I have a functioning B-100 flight computer (version
1.1). My new ship (SZD-59) is equipped with an LX-4000.
The LX has integrated GPS and the B-100 takes a separate
unit (offhand that seems better since new GPS's kick
the crap out of early units) I also have an Ilec SB-8
with the ASR unit, that for 150 Euros can be upgraded
to the latest GPS driven ASR unit. Upgrading to the
SN10B or LX8000 etc is out of the question, and frankly
not necessary for my current set of skills so I am
not looking for upgrade recommendations like that (unless
someone wants to sell me one REAL cheap!) as much as
I am looking for advice on deciding between the three.
I'm leaning towards the Borgelt or the Ilec, but want
to hear opinions as to which one/ones and why. I'm
just beginning X-C, so user friendly is a real consideration
as well.
I know, I know, 50 pilots=60 opinions, but I still
want to know what others think since I do not have
enough first hand experience with any of them to determine
which would be best. Also, if the B-100 is the better
choice, which external (inexpensive) GPS should I get
to use with it?

Paul Hanson
"Do the usual, unusually well"--Len Niemi

On Nov 5, 8:15 pm, Paul Hanson
> wrote:
> I have a functioning B-100 flight computer (version
> 1.1). My new ship (SZD-59) is equipped with an LX-4000.
> The LX has integrated GPS and the B-100 takes a separate
> unit (offhand that seems better since new GPS's kick
> the crap out of early units) I also have an Ilec SB-8
> with the ASR unit, that for 150 Euros can be upgraded
> to the latest GPS driven ASR unit. Upgrading to the
> SN10B or LX8000 etc is out of the question, and frankly
> not necessary for my current set of skills so I am
> not looking for upgrade recommendations like that (unless
> someone wants to sell me one REAL cheap!) as much as
> I am looking for advice on deciding between the three.
Paul,
The most important thing is a good current wind determination. The
B-100 wind sucks, don't know about the LX-4000. I'm flying the SN-10
and knowing the current wind saves me on almost every flight. Wish I
had puchased it years ago, worth every penny, even at todays prices.
JJ

> I'm leaning towards the Borgelt or the Ilec, but want
> to hear opinions as to which one/ones and why. I'm
> just beginning X-C, so user friendly is a real consideration
> as well.
> I know, I know, 50 pilots=60 opinions, but I still
> want to know what others think since I do not have
> enough first hand experience with any of them to determine
> which would be best. Also, if the B-100 is the better
> choice, which external (inexpensive) GPS should I get
> to use with it?
>
> Paul Hanson
> "Do the usual, unusually well"--Len Niemi

On Nov 5, 8:15 pm, Paul Hanson
> wrote:
> I have a functioning B-100 flight computer (version
> 1.1). My new ship (SZD-59) is equipped with an LX-4000.
> The LX has integrated GPS and the B-100 takes a separate
> unit (offhand that seems better since new GPS's kick
> the crap out of early units) I also have an Ilec SB-8
> with the ASR unit, that for 150 Euros can be upgraded
> to the latest GPS driven ASR unit. Upgrading to the
> SN10B or LX8000 etc is out of the question, and frankly
> not necessary for my current set of skills so I am
> not looking for upgrade recommendations like that (unless
> someone wants to sell me one REAL cheap!) as much as
> I am looking for advice on deciding between the three.
> I'm leaning towards the Borgelt or the Ilec, but want
> to hear opinions as to which one/ones and why. I'm
> just beginning X-C, so user friendly is a real consideration
> as well.
> I know, I know, 50 pilots=60 opinions, but I still
> want to know what others think since I do not have
> enough first hand experience with any of them to determine
> which would be best. Also, if the B-100 is the better
> choice, which external (inexpensive) GPS should I get
> to use with it?
>
> Paul Hanson
> "Do the usual, unusually well"--Len Niemi

Paul,

I have found that the wind calculation on all the newer fligth
computers are excellent. CAI 302, Borgelt B500, LX7000, LX7007,
WinPilot, SeeYou Mobile, SN10. Software is what calculates the wind
not the instrument. Most instruments have pitot and temperature inputs
and I beleive all use calculation of wind from circling drift in a
theraml, course change, True Airspeed and GPS info. They all probably
use slightly different combinations of the inputs and use a different
formula. Comparing any of these systems to a B100 or a LX4000 is like
comparing apples and peas. WinPilot and SeeYou Mobile can be
connected to just a GPS and calculate the winds from circling drift in
your last thermal.

A good external GPS if you don't need a IGC data Logger is a Garmin
GPS 18.


Richard
www.craggyaero.com

Hi Paul,

I sell instruments - so take this with a grain of salt. But have you
considered that you may be able to get pretty good money selling the used
instruments - perhaps enough to buy a new one? Working with old hardware is
a lot of work and may or may not be worth it. The market for used soaring
instruments is pretty good. I often talk to customers that are spending a
lot of money trying to get old systems upgraded - and they never think of
the idea of selling the existing hardware to help pay for new instruments.

I do offer a free soaring classifieds web site that has helped many glider
pilots sell used instruments. You can see details here:
http://www.soaring-classifieds.com

Just a thought...

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

"Paul Hanson" > wrote in message
...
>I have a functioning B-100 flight computer (version
> 1.1). My new ship (SZD-59) is equipped with an LX-4000.
> The LX has integrated GPS and the B-100 takes a separate
> unit (offhand that seems better since new GPS's kick
> the crap out of early units) I also have an Ilec SB-8
> with the ASR unit, that for 150 Euros can be upgraded
> to the latest GPS driven ASR unit. Upgrading to the
> SN10B or LX8000 etc is out of the question, and frankly
> not necessary for my current set of skills so I am
> not looking for upgrade recommendations like that (unless
> someone wants to sell me one REAL cheap!) as much as
> I am looking for advice on deciding between the three.
> I'm leaning towards the Borgelt or the Ilec, but want
> to hear opinions as to which one/ones and why. I'm
> just beginning X-C, so user friendly is a real consideration
> as well.
> I know, I know, 50 pilots=60 opinions, but I still
> want to know what others think since I do not have
> enough first hand experience with any of them to determine
> which would be best. Also, if the B-100 is the better
> choice, which external (inexpensive) GPS should I get
> to use with it?
>
> Paul Hanson
> "Do the usual, unusually well"--Len Niemi
>
>

On Nov 5, 11:15 pm, Paul Hanson
> wrote:
> I have a functioning B-100 flight computer (version
> 1.1). My new ship (SZD-59) is equipped with an LX-4000.
> The LX has integrated GPS and the B-100 takes a separate
> unit (offhand that seems better since new GPS's kick
> the crap out of early units) I also have an Ilec SB-8
> with the ASR unit, that for 150 Euros can be upgraded
> to the latest GPS driven ASR unit. Upgrading to the
> SN10B or LX8000 etc is out of the question, and frankly
> not necessary for my current set of skills so I am
> not looking for upgrade recommendations like that (unless
> someone wants to sell me one REAL cheap!) as much as
> I am looking for advice on deciding between the three.
> I'm leaning towards the Borgelt or the Ilec, but want
> to hear opinions as to which one/ones and why. I'm
> just beginning X-C, so user friendly is a real consideration
> as well.
> I know, I know, 50 pilots=60 opinions, but I still
> want to know what others think since I do not have
> enough first hand experience with any of them to determine
> which would be best. Also, if the B-100 is the better
> choice, which external (inexpensive) GPS should I get
> to use with it?
>
> Paul Hanson
> "Do the usual, unusually well"--Len Niemi

One thing also to keep in mind that units with integrated GPS are more
"acceptable"
to IGC (record/badge/contest flights). Usually I fly with SoarPilot
on a PDA. When
I started flying cross country I just plugged it into a cheap handheld
Garmin. Now, I fly a nicer ship
that has an LX5000 installed. The user interface on the LX is
abominable, but it can drive
the PDA quite well, and I've managed to figure out enough on the LX to
be able to declare
goal flights in it (got the diamond on the first try this summer!).

-- Matt

On Nov 6, 10:30 pm, Richard > wrote:
> Software is what calculates the wind not the instrument.

More than 98% of the engineering content of a flight
computer is software. The instrument is in fact mostly
software. And the software is completely different
in the different instruments.

> Most instruments have pitot and temperature inputs
> and I beleive all use calculation of wind from circling drift in a
> theraml, course change, True Airspeed and GPS info.

Incorrect. ILEC SN10 certainly does not require circling
to calculate wind; you'll often get a wind indication on
tow.

> They all probably use slightly different combinations
> of the inputs and use a different formula.

Right. So, talk to experienced XC pilots who have
*really* flown with these instruments, and find out which
ones are considered to produce reliable wind info.
Your mileage will vary. A lot.

Hope that's helpful,
Best Regards, Dave "YO"

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Nov 6, 10:30 pm, Richard > wrote:
>> Software is what calculates the wind not the instrument.
>
> More than 98% of the engineering content of a flight
> computer is software. The instrument is in fact mostly
> software. And the software is completely different
> in the different instruments.
>
>> Most instruments have pitot and temperature inputs
>> and I beleive all use calculation of wind from circling drift in a
>> theraml, course change, True Airspeed and GPS info.
>
> Incorrect. ILEC SN10 certainly does not require circling
> to calculate wind; you'll often get a wind indication on
> tow.
>
>> They all probably use slightly different combinations
>> of the inputs and use a different formula.
>
> Right. So, talk to experienced XC pilots who have
> *really* flown with these instruments, and find out which
> ones are considered to produce reliable wind info.
> Your mileage will vary. A lot.
>
> Hope that's helpful,
> Best Regards, Dave "YO"


So how do you know for sure that a particular software produces accurate
wind data? It seems that any test would require accurate wind data
determined by some highly trusted independent method to compare with the
software output.

Bildan

Well, if I'm climbing on a ridge and the wind calculator tells me that I'm
on the lee side, I tend to think that the calculator is bull****ting me :-)
In mountain flying, good wind calculation is a precious help (notably when
conditions are marginal), and can be - relatively - easily tested.

Bert

"Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote in message
. ..
> So how do you know for sure that a particular software produces accurate
> wind data? It seems that any test would require accurate wind data
> determined by some highly trusted independent method to compare with the
> software output.
>
> Bildan
>

Well, having flown over the mountains and plains while listening to other
pilots reporting wind from all points of the compass, I've jotted down their
readings, my data and the time. Later I compared that to the data collected
by a real-time NOAA wind profiler 16NM away. Using the wind profiler as a
reference, all of our calculated winds aloft data were highly unreliable.
No one was better than the others and all were way off. The only useful
data was collected while circling and then only if the circles were perfect,
otherwise it's is a rough approximation..

To get accurate real-time wind data in flight you need four input variables,
ground track, ground speed, trufe airspeed, and true heading. The last is
because winds aloft data are referenced to true north. To date, all glide
software omits heading input.

Bill Daniels

"Bert Willing" > wrote in message
...
> Well, if I'm climbing on a ridge and the wind calculator tells me that I'm
> on the lee side, I tend to think that the calculator is bull****ting me
> :-)
> In mountain flying, good wind calculation is a precious help (notably when
> conditions are marginal), and can be - relatively - easily tested.
>
> Bert
>
> "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote in message
> . ..
>> So how do you know for sure that a particular software produces accurate
>> wind data? It seems that any test would require accurate wind data
>> determined by some highly trusted independent method to compare with the
>> software output.
>>
>> Bildan
>>
>
>

On Nov 7, 9:52 am, "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote:
> Well, having flown over the mountains and plains while listening to other
> pilots reporting wind from all points of the compass, I've jotted down their
> readings, my data and the time. Later I compared that to the data collected
> by a real-time NOAA wind profiler 16NM away. Using the wind profiler as a
> reference, all of our calculated winds aloft data were highly unreliable.
> No one was better than the others and all were way off. The only useful
> data was collected while circling and then only if the circles were perfect,
> otherwise it's is a rough approximation..
>
> To get accurate real-time wind data in flight you need four input variables,
> ground track, ground speed, trufe airspeed, and true heading. The last is
> because winds aloft data are referenced to true north. To date, all glide
> software omits heading input.
>
> Bill Daniels
>
> "Bert Willing" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Well, if I'm climbing on a ridge and the wind calculator tells me that I'm
> > on the lee side, I tend to think that the calculator is bull****ting me
> > :-)
> > In mountain flying, good wind calculation is a precious help (notably when
> > conditions are marginal), and can be - relatively - easily tested.
>
> > Bert
>
> > "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote in message
> . ..
> >> So how do you know for sure that a particular software produces accurate
> >> wind data? It seems that any test would require accurate wind data
> >> determined by some highly trusted independent method to compare with the
> >> software output.
>
> >> Bildan

Actually several of the LX series have a fluxgate compass input for
just this reason. I have no experience using them.

I think a lot of wind calculations would be more reliable if people
understood what the devices are calculating, hwo they expire the
calculations, how to look at wind at different altitudes, how to reset
the wind calculations etc. I'm not suprised that voting across several
gliders yields near random results.

Darryl

On Nov 7, 10:32 am, " >
wrote:
> On Nov 7, 9:52 am, "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote:
>
> Actually several of the LX series have a fluxgate compass input for
> just this reason. I have no experience using them.

I have the compass on my LX 7000. It is a pain to get aligned and even
a small alignment error seems to affect the wind estimates, so I have
stuck with the circling mode. Without good heading data I think it is
impossible to estimate wind direction and speed in straight flight -
you can estimate headwind component based on true airspeed versus
ground speed if you have altitude (and temperature?) inputs, though I
am unsure as to which systems offer this.

I also run WinPilot and have found the two are generally pretty close
on winds - though not always, which make you wonder on those long
final glides...

9B

Bill Daniels wrote:
> Well, having flown over the mountains and plains while listening to other
> pilots reporting wind from all points of the compass, I've jotted down their
> readings, my data and the time. Later I compared that to the data collected
> by a real-time NOAA wind profiler 16NM away. Using the wind profiler as a
> reference, all of our calculated winds aloft data were highly unreliable.
> No one was better than the others and all were way off. The only useful
> data was collected while circling and then only if the circles were perfect,
> otherwise it's is a rough approximation..
>
> To get accurate real-time wind data in flight you need four input variables,
> ground track, ground speed, trufe airspeed, and true heading. The last is
> because winds aloft data are referenced to true north. To date, all glide
> software omits heading input.
>
> Bill Daniels

Another local pilot and I have compared wind calculations when flying in
the same area. He has an L-NAV, and I use SeeYou. Both units are using
airspeed data. Often the wind speeds are within a knot or two of each
other, and wind direction often is the same within a few degrees.

Either both units have amazingly similar errors, or both are quite accurate.

On Nov 7, 11:45 pm, "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote:
> So how do you know for sure that a particular software produces accurate
> wind data? It seems that any test would require accurate wind data
> determined by some highly trusted independent method to compare with the
> software output.
>
> Bildan

Exactly. Creating an accurate algorithm requires testing against
known data. In our case, the algorithms were developed testing
against carefully measured datasets, and stress tested against
common instrumentation errors such as static errors common
in our toys. In addition, I have tested our as-implemented
algorithms against data derived with the addition of heading
sensors.

Other algorithms may not have been so tested.

Hope this is helpful,
Best Regards, Dave "YO"

PS: Compasses don't work so good. Don't ask me how
we know.

PPS: These algorithms do not work well when wind changes
rapidly (flying into a seabreeze etc), or in extended straight
flight...

On Nov 7, 4:44 am, wrote:
> On Nov 6, 10:30 pm, Richard > wrote:
>
> > Software is what calculates the wind not the instrument.
>
> More than 98% of the engineering content of a flight
> computer is software. The instrument is in fact mostly
> software. And the software is completely different
> in the different instruments.
>
> > Most instruments have pitot and temperature inputs
> > and I beleive all use calculation of wind from circling drift in a
> > theraml, course change, True Airspeed and GPS info.
>
> Incorrect. ILEC SN10 certainly does not require circling
> to calculate wind; you'll often get a wind indication on
> tow.
>
> > They all probably use slightly different combinations
> > of the inputs and use a different formula.
>
> Right. So, talk to experienced XC pilots who have
> *really* flown with these instruments, and find out which
> ones are considered to produce reliable wind info.
> Your mileage will vary. A lot.
>
> Hope that's helpful,
> Best Regards, Dave "YO"

Dave,

I have flown will all the instruments mention in my post. I am sorry
for being slightly incorrect on my paragraph about wind calculation.

It should have said: Most calculate wind from some of the following
inputs circling drift in a
theraml, course change, True Airspeed and GPS info.

I have **really** flown with all the instruments and software
mentioned. Even the SN10 for an entire summer (approx 200 hours).
I found the SN10 just as good as the other instruments.
Last year I flew approx 250 hours with B500, B2000 and WinPilot and
for several months the LX1600 with SeeYou Mobile running on an
embedded computer in the panel with a large color screen 6" diagonal.
There is a small picture on the top of my home page of this setup.
More will follow on my web as I work on this system.

Thanks for correcting my mistakes.

Richard
www.craggyaero.com

Richard wrote:

> Last year I flew approx 250 hours with B500, B2000 and WinPilot and
> for several months the LX1600 with SeeYou Mobile running on an
> embedded computer in the panel with a large color screen 6" diagonal.
> There is a small picture on the top of my home page of this setup.
> More will follow on my web as I work on this system.

I'm guessing by the left-handed flying and the trackball on the right
that the system doesn't have touch screen!

--
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

On Nov 8, 5:15 pm, Eric Greenwell > wrote:
> Richard wrote:
> > Last year I flew approx 250 hours with B500, B2000 and WinPilot and
> > for several months the LX1600 with SeeYou Mobile running on an
> > embedded computer in the panel with a large color screen 6" diagonal.
> > There is a small picture on the top of my home page of this setup.
> > More will follow on my web as I work on this system.
>
> I'm guessing by the left-handed flying and the trackball on the right
> that the system doesn't have touch screen!
>
> --
> 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" atwww.motorglider.org

Eric,

It does also have a touch screen, but I found that the ball track was
easier to use. I also moved the ball track and strapped it on my
leg.

Got any ideas for a small ball track? or a different input device.

Richard
www.craggyaero.com

"Richard" > wrote in message
> Got any ideas for a small ball track? or a different input device.
>
> Richard
> www.craggyaero.com

This work?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2x-UDka4pU

Bill Daniels

Richard wrote:
> It does also have a touch screen, but I found that the ball track was
> easier to use.

Would moving the screen a few inches towards the rear from the panel
make the touch screen acceptable? I really like the touch screen input
when using GNII or SeeYou Mobile.

> I also moved the ball track and strapped it on my
> leg.
>
> Got any ideas for a small ball track? or a different input device.

These look interesting:

No trackball to fall out...

http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/mice_pointers/design_controller/devices/407&cl=us,en

Small and ambidextrous...

http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/mice_pointers/trackballs/devices/156&cl=us,en

--
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

On Nov 9, 4:26 pm, Eric Greenwell > wrote:
> Richard wrote:
> > It does also have a touch screen, but I found that the ball track was
> > easier to use.
>
> Would moving the screen a few inches towards the rear from the panel
> make the touch screen acceptable? I really like the touch screen input
> when using GNII or SeeYou Mobile.
>
> > I also moved the ball track and strapped it on my
> > leg.
>
> > Got any ideas for a small ball track? or a different input device.
>
> These look interesting:
>
> No trackball to fall out...
>
> http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/mice_pointers/design_controller/dev...
>
> Small and ambidextrous...
>
> http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/mice_pointers/trackballs/devices/15...
>
> --
> 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" atwww.motorglider.org

I tried the second mice but the bigger one was easier to use. I may
order that first ambidextrous one and see how it works.

I would have to make a case for the display and computer to more the
panel closer to me,but it would probably be better. I found that the
touch was not as positive as one on an ipaq.

Thanks,

Richard
www.craggyaero.com