Is anyone working on or studying using WAAS GPS data to make a stand-
alone vario? How would TE be implemented in such a device? Ground
speed change during a pullup? TAS based on circling winds?

Do the current PDA software programs (mSeeYou, Winpilot, etc.) when
used in GPS-only mode provide accurate vario data when hooked up to a
WAAS GPS?

Just curious - seems a 5 hz WAAS GPS could be the basis for a really
nice vario that wouldn't need any pitot-static imputs. I use mSeeYou
and a Themi, non-WAAS, and the "vario" data seems close, but I use it
more for trend and average than instantaneous data.

Winter can't end soon enough!

Kirk
66

On Jan 13, 8:23*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> Is anyone working on or studying using WAAS GPS data to make a stand-
> alone vario? *How would TE be implemented in such a device? Ground
> speed change during a pullup? *TAS based on circling winds?
>
> Do the current PDA software programs (mSeeYou, Winpilot, etc.) when
> used in GPS-only mode provide accurate vario data when hooked up to a
> WAAS GPS?
>
> Just curious - seems a 5 hz WAAS GPS could be the basis for a really
> nice vario that wouldn't need any pitot-static imputs. *I use mSeeYou
> and a Themi, non-WAAS, and the "vario" data seems close, but I use it
> more for trend and average than instantaneous data.
>
> Winter can't end soon enough!
>
> Kirk
> 66

Yes but how does it tell the difference between an increase in wind
and a pull up? How will it handle STF calculations in a strong
headwind/wave where it may be really confused what is going on?

Darryl

On Jan 13, 8:36*am, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
> On Jan 13, 8:23*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
>
>
> > Is anyone working on or studying using WAAS GPS data to make a stand-
> > alone vario? *How would TE be implemented in such a device? Ground
> > speed change during a pullup? *TAS based on circling winds?
>
> > Do the current PDA software programs (mSeeYou, Winpilot, etc.) when
> > used in GPS-only mode provide accurate vario data when hooked up to a
> > WAAS GPS?
>
> > Just curious - seems a 5 hz WAAS GPS could be the basis for a really
> > nice vario that wouldn't need any pitot-static imputs. *I use mSeeYou
> > and a Themi, non-WAAS, and the "vario" data seems close, but I use it
> > more for trend and average than instantaneous data.
>
> > Winter can't end soon enough!
>
> > Kirk
> > 66
>
> Yes but how does it tell the difference between an increase in wind
> and a pull up? How will it handle STF calculations in a strong
> headwind/wave where it may be really confused what is going on?
>
> Darryl

Darryl's right (again).

I don't think there's really a satisfactory way to take wind out of
the equation. You could try to do it with track and drift trends, but
that's not very precise given how much the wind can vary with
altitude, position and over time.

9B

Hi,

Interesting thought.

To answer your 2nd question below, I have flow with SeeYou Mobile with a
WAAS GPS only (CF GPS) and I found the thermal assistant to be pretty much
useless. However, it worked great when connected to a 302.

Good Soaring,

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

"kirk.stant" > wrote in message
...
> Is anyone working on or studying using WAAS GPS data to make a stand-
> alone vario? How would TE be implemented in such a device? Ground
> speed change during a pullup? TAS based on circling winds?
>
> Do the current PDA software programs (mSeeYou, Winpilot, etc.) when
> used in GPS-only mode provide accurate vario data when hooked up to a
> WAAS GPS?
>
> Just curious - seems a 5 hz WAAS GPS could be the basis for a really
> nice vario that wouldn't need any pitot-static imputs. I use mSeeYou
> and a Themi, non-WAAS, and the "vario" data seems close, but I use it
> more for trend and average than instantaneous data.
>
> Winter can't end soon enough!
>
> Kirk
> 66
>

On Jan 13, 11:03*am, wrote:
> On Jan 13, 8:36*am, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 13, 8:23*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > > Is anyone working on or studying using WAAS GPS data to make a stand-
> > > alone vario? *How would TE be implemented in such a device? Ground
> > > speed change during a pullup? *TAS based on circling winds?
>
> > > Do the current PDA software programs (mSeeYou, Winpilot, etc.) when
> > > used in GPS-only mode provide accurate vario data when hooked up to a
> > > WAAS GPS?
>
> > > Just curious - seems a 5 hz WAAS GPS could be the basis for a really
> > > nice vario that wouldn't need any pitot-static imputs. *I use mSeeYou
> > > and a Themi, non-WAAS, and the "vario" data seems close, but I use it
> > > more for trend and average than instantaneous data.
>
> > > Winter can't end soon enough!
>
> > > Kirk
> > > 66
>
> > Yes but how does it tell the difference between an increase in wind
> > and a pull up? How will it handle STF calculations in a strong
> > headwind/wave where it may be really confused what is going on?
>
> > Darryl
>
> Darryl's right (again).
>
> I don't think there's really a satisfactory way to take wind out of
> the equation. You could try to do it with track and drift trends, but
> that's not very precise given how much the wind can vary with
> altitude, position and over time.
>
> 9B- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Cmon, let's think out of the box!

An INS/IMU can measure winds without air data. How accurate (read
"expensive") would an inertial sensor need to be to provide useful
wind data (or just TAS vs GS)?

Or bite the bullet and T into the pitot/static system and provide the
data to the GPS vario - no worse than a TE connection for a
conventional vario.

Question is whether it would be cheaper and/or better than current
mechanical or electronic TE varios? Better or worse at altitude,
faster/slower response, etc?

I'm thinking: One little box with an LCD display. TE vario, audio,
horizontal lift distribution in the current thermal in real time (for
centering), current average, past averages/acheived climbs (trend for
MC settings), logger, GPS output for other devices. Run off ship
power and have a backup rechargeable battery.

Stick in a 68mm hole, hook up pitot/static and power, off you go.
Replaces your backup mechanical or electric, gives you a real backup
when your TE probe falls off! Do it for less than $500 (yeah, right,
I know...) and you stick it in every glider out there (think of all
the crap instruments in club/commercial gliders in the US).

And please don't say "Cambridge 302" - TE probes are soooo 20th
century!

Kirk
66

Kirk - it's about time you came back home to Arizona. We don't need
no stinking varios here!

Mike

On Jan 13, 10:05*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> On Jan 13, 11:03*am, wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 13, 8:36*am, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 13, 8:23*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > > > Is anyone working on or studying using WAAS GPS data to make a stand-
> > > > alone vario? *How would TE be implemented in such a device? Ground
> > > > speed change during a pullup? *TAS based on circling winds?
>
> > > > Do the current PDA software programs (mSeeYou, Winpilot, etc.) when
> > > > used in GPS-only mode provide accurate vario data when hooked up to a
> > > > WAAS GPS?
>
> > > > Just curious - seems a 5 hz WAAS GPS could be the basis for a really
> > > > nice vario that wouldn't need any pitot-static imputs. *I use mSeeYou
> > > > and a Themi, non-WAAS, and the "vario" data seems close, but I use it
> > > > more for trend and average than instantaneous data.
>
> > > > Winter can't end soon enough!
>
> > > > Kirk
> > > > 66
>
> > > Yes but how does it tell the difference between an increase in wind
> > > and a pull up? How will it handle STF calculations in a strong
> > > headwind/wave where it may be really confused what is going on?
>
> > > Darryl
>
> > Darryl's right (again).
>
> > I don't think there's really a satisfactory way to take wind out of
> > the equation. You could try to do it with track and drift trends, but
> > that's not very precise given how much the wind can vary with
> > altitude, position and over time.
>
> > 9B- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Cmon, let's think out of the box!
>
> An INS/IMU can measure winds without air data. *How accurate (read
> "expensive") would an inertial sensor need to be to provide useful
> wind data (or just TAS vs GS)?
>
> Or bite the bullet and T into the pitot/static system and provide the
> data to the GPS vario - no worse than a TE connection for a
> conventional vario.
>
> Question is whether it would be cheaper and/or better than current
> mechanical or electronic TE varios? *Better or worse at altitude,
> faster/slower response, etc?
>
> I'm thinking: *One little box with an LCD display. *TE vario, audio,
> horizontal lift distribution in the current thermal in real time (for
> centering), current average, past averages/acheived climbs (trend for
> MC settings), logger, GPS output for other devices. *Run off ship
> power and have a backup rechargeable battery.
>
> Stick in a 68mm hole, hook up pitot/static and power, off you go.
> Replaces your backup mechanical or electric, gives you a real backup
> when your TE probe falls off! *Do it for less than $500 (yeah, right,
> I know...) and you stick it in every glider out there (think of all
> the crap instruments in club/commercial gliders in the US).
>
> And please don't say "Cambridge 302" - TE probes are soooo 20th
> century!
>
> Kirk
> 66

I am not aware of any IMS/IMU that attempt to calculate wind without
air data input. Do you know of one? It is likely a significant
challenge for rate based systems (vs. position based with GPS). e.g.
"taking a turn" cannot help determine wind with an INS. All the poor
thing can try to do is integrate external accelerations on the
aircraft caused by changes in wind.

While trying to integrate up rate based sensors to determine wind is
likely impractical. Using rate based sensors to filter other rate base
inputs likely makes more sense. I believe accelerometer based
assistance is already used to help improve/filter gusts and other
effects on variometers (wether using TE probe or digitally adjusted TAS
+pitot). I believe the Cambridge 302 uses it's accelerometers for
this, but also have heard rumors that this was never really fully
developed in the software. I am not sure if other vario/computer
systems also do this. I certainly like how the vario in the 302
performs (and I'm using electronic TE compensation with mine).

Paul gives on example of the SeeYou Mobile thermal assistant not
working well with just GPS+WAAS input. In the past other people have
tried to use STF data through PDA software. Finally Naviter had to
warn pilots this can't possibly work, they just don't have enough data
to calculate something useful.

Even if all the above were not show-stopping issues you'd have to look
at the noise spectrum of the altitude signal around a fraction to 1 Hz
to see how bad differentiating (for vertical velocity) and filtering
this is going to be. I just don't have that data handy. And you may
need a sophisticated antenna system to provide a good GPS satellite
sky view when turning tightly. A TE probe, which is just a couple of
holes or a slot cut in a few dollars worth of tube seems a lot easier
way to get basic data. As Dick Johnson kept reminding us, you don't
need a fancy tail mount TE probe a simple home made fuselage mounted
one works great. An electronic pressure sensor to incorporate into a
vario costs a few dollars. The software to make all this work really
well. Priceless. I can't wait to see what Dave Ellis does at
ClearNav...


Darryl

On Jan 13, 12:38*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>I believe the Cambridge 302 uses it's accelerometers for
> this, but also have heard rumors that this was never really fully
> developed in the software.

More than a rumor I think. My recollection is that it was
experimented with but never implemented in any way. You can read the
accerolemeter values on one of the data pages though.

Andy

On Jan 13, 12:25*pm, Andy > wrote:
> On Jan 13, 12:38*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
> >I believe the Cambridge 302 uses it's accelerometers for
> > this, but also have heard rumors that this was never really fully
> > developed in the software.
>
> More than a rumor I think. *My recollection is that it was
> experimented with but never implemented in any way. *You can read the
> accerolemeter values on one of the data pages though.
>
> Andy

It would be interesting to know what they did and if there is anything
used for gust filtering etc.

The accelerometer (or one axis of it) is used for the slow flight
warning, as can be demonstrated by playing around with the glider near
the low-speed threshold.

Darryl

Darryl,

INS would be like a GPS that had accurate heading info - would still
need TAS to solve the wind triangle, just like on an E6B.

I didn't think it all the way through, obviously!

The trouble with TE probes is that they are fragile have several
failure points. So it's nice to have a backup system (electronic TE
on a 302, for example).

My experience with a non WAAS Themi, which also drives my mSeeYou, is
that the "vario" data, once established in a thermal, is pretty good -
since I'm looking for differences around the circle, not absolute
climb values. And having the GPS show where in the thermal the
stronger lift was located is useful. But it is not a replacement for
a good TE vario.

I'm just curious if the increased accuracy of WAAS can be merged into
an instrument that will present a clearer 3-D picture of a thermal.
The best current vario only tells you how well you were climbing a few
seconds ago, but not where. PDA software is pretty good at showing
historical flight path, but I think there is room for improvement on
how to display a thermal in 3D that is useful for a pilot trying to
dig out of a hole or max out a boomer.

I'm going to have to run some simultaneous traces from a conventional
logger (pressure altitude) and my PDA logger (GPS altitude) and
compare the thermal data in SeeYou.

Fun to what-if...!

Kirk

On Jan 13, 12:54*pm, Mike the Strike > wrote:
> Kirk - it's about time you came back home to Arizona. *We don't need
> no stinking varios here!
>
> Mike

Mike, we don't need no stinkin varios here in Illinois now either -
It's too damn cold to fly gliders!

Although I did tow up a Canadian member of our club Sunday - I was
nice and warm in the Pawnee; he was in - wait for it - an open cockpit
1-26!

Dem Canuks, they be a bit touched, eh!

Kirk

kirk.stant wrote:
t's too damn cold to fly gliders!
>
> Although I did tow up a Canadian member of our club Sunday - I was
> nice and warm in the Pawnee; he was in - wait for it - an open cockpit
> 1-26!
>
> Dem Canuks, they be a bit touched, eh!

Says the guy that moved from Arizona to Illinois, about a guy that moves
south for the winter!

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

Differentiating altitude from a 1Hz GPS is going to be fairly useless
for a vario. You will need a GPS that outputs true vertical velocity,
and preferably >1Hz. GPS velocity is very accurate because it is taken
directly from doppler shifts in the GPS signal, not from
differentiating position. It has been reported that low cost GPS
horizontal velocity has an accuracy of 5mm/s (0.01 knots). Vertical
velocity error will be greater because of satellite geometry, but
probably only double that. You don't need a WAAS receiver to get this
precision, but it probably helps somewhat since you need to know your
position precisely to calculate the relative satellite velocity. You
don't need fancy antennas, just a good view of the sky. Fortunately
it's the overhead satellites that provide vertical velocity
information, so as long as your bank angle does not exceed 45 degrees,
you should be able to track these constantly as long as the antenna is
properly positioned.

Unfortunately, vertical velocity is not included in any of the
standard NMEA sentences--probably because boats are not supposed to
have a vertical velocity. So most low-cost GPS units will not have
this. The Garmin GPS-18 does have a proprietary sentence with X, Y & Z
velocities, and it also comes in a 5 Hz version for ~$150.

TE compensation will be a bit tricky without airdata input, but it
could potentially be better since it is not subject to errors like
gusts and lags (not to mention leaks). I don't see why an INS based on
low-cost automotive grade sensors could not provide TE comp at least
as good as a pneumatic system. Any change in kinetic energy will
require an acceleration that can be measured by an accelerometer. But
you would need to remove acceletation due to gravity and rate of turn,
so this would also require solid-state gyros, and a lot of software to
integrate them.

On Jan 13, 2:38*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
> On Jan 13, 10:05*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 13, 11:03*am, wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 13, 8:36*am, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 13, 8:23*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > > > > Is anyone working on or studying using WAAS GPS data to make a stand-
> > > > > alone vario? *How would TE be implemented in such a device? Ground
> > > > > speed change during a pullup? *TAS based on circling winds?
>
> > > > > Do the current PDA software programs (mSeeYou, Winpilot, etc.) when
> > > > > used in GPS-only mode provide accurate vario data when hooked up to a
> > > > > WAAS GPS?
>
> > > > > Just curious - seems a 5 hz WAAS GPS could be the basis for a really
> > > > > nice vario that wouldn't need any pitot-static imputs. *I use mSeeYou
> > > > > and a Themi, non-WAAS, and the "vario" data seems close, but I use it
> > > > > more for trend and average than instantaneous data.
>
> > > > > Winter can't end soon enough!
>
> > > > > Kirk
> > > > > 66
>
> > > > Yes but how does it tell the difference between an increase in wind
> > > > and a pull up? How will it handle STF calculations in a strong
> > > > headwind/wave where it may be really confused what is going on?
>
> > > > Darryl
>
> > > Darryl's right (again).
>
> > > I don't think there's really a satisfactory way to take wind out of
> > > the equation. You could try to do it with track and drift trends, but
> > > that's not very precise given how much the wind can vary with
> > > altitude, position and over time.
>
> > > 9B- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Cmon, let's think out of the box!
>
> > An INS/IMU can measure winds without air data. *How accurate (read
> > "expensive") would an inertial sensor need to be to provide useful
> > wind data (or just TAS vs GS)?
>
> > Or bite the bullet and T into the pitot/static system and provide the
> > data to the GPS vario - no worse than a TE connection for a
> > conventional vario.
>
> > Question is whether it would be cheaper and/or better than current
> > mechanical or electronic TE varios? *Better or worse at altitude,
> > faster/slower response, etc?
>
> > I'm thinking: *One little box with an LCD display. *TE vario, audio,
> > horizontal lift distribution in the current thermal in real time (for
> > centering), current average, past averages/acheived climbs (trend for
> > MC settings), logger, GPS output for other devices. *Run off ship
> > power and have a backup rechargeable battery.
>
> > Stick in a 68mm hole, hook up pitot/static and power, off you go.
> > Replaces your backup mechanical or electric, gives you a real backup
> > when your TE probe falls off! *Do it for less than $500 (yeah, right,
> > I know...) and you stick it in every glider out there (think of all
> > the crap instruments in club/commercial gliders in the US).
>
> > And please don't say "Cambridge 302" - TE probes are soooo 20th
> > century!
>
> > Kirk
> > 66
>
> I am not aware of any IMS/IMU that attempt to calculate wind without
> air data input. Do you know of one? It is likely a significant
> challenge for rate based systems (vs. position based with GPS). e.g.
> "taking a turn" cannot help determine wind with an INS. All the poor
> thing can try to do is integrate external accelerations on the
> aircraft caused by changes in wind.
>
> While trying to integrate up rate based sensors to determine wind is
> likely impractical. Using rate based sensors to filter other rate base
> inputs likely makes more sense. I believe accelerometer based
> assistance is already used to help improve/filter gusts and other
> effects on variometers (wether using TE probe or digitally adjusted TAS
> +pitot). I believe the Cambridge 302 uses it's accelerometers for
> this, but also have heard rumors that this was never really fully
> developed in the software. I am not sure if other vario/computer
> systems also do this. I certainly like how the vario in the 302
> performs (and I'm using electronic TE compensation with mine).
>
> Paul gives on example of the SeeYou Mobile thermal assistant not
> working well with just GPS+WAAS input. In the past other people have
> tried to use STF data through PDA software. *Finally Naviter had to
> warn pilots this can't possibly work, they just don't have enough data
> to calculate something useful.
>
> Even if all the above were not show-stopping issues you'd have to look
> at the noise spectrum of the altitude signal around a fraction to 1 Hz
> to see how bad differentiating (for vertical velocity) and filtering
> this is going to be. I just don't have that data handy. And you may
> need a sophisticated antenna system to provide a good GPS satellite
> sky view when turning tightly. A TE probe, which is just a couple of
> holes or a slot cut in a few dollars worth of tube seems a lot easier
> way to get basic data. As Dick Johnson kept reminding us, you don't
> need a fancy tail mount TE probe a simple home made fuselage mounted
> one works great. An electronic pressure sensor to incorporate into a
> vario costs a few dollars. The software to make all this work really
> well. Priceless. I can't wait to see what Dave Ellis does at
> ClearNav...
>
> Darryl

>
> Says the guy that moved from Arizona to Illinois, about a guy that moves
> south for the winter!
>
> --
> Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
> * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly


Mumble mumble something about character building, etc...

I prefer to think about it as a remote tour - think Shemya, etc.

And if the cold wasn't enough, in the summer you gots to mow grass!!!
Arggg!!!

Upside? Well, you can pretty much landout anywhere...good thing, too!

Oh, and the toasted ravioli in Soulard.

66

On Jan 13, 1:45*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
> The accelerometer (or one axis of it) is used for the slow flight
> warning, as can be demonstrated by playing around with the glider near
> the low-speed threshold.

That may be true but, from my experience, they didn't make it work
very well. I have to set my slow alarm threshold well below 1 g stall
to stop it being a nuisance while thermalling. I like to crank it up
tight in our southwest thermals. With that setting though it is
useful as the 28 climb rate really falls if if flown too slow.

Andy

On Jan 14, 5:22*am, dhaluza > wrote:
> Differentiating altitude from a 1Hz GPS is going to be fairly useless
> for a vario. You will need a GPS that outputs true vertical velocity,
> and preferably >1Hz. GPS velocity is very accurate because it is taken
> directly from doppler shifts in the GPS signal, not from
> differentiating position. It has been reported that low cost GPS
> horizontal velocity has an accuracy of 5mm/s (0.01 knots). Vertical
> velocity error will be greater because of satellite geometry, but
> probably only double that. You don't need a WAAS receiver to get this
> precision, but it probably helps somewhat since you need to know your
> position precisely to calculate the relative satellite velocity. You
> don't need fancy antennas, just a good view of the sky. Fortunately
> it's the overhead satellites that provide vertical velocity
> information, so as long as your bank angle does not exceed 45 degrees,
> you should be able to track these constantly as long as the antenna is
> properly positioned.
>
> Unfortunately, vertical velocity is not included in any of the
> standard NMEA sentences--probably because boats are not supposed to
> have a vertical velocity. So most low-cost GPS units will not have
> this. The Garmin GPS-18 does have a proprietary sentence with X, Y & Z
> velocities, and it also comes in a 5 Hz version for ~$150.
>
> TE compensation will be a bit tricky without airdata input, but it
> could potentially be better since it is not subject to errors like
> gusts and lags (not to mention leaks). I don't see why an INS based on
> low-cost automotive grade sensors could not provide TE comp at least
> as good as a pneumatic system. Any change in kinetic energy will
> require an acceleration that can be measured by an accelerometer. But
> you would need to remove acceletation due to gravity and rate of turn,
> so this would also require solid-state gyros, and a lot of software to
> integrate them.
>
> On Jan 13, 2:38*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
> > On Jan 13, 10:05*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 13, 11:03*am, wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 13, 8:36*am, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 13, 8:23*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > > > > > Is anyone working on or studying using WAAS GPS data to make a stand-
> > > > > > alone vario? *How would TE be implemented in such a device? Ground
> > > > > > speed change during a pullup? *TAS based on circling winds?
>
> > > > > > Do the current PDA software programs (mSeeYou, Winpilot, etc.) when
> > > > > > used in GPS-only mode provide accurate vario data when hooked up to a
> > > > > > WAAS GPS?
>
> > > > > > Just curious - seems a 5 hz WAAS GPS could be the basis for a really
> > > > > > nice vario that wouldn't need any pitot-static imputs. *I use mSeeYou
> > > > > > and a Themi, non-WAAS, and the "vario" data seems close, but I use it
> > > > > > more for trend and average than instantaneous data.
>
> > > > > > Winter can't end soon enough!
>
> > > > > > Kirk
> > > > > > 66
>
> > > > > Yes but how does it tell the difference between an increase in wind
> > > > > and a pull up? How will it handle STF calculations in a strong
> > > > > headwind/wave where it may be really confused what is going on?
>
> > > > > Darryl
>
> > > > Darryl's right (again).
>
> > > > I don't think there's really a satisfactory way to take wind out of
> > > > the equation. You could try to do it with track and drift trends, but
> > > > that's not very precise given how much the wind can vary with
> > > > altitude, position and over time.
>
> > > > 9B- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Cmon, let's think out of the box!
>
> > > An INS/IMU can measure winds without air data. *How accurate (read
> > > "expensive") would an inertial sensor need to be to provide useful
> > > wind data (or just TAS vs GS)?
>
> > > Or bite the bullet and T into the pitot/static system and provide the
> > > data to the GPS vario - no worse than a TE connection for a
> > > conventional vario.
>
> > > Question is whether it would be cheaper and/or better than current
> > > mechanical or electronic TE varios? *Better or worse at altitude,
> > > faster/slower response, etc?
>
> > > I'm thinking: *One little box with an LCD display. *TE vario, audio,
> > > horizontal lift distribution in the current thermal in real time (for
> > > centering), current average, past averages/acheived climbs (trend for
> > > MC settings), logger, GPS output for other devices. *Run off ship
> > > power and have a backup rechargeable battery.
>
> > > Stick in a 68mm hole, hook up pitot/static and power, off you go.
> > > Replaces your backup mechanical or electric, gives you a real backup
> > > when your TE probe falls off! *Do it for less than $500 (yeah, right,
> > > I know...) and you stick it in every glider out there (think of all
> > > the crap instruments in club/commercial gliders in the US).
>
> > > And please don't say "Cambridge 302" - TE probes are soooo 20th
> > > century!
>
> > > Kirk
> > > 66
>
> > I am not aware of any IMS/IMU that attempt to calculate wind without
> > air data input. Do you know of one? It is likely a significant
> > challenge for rate based systems (vs. position based with GPS). e.g.
> > "taking a turn" cannot help determine wind with an INS. All the poor
> > thing can try to do is integrate external accelerations on the
> > aircraft caused by changes in wind.
>
> > While trying to integrate up rate based sensors to determine wind is
> > likely impractical. Using rate based sensors to filter other rate base
> > inputs likely makes more sense. I believe accelerometer based
> > assistance is already used to help improve/filter gusts and other
> > effects on variometers (wether using TE probe or digitally adjusted TAS
> > +pitot). I believe the Cambridge 302 uses it's accelerometers for
> > this, but also have heard rumors that this was never really fully
> > developed in the software. I am not sure if other vario/computer
> > systems also do this. I certainly like how the vario in the 302
> > performs (and I'm using electronic TE compensation with mine).
>
> > Paul gives on example of the SeeYou Mobile thermal assistant not
> > working well with just GPS+WAAS input. In the past other people have
> > tried to use STF data through PDA software. *Finally Naviter had to
> > warn pilots this can't possibly work, they just don't have enough data
> > to calculate something useful.
>
> > Even if all the above were not show-stopping issues you'd have to look
> > at the noise spectrum of the altitude signal around a fraction to 1 Hz
> > to see how bad differentiating (for vertical velocity) and filtering
> > this is going to be. I just don't have that data handy. And you may
> > need a sophisticated antenna system to provide a good GPS satellite
> > sky view when turning tightly. A TE probe, which is just a couple of
> > holes or a slot cut in a few dollars worth of tube seems a lot easier
> > way to get basic data. As Dick Johnson kept reminding us, you don't
> > need a fancy tail mount TE probe a simple home made fuselage mounted
> > one works great. An electronic pressure sensor to incorporate into a
> > vario costs a few dollars. The software to make all this work really
> > well. Priceless. I can't wait to see what Dave Ellis does at
> > ClearNav...
>
> > Darryl

GPS, even WAAS enabled, is best considered to be a highly accurate but
interruptable data source. Inertial reference units are best
considered a less accurate but non-interruptable data source. GPS
signals can provide not only position data but, with multiple
antennas, can provide attitude data. Combining the two with a Kalman
filter where GPS keeps the INS updated results in the best of both.

This combination outputs highly accurate Euler angles, 3D velocity and
position data. In other words, your gadget would know where it was,
its pitch, roll and heading angles, and its velocity on each of three
axes - all to extremely high precision. There's a lot that can be
done with these data.

Could this hypothetical gadget be used as an inertial TE vario?
Absolutely, as long as all TE calculations were done in the same
inertial reference frame. Speed to fly would require air data,
however.

The benefits of a GPS/inertial system would include:

A vario with no gust sensitivity, high S/N ratio and instant
response,
Instantly updated, highly accurate vector wind data.
Accurate lift mapping for thermal centering assistance.

Bill Daniels

On Jan 14, 9:51*am, bildan > wrote:
> On Jan 14, 5:22*am, dhaluza > wrote:
>
>
>
> > Differentiating altitude from a 1Hz GPS is going to be fairly useless
> > for a vario. You will need a GPS that outputs true vertical velocity,
> > and preferably >1Hz. GPS velocity is very accurate because it is taken
> > directly from doppler shifts in the GPS signal, not from
> > differentiating position. It has been reported that low cost GPS
> > horizontal velocity has an accuracy of 5mm/s (0.01 knots). Vertical
> > velocity error will be greater because of satellite geometry, but
> > probably only double that. You don't need a WAAS receiver to get this
> > precision, but it probably helps somewhat since you need to know your
> > position precisely to calculate the relative satellite velocity. You
> > don't need fancy antennas, just a good view of the sky. Fortunately
> > it's the overhead satellites that provide vertical velocity
> > information, so as long as your bank angle does not exceed 45 degrees,
> > you should be able to track these constantly as long as the antenna is
> > properly positioned.
>
> > Unfortunately, vertical velocity is not included in any of the
> > standard NMEA sentences--probably because boats are not supposed to
> > have a vertical velocity. So most low-cost GPS units will not have
> > this. The Garmin GPS-18 does have a proprietary sentence with X, Y & Z
> > velocities, and it also comes in a 5 Hz version for ~$150.
>
> > TE compensation will be a bit tricky without airdata input, but it
> > could potentially be better since it is not subject to errors like
> > gusts and lags (not to mention leaks). I don't see why an INS based on
> > low-cost automotive grade sensors could not provide TE comp at least
> > as good as a pneumatic system. Any change in kinetic energy will
> > require an acceleration that can be measured by an accelerometer. But
> > you would need to remove acceletation due to gravity and rate of turn,
> > so this would also require solid-state gyros, and a lot of software to
> > integrate them.
>
> > On Jan 13, 2:38*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 13, 10:05*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 13, 11:03*am, wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 13, 8:36*am, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jan 13, 8:23*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Is anyone working on or studying using WAAS GPS data to make a stand-
> > > > > > > alone vario? *How would TE be implemented in such a device? Ground
> > > > > > > speed change during a pullup? *TAS based on circling winds?
>
> > > > > > > Do the current PDA software programs (mSeeYou, Winpilot, etc.) when
> > > > > > > used in GPS-only mode provide accurate vario data when hooked up to a
> > > > > > > WAAS GPS?
>
> > > > > > > Just curious - seems a 5 hz WAAS GPS could be the basis for a really
> > > > > > > nice vario that wouldn't need any pitot-static imputs. *I use mSeeYou
> > > > > > > and a Themi, non-WAAS, and the "vario" data seems close, but I use it
> > > > > > > more for trend and average than instantaneous data.
>
> > > > > > > Winter can't end soon enough!
>
> > > > > > > Kirk
> > > > > > > 66
>
> > > > > > Yes but how does it tell the difference between an increase in wind
> > > > > > and a pull up? How will it handle STF calculations in a strong
> > > > > > headwind/wave where it may be really confused what is going on?
>
> > > > > > Darryl
>
> > > > > Darryl's right (again).
>
> > > > > I don't think there's really a satisfactory way to take wind out of
> > > > > the equation. You could try to do it with track and drift trends, but
> > > > > that's not very precise given how much the wind can vary with
> > > > > altitude, position and over time.
>
> > > > > 9B- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > Cmon, let's think out of the box!
>
> > > > An INS/IMU can measure winds without air data. *How accurate (read
> > > > "expensive") would an inertial sensor need to be to provide useful
> > > > wind data (or just TAS vs GS)?
>
> > > > Or bite the bullet and T into the pitot/static system and provide the
> > > > data to the GPS vario - no worse than a TE connection for a
> > > > conventional vario.
>
> > > > Question is whether it would be cheaper and/or better than current
> > > > mechanical or electronic TE varios? *Better or worse at altitude,
> > > > faster/slower response, etc?
>
> > > > I'm thinking: *One little box with an LCD display. *TE vario, audio,
> > > > horizontal lift distribution in the current thermal in real time (for
> > > > centering), current average, past averages/acheived climbs (trend for
> > > > MC settings), logger, GPS output for other devices. *Run off ship
> > > > power and have a backup rechargeable battery.
>
> > > > Stick in a 68mm hole, hook up pitot/static and power, off you go.
> > > > Replaces your backup mechanical or electric, gives you a real backup
> > > > when your TE probe falls off! *Do it for less than $500 (yeah, right,
> > > > I know...) and you stick it in every glider out there (think of all
> > > > the crap instruments in club/commercial gliders in the US).
>
> > > > And please don't say "Cambridge 302" - TE probes are soooo 20th
> > > > century!
>
> > > > Kirk
> > > > 66
>
> > > I am not aware of any IMS/IMU that attempt to calculate wind without
> > > air data input. Do you know of one? It is likely a significant
> > > challenge for rate based systems (vs. position based with GPS). e.g.
> > > "taking a turn" cannot help determine wind with an INS. All the poor
> > > thing can try to do is integrate external accelerations on the
> > > aircraft caused by changes in wind.
>
> > > While trying to integrate up rate based sensors to determine wind is
> > > likely impractical. Using rate based sensors to filter other rate base
> > > inputs likely makes more sense. I believe accelerometer based
> > > assistance is already used to help improve/filter gusts and other
> > > effects on variometers (wether using TE probe or digitally adjusted TAS
> > > +pitot). I believe the Cambridge 302 uses it's accelerometers for
> > > this, but also have heard rumors that this was never really fully
> > > developed in the software. I am not sure if other vario/computer
> > > systems also do this. I certainly like how the vario in the 302
> > > performs (and I'm using electronic TE compensation with mine).
>
> > > Paul gives on example of the SeeYou Mobile thermal assistant not
> > > working well with just GPS+WAAS input. In the past other people have
> > > tried to use STF data through PDA software. *Finally Naviter had to
> > > warn pilots this can't possibly work, they just don't have enough data
> > > to calculate something useful.
>
> > > Even if all the above were not show-stopping issues you'd have to look
> > > at the noise spectrum of the altitude signal around a fraction to 1 Hz
> > > to see how bad differentiating (for vertical velocity) and filtering
> > > this is going to be. I just don't have that data handy. And you may
> > > need a sophisticated antenna system to provide a good GPS satellite
> > > sky view when turning tightly. A TE probe, which is just a couple of
> > > holes or a slot cut in a few dollars worth of tube seems a lot easier
> > > way to get basic data. As Dick Johnson kept reminding us, you don't
> > > need a fancy tail mount TE probe a simple home made fuselage mounted
> > > one works great. An electronic pressure sensor to incorporate into a
> > > vario costs a few dollars. The software to make all this work really
> > > well. Priceless. I can't wait to see what Dave Ellis does at
> > > ClearNav...
>
> > > Darryl
>
> GPS, even WAAS enabled, is best considered to be a highly accurate but
> interruptable data source. *Inertial reference units are best
> considered a less accurate but non-interruptable data source. *GPS
> signals can provide not only position data but, with multiple
> antennas, can provide attitude data. *Combining the two with a Kalman
> filter where GPS keeps the INS updated results in the best of both.
>
> This combination outputs highly accurate Euler angles, 3D velocity and
> position data. *In other words, your gadget would know where it was,
> its pitch, roll and heading angles, and its velocity on each of three
> axes - all to extremely high precision. *There's a lot that can be
> done with these data.
>
> Could this hypothetical gadget be used as an inertial TE vario?
> Absolutely, as long as all TE calculations were done in the same
> inertial reference frame. *Speed to fly would require air data,
> however.
>
> The benefits of a GPS/inertial system would include:
>
> A vario with no gust sensitivity, high S/N ratio and instant
> response,
> Instantly updated, highly accurate vector wind data.
> Accurate lift mapping for thermal centering assistance.
>
> Bill Daniels

Spoken like a true control systems whiz.

Maybe this is what you had in mind, but wouldn't the best Kalman
filter combine GPS, inertial and air data into a single optimal
estimate for all the relevant rates and angles? The air data has lags
for sure, but you should be able to model the dynamics and use it to
take the drift out of integrated accelerometer signals.

The cool part (I think) would be that you'd be able to make a vario
that can distinguish between horizontal and vertical gusts - which
ought to better correlate to and enhance the "seat of the pants" feel
that a lot of us try to use in choosing and centering lift.

Do you think differential GPS has the resolution to give good attitude
information? I think there are laser ring gyros out there now that are
pretty inexpensive and I think the drift is pretty good for our
application, but I have no idea which is would be more accurate - GPS
would almost certainly be cheaper and easier on the batteries.

Andy

On Jan 14, 1:26*pm, wrote:
> On Jan 14, 9:51*am, bildan > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 14, 5:22*am, dhaluza > wrote:
>
> > > Differentiating altitude from a 1Hz GPS is going to be fairly useless
> > > for a vario. You will need a GPS that outputs true vertical velocity,
> > > and preferably >1Hz. GPS velocity is very accurate because it is taken
> > > directly from doppler shifts in the GPS signal, not from
> > > differentiating position. It has been reported that low cost GPS
> > > horizontal velocity has an accuracy of 5mm/s (0.01 knots). Vertical
> > > velocity error will be greater because of satellite geometry, but
> > > probably only double that. You don't need a WAAS receiver to get this
> > > precision, but it probably helps somewhat since you need to know your
> > > position precisely to calculate the relative satellite velocity. You
> > > don't need fancy antennas, just a good view of the sky. Fortunately
> > > it's the overhead satellites that provide vertical velocity
> > > information, so as long as your bank angle does not exceed 45 degrees,
> > > you should be able to track these constantly as long as the antenna is
> > > properly positioned.
>
> > > Unfortunately, vertical velocity is not included in any of the
> > > standard NMEA sentences--probably because boats are not supposed to
> > > have a vertical velocity. So most low-cost GPS units will not have
> > > this. The Garmin GPS-18 does have a proprietary sentence with X, Y & Z
> > > velocities, and it also comes in a 5 Hz version for ~$150.
>
> > > TE compensation will be a bit tricky without airdata input, but it
> > > could potentially be better since it is not subject to errors like
> > > gusts and lags (not to mention leaks). I don't see why an INS based on
> > > low-cost automotive grade sensors could not provide TE comp at least
> > > as good as a pneumatic system. Any change in kinetic energy will
> > > require an acceleration that can be measured by an accelerometer. But
> > > you would need to remove acceletation due to gravity and rate of turn,
> > > so this would also require solid-state gyros, and a lot of software to
> > > integrate them.
>
> > > On Jan 13, 2:38*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 13, 10:05*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 13, 11:03*am, wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jan 13, 8:36*am, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Jan 13, 8:23*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Is anyone working on or studying using WAAS GPS data to make a stand-
> > > > > > > > alone vario? *How would TE be implemented in such a device? Ground
> > > > > > > > speed change during a pullup? *TAS based on circling winds?
>
> > > > > > > > Do the current PDA software programs (mSeeYou, Winpilot, etc.) when
> > > > > > > > used in GPS-only mode provide accurate vario data when hooked up to a
> > > > > > > > WAAS GPS?
>
> > > > > > > > Just curious - seems a 5 hz WAAS GPS could be the basis for a really
> > > > > > > > nice vario that wouldn't need any pitot-static imputs. *I use mSeeYou
> > > > > > > > and a Themi, non-WAAS, and the "vario" data seems close, but I use it
> > > > > > > > more for trend and average than instantaneous data.
>
> > > > > > > > Winter can't end soon enough!
>
> > > > > > > > Kirk
> > > > > > > > 66
>
> > > > > > > Yes but how does it tell the difference between an increase in wind
> > > > > > > and a pull up? How will it handle STF calculations in a strong
> > > > > > > headwind/wave where it may be really confused what is going on?
>
> > > > > > > Darryl
>
> > > > > > Darryl's right (again).
>
> > > > > > I don't think there's really a satisfactory way to take wind out of
> > > > > > the equation. You could try to do it with track and drift trends, but
> > > > > > that's not very precise given how much the wind can vary with
> > > > > > altitude, position and over time.
>
> > > > > > 9B- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > Cmon, let's think out of the box!
>
> > > > > An INS/IMU can measure winds without air data. *How accurate (read
> > > > > "expensive") would an inertial sensor need to be to provide useful
> > > > > wind data (or just TAS vs GS)?
>
> > > > > Or bite the bullet and T into the pitot/static system and provide the
> > > > > data to the GPS vario - no worse than a TE connection for a
> > > > > conventional vario.
>
> > > > > Question is whether it would be cheaper and/or better than current
> > > > > mechanical or electronic TE varios? *Better or worse at altitude,
> > > > > faster/slower response, etc?
>
> > > > > I'm thinking: *One little box with an LCD display. *TE vario, audio,
> > > > > horizontal lift distribution in the current thermal in real time (for
> > > > > centering), current average, past averages/acheived climbs (trend for
> > > > > MC settings), logger, GPS output for other devices. *Run off ship
> > > > > power and have a backup rechargeable battery.
>
> > > > > Stick in a 68mm hole, hook up pitot/static and power, off you go.
> > > > > Replaces your backup mechanical or electric, gives you a real backup
> > > > > when your TE probe falls off! *Do it for less than $500 (yeah, right,
> > > > > I know...) and you stick it in every glider out there (think of all
> > > > > the crap instruments in club/commercial gliders in the US).
>
> > > > > And please don't say "Cambridge 302" - TE probes are soooo 20th
> > > > > century!
>
> > > > > Kirk
> > > > > 66
>
> > > > I am not aware of any IMS/IMU that attempt to calculate wind without
> > > > air data input. Do you know of one? It is likely a significant
> > > > challenge for rate based systems (vs. position based with GPS). e.g..
> > > > "taking a turn" cannot help determine wind with an INS. All the poor
> > > > thing can try to do is integrate external accelerations on the
> > > > aircraft caused by changes in wind.
>
> > > > While trying to integrate up rate based sensors to determine wind is
> > > > likely impractical. Using rate based sensors to filter other rate base
> > > > inputs likely makes more sense. I believe accelerometer based
> > > > assistance is already used to help improve/filter gusts and other
> > > > effects on variometers (wether using TE probe or digitally adjusted TAS
> > > > +pitot). I believe the Cambridge 302 uses it's accelerometers for
> > > > this, but also have heard rumors that this was never really fully
> > > > developed in the software. I am not sure if other vario/computer
> > > > systems also do this. I certainly like how the vario in the 302
> > > > performs (and I'm using electronic TE compensation with mine).
>
> > > > Paul gives on example of the SeeYou Mobile thermal assistant not
> > > > working well with just GPS+WAAS input. In the past other people have
> > > > tried to use STF data through PDA software. *Finally Naviter had to
> > > > warn pilots this can't possibly work, they just don't have enough data
> > > > to calculate something useful.
>
> > > > Even if all the above were not show-stopping issues you'd have to look
> > > > at the noise spectrum of the altitude signal around a fraction to 1 Hz
> > > > to see how bad differentiating (for vertical velocity) and filtering
> > > > this is going to be. I just don't have that data handy. And you may
> > > > need a sophisticated antenna system to provide a good GPS satellite
> > > > sky view when turning tightly. A TE probe, which is just a couple of
> > > > holes or a slot cut in a few dollars worth of tube seems a lot easier
> > > > way to get basic data. As Dick Johnson kept reminding us, you don't
> > > > need a fancy tail mount TE probe a simple home made fuselage mounted
> > > > one works great. An electronic pressure sensor to incorporate into a
> > > > vario costs a few dollars. The software to make all this work really
> > > > well. Priceless. I can't wait to see what Dave Ellis does at
> > > > ClearNav...
>
> > > > Darryl
>
> > GPS, even WAAS enabled, is best considered to be a highly accurate but
> > interruptable data source. *Inertial reference units are best
> > considered a less accurate but non-interruptable data source. *GPS
> > signals can provide not only position data but, with multiple
> > antennas, can provide attitude data. *Combining the two with a Kalman
> > filter where GPS keeps the INS updated results in the best of both.
>
> > This combination outputs highly accurate Euler angles, 3D velocity and
> > position data. *In other words, your gadget would know where it was,
> > its pitch, roll and heading angles, and its velocity on each of three
> > axes - all to extremely high precision. *There's a lot that can be
> > done with these data.
>
> > Could this hypothetical gadget be used as an inertial TE vario?
> > Absolutely, as long as all TE calculations were done in the same
> > inertial reference frame. *Speed to fly would require air data,
> > however.
>
> > The benefits of a GPS/inertial system would include:
>
> > A vario with no gust sensitivity, high S/N ratio and instant
> > response,
> > Instantly updated, highly accurate vector wind data.
> > Accurate lift mapping for thermal centering assistance.
>
> > Bill Daniels
>
> Spoken like a true control systems whiz.
>
> Maybe this is what you had in mind, but wouldn't the best Kalman
> filter combine GPS, inertial and air data into a single optimal
> estimate for all the relevant rates and angles? The air data has lags
> for sure, but you should be able to model the dynamics and use it to
> take *the drift out of integrated accelerometer signals.
>
> The cool part (I think) would be that you'd be able to make a vario
> that can distinguish between horizontal and vertical gusts - which
> ought to better correlate to and enhance the "seat of the pants" feel
> that a lot of us try to use in choosing and centering lift.
>
> Do you think differential GPS has the resolution to give good attitude
> information? I think there are laser ring gyros out there now that are
> pretty inexpensive and I think the drift is pretty good for our
> application, but I have no idea which is would be more accurate - GPS
> would almost certainly be cheaper and easier on the batteries.
>
> Andy

GPS altitude data good enough? - sorta. (engineering term). There's a
lot of noise in the GPS altitude data which would be smoothed out by
the inertial reference unit (IRU) resulting in very accurate
geopotential altitude data.

Note: For the hangar lawyers out there, ATC is referenced to
barometric altitude and airspace rules are written around the inherent
errors in barometric altimetry so that's what we use. GPS altitude is
more 'accurate' but it's not to be used for airspace navigation. GPS
is the preferred source of altitude data for glide calculations.
Hopefully, ATC will continue to use barometric altimetry since on a
hot summer day we can get an extra 1500 feet or so higher without
busting Class A airspace.

You wouldn't need ring laser gyros. Interferometric fiber optic gyros
(I-FOG) are cheaper and much smaller. MEMS solid state gyros are
becoming more accurate as well. You can buy complete inertial
reference units for a few hundred dollars which is actually cheaper
than multi-antenna attitude sensing GPS units. If the GPS attitude
updates are fast enough, the IRU can tolerate automotive quality MEMS
gyros and accelerometers.

Embedded GPS INS (using RLG) are now standard in almost all military
aircraft - often two are used. Neat devices; just turn it on, and in
4 minutes at most you have attitude, velocities, and position.

And GPS chips are showing up everywhere.

And MEMS gyros and accelerometers are ubiquitous in modern cars.

Could be that the hardware to make our theoretical GPS vario will soon
be less expensive than classical pneumatic varios - whether mechanical
or electronic - if the complete installation cost is compared. What
does a really good TE system cost these days? Probe, tubing,
installation, etc.

So my glider cockpit of the future has an AOA system, a sunlight
visible moving map/glide computer with real time weather (disabled for
contests, of course), GPS Vario, instant-on attitude info for when
you get sucked into a cloud or trapped above a deck in a wave, ADS-B
in/out to show traffic around me, SPOT to let the family know where I
am.

And I want to be able to use voice commands to change a task inflight!


66

On Jan 14, 1:01*pm, bildan > wrote:
> On Jan 14, 1:26*pm, wrote:
>
> > On Jan 14, 9:51*am, bildan > wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 14, 5:22*am, dhaluza > wrote:
>
> > > > Differentiating altitude from a 1Hz GPS is going to be fairly useless
> > > > for a vario. You will need a GPS that outputs true vertical velocity,
> > > > and preferably >1Hz. GPS velocity is very accurate because it is taken
> > > > directly from doppler shifts in the GPS signal, not from
> > > > differentiating position. It has been reported that low cost GPS
> > > > horizontal velocity has an accuracy of 5mm/s (0.01 knots). Vertical
> > > > velocity error will be greater because of satellite geometry, but
> > > > probably only double that. You don't need a WAAS receiver to get this
> > > > precision, but it probably helps somewhat since you need to know your
> > > > position precisely to calculate the relative satellite velocity. You
> > > > don't need fancy antennas, just a good view of the sky. Fortunately
> > > > it's the overhead satellites that provide vertical velocity
> > > > information, so as long as your bank angle does not exceed 45 degrees,
> > > > you should be able to track these constantly as long as the antenna is
> > > > properly positioned.
>
> > > > Unfortunately, vertical velocity is not included in any of the
> > > > standard NMEA sentences--probably because boats are not supposed to
> > > > have a vertical velocity. So most low-cost GPS units will not have
> > > > this. The Garmin GPS-18 does have a proprietary sentence with X, Y & Z
> > > > velocities, and it also comes in a 5 Hz version for ~$150.
>
> > > > TE compensation will be a bit tricky without airdata input, but it
> > > > could potentially be better since it is not subject to errors like
> > > > gusts and lags (not to mention leaks). I don't see why an INS based on
> > > > low-cost automotive grade sensors could not provide TE comp at least
> > > > as good as a pneumatic system. Any change in kinetic energy will
> > > > require an acceleration that can be measured by an accelerometer. But
> > > > you would need to remove acceletation due to gravity and rate of turn,
> > > > so this would also require solid-state gyros, and a lot of software to
> > > > integrate them.
>
> > > > On Jan 13, 2:38*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 13, 10:05*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jan 13, 11:03*am, wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Jan 13, 8:36*am, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On Jan 13, 8:23*am, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Is anyone working on or studying using WAAS GPS data to make a stand-
> > > > > > > > > alone vario? *How would TE be implemented in such a device? Ground
> > > > > > > > > speed change during a pullup? *TAS based on circling winds?
>
> > > > > > > > > Do the current PDA software programs (mSeeYou, Winpilot, etc.) when
> > > > > > > > > used in GPS-only mode provide accurate vario data when hooked up to a
> > > > > > > > > WAAS GPS?
>
> > > > > > > > > Just curious - seems a 5 hz WAAS GPS could be the basis for a really
> > > > > > > > > nice vario that wouldn't need any pitot-static imputs. *I use mSeeYou
> > > > > > > > > and a Themi, non-WAAS, and the "vario" data seems close, but I use it
> > > > > > > > > more for trend and average than instantaneous data.
>
> > > > > > > > > Winter can't end soon enough!
>
> > > > > > > > > Kirk
> > > > > > > > > 66
>
> > > > > > > > Yes but how does it tell the difference between an increase in wind
> > > > > > > > and a pull up? How will it handle STF calculations in a strong
> > > > > > > > headwind/wave where it may be really confused what is going on?
>
> > > > > > > > Darryl
>
> > > > > > > Darryl's right (again).
>
> > > > > > > I don't think there's really a satisfactory way to take wind out of
> > > > > > > the equation. You could try to do it with track and drift trends, but
> > > > > > > that's not very precise given how much the wind can vary with
> > > > > > > altitude, position and over time.
>
> > > > > > > 9B- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > Cmon, let's think out of the box!
>
> > > > > > An INS/IMU can measure winds without air data. *How accurate (read
> > > > > > "expensive") would an inertial sensor need to be to provide useful
> > > > > > wind data (or just TAS vs GS)?
>
> > > > > > Or bite the bullet and T into the pitot/static system and provide the
> > > > > > data to the GPS vario - no worse than a TE connection for a
> > > > > > conventional vario.
>
> > > > > > Question is whether it would be cheaper and/or better than current
> > > > > > mechanical or electronic TE varios? *Better or worse at altitude,
> > > > > > faster/slower response, etc?
>
> > > > > > I'm thinking: *One little box with an LCD display. *TE vario, audio,
> > > > > > horizontal lift distribution in the current thermal in real time (for
> > > > > > centering), current average, past averages/acheived climbs (trend for
> > > > > > MC settings), logger, GPS output for other devices. *Run off ship
> > > > > > power and have a backup rechargeable battery.
>
> > > > > > Stick in a 68mm hole, hook up pitot/static and power, off you go.
> > > > > > Replaces your backup mechanical or electric, gives you a real backup
> > > > > > when your TE probe falls off! *Do it for less than $500 (yeah, right,
> > > > > > I know...) and you stick it in every glider out there (think of all
> > > > > > the crap instruments in club/commercial gliders in the US).
>
> > > > > > And please don't say "Cambridge 302" - TE probes are soooo 20th
> > > > > > century!
>
> > > > > > Kirk
> > > > > > 66
>
> > > > > I am not aware of any IMS/IMU that attempt to calculate wind without
> > > > > air data input. Do you know of one? It is likely a significant
> > > > > challenge for rate based systems (vs. position based with GPS). e..g.
> > > > > "taking a turn" cannot help determine wind with an INS. All the poor
> > > > > thing can try to do is integrate external accelerations on the
> > > > > aircraft caused by changes in wind.
>
> > > > > While trying to integrate up rate based sensors to determine wind is
> > > > > likely impractical. Using rate based sensors to filter other rate base
> > > > > inputs likely makes more sense. I believe accelerometer based
> > > > > assistance is already used to help improve/filter gusts and other
> > > > > effects on variometers (wether using TE probe or digitally adjusted TAS
> > > > > +pitot). I believe the Cambridge 302 uses it's accelerometers for
> > > > > this, but also have heard rumors that this was never really fully
> > > > > developed in the software. I am not sure if other vario/computer
> > > > > systems also do this. I certainly like how the vario in the 302
> > > > > performs (and I'm using electronic TE compensation with mine).
>
> > > > > Paul gives on example of the SeeYou Mobile thermal assistant not
> > > > > working well with just GPS+WAAS input. In the past other people have
> > > > > tried to use STF data through PDA software. *Finally Naviter had to
> > > > > warn pilots this can't possibly work, they just don't have enough data
> > > > > to calculate something useful.
>
> > > > > Even if all the above were not show-stopping issues you'd have to look
> > > > > at the noise spectrum of the altitude signal around a fraction to 1 Hz
> > > > > to see how bad differentiating (for vertical velocity) and filtering
> > > > > this is going to be. I just don't have that data handy. And you may
> > > > > need a sophisticated antenna system to provide a good GPS satellite
> > > > > sky view when turning tightly. A TE probe, which is just a couple of
> > > > > holes or a slot cut in a few dollars worth of tube seems a lot easier
> > > > > way to get basic data. As Dick Johnson kept reminding us, you don't
> > > > > need a fancy tail mount TE probe a simple home made fuselage mounted
> > > > > one works great. An electronic pressure sensor to incorporate into a
> > > > > vario costs a few dollars. The software to make all this work really
> > > > > well. Priceless. I can't wait to see what Dave Ellis does at
> > > > > ClearNav...
>
> > > > > Darryl
>
> > > GPS, even WAAS enabled, is best considered to be a highly accurate but
> > > interruptable data source. *Inertial reference units are best
> > > considered a less accurate but non-interruptable data source. *GPS
> > > signals can provide not only position data but, with multiple
> > > antennas, can provide attitude data. *Combining the two with a Kalman
> > > filter where GPS keeps the INS updated results in the best of both.
>
> > > This combination outputs highly accurate Euler angles, 3D velocity and
> > > position data. *In other words, your gadget would know where it was,
> > > its pitch, roll and heading angles, and its velocity on each of three
> > > axes - all to extremely high precision. *There's a lot that can be
> > > done with these data.
>
> > > Could this hypothetical gadget be used as an inertial TE vario?
> > > Absolutely, as long as all TE calculations were done in the same
> > > inertial reference frame. *Speed to fly would require air data,
> > > however.
>
> > > The benefits of a GPS/inertial system would include:
>
> > > A vario with no gust sensitivity, high S/N ratio and instant
> > > response,
> > > Instantly updated, highly accurate vector wind data.
> > > Accurate lift mapping for thermal centering assistance.
>
> > > Bill Daniels
>
> > Spoken like a true control systems whiz.
>
> > Maybe this is what you had in mind, but wouldn't the best Kalman
> > filter combine GPS, inertial and air data into a single optimal
> > estimate for all the relevant rates and angles? The air data has lags
> > for sure, but you should be able to model the dynamics and use it to
> > take *the drift out of integrated accelerometer signals.
>
> > The cool part (I think) would be that you'd be able to make a vario
> > that can distinguish between horizontal and vertical gusts - which
> > ought to better correlate to and enhance the "seat of the pants" feel
> > that a lot of us try to use in choosing and centering lift.
>
> > Do you think differential GPS has the resolution to give good attitude
> > information? I think there are laser ring gyros out there now that are
> > pretty inexpensive and I think the drift is pretty good for our
> > application, but I have no idea which is would be more accurate - GPS
> > would almost certainly be cheaper and easier on the batteries.
>
> > Andy
>
> GPS altitude data good enough? - sorta. (engineering term). *There's a
> lot of noise in the GPS altitude data which would be smoothed out by
> the inertial reference unit (IRU) resulting in very accurate
> geopotential altitude data.
>
> Note: For the hangar lawyers out there, ATC is referenced to
> barometric altitude and airspace rules are written around the inherent
> errors in barometric altimetry so that's what we use. *GPS altitude is
> more 'accurate' but it's not to be used for airspace navigation. *GPS
> is the preferred source of altitude data for glide calculations.
> Hopefully, ATC will continue to use barometric altimetry since on a
> hot summer day we can get an extra 1500 feet or so higher without
> busting Class A airspace.
>
> You wouldn't need ring laser gyros. *Interferometric fiber optic gyros
> (I-FOG) are cheaper and much smaller. *MEMS solid state gyros are
> becoming more accurate as well. *You can buy complete inertial
> reference units for a few hundred dollars which is actually cheaper
> than multi-antenna attitude sensing GPS units. *If the GPS attitude
> updates are fast enough, the IRU can tolerate automotive quality MEMS
> gyros and accelerometers.

Oops - confused my terms - I meant the I-FOG gyros. Isn't the drift
is slow enough that you wouldn't need GPS attitude updates over the
course of a typical soaring flight would you? Maybe the ClearNav guys
could integrate an inexpensive IRU to take Total Energy and wind
estimation to the next level when the produce their promised
variometer.

On Jan 14, 3:01*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> Embedded GPS INS (using RLG) are now standard in almost all military
> aircraft - often two are used. *Neat devices; just turn it on, and in
> 4 minutes at most you have attitude, velocities, and position.
>
> And GPS chips are showing up everywhere.
>
> And MEMS gyros and accelerometers are ubiquitous in modern cars.
>
> Could be that the hardware to make our theoretical GPS vario will soon
> be less expensive than classical pneumatic varios - whether mechanical
> or electronic - if the complete installation cost is compared. *What
> does a really good TE system cost these days? *Probe, tubing,
> installation, etc.
>
> So my glider cockpit of the future has an AOA system, a sunlight
> visible moving map/glide computer with real time weather (disabled for
> contests, of course), GPS Vario, *instant-on attitude info for when
> you get sucked into a cloud or trapped above a deck in a wave, ADS-B
> in/out to show traffic around me, SPOT to let the family know where I
> am.
>
> And I want to be able to use voice commands to change a task inflight!
>
> 66

On Jan 14, 3:01 pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> Embedded GPS INS (using RLG) are now standard in almost all military
> aircraft - often two are used. Neat devices; just turn it on, and in
> 4 minutes at most you have attitude, velocities, and position.
>
> And GPS chips are showing up everywhere.
>
> And MEMS gyros and accelerometers are ubiquitous in modern cars.
>
> Could be that the hardware to make our theoretical GPS vario will soon
> be less expensive than classical pneumatic varios - whether mechanical
> or electronic - if the complete installation cost is compared. What
> does a really good TE system cost these days? Probe, tubing,
> installation, etc.
>
> So my glider cockpit of the future has an AOA system, a sunlight
> visible moving map/glide computer with real time weather (disabled for
> contests, of course), GPS Vario, instant-on attitude info for when
> you get sucked into a cloud or trapped above a deck in a wave, ADS-B
> in/out to show traffic around me, SPOT to let the family know where I
> am.
>
> And I want to be able to use voice commands to change a task inflight!
>
> 66


I've broken my triple probe once and cursed at (and fixed) O-ring
leaks in other ships, etc. but I'm still not sure I agree this is the
worst problem we need to solve. But maybe we could be moving to
simpler TE probe installations than many gliders come with. BTW a
shootout of TE probes and mounting options would be interesting.

So following Doug's points it seems that GPS doppler vertical velocity
would give very impressive resolution (ugh I should have know this -
embarrassingly I've worked on stuff related to high stability/ultra
low phase noise microwave oscillators). But I still think worrying
about doing away with the TE probe is not the right thing. Especially
since for wind purposes you still need a static + pitot so already
need (low cost) sensors for those in the unit and many pilots probably
would not want to give up a pure mechanical vario backup (or would
they?). I also suspect most people ordering new (expensive) gliders
are not going to worry about saving a little by ordering it without a
TE probe fitting and plumbing and would want the flexibility of having
that installed. If you have the air data (and can get a digital TE if
needed) then I'd hope that simple accelerometers could significantly
improve TE compensation. If GPS can also improve that then great, but
it's a complex high-end type of thing, not something that is going to
target saving costs of TE systems.

On the "less expensive" theme... you run into an common dilemma with
claiming simplicity/cost savings with new technology. To realize that
savings they have to take risks and suffer incompatibility with how
things work now (e.g. not install a TE probe system in a new glider?
Not have a TE probe etc. to also feed to a mechanical vario...). And
the cost of developing a new advanced system is likely to be
significant, so it is likely going to be something you need to target
at the higher end/performance market, with really visceral benefits
like providing for radically better wind calculations, much better
gust isolation, etc..

So while we are dreaming about possible varios/flight computers here
is my blue-sky feature wish list for a vario/flight computer/logger
-- an evolved, up to date technology version of something like the
Cambridge 302... and I'm completely biased and just want a vario/
logger/basic computer to interface to an external PDA, PNA or ClearNav
etc. not a device to navigate etc. on.

- Direct reading/pressure based (i.e. not flow rate based, no capacity
flask, etc. needed,as done in some several current designs)

- Digital TE compensation to remove the need for a TE probe, or to
tune the TE probe response as done in some current systems)

- Low power consumption.

- Good reliability (we have lots of glider instruments with sloppy
electric or mechanical design that directly affects reliability.
Starting with the corrosion/handling damage prone daughter card/rear
panel connector mess that some vendors use.).

- ICG approved logger, for everything, built-in ENL support for
motorgliders.

- A development team who can actually provide support and enhancements
for the product.

- Selection of audio tones/styles (including simulate some popular
audio vario tones. Anybody like the Rico?).

- The supplied external speaker if one is needed is not a piece of
crap (just about all of them seem to be).

- Support better wind calculation than typical today: Including 3D
Fluxgate magnetometer enhanced wind calculations. Remote mount (e.g.
down the back of the fueslage?) the fluxgate if needed. The main
intent is to hand all this stuff off to a PDA but on board
calculations of wind as a backup is nice. This may add significant
cost.

- Decreased horizontal gust sensitivity with accelerometer based
filtering/enhancement. I'd hope fairly simple MEMS accelerometers
should be enough for this with no need for anything more complex. If
GPS can enhance this significantly and be affordable and work reliably
(steep banks, next to stepp terrain) etc. then great.

- Make sure the advanced stuff does not get in the way, the thing is
stupid easy to use and just works, push complex things off to PDA
software or other devices. Logging just starts and stops
automatically, with absolutely no effort/problems.

- Enhanced IGC file logging, allow things like TAS data, fluxgste
data, (and many more) to be recorded to the IGC log file (like
apparently LX does).

- Support dual log files with different parameters, sample rates etc..
Massive IGC log files that can contain extra stuff and a smaller also
valid IGC file for uploading to OLC etc.

- Use latest generation GPS+WAAS receiver technology for improved
signal quality/fix times etc.

- Support gobs of flash memory for flight traces. Even club ships
should never need to overwrite a flight trace during a season, etc. at
reasonable log rates.

- Allow very high rate logging rate for beautifully smooth flight
traces for pretty post-flight analysis.

- Voice announce (needs to be multilingual) for warnings such as gear
up, slow speed/stall etc. Too many stupid beeps in the cockpit
already. Female voice would be great, just don't make her sound like
my ex :-)

- Have a variant of the device intended in headless operation (remote
mounted with no dial/etc on panel for use where a PDA or other
display will show a representation of the vario needle and averager
etc.

- Try to make the log data survive a crash. We've had a few
unexplained fatal accidents where the logger does not survive and I
wonder if something simple could be done in an attempt to make the
data more likely to survive. e/g. Consider dual logging to onboard
memory and a backup SD card plugged into the vario in a protected
slot.

I'd especially like to see lots of connectivity, e.g. possibly
consider things like the following...

- Utilize standard IGC RJ-45 connector wiring (All connector choices
have issues, but there *is* supposed to be a standard).

- Built in Bluetooth serial port profile support, in addition to
legacy RS-232 serial ports, to drive external PDA and PNA devices.
Could support dual Bluetooth connections for two-seat gliders.

- USB Host support for file transfer, make the logger look like a disk
drive and downloading IGC files just drag and drop from a laptop. Real
USB support not a built-in USB to serial adapter pretend stuff some
vendors ship today.

- Could also consider USB OTG support - i.e. support USB client for
connecting a Laptop or USB host for connecting to a PDA for high-
speed file/waypoint/firmware updates etc.

- Support for Bluetooth file exchange (flight traces and waypoints
etc.). This works with many laptops and PDAs and is likely a very easy
for people to use if they have a Bluetooth capable Laptop or PDA and
speeds are probably OK until you get to huge log files.


Thing's I'm not sure would work ...

- More advanced AHRS/INS technology. Why do we need this? If you want
a T&B or attitude indicator I think these are different devices and we
are better off leveraging the larger market for experimental and light
sports instrumentation.

- A built in AOA meter? But maybe I'd consider a warning/alarm? Has
anybody shown AOA displays to be useful in gliders? For stall warning?
For thermalling/flight optimization? It might be useful with voice
annunciations/warnings? (too many things beep already) - A vario/
computer could integrate an AOA sensor into slow speed/stall warning
and that could be great. The safeflight AOA instument is just a meter
right?, with no audible alarm? - they seriously want to add another
thing the pilot has to look inside the cockpit?

- Some people are playing with enhanced TE probes that try to align
with the airflow, the mechanical complexity worries me. Not sure how
significant the problem they are trying to solve is. That would be
something interesting to see more info on.

---

It hurts to think about the development effort/cost of something like
this but I'll be dissapointed if we don't see some of these more
advanced features in devices in the next few years.


Darryl

On Jan 14, 4:01*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> ADS-B in/out to show traffic around me, SPOT to let the family know where I
> am.

Why would you need SPOT? If ADS-B is providing real time position
data to ATC what you really need is real time on-line access to that
ATC data.

Andy

On Jan 15, 6:58*am, Andy > wrote:
> On Jan 14, 4:01*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > ADS-B *in/out to show traffic around me, SPOT to let the family know where I
> > am.
>
> Why would you need SPOT? *If ADS-B is providing real time position
> data to ATC what you really need is real time on-line access to that
> ATC data.
>
> Andy

Coverage - will ADS-B find me when I'm down in some valley who know
where.

Signaling - How do I tell via ADS-B the pilot wants a retrieve is OK
or in distress?

It is not clear that people really want to be tracked by the feds and
there is still that whole unresolved anonymous VFR issue (or has that
been settled?)

Darryl

On Jan 15, 9:23*am, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
> On Jan 15, 6:58*am, Andy > wrote:
>
> > On Jan 14, 4:01*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > > ADS-B *in/out to show traffic around me, SPOT to let the family know where I
> > > am.
>
> > Why would you need SPOT? *If ADS-B is providing real time position
> > data to ATC what you really need is real time on-line access to that
> > ATC data.
>
> > Andy
>
> Coverage - will ADS-B find me when I'm down in some valley who know
> where.
>
> Signaling - How do I tell via ADS-B the pilot wants a retrieve is OK
> or in distress?
>
> It is not clear that people really want to be tracked by the feds and
> there is still that whole unresolved anonymous VFR issue (or has that
> been settled?)
>
> Darryl

Andy,

I see SPOT as an improved ELT, and ADS-B as an improved TCAS/TPAS.
Different uses, but they do overlap.

Kirk

I like most of what Darryl said. I've winnowed it down to the things I
really want to have that my 302 doesn't have.

Darryl Ramm wrote:>

> - A development team who can actually provide support and
> enhancements for the product.

> - Support better wind calculation than typical today: Including 3D
> Fluxgate magnetometer enhanced wind calculations.
>
> - Decreased horizontal gust sensitivity with accelerometer based
> filtering/enhancement.

Maybe use the accelerometers that are already there, for starters.
>
> - Enhanced IGC file logging, allow things like TAS data, fluxgste
> data, (and many more) to be recorded to the IGC log file (like
> apparently LX does).

Especially if it would accept data from outside sources; e.g., an engine
data logger.
>
> - Support dual log files with different parameters, sample rates etc.

or at least send them out to the PDA that could make that huge
log file with all manner of stuff in it the IGC doesn't need.

> - Voice announce (needs to be multilingual) for warnings such as gear
> up, slow speed/stall etc. Too many stupid beeps in the cockpit
> already.

> - Make the log data survive a crash.

> - Utilize standard IGC RJ-45 connector wiring (All connector choices
> have issues, but there *is* supposed to be a standard).
>
> - Built in Bluetooth serial port profile support, in addition to
> legacy RS-232 serial ports, to drive external PDA and PNA devices and
> support for Bluetooth file exchange (flight traces and waypoints
> etc.).

And file transfer by just sliding an SD card or USB flash drive into a
socket.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org