New world speed record: 534 km/h!

In a 1-26 no less!

It's gotta be true: it's on OLC and it's not even red flagged.

Now how many FARs does that violate?

Hooray for the crappy gliders! Lets see the fiberglass beat THAT!

wrote:
In a 1-26 no less!

It's gotta be true: it's on OLC and it's not even red flagged.

Now how many FARs does that violate?

Tony wrote:
Hooray for the crappy gliders! Lets see the fiberglass beat THAT!

wrote:
In a 1-26 no less!

It's gotta be true: it's on OLC and it's not even red flagged.

Now how many FARs does that violate?

What is the date of that flight?

Jacek

wrote:
In a 1-26 no less!

It's gotta be true: it's on OLC and it's not even red flagged.

OLC correctly ingnored the "fast" part.

Now how many FARs does that violate?

None, it was done on the ground - before takeoff

-Tom

It's been "corrected" now. No fun.

wrote:
Tony wrote:
Hooray for the crappy gliders! Lets see the fiberglass beat THAT!

wrote:
In a 1-26 no less!

It's gotta be true: it's on OLC and it's not even red flagged.

Now how many FARs does that violate?

What is the date of that flight?

Jacek

Originally Posted by

In a 1-26 no less!

Ha. Let's see Fossett break that one.

By the way, the olc is full of incorrect scoring. I've seen:
- motorglider flights, where the engine was used multiple times, get
scored for the whole distance.
- landouts where the logger was not turned off thus olc included the
aero retreive in the scorring distance.
- flights which cut significantly short as a result of noise comming
from an opened window.
- same flights posted twice the same day or in consecutive days, etc...

Since it is so complicated and confusing to try to make any corrections
on olc, many pilots just leave it as is.

Ramy


wrote:
It's been "corrected" now. No fun.

wrote:
Tony wrote:
Hooray for the crappy gliders! Lets see the fiberglass beat THAT!

wrote:
In a 1-26 no less!

It's gotta be true: it's on OLC and it's not even red flagged.

Now how many FARs does that violate?

What is the date of that flight?

Jacek

Ramy wrote:

Since it is so complicated and confusing to try to make any corrections
on olc, many pilots just leave it as is.

I agree 100%. The inability of OLC to accept corrections when the OLC
system posts information not even closely related to what was flown is a
major weakness. I have experienced several examples in each OLC season
of what you have described.

The OLC is relatively unresponsive, and the USA OLC too uncertain as a
result. I suspect Doug has his hands full trying to present a system
which may seem sensible to its builders and decision makers but has
become increasingly unsatisfactory to its North American users.

I suggest we cut Haluza some slack, 'cause the problem is not on this
continent.


Jack

What a giggle. When I posted this flight I spent a bunch of time trying
to figure out what went wrong. I even tried to download it with
different programs but that didn't work for me either. The only
flight that OLC would accept was the one with the error. Apparently
there was only one point that was wrong at the start but I couldn't
(or didn't know how) to edit it without getting even MORE errors from
the OLC. It got late at night so I gave up and decided to send the OLC
folk an email the next day after I got some sleep. I know Blairstown NJ
is known for some fantastic ridge flights but no one would take a 534
km/h 1-26 flight seriously anyway. By the time I got back to it I saw
that it had magically been fixed. Now that is a *responsive* OLC team!

-Jim H

Jack wrote:
Ramy wrote:

Since it is so complicated and confusing to try to make any corrections
on olc, many pilots just leave it as is.

I agree 100%. The inability of OLC to accept corrections when the OLC
system posts information not even closely related to what was flown is a
major weakness. I have experienced several examples in each OLC season
of what you have described.

The OLC is relatively unresponsive, and the USA OLC too uncertain as a
result. I suspect Doug has his hands full trying to present a system
which may seem sensible to its builders and decision makers but has
become increasingly unsatisfactory to its North American users.

I suggest we cut Haluza some slack, 'cause the problem is not on this
continent.


Jack