new world-record for Steve Fossett (USA) and Terry Delore

[[email protected]]

....flying a 1250 Kilometer (777 mile) triangular course in Nevada in 8
hours and 23 minutes at a new world record average speed of 149.23 km/
h (92.73 mph)..

more: www.aerogazette.com

ciao

Rocco Caruso
Aero Gazette
www.gazette.aero

[5Z]

Nothing yet on OLC :(

[Mike Finegan]

Way to go, Terry!

"5Z" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Nothing yet on OLC :(
>

[5Z]

On Jul 17, 5:52 am, wrote:
> ...flying a 1250 Kilometer (777 mile) triangular course in Nevada in 8
> hours and 23 minutes at a new world record average speed of 149.23 km/
> h (92.73 mph)..

Too bad they didn't post to the OLC... :(

IMHO, that should be a requirement for all record and perhaps even
badge claims. These flights then would be available for all to study
and learn.

-Tom

[Cliff Hilty]

There were some issues with the data integrety. I hope
that they were able to sort them out. Both pilots were
estatic after landing and had quite a tale of long
blue holes for completion. OLC or not quite a feat
for the day!


At 15:42 18 July 2007, 5z wrote:
>On Jul 17, 5:52 am, wrote:
>> ...flying a 1250 Kilometer (777 mile) triangular course
>>in Nevada in 8
>> hours and 23 minutes at a new world record average
>>speed of 149.23 km/
>> h (92.73 mph)..
>
>Too bad they didn't post to the OLC... :(
>
>IMHO, that should be a requirement for all record and
>perhaps even
>badge claims. These flights then would be available
>for all to study
>and learn.
>
>-Tom
>
>

[Cliff Hilty]

There were some issues with the data integrety. I hope
that they were able to sort them out. Both pilots were
estatic after landing and had quite a tale of long
blue holes for completion. OLC or not quite a feat
for the day!


At 15:42 18 July 2007, 5z wrote:
>On Jul 17, 5:52 am, wrote:
>> ...flying a 1250 Kilometer (777 mile) triangular course
>>in Nevada in 8
>> hours and 23 minutes at a new world record average
>>speed of 149.23 km/
>> h (92.73 mph)..
>
>Too bad they didn't post to the OLC... :(
>
>IMHO, that should be a requirement for all record and
>perhaps even
>badge claims. These flights then would be available
>for all to study
>and learn.
>
>-Tom
>
>

[Cliff Hilty]

There were some issues with the data integrety. I hope
that they were able to sort them out. Both pilots were
estatic after landing and had quite a tale of long
blue holes for completion. OLC or not quite a feat
for the day!


At 15:42 18 July 2007, 5z wrote:
>On Jul 17, 5:52 am, wrote:
>> ...flying a 1250 Kilometer (777 mile) triangular course
>>in Nevada in 8
>> hours and 23 minutes at a new world record average
>>speed of 149.23 km/
>> h (92.73 mph)..
>
>Too bad they didn't post to the OLC... :(
>
>IMHO, that should be a requirement for all record and
>perhaps even
>badge claims. These flights then would be available
>for all to study
>and learn.
>
>-Tom
>
>

[Cliff Hilty]

There were some issues with the data integrety. I hope
that they were able to sort them out. Both pilots were
estatic after landing and had quite a tale of long
blue holes for completion. OLC or not quite a feat
for the day!


At 15:42 18 July 2007, 5z wrote:
>On Jul 17, 5:52 am, wrote:
>> ...flying a 1250 Kilometer (777 mile) triangular course
>>in Nevada in 8
>> hours and 23 minutes at a new world record average
>>speed of 149.23 km/
>> h (92.73 mph)..
>
>Too bad they didn't post to the OLC... :(
>
>IMHO, that should be a requirement for all record and
>perhaps even
>badge claims. These flights then would be available
>for all to study
>and learn.
>
>-Tom
>
>

[Mike the Strike]

On Jul 17, 9:01 am, 5Z > wrote:
> Nothing yet on OLC :(

Rumor is that the log files were corrupted on initial download and
they are working to recover them.

We feel their pain!

Mike

[[email protected]]

On Jul 18, 10:40 am, 5Z > wrote:
> On Jul 17, 5:52 am, wrote:
>
> > ...flying a 1250 Kilometer (777 mile) triangular course in Nevada in 8
> > hours and 23 minutes at a new world record average speed of 149.23 km/
> > h (92.73 mph)..
>
> Too bad they didn't post to the OLC... :(
>
> IMHO, that should be a requirement for all record and perhaps even
> badge claims. These flights then would be available for all to study
> and learn.
>
> -Tom

I echo the congrats to Terry. Thats a hell of a flight.

Keep in mind that there are still a few of us out there that are
clinging to the dream that this sport is actually cheap. Requiring a
logger for silver distance is a little overkill. I can see your point
though as viewing the trace would be an excellent debriefing tool and
learning opportunity for other pilots.

[5Z]

On Jul 18, 1:04 pm, Cliff Hilty >
wrote:
> There were some issues with the data integrety. I hope
> that they were able to sort them out. Both pilots were
> estatic after landing and had quite a tale of long
> blue holes for completion. OLC or not quite a feat
> for the day!

Hm, I guess Cliff was having the same posting troubles I was....
Google Groups was a bit recalcitrant the last couple days.

And a belated congratulations to the pilots - an excellent flight even
if the logs don't get sorted out!

-Tom

[FreeFlight107]

> > There were some issues with the data integrety. I hope
> > that they were able to sort them out. Both pilots were
> > estatic after landing and had quite a tale of long
> > blue holes for completion. OLC or not quite a feat
> > for the day!

>>Too bad they didn't post to the OLC... :(

>>IMHO, that should be a requirement for all record and perhaps even
badge claims.

Tom,
IMHO, I can't see making OLC posting a requirement, but it would be a
great show of Sportsmanship if these kinds of flights were posted, but
the next glitch comes with the Tuesday deadline for posting. I
personnaly don't know why such a short time after the weekend is
needed, I'd prefer a 10 day window, and for non-scoring flights a 30
day window. Can someone pass this on to the OLC admins? While we're
at it, I'd like to suggest tothe OLC committee that they settle on one
format, and leave it that way for a very long period. In the last 4
years I've known of OLC they've changed the format, look & feel about
3 times, the last being the worst is terms of user friendlyness.

Wayne

[5Z]

On Jul 20, 4:55 am, FreeFlight107 > wrote:
> > > There were some issues with the data integrety. I hope
> > > that they were able to sort them out. Both pilots were
> > > estatic after landing and had quite a tale of long
> > > blue holes for completion. OLC or not quite a feat
> > > for the day!
> >>Too bad they didn't post to the OLC... :(
> >>IMHO, that should be a requirement for all record and perhaps even
>
> badge claims.
>
> Tom,
> IMHO, I can't see making OLC posting a requirement, but it would be a
> great show of Sportsmanship if these kinds of flights were posted

First would be sportsmanship, but eventually it could develop into a
single international standard for managing all flight claims.

It would take a lot of work, but in the end would give all countries
and regions the same set of tools to manage their badge and record
claims.

> the next glitch comes with the Tuesday deadline for posting. I
> personnaly don't know why such a short time after the weekend is
> needed, I'd prefer a 10 day window, and for non-scoring flights a 30
> day window. Can someone pass this on to the OLC admins?

The rationale for the Tuesday deadline is to "force" weekend flights,
which are the bulk of the claims, to be posted in a timely fashion.

Perhaps a scoring penalty could be applied to all flight claims...
Your score is multiplied by 1.00 if submitted within 72 hours of the
landing time. Then for the next 30 days, the multiplier is
decremented until it reaches zero. Flights can still be posted, but
they no longer get scored.

> While we're at it, I'd like to suggest tothe OLC committee that they settle on
> one format, and leave it that way for a very long period. In the last 4
> years I've known of OLC they've changed the format, look & feel about
> 3 times, the last being the worst is terms of user friendlyness.

Remember, the OLC is a "free" service provided by volunteers with some
corporate sponsorship. The software developers don't have the luxury
of hiring focus groups and teams of testers to decide what works and
what doesn't. The first incarnation was likely an attempt to get
something out for people to use and to validate the concept of the
OLC. It was popular, so they proceeded to the next step, which was to
beef it up and add features. That worked as well, but then a whole
set of new ideas came up about usability, competition formats, methods
of viewing or searching for flights, etc... So now we have the
current version, which, after 6-8 months of field testing by us, is
becoming quite stable and usable.

I have found that the developers do accept comments and suggestions,
but as with most "parents" of a product, don't take kindly to pure
criticism. Don't tell them that something is bad. Instead tell them
what changes could make it better. Be specific.

And personally, I think the current version is quite friendly :)

-Tom

[Mike the Strike]

Snip....
>
> The rationale for the Tuesday deadline is to "force" weekend flights,
> which are the bulk of the claims, to be posted in a timely fashion.
>

A nice Eurocentric view where you can drive home every day from the
gliderport ten miles away, but not practical from some remote US or
other world sites where Internet access may not be readily available.

That's why you're not seeing some record-breaking flights from the
more remote locations - it's just not possible to post until you get
back to civilization.

As long as we have such artificial constraints, OLC will never achieve
universal acceptance.

Mike

[5Z]

On Jul 20, 10:31 am, Mike the Strike > wrote:
> As long as we have such artificial constraints, OLC will never achieve
> universal acceptance.

Agreed.

-Tom

[Martin Gregorie[_1_]]

wrote:
> On Jul 18, 10:40 am, 5Z > wrote:
>> On Jul 17, 5:52 am, wrote:
>>
>>> ...flying a 1250 Kilometer (777 mile) triangular course in Nevada in 8
>>> hours and 23 minutes at a new world record average speed of 149.23 km/
>>> h (92.73 mph)..
>> Too bad they didn't post to the OLC... :(
>>
>> IMHO, that should be a requirement for all record and perhaps even
>> badge claims. These flights then would be available for all to study
>> and learn.
>>
>> -Tom
>
> I echo the congrats to Terry. Thats a hell of a flight.
>
> Keep in mind that there are still a few of us out there that are
> clinging to the dream that this sport is actually cheap. Requiring a
> logger for silver distance is a little overkill. I can see your point
> though as viewing the trace would be an excellent debriefing tool and
> learning opportunity for other pilots.
>
It still can be, though I must admit I like toys in my cockpit. However,
I digress.

A couple of fellows in my club bought a used Tasmin V1000 vario for a
little less than the new price and got a free glider with it. The glider
is a Schreibe L-Spatz. I'm looking forward to seeing it in the air.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

[Bullwinkle]

>
> And personally, I think the current version is quite friendly :)
>
> -Tom
>
I personally find it far less user friendly than the version in use last
summer. I don't even check other club members flights any more because it's
such a struggle just finding today's flights. The morons who "improved" the
website missed the mark badly.

JMHO,
Bullwinkle

[[email protected]]

any news on his record? I see that Steve-O and Einar will be talking
Friday night at Oshkosh about the world altitude record. See you
there!

[Ramy]

AFAIK, you can post to olc anytime, even long after the deadline, it
is just not going to get any score, but the flight will be displayed.

Ramy

> IMHO, I can't see making OLC posting a requirement, but it would be a
> great show of Sportsmanship if these kinds of flights were posted, but
> the next glitch comes with the Tuesday deadline for posting. I
> personnaly don't know why such a short time after the weekend is
> needed, I'd prefer a 10 day window, and for non-scoring flights a 30
> day window. Can someone pass this on to the OLC admins? While we're
> at it, I'd like to suggest tothe OLC committee that they settle on one
> format, and leave it that way for a very long period. In the last 4
> years I've known of OLC they've changed the format, look & feel about
> 3 times, the last being the worst is terms of user friendlyness.
>
> Wayne

[Eric Greenwell]

Ramy wrote:

>> IMHO, I can't see making OLC posting a requirement, but it would be a
>> great show of Sportsmanship if these kinds of flights were posted, but
>> the next glitch comes with the Tuesday deadline for posting. I
>> personnaly don't know why such a short time after the weekend is
>> needed, I'd prefer a 10 day window, and for non-scoring flights a 30
>> day window. Can someone pass this on to the OLC admins?

> AFAIK, you can post to olc anytime, even long after the deadline, it
> is just not going to get any score, but the flight will be displayed.

I just tried it, and the flight does not show up in the listing for that
day (July 16, 2007). It does show up in the listing for the pilot
(that's me); however, it doesn't show the distance, the glider is a
Ventus instead of an ASH 26 E, the takeoff point is on the wrong side of
the country, and the flight track is not shown. Pretty much a waste of
time, even if the glider and takeoff point were correct. I do wish there
was some allowance for when a pilot flies from a place with no Internet
access. In my case, it meant a 40 mile roundtrip drive with 30 miles of
gravel if I wanted to post the flight.

I just noticed my most recent flight (July 17, 2006) also has the
incorrect glider and takeoff point. I edited to correct the glider, but
don't know how to correct the takeoff site. I hope they get those
problems fixed before my next flight.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
* "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org