Glide computer review [Archive]

Itsaplane[_2_]

December 4th 09, 06:53 PM

I'm looking for a ship to buy and find that I don't have much
perspective in evaluating various glide computers. Is there an
existing and comprehensive glide computer review?

My doubtlessly flawed view of the glide computer universe divides
things into two main groups - panel mounted and PDA-based. Another
way to divide things might be between moving map and non-moving map
systems. I'm sure the type of flying is an important in this choice -
contests vs. general XC flying for example.

At the least, I'm hoping for some guidance to distinguish the
Cambridge 302 and the Ilec SN-10B. What else deserves to be
evaluated? Also, are things moving in a particular direction -- like
large super bright (vs. PDA's) built in displays? Having components
that would be useful for doing that later would be plus.

I value: ease of use, readability in sunlight, the ability to monitor
multiple landing options simultaneously, no 250 turn point limitation
(L-Nav), and reliable wind data. I like to fly into areas I've never
been to before and haven't done contests - but might.

Thanks to all who will take a crack at this,

Eric
ER

sisu1a

December 4th 09, 07:08 PM

lanebush

December 4th 09, 07:37 PM

I second that. Paul compares the options better than I ever could. I
just used his SeeYou tutorial and must say that it was excellent. I
am surprised that SeeYou has not bought that tutorial from him and
branded it their own.

As far as PDA vs expensive panel option: I am at your stage of the
game and have chosen to go the PDA route with the EW microrecorder. I
am sure there are drawbacks but I am too naive to realize them just
yet. For $1,000 I have what I need for badge flights and
competitions. Many of the high dollar ships use an EW Microrecorder
as a backup so I figure I have not wasted anything by buying one.

Lane

Richard[_9_]

December 4th 09, 09:00 PM

Paul Remde

December 4th 09, 09:47 PM

Hi,

I would be glad to talk to you and give you my insights into the many
options. You can also view my product comparisons on my web site under the
"Comparisons" menu.
http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/
http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/flightcomputers.htm

I have played and soared with most soaring instruments. They all have their
pros and cons. The key is to find the one that matches your needs and
desires.

You may want to ask some local glider pilots what they like and don't like
about their flight computers.

I can be reached at 952-445-9033 or via Skype.

Best Regards,

Paul Remde
Cumulus Soaring, Inc.

"Itsaplane" > wrote in message
...
> I'm looking for a ship to buy and find that I don't have much
> perspective in evaluating various glide computers. Is there an
> existing and comprehensive glide computer review?
>
> My doubtlessly flawed view of the glide computer universe divides
> things into two main groups - panel mounted and PDA-based. Another
> way to divide things might be between moving map and non-moving map
> systems. I'm sure the type of flying is an important in this choice -
> contests vs. general XC flying for example.
>
> At the least, I'm hoping for some guidance to distinguish the
> Cambridge 302 and the Ilec SN-10B. What else deserves to be
> evaluated? Also, are things moving in a particular direction -- like
> large super bright (vs. PDA's) built in displays? Having components
> that would be useful for doing that later would be plus.
>
> I value: ease of use, readability in sunlight, the ability to monitor
> multiple landing options simultaneously, no 250 turn point limitation
> (L-Nav), and reliable wind data. I like to fly into areas I've never
> been to before and haven't done contests - but might.
>
> Thanks to all who will take a crack at this,
>
> Eric
> ER

Tim Taylor

December 4th 09, 10:42 PM

On Dec 4, 2:47*pm, "Paul Remde" > wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would be glad to talk to you and give you my insights into the many
> options. *You can also view my product comparisons on my web site under the
> "Comparisons" menu.http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/flightcomputers.htm
>
> I have played and soared with most soaring instruments. *They all have their
> pros and cons. *The key is to find the one that matches your needs and
> desires.
>
> You may want to ask some local glider pilots what they like and don't like
> about their flight computers.
>
> I can be reached at 952-445-9033 or via Skype.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Paul Remde
> Cumulus Soaring, Inc.
>
> "Itsaplane" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > I'm looking for a ship to buy and find that I don't have much
> > perspective in evaluating various glide computers. *Is there an
> > existing and comprehensive glide computer review?
>
> > My doubtlessly flawed view of the glide computer universe divides
> > things into two main groups - panel mounted and PDA-based. *Another
> > way to divide things might be between moving map and non-moving map
> > systems. *I'm sure the type of flying is an important in this choice -
> > contests vs. general XC flying for example.
>
> > At the least, I'm hoping for some guidance to distinguish the
> > Cambridge 302 and the Ilec SN-10B. *What else deserves to be
> > evaluated? *Also, are things moving in a particular direction -- like
> > large super bright (vs. PDA's) built in displays? *Having components
> > that would be useful for doing that later would be plus.
>
> > I value: ease of use, readability in sunlight, the ability to monitor
> > multiple landing options simultaneously, no 250 turn point limitation
> > (L-Nav), and reliable wind data. *I like to fly into areas I've never
> > been to before and haven't done contests - but might.
>
> > Thanks to all who will take a crack at this,
>
> > Eric
> > ER

Paul wrote "The key is to find the one that matches your needs and
desires."

This should read "find the one that matches your needs,
desires and pocket book."

Paul Remde

December 4th 09, 11:13 PM

Hi Tim,

Good point!

Paul Remde

"Tim Taylor" > wrote in message
...
On Dec 4, 2:47 pm, "Paul Remde" > wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would be glad to talk to you and give you my insights into the many
> options. You can also view my product comparisons on my web site under the
> "Comparisons"
> menu.http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/flightcomputers.htm
>
> I have played and soared with most soaring instruments. They all have
> their
> pros and cons. The key is to find the one that matches your needs and
> desires.
>
> You may want to ask some local glider pilots what they like and don't like
> about their flight computers.
>
> I can be reached at 952-445-9033 or via Skype.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Paul Remde
> Cumulus Soaring, Inc.
>
> "Itsaplane" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > I'm looking for a ship to buy and find that I don't have much
> > perspective in evaluating various glide computers. Is there an
> > existing and comprehensive glide computer review?
>
> > My doubtlessly flawed view of the glide computer universe divides
> > things into two main groups - panel mounted and PDA-based. Another
> > way to divide things might be between moving map and non-moving map
> > systems. I'm sure the type of flying is an important in this choice -
> > contests vs. general XC flying for example.
>
> > At the least, I'm hoping for some guidance to distinguish the
> > Cambridge 302 and the Ilec SN-10B. What else deserves to be
> > evaluated? Also, are things moving in a particular direction -- like
> > large super bright (vs. PDA's) built in displays? Having components
> > that would be useful for doing that later would be plus.
>
> > I value: ease of use, readability in sunlight, the ability to monitor
> > multiple landing options simultaneously, no 250 turn point limitation
> > (L-Nav), and reliable wind data. I like to fly into areas I've never
> > been to before and haven't done contests - but might.
>
> > Thanks to all who will take a crack at this,
>
> > Eric
> > ER

Paul wrote "The key is to find the one that matches your needs and
desires."

This should read "find the one that matches your needs,
desires and pocket book."

WE[_3_]

December 5th 09, 12:46 PM

Eric,

You simple can't beat the SN-10 as a flight computer. It is rock
solid, easy to read and provides all the information you need, when
you need and on the screens you need it. You don't need a PDA with it
either. I find no other computer that solves the racing problem
better. There is no other computer that computes the wind as well
either -- it is simply to best -- and you need accurate wind for
accurate final glides. Finally, the built in vario is extremely
good. You will have to add a GPS unit. The SN-10 was designed to
work with a Volkslogger which is a solid, reliable device. The SN-10
can declare tasks directly to it. I don't use but like the new ERIXX
GPS/Logger that Wings and Wheels sells. I hear too many bad stories
about the EW giving people trouble. The 302 would be a good choice
but is expensive.

My second choice would be the ClearNav with a 302. A good system but
requires extra panel space.

I've also looked carefully at the LX8000. Very nice, very expensive,
and requires better eyes than I have to see (not good if you require
bi-focals.

WE

cernauta

December 5th 09, 02:50 PM

On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 04:46:27 -0800 (PST), WE > wrote:

>Eric,
>
>You simple can't beat the SN-10 as a flight computer. It is rock
>solid, easy to read and provides all the information you need, when
>you need and on the screens you need it.

I fly two different gliders, one is equipped with the SN-10 and the
other with the Zander ZS-1. I've also had long experience with the
LX-5000 (easy interface, good task management, the vario might be
better) and the S-Nav.

>You don't need a PDA with it either.

Maybe you don't "need" a PDA, but I find a PDA very useful as loading
airspace, and navigating accurately around it is much easier with a
PDA and a good software.

>I find no other computer that solves the racing problem
>better. There is no other computer that computes the wind as well
>either -- it is simply to best -- and you need accurate wind for
>accurate final glides.

I disagree on this point. The Zander is much better in this respect,
as it is linked to a compass and computes the wind in real time, with
reliable accuracy. The SN-10's wind calculation leaves a lot to be
desired when flying "in" an alpine terrain. I will concede that, once
above the ridges, its wind calculation is actually accurate. But as
you descend in the valleys, your only reliable option is to consider
the "wind component" (head or tail) in the appropriate wind page. Many
times the two values are totally incoherent, and the truth is to be
found more in the "component" calculation which unfortunately lacks,
as we all know, wind direction and speed.
Unfortunately, this requires switching page very frequently.
Me and a group of users have submitted these suggestions to Dave,
quite some time ago.

> Finally, the built in vario is extremely good.

that's why I still like the SN-10.
If you take the price into consideration, and you fly in a flat
territory, then the Ilec is hard to beat.

Aldo Cernezzi
(no commercial interest in the equipment business)

Andy[_10_]

December 5th 09, 04:04 PM

On Dec 5, 6:50*am, cernauta > wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 04:46:27 -0800 (PST), WE > wrote:
> >Eric,
>
> >You simple can't beat the SN-10 as a flight computer. *It is rock
> >solid, easy to read and provides all the information you need, when
> >you need and on the screens you need it.
>
> I fly two different gliders, one is equipped with the SN-10 and the
> other with the Zander ZS-1. I've also had long experience with the
> LX-5000 (easy interface, good task management, the vario might be
> better) and the S-Nav.
>
> >You don't need a PDA with it either. *
>
> Maybe you don't "need" a PDA, but I find a PDA very useful as loading
> airspace, and navigating accurately around it is much easier with a
> PDA and a good software.
>
> >I find no other computer that solves the racing problem
> >better. *There is no other computer that computes the wind as well
> >either -- it is simply to best -- and you need accurate wind for
> >accurate final glides.
>
> I disagree on this point. The Zander is much better in this respect,
> as it is linked to a compass and computes the wind in real time, with
> reliable accuracy. The SN-10's wind calculation leaves a lot to be
> desired when flying "in" an alpine terrain. I will concede that, once
> above the ridges, its wind calculation is actually accurate. But as
> you descend in the valleys, your only reliable option is to consider
> the "wind component" (head or tail) in the appropriate wind page. Many
> times the two values are totally incoherent, and the truth is to be
> found more in the "component" calculation which unfortunately lacks,
> as we all know, wind direction and speed.
> Unfortunately, this requires switching page very frequently.
> Me and a group of users have submitted these suggestions to Dave,
> quite some time ago.
>
> > Finally, the built in vario is extremely good.
>
> that's why I still like the SN-10.
> If you take the price into consideration, and you fly in a flat
> territory, then the Ilec is hard to beat.
>
> Aldo Cernezzi
> (no commercial interest in the equipment business)

I've flown with the 302/Winpilot-on an iPaq PDA, 302/SeeYou Mobile-on
an iPaq PDA, LX-7000, SN-10, GPS Nav. I have played with Craggy
Ultimate LX-8000 and ClearNav. I've stuck with the 302-PDA
combination because I love the 302, but find the PDA is becoming too
dim and small for older eyes. The newer big-format screens are
impressive if you go with the bigger brighter displays (Ultimate
always had this, I think the ClearNav has upgraded too). A lot of
contest pilots use the SN-10. It is a much less compelling visual
display (think DOS versus Windows) - but a lot of people love the
simple output. SeeYou probably has the best PC integration. There are
also less widely distributed (and in some cases cheaper) options like
Glide Navigator and StrePla (don't ask me what the name means).

Best to go to a contest and play with some. Some also have demos
online.

9B

Darryl Ramm

December 5th 09, 04:18 PM

On Dec 4, 10:53*am, Itsaplane > wrote:
> I'm looking for a ship to buy and find that I don't have much
> perspective in evaluating various glide computers. *Is there an
> existing and comprehensive glide computer review?
>
> My doubtlessly flawed view of the glide computer universe divides
> things into two main groups - panel mounted and PDA-based. *Another
> way to divide things might be between moving map and non-moving map
> systems. *I'm sure the type of flying is an important in this choice -
> contests vs. general XC flying for example.
>
> At the least, I'm hoping for some guidance to distinguish the
> Cambridge 302 and the Ilec SN-10B. *What else deserves to be
> evaluated? *Also, are things moving in a particular direction -- like
> large super bright (vs. PDA's) built in displays? *Having components
> that would be useful for doing that later would be plus.
>
> I value: ease of use, readability in sunlight, the ability to monitor
> multiple landing options simultaneously, no 250 turn point limitation
> (L-Nav), and reliable wind data. *I like to fly into areas I've never
> been to before and haven't done contests - but might.
>
> Thanks to all who will take a crack at this,
>
> Eric
> ER

Asking to compare a 302 and an SN-10 is like comparing apples and
oranges. Most 302s will be used with PDAs or PNAs and those that have
303s installed are used as back-ups to the PDA. So the question is
more comparing flight computer software to the SN-10 than the 302 per
se.

There for support and features and a whole variety of reasons I would
look at SeeYou Mobile or XCSoar.

But instead of worrying about any of this go buy a glider. If you
happen to find two otherwise identical gliders and the significant
difference is the flight computer then you might have a problem. Worry
about that then. Eitherway with any leading system, 302, SN10B,
clearnav, etc you can fly with it for a while and see if you like them
and sell the unit on the used market fairly readilly so in the big
picture it is probably not a significant financial risk. Whatever you
buy is unlikely to have the panel layout exactly as you will want so
to be safe factor in a new panel blank and labour to tweek the layout,
maybe after you have flown for a while.

Of course if this was really important I know where you can go try out
and fly the same model glider you are considering with some of these
instruments...

Darryl

kirk.stant

December 6th 09, 12:01 AM

My choice: SN-10 as primary glide/task computer/vario (with it's own
dedicated Garmin hockey-puck GPS hardwired in). Backup (on separate
battery system) is my IGC logger (a Themi) driving a PDA running
SeeYou Mobile, used mainly to show airspace, the current task, and
reachable airports (and ridges if useful).

SN-10 map page is OK as a backup but does not approach the utility of
the PDA display. SYM allows setting up a simple easy to see moving
map with nice big fonts and easy to see lines - visible even in bright
Arizona sunlight.

PDA also can download the logger files from the SN10 and Themi (via
appropriate DOS emulator software - a bit of a pain to setup but does
work).

302A look nice but too expensive for a backup vario. If i win the
lottery, though, it would replace the Themi and have the advantage of
a TE vario that doesn't rely on the vulnerable TE probe.

Kirk
66

mike

December 6th 09, 12:26 AM

On Dec 5, 5:01*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> My choice: *SN-10 as primary glide/task computer/vario (with it's own
> dedicated Garmin hockey-puck GPS hardwired in). *Backup (on separate
> battery system) is my IGC logger (a Themi) driving a PDA running
> SeeYou Mobile, used mainly to show airspace, the current task, and
> reachable airports (and ridges if useful).
>
> SN-10 map page is OK as a backup but does not approach the utility of
> the PDA display. *SYM allows setting up a simple easy to see moving
> map with nice big fonts and easy to see lines - visible even in bright
> Arizona sunlight.
>
> PDA also can download the logger files from the SN10 and Themi (via
> appropriate DOS emulator software - a bit of a pain to setup but does
> work).
>
> 302A look nice but too expensive for a backup vario. *If i win the
> lottery, though, it would replace the Themi and have the advantage of
> a TE vario that doesn't rely on the vulnerable TE probe.
>
> Kirk
> 66

302A is only a logger. The 302 is the version with the logger and
vario.

Westbender

December 6th 09, 01:49 AM

Here's an observation from a low-timer for what it's worth.

I'm a relatively new cross-country pilot. I have a 302/303 in my ship.
That equipment has been absolutely perfect for my transition from
local flying to cross-country flying. I did fly a bit with a PDA/PNA
connected to it, but for my purposes (non-racing), the 303 simply
blows away the PDA/PNA. The 303 is super-simple to use, easy to read
(even in sunlight) and quick to get the info you need. Flying with the
PDA required too much "eye time" for my comfort level. Not to mention
the horrible readability in sunlight (I use SeeYou Mobile). The
302/303 gives me secure flight recording, glide computation, wind,
navigation, landing options and an excellent vario. It's small and
fully self-contained with a built-in GPS receiver. The fact that it's
"expandable" is a big plus. It was nice to be able to try out the PDA/
PNA even though I didn't care for them. I could certainly add on a
ClearNav or other similar "high-end" moving map device if I wanted.
Just plug it in and go. I just don't really have the need for a moving
map in the cockpit at this point.

One other thing regarding PDA compatibility. I don't need a laptop at
the field to download my flight logs or upload tasks/waypoints. I
simply connect my PDA, upload or download and take the PDA back home
with me. Very convenient.

Good luck in your search,
Dave

On Dec 4, 12:53*pm, Itsaplane > wrote:
> I'm looking for a ship to buy and find that I don't have much
> perspective in evaluating various glide computers. *Is there an
> existing and comprehensive glide computer review?
>
> My doubtlessly flawed view of the glide computer universe divides
> things into two main groups - panel mounted and PDA-based. *Another
> way to divide things might be between moving map and non-moving map
> systems. *I'm sure the type of flying is an important in this choice -
> contests vs. general XC flying for example.
>
> At the least, I'm hoping for some guidance to distinguish the
> Cambridge 302 and the Ilec SN-10B. *What else deserves to be
> evaluated? *Also, are things moving in a particular direction -- like
> large super bright (vs. PDA's) built in displays? *Having components
> that would be useful for doing that later would be plus.
>
> I value: ease of use, readability in sunlight, the ability to monitor
> multiple landing options simultaneously, no 250 turn point limitation
> (L-Nav), and reliable wind data. *I like to fly into areas I've never
> been to before and haven't done contests - but might.
>
> Thanks to all who will take a crack at this,
>
> Eric
> ER

kirk.stant

December 6th 09, 09:11 PM

On Dec 5, 6:26*pm, mike > wrote:
> On Dec 5, 5:01*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > My choice: *SN-10 as primary glide/task computer/vario (with it's own
> > dedicated Garmin hockey-puck GPS hardwired in). *Backup (on separate
> > battery system) is my IGC logger (a Themi) driving a PDA running
> > SeeYou Mobile, used mainly to show airspace, the current task, and
> > reachable airports (and ridges if useful).
>
> > SN-10 map page is OK as a backup but does not approach the utility of
> > the PDA display. *SYM allows setting up a simple easy to see moving
> > map with nice big fonts and easy to see lines - visible even in bright
> > Arizona sunlight.
>
> > PDA also can download the logger files from the SN10 and Themi (via
> > appropriate DOS emulator software - a bit of a pain to setup but does
> > work).
>
> > 302A look nice but too expensive for a backup vario. *If i win the
> > lottery, though, it would replace the Themi and have the advantage of
> > a TE vario that doesn't rely on the vulnerable TE probe.
>
> > Kirk
> > 66
>
> 302A is only a logger. The 302 is the version with the logger and
> vario.

Correct, I meant the 302 (vario with logger).

Kirk

Michael Huber

December 7th 09, 08:53 AM

I flew with PDA only for a few years before adding a SN10B, to me the SN10
is a big improvement. The display is *always* readable at a glance, it
*always* works when I turn it on, and there are *no* settings to fiddle with
before take off. I now use the PDA as a moving map and the SN10 for
everything else. I hardly have to touch anything on the PDA or switch pages
at the SN10 during flight (XC, no competition flying), the same would be
true with a Zander, LX, or any similar system.

After landing I use the PDA to read my flights from the logger to a memory
card, so no need to bring a laptop to the airfield. I guess (but haven´t
tried yet) I could also use the PDA to transfer airspace and waypoint data
to the rather small (compared to a PDA) SN10 memory.

Michael

noel.wade

December 7th 09, 06:02 PM

Alright, I'll be the heretic in the group:

I find that a well-set-up PDA is much better than most of the flight
computers out there!

Many of the panel-mounted computers use text and/or point-and-line
graphics; which, while visible in sunlight, don't give you nearly as
good of an idea where you are as a moving map does. Maybe its because
I'm younger than the average US glider pilot (sorry, not my fault) and
I've grown up around computers and graphics, but I find moving-map
symbology (with a couple of choice text items) MUCH easier to
interpret at a glance, compared to the "screen full of text" approach
of many glide computers. And some brain studies have proven that
simple colors and shapes can be interpreted faster than text (letters
are shapes as well; but shapes that need to get shuffled off to the
linguistic part of the brain, IIRC).

I think one of the problems is that most people pull a PDA out of the
box, load up a flight program like XCSoar (my favorite) or SeeYou, and
immediately compare it to the panel-mounted flight computers in top
gliders. The issue is that the major PDA systems are far more
customizable. IF people would take the time to tweak the PDA-based
programs to display the information they want and in the style that
they like, I think the overall opinion of these solutions would go up
quite a bit!

I also find the menu system and feature navigation in most panel-
mounted flight computers is a NIGHTMARE. As a programmer with a lot
of experience in webpages and other user-interfaces, these systems
drive me up a WALL! The designers obviously didn't put a whole lot of
thought into the fact that people will be fiddling with these things
while _flying_. Since the flying is the more important part, some
focus should have been put on easy navigation to the most important
items in an unambiguous manner. IMHO, its a bad design to have 1
button perform 4 or 5 functions depending on how you hold it down or
in what sequence you press it!

They're getting better with the most recent generations of panel-
mounted computers, but a lot of the older/used units on the market
worry me... They require the most "heads-down" time to use, but are
the cheapest and therefore the most likely items to be used by the
least experienced pilots.... Seems like a BAD combo, to me!

OK, enough ranting/opinionating... The bottom line is that neither
PDAs nor Panel-mounted solutions are a silver-bullet. Anyone with
interest in them should SPEND SOME TIME fiddling with a variety of
solutions to find out what feels best to them - even if its just on
the ground with some buddies' gliders. Be sure to ask about how each
system can be customized - in case your idea of the perfect setup
differs from your buddies! You want to make apples-to-apples
comparisons, afterall.

--Noel

noel.wade

December 7th 09, 06:04 PM

Oh, and I got sidetracked before making the sequels; but here's a
video on XCSoar that I put together a long time ago:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swBB_ggqYFA

Maybe someday soon I'll put together a couple of videos on task-flying
and configuring the display...

--Noel

Wayne Paul

December 7th 09, 07:35 PM

"noel.wade" > wrote in message ...
> Oh, and I got sidetracked before making the sequels; but here's a
> video on XCSoar that I put together a long time ago:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swBB_ggqYFA
>
> Maybe someday soon I'll put together a couple of videos on task-flying
> and configuring the display...
>

Noel,

Thank you for the XCSoar demo video.

For several years I have been flying with various version of Glide Navigator in the generic mode. I recently purchase a used Borgelt B50 with all the mods. To exploit the B50 I need software that would read the Borgelt vario record. Sadly GN II only reads Cambridge records.

So my search for software that would support the B50 led me to XCSoar. I flew a couple flights running it on a Aero 1550 and realized being designed for color, the shades of gray on the B/W screen did not "cut it." So I now am the owner of a used iPaq hx4700.

I can hardly wait until spring when I can perform the test flights necessary to determine the B-50 and XCSoar polar setting for my HP-14.

Again, I found the video very helpful.

Wayne
http://www.soaridaho.com/

Evan Ludeman[_2_]

December 7th 09, 08:22 PM

On Dec 7, 2:35*pm, "Wayne Paul" > wrote:
> "noel.wade" > wrote in ...
> > Oh, and I got sidetracked before making the sequels; but here's a
> > video on XCSoar that I put together a long time ago:
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swBB_ggqYFA
>
> > Maybe someday soon I'll put together a couple of videos on task-flying
> > and configuring the display...
>
> Noel,
>
> Thank you for the XCSoar demo video. *
>
> For several years I have been flying with various version of Glide Navigator in the generic mode. *I recently purchase a used Borgelt B50 with all the mods. *To exploit the B50 I need software that would read the Borgelt vario record. *Sadly GN II only reads Cambridge records.
>
> So my search for software that would support the B50 led me to XCSoar. *I flew a couple flights running it on a Aero 1550 and realized being designed for color, the shades of gray on the B/W screen did not "cut it." *So I now am the owner of a used iPaq hx4700.
>
> I can hardly wait until spring when I can perform the test flights necessary to determine the B-50 and XCSoar polar setting for my HP-14.
>
> Again, I found the video very helpful.
>
> Waynehttp://www.soaridaho.com/

I loaded XCSoar on a spare PDA a couple weeks ago and won't get to fly
with it for some months. In simulator, and in a cockpit ground test,
it looks *great* for recreational flying. It doesn't do several
things that are needed for modern competition rules (US), but I am
hopeful that we can lean on the developers to add the necessary
capabilities. It's nothing huge.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

Dave Nadler

December 8th 09, 12:27 AM

Different strokes, however some logical problems in the
above post, explained below...

On Dec 7, 1:02*pm, "noel.wade" > wrote:
> Alright, I'll be the heretic in the group:
>
> I find that a well-set-up PDA is much better than most of the flight
> computers out there!

And you have extensive experience with which ?

> Many of the panel-mounted computers use text and/or point-and-line
> graphics; which, while visible in sunlight, don't give you nearly as
> good of an idea where you are as a moving map does. *Maybe its because
> I'm younger than the average US glider pilot (sorry, not my fault) and
> I've grown up around computers and graphics, but I find moving-map
> symbology (with a couple of choice text items) MUCH easier to
> interpret at a glance, compared to the "screen full of text" approach
> of many glide computers. *And some brain studies have proven that
> simple colors and shapes can be interpreted faster than text (letters
> are shapes as well; but shapes that need to get shuffled off to the
> linguistic part of the brain, IIRC).

I've focused design on being able to QUICKLY SCAN the panel
and get the info you need. Otherwise you spend too much time
heads down. Things that prevent scanning are:
- poor screen clarity (contrast, resolution, size, fonts) requiring
squint time
- too much stuff (why you can't scan a sectional) !
- poor organization

ALL our flight screens are tested for scanability - can you look
at the image for <= one second, look away, and have got what you
need ?
If it takes more time than that, what exactly is going to happen
in a thermal or on the ridge at mach speed ?
That's why our moving map is SIMPLE.
You can scan it !

> I think one of the problems is that most people pull a PDA out of the
> box, load up a flight program like XCSoar (my favorite) or SeeYou, and
> immediately compare it to the panel-mounted flight computers in top
> gliders. *The issue is that the major PDA systems are far more
> customizable. *IF people would take the time to tweak the PDA-based
> programs to display the information they want and in the style that
> they like, I think the overall opinion of these solutions would go up
> quite a bit!

Actually, most people WANT a solution that does not require
extensive fiddling to get to square one. Of course, we provide
a custom screen for those that want it.

> I also find the menu system and feature navigation in most panel-
> mounted flight computers is a NIGHTMARE. *As a programmer with a lot
> of experience in webpages and other user-interfaces, these systems
> drive me up a WALL! *The designers obviously didn't put a whole lot of
> thought into the fact that people will be fiddling with these things
> while _flying_. *Since the flying is the more important part, some
> focus should have been put on easy navigation to the most important
> items in an unambiguous manner. *IMHO, its a bad design to have 1
> button perform 4 or 5 functions depending on how you hold it down or
> in what sequence you press it!

Right. We design for operation with the left hand, with gloves on.
We use a flat, non-modal interface. No silly menus.

> They're getting better with the most recent generations of panel-
> mounted computers, but a lot of the older/used units on the market
> worry me... *They require the most "heads-down" time to use, but are
> the cheapest and therefore the most likely items to be used by the
> least experienced pilots.... *Seems like a BAD combo, to me!
>
> OK, enough ranting/opinionating... *The bottom line is that neither
> PDAs nor Panel-mounted solutions are a silver-bullet. *Anyone with
> interest in them should SPEND SOME TIME fiddling with a variety of
> solutions to find out what feels best to them - even if its just on
> the ground with some buddies' gliders. *Be sure to ask about how each
> system can be customized - in case your idea of the perfect setup
> differs from your buddies! *You want to make apples-to-apples
> comparisons, afterall.
>
> --Noel

kirk.stant

December 8th 09, 02:05 AM

Noel, have you tried the SN-10 demo? I test aircraft cockpit display
software for a living and really like the SN-10 for in-flight ease of
use. I find it pretty logical -especially for competitions. OTOH,
most PDA software is pretty hideous. SYM is just bearable, but since
I only use it for a stripped down moving map, that's OK for now.

It is neat to have all these gizmos in the cockpit. I joke with my
friends that I have way more comm, nav, and ID capability in my glider
than I ever had in the F-4s I flew in the AF!

Cheers,

Kirk
66

Wayne Paul

December 8th 09, 02:34 AM

"kirk.stant" > wrote in message ...
> Noel, have you tried the SN-10 demo? I test aircraft cockpit display
> software for a living and really like the SN-10 for in-flight ease of
> use. I find it pretty logical -especially for competitions. OTOH,
> most PDA software is pretty hideous. SYM is just bearable, but since
> I only use it for a stripped down moving map, that's OK for now.
>
> It is neat to have all these gizmos in the cockpit. I joke with my
> friends that I have way more comm, nav, and ID capability in my glider
> than I ever had in the F-4s I flew in the AF!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Kirk
> 66

Kirk,

I'm a gizmo nut! I really have to be careful to avoid creating an instrument panel that has more value then the glider in which it is installed.

Even with the limitations of simply attaching a GPS to XCSoar, the capability is close to what was available to me as a Bombardier/Navigation in the A-6 Intruder.
http://www.soaridaho.com/Naval_Pictures/A-6_Cockpit.jpg

Wayne
HP-14 "6F"

Andy[_10_]

December 8th 09, 11:57 AM

On Dec 7, 4:27*pm, Dave Nadler > wrote:
> Different strokes, however some logical problems in the
> above post, explained below...
>
> On Dec 7, 1:02*pm, "noel.wade" > wrote:
>
> > Alright, I'll be the heretic in the group:
>
> > I find that a well-set-up PDA is much better than most of the flight
> > computers out there!
>
> And you have extensive experience with which ?
>
> > Many of the panel-mounted computers use text and/or point-and-line
> > graphics; which, while visible in sunlight, don't give you nearly as
> > good of an idea where you are as a moving map does. *Maybe its because
> > I'm younger than the average US glider pilot (sorry, not my fault) and
> > I've grown up around computers and graphics, but I find moving-map
> > symbology (with a couple of choice text items) MUCH easier to
> > interpret at a glance, compared to the "screen full of text" approach
> > of many glide computers. *And some brain studies have proven that
> > simple colors and shapes can be interpreted faster than text (letters
> > are shapes as well; but shapes that need to get shuffled off to the
> > linguistic part of the brain, IIRC).
>
> I've focused design on being able to QUICKLY SCAN the panel
> and get the info you need. Otherwise you spend too much time
> heads down. Things that prevent scanning are:
> - poor screen clarity (contrast, resolution, size, fonts) requiring
> squint time
> - too much stuff (why you can't scan a sectional) !
> - poor organization
>
> ALL our flight screens are tested for scanability - can you look
> at the image for <= one second, look away, and have got what you
> need ?
> If it takes more time than that, what exactly is going to happen
> in a thermal or on the ridge at mach speed ?
> That's why our moving map is SIMPLE.
> You can scan it !

Some user feedback Dave - don't taze me, bro!. While the SN-10 screen
gets high marks for contrast, I find the text display too crammed to
scan easily. The fonts are pretty blocky for easy readability too - at
least for me. I suspect this is due to the display technology selected
by Ilec rather than a software design choice, but you're the expert. I
found the LX 7000 to have a much easier to scan display for an
instrument in this class because of the clearer placement of the
various display elements, sharper characters, use of different text
sizes, etc.

Different strokes to be sure, but people should really take a live
look at some operating units and twiddle the knobs before they buy if
at all possible. The features and functionality also matter and the
SN-10 does pretty well here. I suspect it is the share leader among US
competition pilots.

9B

DaleKramer

December 11th 09, 05:43 PM

On Dec 7, 7:27*pm, Dave Nadler > wrote:
> I've focused design on being able to QUICKLY SCAN the panel
> and get the info you need. Otherwise you spend too much time
> heads down. Things that prevent scanning are:
> - poor screen clarity (contrast, resolution, size, fonts) requiring
> squint time
> - too much stuff (why you can't scan a sectional) !
> - poor organization
>
> ALL our flight screens are tested for scanability - can you look
> at the image for <= one second, look away, and have got what you
> need ?
> If it takes more time than that, what exactly is going to happen
> in a thermal or on the ridge at mach speed ?
> That's why our moving map is SIMPLE.
> You can scan it !

Every once in a while I find something that I have to respond to.
Sorry Dave, I'm still using the SN10. Overall it is the best of what
I have used.

Yes, I agree that the SN10 map page can be scanned quickly, mainly
because there is not much there but that is not what I take exception
to.

It is NOT SIMPLE and does require enormous heads down time to use.

With the interface, it is extremely time consuming and it is a mind
teaser to zoom, scroll, put the current glider location back in the
center of the screen and to get the task area you are flying into and
the current glider location on the screen at the same time. AND, once
you do achieve this, when you return to the screen in 10 minutes, you
have to do it all over again.

For these reasons, I VERY RARELY find it worthwhile to use the screen
and when I do I usually loose some mojo due to the time it takes,
heads down by the way, to do what I need to do with it.

And by the way Dave, when are you going to fix the costly reserve
altitude problem I pointed out in Montague (it gets reset without
informing the user when clicking on the finish TP on your tasking
listing page)?