Wind information

[Brad[_2_]]

Throughout this season I've flown with several friends that use
different instruments that calculate wind information while in flight.

I use a GPS driving a PDA running LK8000 (I don't use the new true
wind function). Ron uses an SN-10, Dan uses a PDA running Seeyou and
getting wind information via GPS and the Tasman FP module, Brian uses
an iPAQ 310 running Seeyou and using only GPS wind (internal GPS
chip).

My observations are that generally we are all within 2 to 7 knots and
5 to 15 degrees of speed and direction off when we report to each
other what we are seeing at that moment. The guys using GPS only have
the widest spread and the guys using pitot/static/GPS seem to be
closer and I feel more accurate. However even with my GPS driven wind
I still feel fairly confident that it is giving me very useful
information. I.E. coming back off the flats in Eastern WA heading into
a strong headwind it was nice to know the ridge up ahead was going to
give me ridge lift when I got to it.

I also think that since when we report the wind info to each other, we
are spread out across a large area of sky and the winds could very
well be different, so maybe there isn't that large of a difference due
to calculation methods after all. In the foothills/mountains there can
be large local airmass difference due to orographic, local flow,
valley flow, etc..............

Anyone have any thoughts on this foggy morning rambling?

Brad

[David Salmon[_2_]]

I use a PNA running LK8000 and also an SN10. Sometimes there are quite wide
differences, but generally the two agree fairly well, within 10 deg and 2/3
kts.
Dave


At 16:25 02 October 2010, Brad wrote:
>Throughout this season I've flown with several friends that use
>different instruments that calculate wind information while in flight.
>
>I use a GPS driving a PDA running LK8000 (I don't use the new true
>wind function). Ron uses an SN-10, Dan uses a PDA running Seeyou and
>getting wind information via GPS and the Tasman FP module, Brian uses
>an iPAQ 310 running Seeyou and using only GPS wind (internal GPS
>chip).
>
>My observations are that generally we are all within 2 to 7 knots and
>5 to 15 degrees of speed and direction off when we report to each
>other what we are seeing at that moment. The guys using GPS only have
>the widest spread and the guys using pitot/static/GPS seem to be
>closer and I feel more accurate. However even with my GPS driven wind
>I still feel fairly confident that it is giving me very useful
>information. I.E. coming back off the flats in Eastern WA heading into
>a strong headwind it was nice to know the ridge up ahead was going to
>give me ridge lift when I got to it.
>
>I also think that since when we report the wind info to each other, we
>are spread out across a large area of sky and the winds could very
>well be different, so maybe there isn't that large of a difference due
>to calculation methods after all. In the foothills/mountains there can
>be large local airmass difference due to orographic, local flow,
>valley flow, etc..............
>
>Anyone have any thoughts on this foggy morning rambling?
>
>Brad
>

[brianDG303[_2_]]

On Oct 2, 10:55*am, David Salmon > wrote:
> I use a PNA running LK8000 and also an SN10. Sometimes there are quite wide
> differences, but generally the two agree fairly well, within 10 deg and 2/3
> kts.
> Dave
>
> At 16:25 02 October 2010, Brad wrote:
>
> >Throughout this season I've flown with several friends that use
> >different instruments that calculate wind information while in flight.
>
> >I use a GPS driving a PDA running LK8000 (I don't use the new true
> >wind function). Ron uses an SN-10, Dan uses a PDA running Seeyou and
> >getting wind information via GPS and the Tasman FP module, Brian uses
> >an iPAQ 310 running Seeyou and using only GPS wind (internal GPS
> >chip).
>
> >My observations are that generally we are all within 2 to 7 knots and
> >5 to 15 degrees of speed and direction off when we report to each
> >other what we are seeing at that moment. The guys using GPS only have
> >the widest spread and the guys using pitot/static/GPS seem to be
> >closer and I feel more accurate. However even with my GPS driven wind
> >I still feel fairly confident that it is giving me very useful
> >information. I.E. coming back off the flats in Eastern WA heading into
> >a strong headwind it was nice to know the ridge up ahead was going to
> >give me ridge lift when I got to it.
>
> >I also think that since when we report the wind info to each other, we
> >are spread out across a large area of sky and the winds could very
> >well be different, so maybe there isn't that large of a difference due
> >to calculation methods after all. In the foothills/mountains there can
> >be large local airmass difference due to orographic, local flow,
> >valley flow, etc..............
>
> >Anyone have any thoughts on this foggy morning rambling?
>
> >Brad

david,
which PNA?

[David Salmon[_2_]]

At 19:15 02 October 2010, brianDG303 wrote:
>On Oct 2, 10:55=A0am, David Salmon wrote:
>> I use a PNA running LK8000 and also an SN10. Sometimes there are quite
>wi=
>de
>> differences, but generally the two agree fairly well, within 10 deg
and
>2=
>/3
>> kts.
>> Dave
>>
>> At 16:25 02 October 2010, Brad wrote:
>>
>> >Throughout this season I've flown with several friends that use
>> >different instruments that calculate wind information while in
flight.
>>
>> >I use a GPS driving a PDA running LK8000 (I don't use the new true
>> >wind function). Ron uses an SN-10, Dan uses a PDA running Seeyou and
>> >getting wind information via GPS and the Tasman FP module, Brian uses
>> >an iPAQ 310 running Seeyou and using only GPS wind (internal GPS
>> >chip).
>>
>> >My observations are that generally we are all within 2 to 7 knots and
>> >5 to 15 degrees of speed and direction off when we report to each
>> >other what we are seeing at that moment. The guys using GPS only have
>> >the widest spread and the guys using pitot/static/GPS seem to be
>> >closer and I feel more accurate. However even with my GPS driven wind
>> >I still feel fairly confident that it is giving me very useful
>> >information. I.E. coming back off the flats in Eastern WA heading
into
>> >a strong headwind it was nice to know the ridge up ahead was going to
>> >give me ridge lift when I got to it.
>>
>> >I also think that since when we report the wind info to each other,
we
>> >are spread out across a large area of sky and the winds could very
>> >well be different, so maybe there isn't that large of a difference
due
>> >to calculation methods after all. In the foothills/mountains there
can
>> >be large local airmass difference due to orographic, local flow,
>> >valley flow, etc..............
>>
>> >Anyone have any thoughts on this foggy morning rambling?
>>
>> >Brad
>
>david,
>which PNA?

An iPAQ 314, though opinion is tending towards a Mio M400 for better
visibility in sunlight. Not much of a problem in the UK these days.
The iPAQ internal gps is not very good in a glider, gives some odd
results at times, so I use a Holux BT gps with.
Dave


>

[hretting]

> Anyone have any thoughts on this foggy morning rambling?
>
> Brad

It's OK, it happens to all old people. Take your Metamucial and go for
a walk.
R

[Brad[_2_]]

On Oct 3, 8:28*am, hretting > wrote:
> > Anyone have any thoughts on this foggy morning rambling?
>
> > Brad
>
> It's OK, it happens to all old people. Take your Metamucial and go for
> a walk.
> R

geez, no wonder I don't support the youth in soaring movement, unless
the movement is a metamucial induced one on top of this guys head!

Brad

[hretting]

Brad, I thought your come back was funny and I certainly deserve it.

What I get from your opening thread is perhaps your reluctance to
trust the wind information you are seeing or you are looking for
supporting information that would increase your trust in the
information.
Transitioning to ridge would require accurate wind information, but
you write you do this without fear all the time.
If you would elaborate a little more on what you are thinking
regarding wind data , I'm sure others have helpful input and comments.
Myself , operating a 302 with a CAI M-25 backup...they become accurate
as long as I thermal and slowly diverge / degrade with long stretches
of glides. A few turns and I am amaze how quickly they recapture the
wind. I was able to run trials base on observation of smoke coming off
the burning sugarcane fields and learn my instrument.
R

[Brad[_2_]]

On Oct 3, 10:44*am, hretting > wrote:
> Brad, I thought your come back was funny and I certainly deserve it.
>
> What I get from your opening thread is perhaps your reluctance to
> trust the wind information you are seeing or you are looking for
> supporting information that would increase your trust in the
> information.
> Transitioning to ridge would require accurate wind information, but
> you write you do this without fear all the time.
> If you would elaborate a little more on what you are thinking
> regarding wind data , I'm sure others have helpful input and comments.
> Myself , operating a 302 with a CAI M-25 backup...they become accurate
> as long as I thermal and slowly diverge / degrade with long stretches
> of glides. A few turns and I am amaze how quickly they recapture the
> wind. I was able to run trials base on observation of smoke coming off
> the burning sugarcane fields and learn my instrument.
> R

Hi,

Well, I did delete it after I had my morning coffee................. I
sure had a laugh when I hit send!

To your question:

I do feel confident that the wind information is reliable enough to
use within a certain amount of time/airspace. What I mean by that is
since I only get wind info from circling (with my set-up) it is good
only for a certain amount of time until I start circling again. So, If
I climb up and get wind info X, then start a long glide the wind could
be different when I finish my glide and I'll not know what it is until
I start circling again and get a new fix. Probably not a big deal when
I think about it.

So actually it looks like we are similar in our thoughts on this!

I am an avid observer of all wind indicators (learned from my years as
a hang glider pilot).

And...........I actually do down a few psylliam caps every night
before bed, it does help......:)

Brad

[Bob]

In general I find all wind calculations appear to be more accurate
when I like what they say, and less accurate when I don't like what
they are telling me.

A grain of salt........

;-)

Bob

[Eric Greenwell[_4_]]

On 10/3/2010 11:09 AM, Brad wrote:
> On Oct 3, 10:44 am, > wrote:
>
>> Brad, I thought your come back was funny and I certainly deserve it.
>>
>> What I get from your opening thread is perhaps your reluctance to
>> trust the wind information you are seeing or you are looking for
>> supporting information that would increase your trust in the
>> information.
>> Transitioning to ridge would require accurate wind information, but
>> you write you do this without fear all the time.
>> If you would elaborate a little more on what you are thinking
>> regarding wind data , I'm sure others have helpful input and comments.
>> Myself , operating a 302 with a CAI M-25 backup...they become accurate
>> as long as I thermal and slowly diverge / degrade with long stretches
>> of glides. A few turns and I am amaze how quickly they recapture the
>> wind. I was able to run trials base on observation of smoke coming off
>> the burning sugarcane fields and learn my instrument.
>> R
> I do feel confident that the wind information is reliable enough to
> use within a certain amount of time/airspace. What I mean by that is
> since I only get wind info from circling (with my set-up) it is good
> only for a certain amount of time until I start circling again. So, If
> I climb up and get wind info X, then start a long glide the wind could
> be different when I finish my glide and I'll not know what it is until
> I start circling again and get a new fix. Probably not a big deal when
> I think about it.
>
It could be a big deal if you are ridge flying, or flying in the
mountains (that's' _in_ not _over_), or wave is present but not strongly
established. Under those conditions, the wind can change significantly
from where you last circled due to valley flows, mountain peaks/ridges
diverting the wind, or wave dipping down into the convection layer (or
coming and going as the speed, direction, and air mass change).

My experience is wind derived from circling is adequate for relatively
open areas, like the Columbia basin in Eastern Washington state, but
"current headwind" derived from an air-data vario like the my 302 is
very useful in the ridge/mountain/wave situations. And, of course,
during long glides (like a final glide), where the glider sinks
thousands of feet lower than the altitudes I at which I was circling and
getting wind measurements.

If wind is important to you, spend the money for an air-data instrument.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl
- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz

[David Salmon[_2_]]

LK8000 has had a feature called TrueWind for some months now.
By flying at a preset speed for a preset time (say 60kts for 10 secs, but
you choose when configuring), in one of 12 directions, and pressing a
button, you will get the wind. Sounds complicated, but in practice it
isn't. Ideal for checking the wind on a long final glide. You might have
to change heading, but no more than 15 deg, for the 10 secs. However, if
your compass is not accurate, the wind won't be.
Dave

At 02:54 04 October 2010, Eric Greenwell wrote:
>On 10/3/2010 11:09 AM, Brad wrote:
>> On Oct 3, 10:44 am, hretting wrote:
>>
>>> Brad, I thought your come back was funny and I certainly deserve it.
>>>
>>> What I get from your opening thread is perhaps your reluctance to
>>> trust the wind information you are seeing or you are looking for
>>> supporting information that would increase your trust in the
>>> information.
>>> Transitioning to ridge would require accurate wind information, but
>>> you write you do this without fear all the time.
>>> If you would elaborate a little more on what you are thinking
>>> regarding wind data , I'm sure others have helpful input and
comments.
>>> Myself , operating a 302 with a CAI M-25 backup...they become
accurate
>>> as long as I thermal and slowly diverge / degrade with long stretches
>>> of glides. A few turns and I am amaze how quickly they recapture the
>>> wind. I was able to run trials base on observation of smoke coming
off
>>> the burning sugarcane fields and learn my instrument.
>>> R
>> I do feel confident that the wind information is reliable enough to
>> use within a certain amount of time/airspace. What I mean by that is
>> since I only get wind info from circling (with my set-up) it is good
>> only for a certain amount of time until I start circling again. So, If
>> I climb up and get wind info X, then start a long glide the wind could
>> be different when I finish my glide and I'll not know what it is
until
>> I start circling again and get a new fix. Probably not a big deal when
>> I think about it.
>>
>It could be a big deal if you are ridge flying, or flying in the
>mountains (that's' _in_ not _over_), or wave is present but not
strongly
>established. Under those conditions, the wind can change significantly
>from where you last circled due to valley flows, mountain peaks/ridges
>diverting the wind, or wave dipping down into the convection layer (or
>coming and going as the speed, direction, and air mass change).
>
>My experience is wind derived from circling is adequate for relatively
>open areas, like the Columbia basin in Eastern Washington state, but
>"current headwind" derived from an air-data vario like the my 302 is
>very useful in the ridge/mountain/wave situations. And, of course,
>during long glides (like a final glide), where the glider sinks
>thousands of feet lower than the altitudes I at which I was circling and

>getting wind measurements.
>
>If wind is important to you, spend the money for an air-data instrument.
>
>--
>Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email
>me)
>- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm
>http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl
>- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of
what
>you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz
>
>

[[email protected]]

On Oct 3, 10:54*pm, Eric Greenwell > wrote:
> On 10/3/2010 11:09 AM, Brad wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 3, 10:44 am, > *wrote:
>
> >> Brad, I thought your come back was funny and I certainly deserve it.
>
> >> What I get from your opening thread is perhaps your reluctance to
> >> trust the wind information you are seeing or you are looking for
> >> supporting information that would increase your trust in the
> >> information.
> >> Transitioning to ridge would require accurate wind information, but
> >> you write you do this without fear all the time.
> >> If you would elaborate a little more on what you are thinking
> >> regarding wind data , I'm sure others have helpful input and comments.
> >> Myself , operating a 302 with a CAI M-25 backup...they become accurate
> >> as long as I thermal and slowly diverge / degrade with long stretches
> >> of glides. A few turns and I am amaze how quickly they recapture the
> >> wind. I was able to run trials base on observation of smoke coming off
> >> the burning sugarcane fields and learn my instrument.
> >> R
> > I do feel confident that the wind information is reliable enough to
> > use within a certain amount of time/airspace. What I mean by that is
> > since I only get wind info from circling (with my set-up) it is good
> > only for a certain amount of time until I start circling again. So, If
> > I climb up and get wind info X, then start a long glide the wind could
> > be different when I finish my glide and I'll not know what it is until
> > I start circling again and get a new fix. Probably not a big deal when
> > I think about it.
>
> It could be a big deal if you are ridge flying, or flying in the
> mountains (that's' _in_ not _over_), or wave is present but not strongly
> established. Under those conditions, the wind can change significantly
> from where you last circled due to valley flows, mountain peaks/ridges
> diverting the wind, or wave dipping down into the convection layer (or
> coming and going as the speed, direction, and air mass change).
>
> My experience is wind derived from circling is adequate for relatively
> open areas, like the Columbia basin in Eastern Washington state, but
> "current headwind" derived from an air-data vario like the my 302 is
> very useful in the ridge/mountain/wave situations. And, of course,
> during long glides (like a final glide), where the glider sinks
> thousands of feet lower than the altitudes I at which I was circling and
> getting wind measurements.
>
> If wind is important to you, spend the money for an air-data instrument.
>
> --
> Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
> - "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarmhttp://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl
> - "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I agree with Eric.
Circling winds are useful for general information and adequate for
much of our flying but they fall short in 2 very important aspects.
1. Long glides through deep boundary layers with direction changes in
the boundary layer. Really good wind info from air data/ GPS
computation updates your situation which can make final glides more
accurate and, most useful for me, I can see direction changes to help
me picture where shears are and what direction they are.
2. I somtimes go for quite some time on the ridge without circling.
Knowing the wind vector is hugely useful, in terms of how ridge works
now and what the trend is during the day. Can I go to Cumberland 90
miles away and use this turnpoint a couple hours from now?
FWIW
UH

[Andy[_1_]]

On Oct 3, 7:54*pm, Eric Greenwell > wrote:

> If wind is important to you, spend the money for an air-data instrument.

Even the best on board measuring system can only tell you what the
wind is here and now, and what it was where and when.

No on-board measuring system can tell you what the wind will be
someplace you have not been yet at some time in the future, and that
is what we need for those long final glides and presumably for long
ridge flights and ridge transitions.

Flight management systems allow the entry of wind forecasts at
multiple altitudes for the various en-route waypoints. Perhaps a smart
glider flight computer would allow entry of discrete point wind
forecast data, or even derive them automatically from a web source.
Perhaps a smarter one would enable the wind forecast data to be
updated in flight. For example local winds at different altitudes
could be derived from FLARM transmissions from other gliders in the
area.

One problem with dreaming of systems like this is that in-flight
reception of weather data, other than by voice radio, is prohibited by
US contest rules. It's OK to listen to an AWOS or ATIS but not OK to
receive the same data from, for example, XM weather.

In the past looking outside has provided very useful indicators of
wind strength and direction. I see no reason to assume that source
will go away as technology advances.

Andy

[cernauta]

On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 19:54:52 -0700, Eric Greenwell
> wrote:

>If wind is important to you, spend the money for an air-data instrument.

If someone flies in mountain environment, I feel I can recommend the
Zander vario-computer, coupled to an electronic (rs232) interface on
the compass. (I have no connection with the maker nor any seller).

I have used computers of many brands, many models, I have fine tuned
almost every possible variant, but in the end I was hardly satisfied.
Nothing beats the Zander setup (if you can guess through the obscure
reasoning which inspired the author of the user's manual).

Just don't think about other setups based around solid state
compasses; the affordable ones are too pitch sensitive to be of any
use.

With the Zander, once it's correctly tuned (airspeed, and extremely
careful compass calibration), you get a consistent, reliable wind
reading. If you see sudden changes, in direction, you may be
reasonably sure the wind is locally deviated by some local features or
breeze. It happens frequently. I find it interesting and sobering
(thinking, the risks of wind-shears when ridge flying).

On occasions, such local wind regimes can have a huge influence on
your average speed on a competition task, and the information I get
from the Zander gave a few very valuable opportunities)

I have tested the "True Wind" function in LK8000 for PDA, and I was
positively impressed. Keeping accurate compass heading and speed is
easier than I thought when crossing valleys, while it's out of
question when close to approaching a ridge.
Of course, my Duo has a perfectly calibrated compass.

Aldo Cernezzi

[Girlnend]

What Are the Realizable Side Effects of CIALIS?

The most understandable side effects with CIALIS are: indubitably, frighten tummy, collect touched in the flair moan, muscle aches, flushing, and compressed or runny nose. These side effects predominantly harmonize away after a not myriad hours. Men who on account of the treatment of all sound purposes on unembellished travail and muscle aches on the intention of eternally be established it 12 to 24 hours after bewitching CIALIS. Bamboozle woe and muscle aches scarcely eternally pass on away within 2 days. Dial your healthcare provider if you be the actuality any side clout that bothers you or a irrevocable that does not wane away.

Uncommon but uncompromising side effects encompass: an erection that won’t prime sneakily to on on away: If you seize an erection long-term more than 4 hours, war owing manifest medical check to refrain from long-term injury.

In rare instances, men charming medication ED tablets, including CIALIS, reported a current slackening or weakness of make-believe or hearing (on push with ringing in the ears and dizziness). It’s not doable to dig up if these events are cognate anon to the ED tablets or to other factors. If you beget a hurried outlook as a service to up or vacuum of revenant or hearing, abort obedient any ED smidgin, including CIALIS and holler your doctor upstanding away.
CIALIS does not:
heal ED
upon a authority’s fleshly take a fancy to in render the treatment of
have in mind up sound a gazabo or his partaker from sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV
of shoot up as a spear sketch of descent govern

cialis online generic buy (http://mycialisrx.com) is to hold less medicament only.