OLC scoring - USA

[Ian Cant]

Over the last few days I have noticed that the number
of US competitors has
crept up from 142 to 145, but on the daily score sheet
there have been no
scored flights. I have looked at the 'unscored' flights
which have
appeared, but they do not seem to correspond with the
increased number of
competitors. This may be just a timing issue, or poor
observation on my
part - can anyone say what's happening ?

Ian

[[email protected]]

Mitosis.

[[email protected]]

Brian Iten 26.11, Rick Barber 27.11, Gary Campbell 23.11

Maybe?

Bob

[Jack]

Ian Cant wrote:
> Over the last few days I have noticed that the number
> of US competitors has
> crept up from 142 to 145, but on the daily score sheet
> there have been no
> scored flights. I have looked at the 'unscored' flights
> which have
> appeared, but they do not seem to correspond with the
> increased number of
> competitors. This may be just a timing issue, or poor
> observation on my
> part - can anyone say what's happening ?
>

I wish I knew enough about the USA OLC to answer your question
thoroughly. Hopefully someone else here does know. I wish it were as
easy to understand the workings of the OLC as its booming popularity
deserves. US participation has doubled in each successive year of its
existence.

It appears to me that:

As of now, there are 773 "Competitors" -- pilots who have signed up for
the USA OLC, without necessarily submitting flights;

There are 145 on the "OLC_Champions" list -- pilots who have submitted
scoreable flights;

The OLC site has been experiencing some anomalies as it transitions to
the new season's database, but OLC seem to be working them out, if
slowly. I noticed some inconsistencies in flights here in region Seven
(easy since there are so few flights here this time of year) that have,
after several weeks, been corrected.

These three pages are all that I have found, in English, to explain the
OLC: <http://tinyurl.com/bb3mm>, <http://tinyurl.com/eyfgn>, and
<http://tinyurl.com/9kj3z>.

I hope that as SSA takes over OLC for the USA it will result in a
clarifying of the behind-the-scenes processes, and result in more
useful, detailed explanations in English -- including a Forum for OLC
discussions, preferably on the SSA USENET Groups. They need to be
enlivened anyway.


WRT: [Rule] 10. Validation
Flights and scores will be accepted if no objections have been
filed against them within 4 weeks after the corresponding weekly
deadline (see para 6)."

During the 2005 season, a significant percentage of flights filed in
Region Seven contained no point on the track which was actually within
the region's boundaries. I can only assume that a similar proportion of
errors occurred in other regions. I believe all the erroneous entries I
noted were the result of keyboard fumbling and inattention, e.g.,
clicking on an adjacent pull-down menu item to the one intended during
the submission process. As noted above, objections to these entries must
be submitted within four weeks or they will be incorporated into the
results as entered. Anyone can file an objection, but it would be best
if the Pilot submitting the flight would be careful to review the entry
to see that it is represented properly.

Also there are instances where the same individual has registered with
OLC multiple times using either the same name or a slight variation.
Consequently the number of actual "Competitors" is somewhat less than
stated on the OLC site.

Corrections to the above perceptions are heartily encouraged.


Jack

[Frank Whiteley]

Personally, I don't know why we are using regional filters at all
unless someone in the SSA is planning on regional records/awards. But
those are not in evidence at this point. Since the SSA has the rights
to the US OLC, I'd like to know who requested the regional queries and
what the plans are. It's worthy of discussion. If this is posted
somewhere, point me there please.

I did award state OLC trophies this year and would appreciate some
selectable state filters to isolate flights originating here,
terminating here, or both. However, I can import pilot flights into a
spreadsheet or database and filter appropriately, just takes extra time
and effort. Criteria for last year were Colorado starts. This
eliminated those flights in Uvalde, Hobbs, and Parowan which might have
skewed things a bit here and there. I also included all Colorado
flights, rather than the top six, as the top six led to additional
skewing to particular sites. Including all flights showed pilot
effort, even though there was little difference in the total number of
flights among the best pilots after the out of state flights were
removed. The regional query also removes flights outside the region,
so it misses what some pilots based within the region may be doing. I
guess the question is where to draw the lines and why. I found the
regional query useless.

Frank Whiteley
SSA Governor Colorado

[Jack]

Frank Whiteley wrote:

> Personally, I don't know why we are using regional filters at all
> unless someone in the SSA is planning on regional records/awards.

The regional filter began with the 2005 season, did it not? SSA takes
over at some point during the 2006 season. You would know better than I
if the addition of the Regional filter was at the behest of SSA, but I
think it was a good idea whatever its source, and I also think regional
awards make sense.

I like the regional filter as it allows us to easily review, compare,
and hopefully learn from, flights that can be readily related to our
own. It doesn't do me much good to look at a Discus 2B flight at Minden
when what I really want to know is what did Jim Hard and Kevin Ford do
in their 1-26's here in my neck of the woods, on the same day that I do
nothing of the kind. I want to do be able to do what they do, some day
(and I'm sure not getting any younger).

Except for filters like the Regions and the Clubs, it would be very
difficult to get the info that I want about flying what I fly, where I
fly. Conversely it also helps me plan where to go to get the kind of
flying that I can't get here at all, or cannot get in a particular
season. In fact, I want more filters. I like the idea of the Departure
airfield filter, new for the 2006 season. And I want a glider
type-specific filter so I can easily sort for 1-26 flights, or whatever
type I may fly or hope to fly. Not all 1-26 flights, for example, get
posted to the 1-26 Association, though I suppose most do. Information is
good. The more you have the more ideas you get for how to put it to use.

The whole point of the OLC is motivation, and it works, as clearly
evidenced by the growth in participation in each successive season. Go
back and look at the data for 2002, 2003, and 2004, as well as last
season, and you will see a strong progression in participation, and a
big improvement in presentation and in amount of information available.


> The regional query also removes flights outside the region,
> so it misses what some pilots based within the region may be doing.

Flights by an individual pilot, wherever made, seem easy enough to get.
There are plenty of refinements that can still be made in the OLC but
subtracting information, and the filters we use to get it, would be
moving in the wrong direction.

As you say, you "can still import flights into a spreadsheet or database
and filter appropriately, [it] just takes extra time and effort." And
knowledgeable individuals will continue to do just that in order to
satisfy their particular curiosities. However, a good number of OLC
participants, and potential participants, are not yet ready to construct
their own spreadsheet or database type filters. The combination of
computer and software facility and sailplane proficiency should not be a
double barrier to participation for the Flyin' New Guys that we want and
need.

Give 'em the info, keep it simple, and keep 'em flyin'.


Jack

[5Z]

Jack wrote:
> The regional filter began with the 2005 season, did it not? SSA takes
> over at some point during the 2006 season.

The SSA is not "taking over" the OLC. They are just supporting it as
an "official" SSA activity. Currently, they are looking for US
sponsors to help support this great effort which is and will be based
in Germany.

Region 9 director Chip Garner is spearheading this effort.

-Tom

[Mike the Strike]

>
> Region 9 director Chip Garner is spearheading this effort.
>
> -Tom

I and my colleagues in the Arizona Soaring Association fully supports
OLC and its challenge to the USA soaring community. From my
perspective, this includes SSA's support, as long as the latter doesn't
become an undue burden with unnecessary new rules, policing or
nannying.

OLC participation has already increased cross-country flying here in
Arizona. Our local FBO was amazed to see five gliders turn up on a
freezing November day this last weekend so that we could add a few
hundred more OLC points. (We had thermals to 7,500 feet on Saturday
and 8,500 feet Sunday, plus some wave).

The OLC is working, don't weigh it down with too many rules or too much
beaurocracy!

Scoring should be easy, transparent and accessible.

Mike

[Jack]

5Z wrote:

> The SSA is not "taking over" the OLC. They are just supporting it as
> an "official" SSA activity. Currently, they are looking for US
> sponsors to help support this great effort which is and will be based
> in Germany.
>
> Region 9 director Chip Garner is spearheading this effort.

Thanks very much, Tom.

To Chip, out there somewhere, in USENET land -- What does "supporting"
mean to the SSA?

Will there be nuts-and-bolts improvements, or will it be more of an
advertising linkage than an enhancement to the USA OLC online?


Jack

[Greg Arnold]

Also, will SSA limit participation to SSA members?

Jack wrote:
> 5Z wrote:
>
>> The SSA is not "taking over" the OLC. They are just supporting it as
>> an "official" SSA activity. Currently, they are looking for US
>> sponsors to help support this great effort which is and will be based
>> in Germany.
>>
>> Region 9 director Chip Garner is spearheading this effort.
>
> Thanks very much, Tom.
>
> To Chip, out there somewhere, in USENET land -- What does "supporting"
> mean to the SSA?
>
> Will there be nuts-and-bolts improvements, or will it be more of an
> advertising linkage than an enhancement to the USA OLC online?
>
>
> Jack
>

[Bill Daniels]

"Frank Whiteley" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Personally, I don't know why we are using regional filters at all
> unless someone in the SSA is planning on regional records/awards. But
> those are not in evidence at this point. Since the SSA has the rights
> to the US OLC, I'd like to know who requested the regional queries and
> what the plans are. It's worthy of discussion. If this is posted
> somewhere, point me there please.
>
> I did award state OLC trophies this year and would appreciate some
> selectable state filters to isolate flights originating here,
> terminating here, or both. However, I can import pilot flights into a
> spreadsheet or database and filter appropriately, just takes extra time
> and effort. Criteria for last year were Colorado starts. This
> eliminated those flights in Uvalde, Hobbs, and Parowan which might have
> skewed things a bit here and there. I also included all Colorado
> flights, rather than the top six, as the top six led to additional
> skewing to particular sites. Including all flights showed pilot
> effort, even though there was little difference in the total number of
> flights among the best pilots after the out of state flights were
> removed. The regional query also removes flights outside the region,
> so it misses what some pilots based within the region may be doing. I
> guess the question is where to draw the lines and why. I found the
> regional query useless.
>
> Frank Whiteley
> SSA Governor Colorado
>

I'd like to see the worlds national clubs adapt the OLC as a recruiting
tool. The 'WOW!" response evoked by showing an XC flight on SeeYou to a
someone new is increadible. I predict that the OLC plus a flight viewer
will be the 'killer app' soaring recruitment has been looking for.

Lets figure out an easy way for newbies to view these flights. The OLC
'info' page with map and barogram is good but a JAVA app with animation
would be far better, especially if multiple flights could be animated on the
same map. For example if the daily score page could animate all flights in
a country for that day.

Bill Daniels

[Paul Remde]

Hi Frank,

I would love it if it were possible to list all flights from (for example)
Minnesota. I hosted a contest in 2005 in Minnesota and it was somewhat
difficult to extract data for all flights that originated in MN. That would
make it even more fun than it already is in my opinion. To find the data I
had to know which pilot had submitted OLC flights. I was then able to
generated a spreadsheet manually by looking at lists of flights by each
pilot. The competition I sponsored also compared flights from specific
soaring sites. That was tough because some of the pilots flew from multiple
locations and submitted flights to the 1-26 Association. In the end I was
able to use the spreadsheet to compare the flights from the 3 gliderports,
but it was not easy. It would be awesome to be able to see a total of all
flights that originated from a particular soaring site.

The contest I sponsored for 2005 is shown here:
http://www.soarmn.com/cumulus/olc-mn.htm

Good Soaring,

Paul Remde
Cumulus Soaring, Inc.
http://www.cumulus-soaring.com

"Frank Whiteley" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Personally, I don't know why we are using regional filters at all
> unless someone in the SSA is planning on regional records/awards. But
> those are not in evidence at this point. Since the SSA has the rights
> to the US OLC, I'd like to know who requested the regional queries and
> what the plans are. It's worthy of discussion. If this is posted
> somewhere, point me there please.
>
> I did award state OLC trophies this year and would appreciate some
> selectable state filters to isolate flights originating here,
> terminating here, or both. However, I can import pilot flights into a
> spreadsheet or database and filter appropriately, just takes extra time
> and effort. Criteria for last year were Colorado starts. This
> eliminated those flights in Uvalde, Hobbs, and Parowan which might have
> skewed things a bit here and there. I also included all Colorado
> flights, rather than the top six, as the top six led to additional
> skewing to particular sites. Including all flights showed pilot
> effort, even though there was little difference in the total number of
> flights among the best pilots after the out of state flights were
> removed. The regional query also removes flights outside the region,
> so it misses what some pilots based within the region may be doing. I
> guess the question is where to draw the lines and why. I found the
> regional query useless.
>
> Frank Whiteley
> SSA Governor Colorado
>

[Frank Whiteley]

I made a few attempts to get my club to adopt a UK like ladder system
over the past few years, without success. The UK clubs often
established a club ladder, best four flights, as an annual trophy
recognition. The BGA also had a couple of national ladders, one for
weekend only flights and the other for weekday flights. These were
very popular and an inspiration for XC flying. The OLC is a 21st
century iteration of this.

I don't have any problem with the SSA regional filter as it probably
aids those sites that are borderline with other regions. Haven't
checked to see if there are any anomalies. A state filter would assist
me, and other governors, in the role of governor in presenting soaring
to the general Colorado public and deciphering annual OLC awards. I've
posted to the 'governors' group to see how and if others have made
these awards. Possibly the SSA will give regional or national
recognition at some point in the forms of certificates. Trophies are
probably out as official SSA trophies require sizable endowments. It
took several years before the Sports Class Nationals trophy became a
reality. I agree Bill, there is some gee-whiz value here.

FWIW, our Colorado record keeper holds 10 state records (from diverse
sites, see Mr. January on the 2006 SSA Calendar), 17 Wyoming records
(same region) and 13 Nebraska records (different region). The WY and
NE records were all flown from our club in Colorado. So I can
appreciate how some sites are looking at the regional mapping,
especially if soaring just over the boundary may be greener. But these
flights and OLC are mixing apples and oranges presently.

My club hasn't taken an official stand WRT OLC and our fleet is not yet
logger equipped. It's mostly economics, and partly member awareness.
Though a private owner, I'd like to see the club ships that are likely
to go XC so equipped.

Mapping states is not necessarily trivial, having done some lat/lon and
grid ref conversions encompassing the 0 meridian when helping develop
software during 1993 and 1994 for task setting and doing logging
analysis. Colorado, one of the rectangular states, is easy. States
with river boundaries are something else again.

OLC is still in its infancy. Use will change somewhat. The criteria I
used this year will undoubtedly change in the future, but we also have
to look forward to other awards based on OLC performance. One change
in 2005 (50km minimum distance) resulted in one club in our state to
stop posting, as they have about 8 1-26's in the private and club
fleet. The bar appears to have been raised a little too high. I know
of some more senior pilots that aren't posting though they do manage a
lot of soaring and some impressive flights, but somehow they haven't
bought into the process yet. So we need to win them back and I really
think the state filter might help there also. Anyway, I'll get with
Chip on this.

There is a cost per pilot associated with OLC participation. SSA would
rather support this through an advertising stream rather through member
fund or charges. Aerokourier has a cost for hosting and bandwidth, but
is not charging for the service, but will need some revenue to keep it
running.

It will be interesting to see if the FAI 28% triangle fit will change
the type of flying done this year.

Frank Whiteley

[5Z]

Greg Arnold wrote:
> Also, will SSA limit participation to SSA members?
>
> Jack wrote:
> > Will there be nuts-and-bolts improvements, or will it be more of an
> > advertising linkage than an enhancement to the USA OLC online?

My understanding is that OLC will not be changing in any appreciable
way except that SSA specific scoring can be applied at the OLC site and
viewed from there. The region support seems to be an example of this,
though maybe not the most useful.

As for needing to be an SSA member, I'm sure this will be a requirement
for recogition within the SSA, but as always, anyone will be able to
submit and comptete.

-Tom

[5Z]

The airfield statistics will help some, but they need to be "clickable"
so that all flights from a particular takeoff site are available in a
single page for further analysis.This is already possible with club
statistics.

Make your wishes known to the OLC folks and if the demand is there,
they will respond. I just got the name "Kelly1" changed to a much more
usable "Kelly Airpark" for the home airport of the Black Forest Soaring
Society http://soarBFSS.org

-Tom

[Jack]

Frank Whiteley wrote:

> One change
> in 2005 (50km minimum distance) resulted in one club in our state to
> stop posting, as they have about 8 1-26's in the private and club
> fleet. The bar appears to have been raised a little too high.

This may not be as it seems, despite the fact OLC have stated just that
on their web page.

For both 2005 and 2006 flights scoring at least fifty _points_ are
apparently counted. Shorter flights are also displayed. I wonder if
perhaps the explanation on the OLC site is as clear as it might be on
that min. distance v min. points. It lacks considerable clarity on much
of the inner workings of the OLC. I put this down to the language
barrier, German/English, and not any lack of effort.

Consequently those 1-26 drivers should take heart, since their handicap
rating of 63 gives a minimum scoreable flight of fifty points with an
actual scoreable flight distance of only 31.5k. Not that tough, even
here in N. IL. When they go to higher L/D gliders then they'll have to
fly even more than 50k to get those fifty points.

Examples from the current 2006 season:

Iten, Brian flew 55.38km for 46.69 pts in a Discus (DAeC index or
"handicap" of 108). The entry is grayed-out on the page indicating that
the flight is "displayed but not counted" <http://tinyurl.com/akkyz>

Herrmann, Jim flew 36.52km for 52.1 points in a 1-26D/E (DAeC index or
"handicap" of 63). The entry is black text indicating "scored and
counted". <http://tinyurl.com/9nh2z>

As always, corrections to the above are encouraged.


Jack

[Greg Arnold]

Yes, it is 50 points, not 50 km.

I understand the reason for setting a minimum was that some pilots were
taking sledrides to increase their scores. However, it is frustrating
to spend several hours struggling in weak lift, only to have your flight
not count because you didn't get 50 points.

I think they should score all flights, as letting pilots score their
sledrides will have little effect on the total scores. And it will help
out the towpilots!



Jack wrote:
> Frank Whiteley wrote:
>
> > One change
>> in 2005 (50km minimum distance) resulted in one club in our state to
>> stop posting, as they have about 8 1-26's in the private and club
>> fleet. The bar appears to have been raised a little too high.
>
> This may not be as it seems, despite the fact OLC have stated just that
> on their web page.
>
> For both 2005 and 2006 flights scoring at least fifty _points_ are
> apparently counted. Shorter flights are also displayed. I wonder if
> perhaps the explanation on the OLC site is as clear as it might be on
> that min. distance v min. points. It lacks considerable clarity on much
> of the inner workings of the OLC. I put this down to the language
> barrier, German/English, and not any lack of effort.
>
> Consequently those 1-26 drivers should take heart, since their handicap
> rating of 63 gives a minimum scoreable flight of fifty points with an
> actual scoreable flight distance of only 31.5k. Not that tough, even
> here in N. IL. When they go to higher L/D gliders then they'll have to
> fly even more than 50k to get those fifty points.
>
> Examples from the current 2006 season:
>
> Iten, Brian flew 55.38km for 46.69 pts in a Discus (DAeC index or
> "handicap" of 108). The entry is grayed-out on the page indicating that
> the flight is "displayed but not counted" <http://tinyurl.com/akkyz>
>
> Herrmann, Jim flew 36.52km for 52.1 points in a 1-26D/E (DAeC index or
> "handicap" of 63). The entry is black text indicating "scored and
> counted". <http://tinyurl.com/9nh2z>
>
> As always, corrections to the above are encouraged.
>
>
> Jack

[Frank Whiteley]

Thanks for clarifying, don't know how I got 50km, second hand I think.


50pts in a 1-26 shouldn't be an real issue. Surely they have a no
tears triangle.

Think I'll dig around a bit more.

Frank

[Frank Whiteley]

I spoke with Chip Garner this morning and he'll be contacting OLC about
the possibilities at this stage of development. SSA also has access to
the raw data, which means US specific queries/filters may be possible
via another host.

Frank Whiteley