task not completed ClearNavII

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

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

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

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

On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 8:45:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 10:04:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start to first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie produced task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case said no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could help.Thanks ,
BobW

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

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

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

best regards,
Evan Ludeman for CNi

On 5/17/20 7:25 AM, Tango Eight wrote:
On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 8:45:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 10:04:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start to first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie produced task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case said no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could help.Thanks ,
BobW

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

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

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

best regards,
Evan Ludeman for CNi


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

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

-Dave

At 14:01 17 May 2020, kinsell wrote:
On 5/17/20 7:25 AM, Tango Eight wrote:
On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 8:45:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 10:04:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using
the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start
to
first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish
but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my
Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task
finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the
flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie
produced
task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case
said
no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does
ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very
frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be
happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could
help.Thanks ,
BobW

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

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

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

best regards,
Evan Ludeman for CNi


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

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

-Dave

When recording at 1 second intervals, with a 1 second resolution, this can
happen. When it does. download again at (say) 4 second intervals.

Tim.

On 5/17/20 9:20 AM, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:
At 14:01 17 May 2020, kinsell wrote:
On 5/17/20 7:25 AM, Tango Eight wrote:
On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 8:45:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
On Thursday, May 14, 2020 at 10:04:24 AM UTC-4, BobWa43 wrote:
I am new to ClearNav2. I have planned and flown two FAI tasks using
the ClearNav2. ClearNav gave me a start time and changed from the start
to
first way point and then to the second way point, and then to the finish
but no finish was acknowledged. I had the same task in my Nano and my
Oudie, both recorded a completed task and the Oudie gave me a "task
finished" announcement. This sequence applies to both flights. When the
flights were analyzed on SeeYou, the files from the Nano and Oudie
produced
task completed analysis while the files from the ClearNav in one case
said
no valid start and in the other only the start was acknowledged. Does
ClearNavII give a task completed statement like the Oudie? This is very
frustrating. Please help me figure out what I am doing wrong. I would be
happy to email the flight files to anyone who is interested and could
help.Thanks ,
BobW

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

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

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

best regards,
Evan Ludeman for CNi


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

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

-Dave

When recording at 1 second intervals, with a 1 second resolution, this can
happen. When it does. download again at (say) 4 second intervals.

Tim.


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

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

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


Properly designed software would validate the output it produces.

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

5Z

On Monday, May 18, 2020 at 11:25:50 PM UTC-4, 5Z wrote:
On Sunday, May 17, 2020 at 8:30:04 AM UTC-7, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:
When recording at 1 second intervals, with a 1 second resolution, this can
happen. When it does. download again at (say) 4 second intervals.


Properly designed software would validate the output it produces.

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

5Z

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