Dr. Jack's Wind Direction

[rjciii]

As shown on Dr. Jack's "BL Wind Direct." parameter, is the wind
depicted as the direction it is blowing FROM (as is METAR standard),
or depicted as the direction the wind is blowing TO?

[JJ Sinclair]

Winds are always FROM
JJ Sinclair

[JJ Sinclair]

It's one of those rule things. Do you need to have an explanation for where it
says we drive on the right hand side of the road? Ups, left hand side for you
Brits. Where do the winds come from in the UK and where does it say that?
JJ Sinclair

[rjciii]

(JJ Sinclair) wrote in message >...
> It's one of those rule things. Do you need to have an explanation for where it
> says we drive on the right hand side of the road? Ups, left hand side for you
> Brits. Where do the winds come from in the UK and where does it say that?
> JJ Sinclair

JJ:

I suppose the following is exactly the kind of retort you are fishing
for, but I'll bite:

Thanks so much for your smart-assed 2-cents worth to an otherwise
serious question. It's such childish responses from people like you
that preclude many other from wanting to participate in this forum.

Thanks for trashing my attempt to better understand a soaring issue.

[JJ Sinclair]

Well, now rjciii.
The whole world uses FROM to indicate wind direction. If you have a pilot
licence, you should know that. But, I suppose that Dr. Jack, who holds a
Doctorate in Meteorology, does't know it and therefore showed his winds TO the
direction they are going. Thanks for bringing that to our attention.
JJ Sinclair

[Andy Durbin]

(JJ Sinclair) wrote in message >...
> Well, now rjciii.
> The whole world uses FROM to indicate wind direction. If you have a pilot
> licence, you should know that. But, I suppose that Dr. Jack, who holds a
> Doctorate in Meteorology, does't know it and therefore showed his winds TO the
> direction they are going. Thanks for bringing that to our attention.
> JJ Sinclair

I have worked for more years than I care to remember in the aerospace
industry. Many programs I was involved with had wind direction
reversed in some part of the system during early stages of
development. It's about as common as getting synchro orientation
wrong, and getting mag var and drift angles reversed.

Pilots may know wind comes "from" but lots of others have to be
reminded of that fact.

Andy (GY)

[Andy Durbin]

(JJ Sinclair) wrote in message >...
> Well, now rjciii.
> The whole world uses FROM to indicate wind direction. If you have a pilot
> licence, you should know that. But, I suppose that Dr. Jack, who holds a
> Doctorate in Meteorology, does't know it and therefore showed his winds TO the
> direction they are going. Thanks for bringing that to our attention.
> JJ Sinclair

I have worked for more years than I care to remember in the aerospace
industry. Many programs I was involved with had wind direction
reversed in some part of the system during early stages of
development. It's about as common as getting synchro orientation
wrong, and getting mag var and drift angles reversed.

Pilots may know wind comes "from" but lots of others have to be
reminded of that fact.

Andy (GY)

[Jack Glendening]

Andy Durbin wrote:
> Pilots may know wind comes "from" but lots of others have to be
> reminded of that fact.

And perhaps some should spend time reading what is said about the
BLIPMAP parameters on the website before bothering others. From

http://www.drjack.net/BLIPMAP/parameter_details.html

"Wind Direction in the Boundary Layer
The direction [using the meteorological convention, i.e. the
direction the wind is coming from] of the ..."

[JJ Sinclair]

>
>Maybe if someone would have politely offered the link as an answer to
>my question without trying to make me feel like such a dumbass for
>daring to ask such a question, this thread wouldn't have de-evolved
>into such mud slinging.

rjciii, I believe the FIRST answer you got said, Winds are always, FROM. ;>)

For Dr. Jack, I believe I warned you about needing a thick skin. I soon learned
to automatically pass on certain names, like rjciii, he NEVER has anything to
offer and is only trying to argue with anyone that is foolish enough to answer
him. <:)
JJ Sinclair

[Jack Glendening]

JJ,

I was not going to respond further to this thread, since it has gotten
depressingly long and convoluted for a very minor matter, but since you
have been in on the thread from its beginning you may be interested in
the background you don't know, which is the poster had first sent a
personal email to me asking the same question.

I used to have an "I'll answer all emails sent to me" policy, but over
the past year found I was spending way too much time answering emails
and so was particularly irked by those who seemed to find it easier to
send an email to me as a first response to any question they had, rather
than first looking for the answer in the information I had already taken
considerable time to write and post on the DrJack website. Having now
over 2200 registered users, I have to expect them to first try to find a
answer to their question on my website before emailing me. So my
present policy is to respond only to any questions which require
something unique from me. In the present case I knew the necessary
information was already on the website for anyone who would take the
time/trouble to click on the "MoreInfo" link under the "Wind Direction"
parameter description. (Interestingly, I checked and found that the
correspondent had not taken the time/trouble to become a registered user
- yet he wanted me to take time/trouble on his behalf!)

So I did not respond personally, but he did receive an automated email
response suggesting that any question could be posted to the DrJack
Forum for someone to answer. He chose not to do that but instead to
post to the entire RAS community, and you know the story from there.
For some time I have not been following RAS, but Tues I had my own
posting to make and stumbled upon this thread and could not believe what
it had produced! So I thought that giving a "definitive" answer might
finally end the thread and took the time to post something. From my
point of view it was not the question per se which was inappropriate,
but the fact that I knew that the asker had not made any effort to find
the answer himself, even though it was readly available. I call this
"not doing one's homework" and instead expecting to get the answer from
someone who _has_ done their homework!

Frankly the reason that I stopped following RAS some time ago was that I
often found the tone/level of discourse to be upsetting, particularly
the "anyone who doesn't agree with me is an idiot" type of posting with
insults being considered to be an "argument". I have been on the
Internet since 1985, which I think predates most, so am well aware of
the long "tradition" of "flaming" on newgroups. But it's not a
"tradition" that I personally want to be part of. There can be true
gold available on RAS (hence my recent posting, which produced info I
had been unable to figure out myself and was very helpful to me). But
there is also a lot of noise, and the question is how much dross is one
willing to pan through to get that gold. Different individuals have
different answers and I'm afraid my skin is not thick enough to be a
"RAS kind of guy". I should add, though, that what I have seen in the
most recent posting has generally been on a much higher level than I had
recalled - but perhaps that is because the soaring season has just ended
and people are still mellow. Oops, I can see I'm getting WAY off-topic
(and possibily be viewed by some as "attacking RAS" and so subject to
the usual flaming response, which I am not willing to respond to). But
I did want to let you know why you shouldn't expect to see regular
postings from me.


Jack

[rjciii]

Dear JJ:

If you skip over my postings (since I "*NEVER* have anything to
offer"--kinda like "the wind is *ALWAYS* from"), then why did you
repond to my original question? ; )

Methinks you mistake many of my posting because of a prevalent
defensive tone due to the fact that I'm not about to take any s%#t
from anybody on this forum. But if you reread this and previous
threads, I generally don't start out that way. Tit for tat. In this
case, all I did was simply ask if anyone could verify *something*
(I'll never make that egregious mistake again!). If my original
question would have been answered in a civil manner, as opposed to "I
suppose you also want to know why we drive on the right side of the
road", then maybe I would have not retaliated in the only option
available to me as a reply in kind. I stated that I "ASSUMED that Dr.
Jack's directions were IAW METAR standard FROM", but that the day's
actuality was winds 180 degrees out--so I was exploring all options
(now much to my chagrin). Look what that quest for expanding my
knowledge has produced.

.................................................. ..........................

Dear Dr. Jack:

I truly appreciate your Blipmap info; however, I must have skipped
over the disclaimer that states utilizing your data automatically
subjects one to a teacher/student relationship requiring one to first
"do [one's] homework". Can you see how one might consider that kinda,
well, somewhat arrogant on your part? I understand why you don't
respond to email (even though you have your address posted at the
site?). What I really don't understand is why you would care one iota
that I chose to ask such a question on R.A.S. Do you think it is an
affront to your knowledge that I asked a question about one of your
parameters? Also be advised that I did try to first locate the answer
via your website without success. A small critisism is that there is
entirely too much verbal noise which hides the forest from the trees
(as may be witnessed by the lengthy pontification of your preceeding
post. My excuse is that this is actually two letters). Jeez, after
your recently expressed opinions, I doubt anyone would dare to ask a
Blipmap question on this forum for a long time. Was that your
intention? If soaring weather matters can't be openly discussed
here--then where do you suggest such matter be better addressed? A
motorcycle forum? Chess forum? The Society for Creative Anacronism?

.................................................. .........................

You know what, guys, I'm just some Joe Schmo who has an interest in
soaring (which I thought was something we all have in common). All I
wanted was a better understanding of how to use some maps. Thanks for
taking the time to enlighten me in such a fraternal manner. To wit,
here's my humble apology: I'm so sorry to bother you, Jack, and JJ
with such trivial matters. A thousand pardons indeed!

I wish you both safe and sucessful soaring. I'll be the guy with the
wind blowing me *FROM* the opposite direction.

Regards, Ray

[rjciii]

Jack Glendening > wrote:

>> (Interestingly, I checked and found that the
>> correspondent had not taken the time/trouble to become a registered
>>user - yet he wanted me to take time/trouble on his behalf!)

Sorry, Doc. Wasn't my intention to put you out...
Does not registering make me a freeloader or something?
I honestly don't realize if there is a fee involved in using your
info.
Is there?

>> but he did receive an automated email
>> response suggesting that any question could be posted to the DrJack
>> Forum for someone to answer. He chose not to do that but instead
>> to post to the entire RAS community,

Yes, I admit that I did not following your instructions to the
letter--
let's give the man a "F" and a thousand lashes with a wet noodle...

>> the fact that I knew that the asker had not made any effort to find
>> the answer himself, even though it was readly available.

Not true, sir. I honestly tried but got lost in a maze of verbage and
multiple links. Guess that makes me either lazy or stupid (or both).

>> the "anyone who doesn't agree with me is an idiot" type of posting

As opposed to, in this case, "anyone who asks a question is an idiot"?

>> I did want to let you know why you shouldn't expect to see regular
>> postings from me.

T'ant pis pour nous!

[rjciii]

Jack Glendening > wrote:

>
> (Interestingly, I checked and found that the
> correspondent had not taken the time/trouble to become a registered user
> - yet he wanted me to take time/trouble on his behalf!)
>
>

Dear Dr. Jack:

I hate to "bother" you again, but I wanted you to know that I just
reviewed all the verbage at the beginning of your website. It says
"Registration is required for this viewer to work".

-Question: How the heck do you suppose I have been able to view the
maps all along if I wasn't a registered user?

-Answer: I had indeed registered at some point in the past but with a
former (but at that time current) email address of . Did
that possibility ever cross your mind? Should I re-register every
time I change my email address?

So you see, in actuality I did take the time/trouble. But thanks
anyhow for slamming me in a public forum.

What we have here is a failure to communicate (and some egregious
assumptions to boot)...

In fact, my only sin was to not expand my initial attempt to "do my
homework" by noticing the *more info* link after initially reviewing
the *parameter information webpage* link. My bad. I do hope you'll
forgive me my oversight.

Oh, the horror of horrors!

Sir, are there any other sitpulations to usage you wish to divulge for
one to access your data without fear of public admonishment?

As I stated before, I appreciate the efforts you expend to supply this
information to the soaring community; however, I'm not certain I can
handle all the baggage that comes with said use. But I promise I'll
really try harder to be a better student and "do my homework" before I
dare ask you a question (or anyone else on RAS for that matter) again.

Enjoy your retirement--you obviously need it.

[Jonathan Gere]

Thank you, Ray, for giving BlipMap fans a chance to show their
gratitude and devotion to Dr. Jack by piling on. BlipMaps may be
hanging on by a thread. I think that Dr. Jack, as a scientist, would
prefer some systematic verification of BlipMaps to online thank you
notes, but something is better than nothing.

Sorry you got only a smart-ass answer from JJ. At least Andy Durbin
understood. It is quite reasonable to suspect any computer output is
180° degrees off, by design or error. Even a few years of uncritical
acceptance by users doesn't preclude the possibility of error in the
case of a seldom used feature. If R.A.S. was all it could be, you
would have been deluged with testimonials and quantitative validations
of the accuracy of the winds BlipMap by users. Sorry that didn't
happen. I think a 180° error would have been noticed, but who knows?
For quite a while the F.S.L. web soundings had winds that were
systematically off by up to 18°, but that is a lot harder to spot.

You might have waited to undertake a scientific study, when you
noticed something funny on a single flight. But I don't think it was
a terrible thing to ask on RAS about the interpretation of the winds
BlipMap. Neither was it wrong to ask about circling mode on an LNAV,
instead of reading the manual from the CAI site. In fact, an
intelligent answer from a person is usually faster and more to the
point than on-line help or the manual. It's easy to see why Dr. Jack
might not have the time to answer any or all questions, but RAS is a
different story. Probably, no one gave a serious answer, because no
one had seriously checked the winds BlipMap. However, 99% know that
winds are "from", and are thus equipped to post useless, smart-ass
replies. It is comforting to note that so few actually did!

Dr. Jack has had a constructive reaction in the past to anyone who
actually compares BlipMap outputs to the real world or to other
weather data sources. See these quotes from his website below.

Jonathan Gere

From the Dr. Jack Forum:
After more days of work than I had hoped I finally got things sorted
out and am now running a corrected program with the BLIPMAP cloud
predictions turned on. Bob Gibbons deserves kudos for having both the
initiative to critically evaluate the "Cumulus Cloudbase" prediction
and the knowledge to compare it to the simple surface-humidity LCL
condensation formula. Thanks, Bob.

The short story is that in the Sfc-umidity LCL calculation I found one
logic error and one place where I had used virtual temperature instead
of "actual" temperature (shame on me). While I am using an "exact"
calculation of the "Surface-humidity LCL", that is because I am a
persnickety scientist - it turns out the "approximate"
Surface-humidity LCL formula should generally agree with the "exact"
formula by within 5%, which is certainly adequate given the overall
error associated with cloud predictions....

-----

I only look at the webpages and maps that I use personally or that I
suspect might contain an error. If you notice a consistent problem
with either, please let me know.

-----

[Tom Seim]

CONGRATULATIONS!!!

YOU HAVE SCORED A PERFECT 10 ON MY JERK-O-METER!!!

For complaining about an extraordinary service provided at no cost by the user.