL suitable for
>> turbine
>>> (jet) engines. The audible frequency of jets sometimes does not register
>>> with a standard ENL that is optimized for a piston/propeller
>> installation.
>>>
>> I think you may mean a MOP type 1b box, which filters to a frequency more
>> common with Jet engines.
>>
>> ENL is always internal to the recorder, but MOP is usually a remote
>> sensor.
>>
>>
>> With a Jet, the main noise is from the Jet Pipe(s), so the sensor
>> needs to
>> be (ideally) mounted in a suitable place to the rear of the piles, which
>> usually mounting the sensor at the rear of the engine bay. Hard to put
>> a FR
>> there as it usually requires removing the engine to gain access.
>>
>> If LXV is the only company to invest in designing, building and gaining
>> approval for a MOP box, it is not the fault of LXV. These are commercial
>> decisions by themselves and their competitors.
>>
>> Also, it is OLC's decision to require a MOP type2 recorder for FES, not
>> IGC's.
>>>
>>
> Looking at LX Navigation (as opposed to LX Nav), they claim to have the
> "Worlds first standalone MOP flight recorder with IGC approved sensor
> for gliders equipped with jet or electric engines".* That makes it sound
> like the same hardware is usable for FES or jets.* Which seems unlikely.
>
> Withe the ear-splitting noise from a jet engine, you'd think they could
> come up with a panel mounted ENL system that was suitable for jets.
>
> Of course FES doesn't cover all all electric gliders, I suppose OLC will
> have to change their rules again when the AS 34 and GP-15's start
> flooding the market.* Any day now.
>
>
>
Oops, left out the Electric Libelle.
Tim Newport-Peace[_6_]
July 12th 20, 02:58 PM
At 12:08 12 July 2020, kinsell wrote:
>On 7/12/20 6:05 AM, kinsell wrote:
>> On 7/12/20 3:09 AM, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:
>>> At 01:17 12 July 2020, wrote:
>>>>> LX is the only company who has devices for putting flights into OLC
if
>>>> you have a FES system.
>>>>
>>>> I think LX is also the only company that offers an ENL suitable for
>>> turbine
>>>> (jet) engines. The audible frequency of jets sometimes does not
>register
>>>> with a standard ENL that is optimized for a piston/propeller
>>> installation.
>>>>
>>> I think you may mean a MOP type 1b box, which filters to a frequency
>more
>>> common with Jet engines.
>>>
>>> ENL is always internal to the recorder, but MOP is usually a remote
>>> sensor.
>>>
>>>
>>> With a Jet, the main noise is from the Jet Pipe(s), so the sensor
>>> needs to
>>> be (ideally) mounted in a suitable place to the rear of the piles,
which
>>> usually mounting the sensor at the rear of the engine bay. Hard to put
>>> a FR
>>> there as it usually requires removing the engine to gain access.
>>>
>>> If LXV is the only company to invest in designing, building and
gaining
>>> approval for a MOP box, it is not the fault of LXV. These are
commercial
>>> decisions by themselves and their competitors.
>>>
>>> Also, it is OLC's decision to require a MOP type2 recorder for FES,
not
>>> IGC's.
>>>>
>>>
>> Looking at LX Navigation (as opposed to LX Nav), they claim to have the
>> "Worlds first standalone MOP flight recorder with IGC approved sensor
>> for gliders equipped with jet or electric engines".* That makes it
sound
>
>> like the same hardware is usable for FES or jets.* Which seems
unlikely.
>>
>> Withe the ear-splitting noise from a jet engine, you'd think they could
>> come up with a panel mounted ENL system that was suitable for jets.
>>
>> Of course FES doesn't cover all all electric gliders, I suppose OLC will
>> have to change their rules again when the AS 34 and GP-15's start
>> flooding the market.* Any day now.
>>
They could still require a MOP type 2 ;=)
>>
>>
>Oops, left out the Electric Libelle.
You are referring to the LX Navigation LX MOP IGC (Sometimes refered to as
a Type 3 MOP).
It records MOP for Jets with a maximum sensitivity at about 6000Hz and ENL
for the rest peaking at 150Hz.
"This small recorder is designed to be installed close to the maximum sound
produced by an engine. The approval does not include other positions that
produce small ENL/MOP numbers".
If mounted in the engine bay to conform to the requirement of being close
to the Jet Pipe(s), retrieving files could be an issue.
>
Emir Sherbi
July 12th 20, 03:27 PM
If the E-glide competitions becomes more popular the mop2 is more interesting. It has an external current sensor. It does not only record the motor activation regardless of the noise but you can measure and register how much energy is used.
The other types of sensors could "fall" in a place that does not record the motor(propeller) noise when using a power settings that extend the L/D.
You can't remove the current sensor without removing a power cable.
kinsell
July 12th 20, 03:48 PM
On 7/12/20 7:58 AM, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:
> At 12:08 12 July 2020, kinsell wrote:
>> On 7/12/20 6:05 AM, kinsell wrote:
>>> On 7/12/20 3:09 AM, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:
>>>> At 01:17 12 July 2020, wrote:
>>>>>> LX is the only company who has devices for putting flights into OLC
> if
>>>>> you have a FES system.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think LX is also the only company that offers an ENL suitable for
>>>> turbine
>>>>> (jet) engines. The audible frequency of jets sometimes does not
>> register
>>>>> with a standard ENL that is optimized for a piston/propeller
>>>> installation.
>>>>>
>>>> I think you may mean a MOP type 1b box, which filters to a frequency
>> more
>>>> common with Jet engines.
>>>>
>>>> ENL is always internal to the recorder, but MOP is usually a remote
>>>> sensor.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> With a Jet, the main noise is from the Jet Pipe(s), so the sensor
>>>> needs to
>>>> be (ideally) mounted in a suitable place to the rear of the piles,
> which
>>>> usually mounting the sensor at the rear of the engine bay. Hard to put
>
>>>> a FR
>>>> there as it usually requires removing the engine to gain access.
>>>>
>>>> If LXV is the only company to invest in designing, building and
> gaining
>>>> approval for a MOP box, it is not the fault of LXV. These are
> commercial
>>>> decisions by themselves and their competitors.
>>>>
>>>> Also, it is OLC's decision to require a MOP type2 recorder for FES,
> not
>>>> IGC's.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> Looking at LX Navigation (as opposed to LX Nav), they claim to have the
>
>>> "Worlds first standalone MOP flight recorder with IGC approved sensor
>>> for gliders equipped with jet or electric engines".Â* That makes it
> sound
>>
>>> like the same hardware is usable for FES or jets.Â* Which seems
> unlikely.
>>>
>>> Withe the ear-splitting noise from a jet engine, you'd think they could
>
>>> come up with a panel mounted ENL system that was suitable for jets.
>>>
>>> Of course FES doesn't cover all all electric gliders, I suppose OLC will
>
>>> have to change their rules again when the AS 34 and GP-15's start
>>> flooding the market.Â* Any day now.
>>>
> They could still require a MOP type 2 ;=)
>>>
>>>
>> Oops, left out the Electric Libelle.
>
> You are referring to the LX Navigation LX MOP IGC (Sometimes refered to as
> a Type 3 MOP).
>
> It records MOP for Jets with a maximum sensitivity at about 6000Hz and ENL
> for the rest peaking at 150Hz.
>
> "This small recorder is designed to be installed close to the maximum sound
> produced by an engine. The approval does not include other positions that
> produce small ENL/MOP numbers".
>
> If mounted in the engine bay to conform to the requirement of being close
> to the Jet Pipe(s), retrieving files could be an issue.
http://lxnavigation.com/downloads/manuals/LX-MOP-IGC-1.0.pdf
The manual says it's a sound-based system suitable for jet or electric
gliders. Ideal mounting position is close to the spar. For an FES,
that doesn't make much sense.
It's powered from a CAN bus, which can be hooked to a Zeus unit for
convenient downloading. Used as a standalone unit, you'll need to mount
yet another GPS antenna. Could be a problem with carbon fiber bay doors.
Luka Žnidaršič[_2_]
July 16th 20, 06:47 AM
4.6.2020 I wrote email:
Dear Rainer,
Recently many FES owners asking about MOP2 installation as ENL is not accepted anymore.
Also on your FAQ is written:
1.18 FES aircraft with invalid logger recording, what can I do?
- For aircraft with a too low noise level, for example all aircraft with front electric sustainer (FES), the MOP level must also be recorded.
- Only the MOP2 sensor from LXNAV is approved by the OLC.
Please note that FES equipped gliders do not have a problem with too low ENL, as propeller is installed in the nose and noise frequency is such that it is easily recognizable by ENL. As you know ENL is problematic with jet gliders (for jets was developed MOP) and also with retractable electric like Antares for which MOP2 was developed.
For FES I think ENL should be accepted. I can provide many igc files for investigation (you can compare, ENL, MOP and FES bridge values).
While FES bridge is quite simple to install, is installation of MOP2 difficult after glider left the manufacturer.*
Another problem is that MOP2 works only with most recent instruments from LXNAV. Usage with older instruments is not possible.
Please consider accepting ENL as before.
How is with data from FES bridge?
Kind regards,
Luka
I received next answer:
Hi Luka,
thanks for your mail and sry. for our late answer.
Last winter we made a lot of effort to integrate FES aircrafts into the OLC..
After reviewing the documentation, we decided to approve only the LXNAV MOP Type 2 sensor in the first year of introduction, because it is the only IGC approved sensor that measures both electrically and ENL.
We have already published this in April in the OLC magazine and there will be no change/extension in the OLC for the time being.
We have to gain experience now.
We ask for your understanding for our decision.
Thanks in advance.
Kind regards - Reiner
On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 9:26:44 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion 6.83 and it installed ok.
> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC system declare: Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.
> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include " ENL ".
>
> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
>
> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
>
> André Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m " DB "
I updated firmware on S10 and MOP2, and FES flight logs now accepted by OLC..
However, I agree with Luka, a current sensor is not needed for a ENL FR and the FES. My flight logs from my ClearNav Vario FR definitely detect operation of the FES, even at low power readings.
Tim Welles
kinsell
July 17th 20, 12:38 PM
On 7/16/20 6:51 AM, wrote:
> On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 9:26:44 PM UTC-4, wrote:
>> Good day all, before the season start I downloaded the Flarm verion 6.83 and it installed ok.
>> We just started flying and my declaration is in light grey as the OLC system declare: Autocomment: Used Aircraft is FES glider, but MOP logging deactivated.
>> I looked in my flarm info and the licences present in my flarm include " ENL ".
>>
>> Any bodie know what this OLC comment refer to
>>
>> Many Thanks in advance and fly safely
>>
>> André Pepin Lak 17b fes 21m " DB "
>
>
> I updated firmware on S10 and MOP2, and FES flight logs now accepted by OLC.
>
> However, I agree with Luka, a current sensor is not needed for a ENL FR and the FES. My flight logs from my ClearNav Vario FR definitely detect operation of the FES, even at low power readings.
> Tim Welles
>
Yet you look at the Jeffrey Banks file from May 29, he tested at low
power and nothing registered on the ENL. A system needs to work all the
time, not some of the time.
This is the OLC, not the world championships. There's no official observer of the pilot or even the type of aircraft. If I set my glider type to a T21 and fly an EB29 I can also cheat.
Why is this standard not applied to jets - often not detected even at full power, or even petrol engines? You can wrap a Nano in some foam and put it in a box and I bet it won't detect a rotary engine.
Perhaps Jeffrey has a suboptimal install, and he should fix that.
Eric Greenwell[_4_]
July 17th 20, 02:12 PM
wrote on 7/17/2020 4:56 AM:
> This is the OLC, not the world championships. There's no official observer of the pilot or even the type of aircraft. If I set my glider type to a T21 and fly an EB29 I can also cheat.
>
> Why is this standard not applied to jets - often not detected even at full power, or even petrol engines? You can wrap a Nano in some foam and put it in a box and I bet it won't detect a rotary engine.
>
> Perhaps Jeffrey has a suboptimal install, and he should fix that.
>
Perhaps the problem the OLC is trying to solve is installations that appear to
show full power properly, but can not detect low power operation, as appears to be
case in Jeff's Silent.
--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
Dan Marotta
July 17th 20, 03:02 PM
Why do we care what OLC says, anyway?* Why so many rules, when there's
nothing to be gained other than frustration when one's flight is
rejected.* I have yet to see any trophies, cash or the ubiquitous hot
chicks flowing from any flight.* As stated above, this is not world
competition, only the place where, it seems, most glider pilots post
their flights.* I keep posting on OLC only out of habit in case any of
my friends are interested.
I recall back in the 90s when we had a map posted on the club house wall
and we would use stick pins and string to show our flights if we felt we
had made a good one.
On 7/17/2020 7:12 AM, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> wrote on 7/17/2020 4:56 AM:
>> This is the OLC, not the world championships. There's no official
>> observer of the pilot or even the type of aircraft. If I set my
>> glider type to a T21 and fly an EB29 I can also cheat.
>>
>> Why is this standard not applied to jets - often not detected even at
>> full power, or even petrol engines? You can wrap a Nano in some foam
>> and put it in a box and I bet it won't detect a rotary engine.
>>
>> Perhaps Jeffrey has a suboptimal install, and he should fix that.
>>
> Perhaps the problem the OLC is trying to solve is installations that
> appear to show full power properly, but can not detect low power
> operation, as appears to be case in Jeff's Silent.
>
--
Dan, 5J
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.