Submitting flights to the OLC

[Lorry]

I have had great difficulty successfully downloading flights from my
Cambridge Model 25 data logger to the OLC. Apparently, my "Cambridge
file does not contain a G-record or the G-record file is not suited for
validation with the FAI supplied software" (quoted from Official
Comment from OLC). Their recommendtion is to use a special software
(for each submition) which involves 7 steps which, for me at least, is
far from straight forward. I am trying to do this through "SeeYou"
which was a snap last year but not now! I am only one of several
pilots submitting flights from the Senior Contest who are experiencing
this problem. Does anyone know of a practicle solution?

Lorry (LJ)

[Greg Arnold]

Lorry wrote:
> I have had great difficulty successfully downloading flights from my
> Cambridge Model 25 data logger to the OLC. Apparently, my "Cambridge
> file does not contain a G-record or the G-record file is not suited for
> validation with the FAI supplied software" (quoted from Official
> Comment from OLC). Their recommendtion is to use a special software
> (for each submition) which involves 7 steps which, for me at least, is
> far from straight forward. I am trying to do this through "SeeYou"
> which was a snap last year but not now! I am only one of several
> pilots submitting flights from the Senior Contest who are experiencing
> this problem. Does anyone know of a practicle solution?
>
> Lorry (LJ)
>

Now that the SSA is affiliated with the OLC, maybe we can get the SSA to
pressure the OLC to go back to the way it was last year, when you didn't
need a secure logger to get credit for your flight. The OLC security
requirements are a solution in search of a problem -- there aren't many
pilots who are going to fake a flight trace just to get a few more OLC
points. The OLC's love of pointless technology is well illustrated by
the 5 numbers you now must type in when you want to view a flight log.

Incidentally, the 7-step-song-and-dance for CAI 20/25 files actually
takes less than 5 minutes once you get the hang of it, though for the
last week the OLC software seems unable to validate such files.

[Andy]

> Incidentally, the 7-step-song-and-dance for CAI 20/25 files actually
> takes less than 5 minutes once you get the hang of it,


But if I understand the 2006 rules correctly I can no longer use a PDA
to download my 302 or model 25. I have to use "approved" download
software and I think that is only available for PC's and not PDA's. So
far none of my PDA downloads (GNII or CAI PDA utility) have been
rejected.


Andy

[Bob Fidler]

I believe you can download a log from a 302 to a pda using the Cambridge
Utility software, use that log to submit a flight to OLC and it will be
accepted. A few pilots in Florida this winter has used that method and the
flights have been accepted.

Downloads from a Model 20/25 are a different problem.

Bob Fidler

"Andy" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
>> Incidentally, the 7-step-song-and-dance for CAI 20/25 files actually
>> takes less than 5 minutes once you get the hang of it,
>
>
> But if I understand the 2006 rules correctly I can no longer use a PDA
> to download my 302 or model 25. I have to use "approved" download
> software and I think that is only available for PC's and not PDA's. So
> far none of my PDA downloads (GNII or CAI PDA utility) have been
> rejected.
>
>
> Andy
>

[Stewart Kissel]

http://www2.onlinecontest.org/olcphp/2006/faq.php?olc=olc-usa&spr=
en&dclp=e2bbaec84a6dbb235317f568028cc499#2

If you scroll down the attached link...directions included(which
I have not tried yet)...for validation from Cambridge
loggers.

Oh boy, we get to return to the world of DOS....as
with badge attempts, the flying is the easy part!!

[Stewart Kissel]

http://www2.onlinecontest.org/olcphp/2006/faq.php?olc=olc-usa&spr=
en&dclp=e2bbaec84a6dbb235317f568028cc499#2

If you scroll down the attached link...directions included(which
I have not tried yet)...for validation from Cambridge
loggers.

Oh boy, we get to return to the world of DOS....as
with badge attempts, the flying is the easy part!!

[Greg Arnold]

This is correct. No problem with 302. Problem is with 20/25.


Bob Fidler wrote:
> I believe you can download a log from a 302 to a pda using the Cambridge
> Utility software, use that log to submit a flight to OLC and it will be
> accepted. A few pilots in Florida this winter has used that method and the
> flights have been accepted.
>
> Downloads from a Model 20/25 are a different problem.
>
> Bob Fidler
>

[Gunnar]

Hi Lorry,

You need to go to the SeeYou website and download a patch to fix your
older version of SeeYou. These are located on the right side under
"other downloads", get OLC 2006 PATCH.

While you are at it, give SeeYou's free program, ConnectMe a try.
Install it on your PDA to download your flights. I like it better than
the Cambridge utility for downloading flights from my 302 and the clubs
Nav 20/25. It's very easy to use.

When you do send your flight to the OLC make sure that it is the file
you took off the data logger, not the flight log recorded by your
navigation/soar software running on the PDA. These are not secure and
will give the dreaded RED FLAG. There may be two logs for your flight
in the folder "flights". One is the log recorded by the program running
on the PDA and the other will be the file downloaded by ConnectMe and
placed in the "flights" folder.

If you get a RED flag, you sent OLC the wrong file. Delete it from OLC
and send the other one. Note the file name; it should have the serial
number of your logger in it. That'll point you in the right direction
for your next claim.

Hope this helps,

Gunnar

[Ian Cant]

At 16:30 23 March 2006, Gunnar wrote:
>Hi Lorry,
>
>You need to go to the SeeYou website and download a
>patch to fix your
>older version of SeeYou. These are located on the right
>side under
>'other downloads', get OLC 2006 PATCH.
>

If your SeeYou is version 2.x, the patch does not work.
You can only submit by using the OLC site and entering
data manually. It is a minor pain. And last year
everything was so slick...

Ian

[5Z]

Greg Arnold wrote:
> The OLC's love of pointless technology is well illustrated by
> the 5 numbers you now must type in when you want to view a flight log.

I am making an assumption here, and it would be nice if an OLC
representative could respond...

The extra step needed to download a log is probably an attempt to
reduce the bandwidth of downloads from the site. It could be that they
were experiencing problems of folks downloading too many logs - maybe
with automated software.

Their solution was to use an interface that requires a human to view a
graphic and decode the text displayed before proceeding. There is also
a limit of 10 downloads a day as a friend who was having some usage
problems discovered a few weeks ago.

The limit of 10, if still there, could prove to be an issue for a club
where more than 10 flights are made in a day and one wants to compare
what happened between friends who all submit logs.

As for the issue of the G record, I agree that until it's proven that
someone is actually cheating, an "insecure" log should just be flagged
as such, and not denied.

-Tom

[Andy]

Agree with this and the other posters that have said PDA downloads have
been accepted and are indistinguishable. However the OLC rules state
approved software must be used. Someone new to OLC may go the hard way
to get a file accepted just becuase the rules are more restrictive than
they need to be.


Andy

[Bob Caldwell]

I think that when using a PDA to download utilizing the CAI utility program you ARE using approved software. Am I mistaken???

[Marc Ramsey]

Bob Caldwell wrote:
> I think that when using a PDA to download utilizing the CAI utility
> program you ARE using approved software. Am I mistaken???

The only software required (and therefore approved by) the IGC are the
short DOS program (data-cam.exe), and the Windows DLL (igc-cai.dll, when
Cambridge gets around to providing it). If you use some other software
to download, it is perfectly acceptable for badge and record purposes (I
can't speak for the OLC), as long as the resulting file can be properly
verified by the approved validation software (vali-cam.exe, or
igc-cai.dll when available). If in doubt, try running vali-cam, if it
fails, download again using data-cam...

Marc

[Doug LS4]

Actually, you don't need a secure data logger for OLC. Mobile SeeYou
works just fine, as do a number of other flight software programs (some
are even free).

You're point is well taken. There is no more need for secure data
loggers in OLC than for secure data loggers for (most?) badges.
Nevertheless, you have to play by whatever rules the rulemakers decide
on.

Doug

(saving up my pennies for a 302, that's a lot of pennies)


Greg Arnold wrote:
> Lorry wrote:
> > I have had great difficulty successfully downloading flights from my
> > Cambridge Model 25 data logger to the OLC. Apparently, my "Cambridge
> > file does not contain a G-record or the G-record file is not suited for
> > validation with the FAI supplied software" (quoted from Official
> > Comment from OLC). Their recommendtion is to use a special software
> > (for each submition) which involves 7 steps which, for me at least, is
> > far from straight forward. I am trying to do this through "SeeYou"
> > which was a snap last year but not now! I am only one of several
> > pilots submitting flights from the Senior Contest who are experiencing
> > this problem. Does anyone know of a practicle solution?
> >
> > Lorry (LJ)
> >
>
> Now that the SSA is affiliated with the OLC, maybe we can get the SSA to
> pressure the OLC to go back to the way it was last year, when you didn't
> need a secure logger to get credit for your flight. The OLC security
> requirements are a solution in search of a problem -- there aren't many
> pilots who are going to fake a flight trace just to get a few more OLC
> points. The OLC's love of pointless technology is well illustrated by
> the 5 numbers you now must type in when you want to view a flight log.
>
> Incidentally, the 7-step-song-and-dance for CAI 20/25 files actually
> takes less than 5 minutes once you get the hang of it, though for the
> last week the OLC software seems unable to validate such files.

[Wayne Paul]

> As for the issue of the G record, I agree that until it's proven that
> someone is actually cheating, an "insecure" log should just be flagged
> as such, and not denied.
>
> -Tom
>

I finally got my old HP-14 flying last summer. I was looking forward to
participating in the OLC this; however, my data logger is an EW Model D. It
doesn't produce a "G" record.

Here in the US I can use the EW Model D for badges up through diamond and,
to the best of my knowledge, all SSA sanctioned contest. It is disheartening
to realize that I have to upgrade to a "secure" system to participate in the
US OLC.

I was looking forward to adding a few points the Seattle Glider Council's
total.

Isn't the object of this contest to get pilots to fly more cross-country?
Aren't these suppose to be "fun flights?" Didn't this all start as an
informal contest? I can see where this is going. Next thing you know, I
will have to install equipment worth half the value of my sailplane to
participate.

Someone please tell me that I have misunderstood this thread.

Wayne
HP-14 N990 "6F"
http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder

[Wayne Paul]

I should do my research prior to posting.

After reading the OLC contest documentation, I review the IGC file from one
of my flights last summer. I was mistaken, the EW Model D IGC files do have
a "G-records."

So, I guess I am in luck and will soon start posting my flights.

Wayne
HP-14 N990 "6F"
http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder/HP-14/N990/N990.html

"Wayne Paul" > wrote in message
...
> > As for the issue of the G record, I agree that until it's proven that
> > someone is actually cheating, an "insecure" log should just be flagged
> > as such, and not denied.
> >
> > -Tom
> >
>
> I finally got my old HP-14 flying last summer. I was looking forward to
> participating in the OLC this; however, my data logger is an EW Model D.
It
> doesn't produce a "G" record.
>
> Here in the US I can use the EW Model D for badges up through diamond and,
> to the best of my knowledge, all SSA sanctioned contest. It is
disheartening
> to realize that I have to upgrade to a "secure" system to participate in
the
> US OLC.
>
> I was looking forward to adding a few points the Seattle Glider Council's
> total.
>
> Isn't the object of this contest to get pilots to fly more cross-country?
> Aren't these suppose to be "fun flights?" Didn't this all start as an
> informal contest? I can see where this is going. Next thing you know, I
> will have to install equipment worth half the value of my sailplane to
> participate.
>
> Someone please tell me that I have misunderstood this thread.
>
> Wayne
> HP-14 N990 "6F"
> http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder
>
>

[Ian Strachan]

The Legacy Cambridge recorders, models 10, 20 and 25, produce an
intermediate binary format file with a CAI suffix. This is then
converted to the IGC format. The presence of an intermediate binary
format is no problem to IGC, several other recorder systems use this
method. It leads to quicker downloads from the recorder because a
binary file wil be smaller in byte count than the ASCII-based IGC
format.

The problem with the three legacy Cambridge models is that the
IGC-required Validation program only works withe the CAI binary file
and not with the IGC file. This is the VALI-CAM.exe program file
available free from the IGC GNSS web site.

I suspect this is the source of your problem, although I have no direct
contact with the OLC people myself and the problem may well be
something else.

It is a matter of record that flight validation for several badge and
record flights has been lost when using Cambridge models 10, 20 and 25
becuse the IGC file has been kept but the CAI file for the flight has
been lost.

Analysis programs listed on the IGC web page are those capable of using
the IGC format itself, IGC does not list any that read any binary files
unless they also read the IGC format.

I also recall that the three Cambridge legacy recorders continue to use
the Garmin dead reckoning (forward prediction) system that has been
banned for IGC-approved recorders since 1997 and is not used in any
other IGC-approved types of recorders.

Finally, the Cambridge 10, 20 and 25 recorders do not use
public/private key encryption that is now used by other IGC-approved
recorders and has been embedded in the IGC Specification document since
its issue in 1997.

As these three types had "Grandfather Rights" after their initial
IGC-approval in January 1996, these points have been brought to the
attention of Cambridge several times, but because of Grandfathering,
they was under no obligation to make changes. The later Cambridge 300
series has all of these features, of course.

Finally, as announced after the 2005 IGC plenary meeting, the Legacy
Cambridges are now no longer eligible to be used for world record
flights. The current IGC-approval document for Models 10, 20 and 25
says:

"(ii) IGC-approval levels .... On 15 March 2006 the IGC-approval level
becomes "all IGC/FAI badge and distance Diploma flights", that is,
excluding evidence for World Record flights. This is in accordance
with a decision of the IGC Plenary meeting on 5 March 2005 on types of
recorders without public/private key security systems such as RSA and
equivalents. Approval levels are listed in para 1.1.3.3 of Annex B to
the Sporting Code for gliding (SC3B)."


Ian Strachan
Chairman IGC GFA Committee

[Mark Hawkins]

Most of the PDA programs that log flights are in fact perfectly
acceptable for the OLC. These rules for what logged flights can be
submitted haven't gotten more restrictive but in fact or less
restrictive this year. They do not get a green "V" but they also do
not get the dreaded red "V". Instead, they will receive the
intermediate blue "V". The OLC has a list of "Approved Software" which
you should not (but probably are) confuse with the IGC's list of
"Approved Loggers". I'd provide the link to the list but the OLC site
is down right now. It is in the rules area. All "Approved Loggers"
are on the OLC's "Approved Software" list. However, so are several
other programs such as SoarPilot (I am one of the developers), SeeYou
Mobile, etc. Last time I looked though, I don't think WinPilot's logs
were accepted though. In fact, you can use just about any Garmin
handheld GPS that has enough memory to log your whole flight, then use
something like SeeYou or G7ToWin to download the flight. Both these
programs then output the flight into IGC format with accompaning "G"
security sentences at the end. The OLC will then give these flights a
nice blue "V".

What has made things a little more complicated is that there are two
scoring methods for the OLC. The old way is called OLC Classic. The
additional method applies the FAI triangle rules. Again, I wish I
could look at the rules, but I believe, at least for the US rules, I'm
remembering that the FAI triangle scoring DOES require an IGC approved
logger. But the OLC Classic does not. But please check that out for
yourself.

Finally, I am still using SeeYou 2.82 (final 2.X version) with the OLC
2006 patch applied. I have been able to successfully upload about 6
different flights with SeeYou. There is one small issue that I am
running into. Every one of the submits have hit the same error. You
must now provide/select the takeoff location. SeeYou 2.82 doesn't seem
to be submitting that correctly/acceptably so I get the little error
button on the submit window. Clicking this brings up the flight on the
OLC site where it tells me in red that I must select the takeoff
location. Once, this is done, and the "Check Flight" button is
selected, the flight is accepted without problem.

Later!

-Mark
Ian Strachan wrote:
> The Legacy Cambridge recorders, models 10, 20 and 25, produce an
> intermediate binary format file with a CAI suffix. This is then
> converted to the IGC format. The presence of an intermediate binary
> format is no problem to IGC, several other recorder systems use this
> method. It leads to quicker downloads from the recorder because a
> binary file wil be smaller in byte count than the ASCII-based IGC
> format.
>
> The problem with the three legacy Cambridge models is that the
> IGC-required Validation program only works withe the CAI binary file
> and not with the IGC file. This is the VALI-CAM.exe program file
> available free from the IGC GNSS web site.
>
> I suspect this is the source of your problem, although I have no direct
> contact with the OLC people myself and the problem may well be
> something else.
>
> It is a matter of record that flight validation for several badge and
> record flights has been lost when using Cambridge models 10, 20 and 25
> becuse the IGC file has been kept but the CAI file for the flight has
> been lost.
>
> Analysis programs listed on the IGC web page are those capable of using
> the IGC format itself, IGC does not list any that read any binary files
> unless they also read the IGC format.
>
> I also recall that the three Cambridge legacy recorders continue to use
> the Garmin dead reckoning (forward prediction) system that has been
> banned for IGC-approved recorders since 1997 and is not used in any
> other IGC-approved types of recorders.
>
> Finally, the Cambridge 10, 20 and 25 recorders do not use
> public/private key encryption that is now used by other IGC-approved
> recorders and has been embedded in the IGC Specification document since
> its issue in 1997.
>
> As these three types had "Grandfather Rights" after their initial
> IGC-approval in January 1996, these points have been brought to the
> attention of Cambridge several times, but because of Grandfathering,
> they was under no obligation to make changes. The later Cambridge 300
> series has all of these features, of course.
>
> Finally, as announced after the 2005 IGC plenary meeting, the Legacy
> Cambridges are now no longer eligible to be used for world record
> flights. The current IGC-approval document for Models 10, 20 and 25
> says:
>
> "(ii) IGC-approval levels .... On 15 March 2006 the IGC-approval level
> becomes "all IGC/FAI badge and distance Diploma flights", that is,
> excluding evidence for World Record flights. This is in accordance
> with a decision of the IGC Plenary meeting on 5 March 2005 on types of
> recorders without public/private key security systems such as RSA and
> equivalents. Approval levels are listed in para 1.1.3.3 of Annex B to
> the Sporting Code for gliding (SC3B)."
>
>
> Ian Strachan
> Chairman IGC GFA Committee

[Robert Hart]

Bob Fidler wrote:
> I believe you can download a log from a 302 to a pda using the Cambridge
> Utility software, use that log to submit a flight to OLC and it will be
> accepted. A few pilots in Florida this winter has used that method and the
> flights have been accepted.
>
> Downloads from a Model 20/25 are a different problem.

I use mobile SeeYou and have been using ConnectMe to dowload my flights
from my Cambridge GPS/NAV 25 and then submitting them without problem to
the OLC (Australia).

Robert

[Doug]

So what's to stop someone from setting up and "flying" a task in Condor
Simulator and capturing the flight in SeeYou Mobile or other software on the
PDA? Do you get a valid G-record that way?

"Doug LS4" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Actually, you don't need a secure data logger for OLC. Mobile SeeYou
> works just fine, as do a number of other flight software programs (some
> are even free).
>
> You're point is well taken. There is no more need for secure data
> loggers in OLC than for secure data loggers for (most?) badges.
> Nevertheless, you have to play by whatever rules the rulemakers decide
> on.
>
> Doug
>
> (saving up my pennies for a 302, that's a lot of pennies)
>
>
> Greg Arnold wrote:
>> Lorry wrote:
>> > I have had great difficulty successfully downloading flights from my
>> > Cambridge Model 25 data logger to the OLC. Apparently, my "Cambridge
>> > file does not contain a G-record or the G-record file is not suited for
>> > validation with the FAI supplied software" (quoted from Official
>> > Comment from OLC). Their recommendtion is to use a special software
>> > (for each submition) which involves 7 steps which, for me at least, is
>> > far from straight forward. I am trying to do this through "SeeYou"
>> > which was a snap last year but not now! I am only one of several
>> > pilots submitting flights from the Senior Contest who are experiencing
>> > this problem. Does anyone know of a practicle solution?
>> >
>> > Lorry (LJ)
>> >
>>
>> Now that the SSA is affiliated with the OLC, maybe we can get the SSA to
>> pressure the OLC to go back to the way it was last year, when you didn't
>> need a secure logger to get credit for your flight. The OLC security
>> requirements are a solution in search of a problem -- there aren't many
>> pilots who are going to fake a flight trace just to get a few more OLC
>> points. The OLC's love of pointless technology is well illustrated by
>> the 5 numbers you now must type in when you want to view a flight log.
>>
>> Incidentally, the 7-step-song-and-dance for CAI 20/25 files actually
>> takes less than 5 minutes once you get the hang of it, though for the
>> last week the OLC software seems unable to validate such files.
>

[lalue]

Hi,

using the OLC with the old Cambridge logger is cumbersome, especially
if you need the flights to be IGC validated. Even worse the Cambridge
supplied windows software to create IGC files is not IGC approved and
hereby not usable.

We, the StrePla team, were confronted with that problem some time ago
and implemted the '7steps' OLC solution in StrePla.

- download the CAI file
- convert the CAI file with the DOS software to the IGC file
- append the CAI file at the end of the IGC file (for validating
purpose)

This works for all Cambridge model 10, 20 or 25 (the older once)
without any special knowlege.
Just download the flight from your logger using your PC or PDA and
submit it to the OLC.

Test it! The download is free. The demo program runs 30 days without
any restrictions.
http://www.strepla.de/StrePla4/english

Happy flights!
Klaus Langelüddeke

[Andrej Kolar]

Hi Klaus,

I didn't want to get into this thread, but now I must. You know just as
well as I do that it's not about being able to tackle this one
technically. Anyone interested in proving that I'm not just boasting
should download this file:
http://www.naviter.si/dload/seeyou-cai-dos.zip

1. Extract both files from the ZIP to your SeeYou folder
2. Overwrite your existing SeeYou.exe

Such flights will be scored as valid and this is what is below referred
to as "implementing the seven step solution". It is really a no-step
solution in SeeYou:
1. Open CAI file in SeeYou
2. Submit it to OLC the same way you are used to doing this with any
other file.

However (isn't there always a however). Today is year 2006. Let's go
away from DOS. Please. I sincerely hope that this is just a very
temporary solution. It's ok for us (we hardly even care), but it's not
ok for all of us in the long term.

Cheers,
Andrej Kolar

P.S. Oh - and by the way. If you have not yet upgraded to SeeYou 3.x
you will have to do that now to use this fix. OLC wants you to. We
proposed several ways around it to no avail. Not that we don't want you
to upgrade, but we wanted you to upgrade for the right reasons. Anyway.
Happy soaring. Keep posting flights to the OLC. I love analyzing great
flights no matter where they are from.

--
glider pilots use
http://www.SeeYou.si/



lalue wrote:
> Hi,
>
> using the OLC with the old Cambridge logger is cumbersome, especially
> if you need the flights to be IGC validated. Even worse the Cambridge
> supplied windows software to create IGC files is not IGC approved and
> hereby not usable.
>
> We, the StrePla team, were confronted with that problem some time ago
> and implemted the '7steps' OLC solution in StrePla.
>
> - download the CAI file
> - convert the CAI file with the DOS software to the IGC file
> - append the CAI file at the end of the IGC file (for validating
> purpose)
>
> This works for all Cambridge model 10, 20 or 25 (the older once)
> without any special knowlege.
> Just download the flight from your logger using your PC or PDA and
> submit it to the OLC.
>
> Test it! The download is free. The demo program runs 30 days without
> any restrictions.
> http://www.strepla.de/StrePla4/english
>
> Happy flights!
> Klaus Langelüddeke

[Mike the Strike]

Right on Andrej!

Most of us are too busy to mess with DOS and just want applications
that will do what we want with the minimum of fuss. No doubt someone
will complain about a commercial solution like the one implemented in
SeeYou 3, but I am glad we have some programmers like you who can
improve our soaring experience with neat software.

For me, the first thing I do after flying is to download my flight into
SeeYou to view and analyze what I did right and wrong. When I started
soaring over 30 years ago I couldn't have imagined the impact of GPS
logging and analysis software.

DOS - ha!

Mike