Photos from Winter

[Paul Remde]

Hi,

I just updated my Winter instruments web site with a few photos from the
factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few photos of the town the
company is located in. This year they sent me a few photos showing the
instrument assembly area and the stand on which they adjust altimeters. I
enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more about the company and
the people that make the instruments. Most glider pilots fly with Winter
instruments and we have come to trust and rely on them.

You can see the photos here:
http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/winter.htm

Good Soaring,

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

[Tim Mara]

I've actually been there in their shop and gone out for dinner with Achim
Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with everyone working
meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses each hand building 3 or
4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly, the owner, his
father and his father before him were none of them pilots and got into this
business building aircraft instruments totally from other business but their
instruments have been the standard for the sailplane industry for decades
and remain the best and most recognized in their field. Winter also has a
full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
tim
Wings & Wheels
www.wingsandwheels.com

"Paul Remde" > wrote in message
news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
> Hi,
>
> I just updated my Winter instruments web site with a few photos from the
> factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few photos of the town the
> company is located in. This year they sent me a few photos showing the
> instrument assembly area and the stand on which they adjust altimeters. I
> enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more about the company and
> the people that make the instruments. Most glider pilots fly with Winter
> instruments and we have come to trust and rely on them.
>

[5Z]

On Dec 8, 11:01 am, "Paul Remde" > wrote:

> ...and the stand on which they adjust altimeters.

All the airspeed indicators on the test stand have no markings, and it
looks like the technician is using a grease pencil to add a marking.
So I'd wager a guess that each airspeed indicator has a custom face to
correspond to the variances in the mechanisms.

-Tom

[Andrew Wood]

I have always thought that Winter instruments are excellent,
and their repair/calibration support has been very
good in my limited experience (I've only needed Winter
support once, and got good service). But there is one
caution that I am aware of: the compact Winter altimeters
have possible errors that US pilots should be aware
of. It's not a secret: the possible errors are listed
in the Winter altimeter data sheet. This is important
to know, for pilots flying under a class B ceiling
(as I do), and especially for pilots who fly up to
the 18000ft ceiling, since the Winter data sheet errors
are surprisingly large at higher altitudes. Take a
look and see. As an experiment, I tested my three altimeters
(my Winter 4FGH40, my Cambridge 302, and my SN10b)
at my local airport, using my airport barometric setting,
to see if the three altimeters agreed with the published
airport elevation (1000ft msl). The errors were respectively
140ft, 2ft and 80ft. The Winter error is at the very
limit of the Winter data sheet error for 1000ft msl,
which is surprising since it had just been recalibrated
by the factory (because it had previously had an even
larger error). The other instruments were about 2 years
from calibration. In comparison, most US aircraft altimeters
that I've seen in (IFR qualified) power planes have
been very accurate under this test, not more than 50ft
error at the very most. The US IFR altimeter accuracy
requirement for this test is 75ft. So under the US
altimeter test, the Winter altimeter would fail, the
Cambridge would be perfect, and the SN10b just acceptable.
I've been asking around as to which of my three altimeters
is the 'legal' altimeter to use, but (of course) have
got no clear answer.


At 19:01 08 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>I've actually been there in their shop and gone out
>for dinner with Achim
>Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with
>everyone working
>meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses
>each hand building 3 or
>4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly,
>the owner, his
>father and his father before him were none of them
>pilots and got into this
>business building aircraft instruments totally from
>other business but their
>instruments have been the standard for the sailplane
>industry for decades
>and remain the best and most recognized in their field.
>Winter also has a
>full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
>tim
>Wings & Wheels
>www.wingsandwheels.com
>
>'Paul Remde' wrote in message
>news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just updated my Winter instruments web site with
>>a few photos from the
>> factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few
>>photos of the town the
>> company is located in. This year they sent me a few
>>photos showing the
>> instrument assembly area and the stand on which they
>>adjust altimeters. I
>> enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more
>>about the company and
>> the people that make the instruments. Most glider
>>pilots fly with Winter
>> instruments and we have come to trust and rely on
>>them.
>>
>
>
>

[Andrew Wood]

I have always thought that Winter instruments are excellent,
and their repair/calibration support has been very
good in my limited experience (I've only needed Winter
support once, and got good service). But there is one
caution that I am aware of: the compact Winter altimeters
have possible errors that US pilots should be aware
of. It's not a secret: the possible errors are listed
in the Winter altimeter data sheet. This is important
to know, for pilots flying under a class B ceiling
(as I do), and especially for pilots who fly up to
the 18000ft ceiling, since the Winter data sheet errors
are surprisingly large at higher altitudes. Take a
look and see. As an experiment, I tested my three altimeters
(my Winter 4FGH40, my Cambridge 302, and my SN10b)
at my local airport, using my airport barometric setting,
to see if the three altimeters agreed with the published
airport elevation (1000ft msl). The errors were respectively
140ft, 2ft and 80ft. The Winter error is at the very
limit of the Winter data sheet error for 1000ft msl,
which is surprising since it had just been recalibrated
by the factory (because it had previously had an even
larger error). The other instruments were about 2 years
from calibration. In comparison, most US aircraft altimeters
that I've seen in (IFR qualified) power planes have
been very accurate under this test, not more than 50ft
error at the very most. The US IFR altimeter accuracy
requirement for this test is 75ft. So under the US
altimeter test, the Winter altimeter would fail, the
Cambridge would be perfect, and the SN10b just acceptable.
I've been asking around as to which of my three altimeters
is the 'legal' altimeter to use, but (of course) have
got no clear answer.


At 19:01 08 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>I've actually been there in their shop and gone out
>for dinner with Achim
>Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with
>everyone working
>meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses
>each hand building 3 or
>4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly,
>the owner, his
>father and his father before him were none of them
>pilots and got into this
>business building aircraft instruments totally from
>other business but their
>instruments have been the standard for the sailplane
>industry for decades
>and remain the best and most recognized in their field.
>Winter also has a
>full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
>tim
>Wings & Wheels
>www.wingsandwheels.com
>
>'Paul Remde' wrote in message
>news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just updated my Winter instruments web site with
>>a few photos from the
>> factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few
>>photos of the town the
>> company is located in. This year they sent me a few
>>photos showing the
>> instrument assembly area and the stand on which they
>>adjust altimeters. I
>> enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more
>>about the company and
>> the people that make the instruments. Most glider
>>pilots fly with Winter
>> instruments and we have come to trust and rely on
>>them.
>>
>
>
>

[Andrew Wood]

I have always thought that Winter instruments are excellent,
and their repair/calibration support has been very
good in my limited experience (I've only needed Winter
support once, and got good service). But there is one
caution that I am aware of: the compact Winter altimeters
have possible errors that US pilots should be aware
of. It's not a secret: the possible errors are listed
in the Winter altimeter data sheet. This is important
to know, for pilots flying under a class B ceiling
(as I do), and especially for pilots who fly up to
the 18000ft ceiling, since the Winter data sheet errors
are surprisingly large at higher altitudes. Take a
look and see. As an experiment, I tested my three altimeters
(my Winter 4FGH40, my Cambridge 302, and my SN10b)
at my local airport, using my airport barometric setting,
to see if the three altimeters agreed with the published
airport elevation (1000ft msl). The errors were respectively
140ft, 2ft and 80ft. The Winter error is at the very
limit of the Winter data sheet error for 1000ft msl,
which is surprising since it had just been recalibrated
by the factory (because it had previously had an even
larger error). The other instruments were about 2 years
from calibration. In comparison, most US aircraft altimeters
that I've seen in (IFR qualified) power planes have
been very accurate under this test, not more than 50ft
error at the very most. The US IFR altimeter accuracy
requirement for this test is 75ft. So under the US
altimeter test, the Winter altimeter would fail, the
Cambridge would be perfect, and the SN10b just acceptable.
I've been asking around as to which of my three altimeters
is the 'legal' altimeter to use, but (of course) have
got no clear answer.


At 19:01 08 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>I've actually been there in their shop and gone out
>for dinner with Achim
>Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with
>everyone working
>meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses
>each hand building 3 or
>4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly,
>the owner, his
>father and his father before him were none of them
>pilots and got into this
>business building aircraft instruments totally from
>other business but their
>instruments have been the standard for the sailplane
>industry for decades
>and remain the best and most recognized in their field.
>Winter also has a
>full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
>tim
>Wings & Wheels
>www.wingsandwheels.com
>
>'Paul Remde' wrote in message
>news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just updated my Winter instruments web site with
>>a few photos from the
>> factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few
>>photos of the town the
>> company is located in. This year they sent me a few
>>photos showing the
>> instrument assembly area and the stand on which they
>>adjust altimeters. I
>> enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more
>>about the company and
>> the people that make the instruments. Most glider
>>pilots fly with Winter
>> instruments and we have come to trust and rely on
>>them.
>>
>
>
>

[Andrew Wood]

I have always thought that Winter instruments are excellent,
and their repair/calibration support has been very
good in my limited experience (I've only needed Winter
support once, and got good service). But there is one
caution that I am aware of: the compact Winter altimeters
have possible errors that US pilots should be aware
of. It's not a secret: the possible errors are listed
in the Winter altimeter data sheet. This is important
to know, for pilots flying under a class B ceiling
(as I do), and especially for pilots who fly up to
the 18000ft ceiling, since the Winter data sheet errors
are surprisingly large at higher altitudes. Take a
look and see. As an experiment, I tested my three altimeters
(my Winter 4FGH40, my Cambridge 302, and my SN10b)
at my local airport, using my airport barometric setting,
to see if the three altimeters agreed with the published
airport elevation (1000ft msl). The errors were respectively
140ft, 2ft and 80ft. The Winter error is at the very
limit of the Winter data sheet error for 1000ft msl,
which is surprising since it had just been recalibrated
by the factory (because it had previously had an even
larger error). The other instruments were about 2 years
from calibration. In comparison, most US aircraft altimeters
that I've seen in (IFR qualified) power planes have
been very accurate under this test, not more than 50ft
error at the very most. The US IFR altimeter accuracy
requirement for this test is 75ft. So under the US
altimeter test, the Winter altimeter would fail, the
Cambridge would be perfect, and the SN10b just acceptable.
I've been asking around as to which of my three altimeters
is the 'legal' altimeter to use, but (of course) have
got no clear answer.


At 19:01 08 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>I've actually been there in their shop and gone out
>for dinner with Achim
>Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with
>everyone working
>meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses
>each hand building 3 or
>4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly,
>the owner, his
>father and his father before him were none of them
>pilots and got into this
>business building aircraft instruments totally from
>other business but their
>instruments have been the standard for the sailplane
>industry for decades
>and remain the best and most recognized in their field.
>Winter also has a
>full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
>tim
>Wings & Wheels
>www.wingsandwheels.com
>
>'Paul Remde' wrote in message
>news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just updated my Winter instruments web site with
>>a few photos from the
>> factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few
>>photos of the town the
>> company is located in. This year they sent me a few
>>photos showing the
>> instrument assembly area and the stand on which they
>>adjust altimeters. I
>> enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more
>>about the company and
>> the people that make the instruments. Most glider
>>pilots fly with Winter
>> instruments and we have come to trust and rely on
>>them.
>>
>
>
>

[Andrew Wood]

I have always thought that Winter instruments are excellent,
and their repair/calibration support has been very
good in my limited experience (I've only needed Winter
support once, and got good service). But there is one
caution that I am aware of: the compact Winter altimeters
have possible errors that US pilots should be aware
of. It's not a secret: the possible errors are listed
in the Winter altimeter data sheet. This is important
to know, for pilots flying under a class B ceiling
(as I do), and especially for pilots who fly up to
the 18000ft ceiling, since the Winter data sheet errors
are surprisingly large at higher altitudes. Take a
look and see. As an experiment, I tested my three altimeters
(my Winter 4FGH40, my Cambridge 302, and my SN10b)
at my local airport, using my airport barometric setting,
to see if the three altimeters agreed with the published
airport elevation (1000ft msl). The errors were respectively
140ft, 2ft and 80ft. The Winter error is at the very
limit of the Winter data sheet error for 1000ft msl,
which is surprising since it had just been recalibrated
by the factory (because it had previously had an even
larger error). The other instruments were about 2 years
from calibration. In comparison, most US aircraft altimeters
that I've seen in (IFR qualified) power planes have
been very accurate under this test, not more than 50ft
error at the very most. The US IFR altimeter accuracy
requirement for this test is 75ft. So under the US
altimeter test, the Winter altimeter would fail, the
Cambridge would be perfect, and the SN10b just acceptable.
I've been asking around as to which of my three altimeters
is the 'legal' altimeter to use, but (of course) have
got no clear answer.


At 19:01 08 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>I've actually been there in their shop and gone out
>for dinner with Achim
>Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with
>everyone working
>meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses
>each hand building 3 or
>4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly,
>the owner, his
>father and his father before him were none of them
>pilots and got into this
>business building aircraft instruments totally from
>other business but their
>instruments have been the standard for the sailplane
>industry for decades
>and remain the best and most recognized in their field.
>Winter also has a
>full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
>tim
>Wings & Wheels
>www.wingsandwheels.com
>
>'Paul Remde' wrote in message
>news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just updated my Winter instruments web site with
>>a few photos from the
>> factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few
>>photos of the town the
>> company is located in. This year they sent me a few
>>photos showing the
>> instrument assembly area and the stand on which they
>>adjust altimeters. I
>> enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more
>>about the company and
>> the people that make the instruments. Most glider
>>pilots fly with Winter
>> instruments and we have come to trust and rely on
>>them.
>>
>
>
>

[Andrew Wood]

I have always thought that Winter instruments are excellent,
and their repair/calibration support has been very
good in my limited experience (I've only needed Winter
support once, and got good service). But there is one
caution that I am aware of: the compact Winter altimeters
have possible errors that US pilots should be aware
of. It's not a secret: the possible errors are listed
in the Winter altimeter data sheet. This is important
to know, for pilots flying under a class B ceiling
(as I do), and especially for pilots who fly up to
the 18000ft ceiling, since the Winter data sheet errors
are surprisingly large at higher altitudes. Take a
look and see. As an experiment, I tested my three altimeters
(my Winter 4FGH40, my Cambridge 302, and my SN10b)
at my local airport, using my airport barometric setting,
to see if the three altimeters agreed with the published
airport elevation (1000ft msl). The errors were respectively
140ft, 2ft and 80ft. The Winter error is at the very
limit of the Winter data sheet error for 1000ft msl,
which is surprising since it had just been recalibrated
by the factory (because it had previously had an even
larger error). The other instruments were about 2 years
from calibration. In comparison, most US aircraft altimeters
that I've seen in (IFR qualified) power planes have
been very accurate under this test, not more than 50ft
error at the very most. The US IFR altimeter accuracy
requirement for this test is 75ft. So under the US
altimeter test, the Winter altimeter would fail, the
Cambridge would be perfect, and the SN10b just acceptable.
I've been asking around as to which of my three altimeters
is the 'legal' altimeter to use, but (of course) have
got no clear answer.


At 19:01 08 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>I've actually been there in their shop and gone out
>for dinner with Achim
>Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with
>everyone working
>meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses
>each hand building 3 or
>4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly,
>the owner, his
>father and his father before him were none of them
>pilots and got into this
>business building aircraft instruments totally from
>other business but their
>instruments have been the standard for the sailplane
>industry for decades
>and remain the best and most recognized in their field.
>Winter also has a
>full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
>tim
>Wings & Wheels
>www.wingsandwheels.com
>
>'Paul Remde' wrote in message
>news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just updated my Winter instruments web site with
>>a few photos from the
>> factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few
>>photos of the town the
>> company is located in. This year they sent me a few
>>photos showing the
>> instrument assembly area and the stand on which they
>>adjust altimeters. I
>> enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more
>>about the company and
>> the people that make the instruments. Most glider
>>pilots fly with Winter
>> instruments and we have come to trust and rely on
>>them.
>>
>
>
>

[Andrew Wood]

I have always thought that Winter instruments are excellent,
and their repair/calibration support has been very
good in my limited experience (I've only needed Winter
support once, and got good service). But there is one
caution that I am aware of: the compact Winter altimeters
have possible errors that US pilots should be aware
of. It's not a secret: the possible errors are listed
in the Winter altimeter data sheet. This is important
to know, for pilots flying under a class B ceiling
(as I do), and especially for pilots who fly up to
the 18000ft ceiling, since the Winter data sheet errors
are surprisingly large at higher altitudes. Take a
look and see. As an experiment, I tested my three altimeters
(my Winter 4FGH40, my Cambridge 302, and my SN10b)
at my local airport, using my airport barometric setting,
to see if the three altimeters agreed with the published
airport elevation (1000ft msl). The errors were respectively
140ft, 2ft and 80ft. The Winter error is at the very
limit of the Winter data sheet error for 1000ft msl,
which is surprising since it had just been recalibrated
by the factory (because it had previously had an even
larger error). The other instruments were about 2 years
from calibration. In comparison, most US aircraft altimeters
that I've seen in (IFR qualified) power planes have
been very accurate under this test, not more than 50ft
error at the very most. The US IFR altimeter accuracy
requirement for this test is 75ft. So under the US
altimeter test, the Winter altimeter would fail, the
Cambridge would be perfect, and the SN10b just acceptable.
I've been asking around as to which of my three altimeters
is the 'legal' altimeter to use, but (of course) have
got no clear answer.


At 19:01 08 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>I've actually been there in their shop and gone out
>for dinner with Achim
>Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with
>everyone working
>meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses
>each hand building 3 or
>4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly,
>the owner, his
>father and his father before him were none of them
>pilots and got into this
>business building aircraft instruments totally from
>other business but their
>instruments have been the standard for the sailplane
>industry for decades
>and remain the best and most recognized in their field.
>Winter also has a
>full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
>tim
>Wings & Wheels
>www.wingsandwheels.com
>
>'Paul Remde' wrote in message
>news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just updated my Winter instruments web site with
>>a few photos from the
>> factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few
>>photos of the town the
>> company is located in. This year they sent me a few
>>photos showing the
>> instrument assembly area and the stand on which they
>>adjust altimeters. I
>> enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more
>>about the company and
>> the people that make the instruments. Most glider
>>pilots fly with Winter
>> instruments and we have come to trust and rely on
>>them.
>>
>
>
>

[Tim Mara]

All (certified at least)altimeters will come with calibration data along
with their approval data including those from Winter. There was some problem
with earlier versions of the small FGH40 altimeters which has been corrected
and Winter has been quite good about repairing those with this specific
problem as a warranty repair of course within reasonable time
limits....Current versions should have no difficulties. Also it might be
noted that few other manufacturers have even attempted offering these 3
needle 20K type altimeters at all in the small 57mm size simply due to the
difficulties of building such an instrument in this scale. You may find some
cheap knock off Chinese type altimeters in 57mm but none that I know of in
the 20K 3 needle design and you may also find some from other manufactures
but certainly noting in the less than thousands of $'s outside those
manufactured by Winter. Winter does also make several variations of the
small altimeters in 1, 2 and 3 needle designs with a variety of scales
including Metric and Feet scale types in varying prices ranges as well.
Tim
Wings & Wheels
www.wingsandwheels.com



"Andrew Wood" > wrote in message
...
>I have always thought that Winter instruments are excellent,
> and their repair/calibration support has been very
> good in my limited experience (I've only needed Winter
> support once, and got good service). But there is one
> caution that I am aware of: the compact Winter altimeters
> have possible errors that US pilots should be aware
> of. It's not a secret: the possible errors are listed
> in the Winter altimeter data sheet. This is important
> to know, for pilots flying under a class B ceiling
> (as I do), and especially for pilots who fly up to
> the 18000ft ceiling, since the Winter data sheet errors
> are surprisingly large at higher altitudes. Take a
> look and see. As an experiment, I tested my three altimeters
> (my Winter 4FGH40, my Cambridge 302, and my SN10b)
> at my local airport, using my airport barometric setting,
> to see if the three altimeters agreed with the published
> airport elevation (1000ft msl). The errors were respectively
> 140ft, 2ft and 80ft. The Winter error is at the very
> limit of the Winter data sheet error for 1000ft msl,
> which is surprising since it had just been recalibrated
> by the factory (because it had previously had an even
> larger error). The other instruments were about 2 years
> from calibration. In comparison, most US aircraft altimeters
> that I've seen in (IFR qualified) power planes have
> been very accurate under this test, not more than 50ft
> error at the very most. The US IFR altimeter accuracy
> requirement for this test is 75ft. So under the US
> altimeter test, the Winter altimeter would fail, the
> Cambridge would be perfect, and the SN10b just acceptable.
> I've been asking around as to which of my three altimeters
> is the 'legal' altimeter to use, but (of course) have
> got no clear answer.
>
>
> At 19:01 08 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>>I've actually been there in their shop and gone out
>>for dinner with Achim
>>Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with
>>everyone working
>>meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses
>>each hand building 3 or
>>4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly,
>>the owner, his
>>father and his father before him were none of them
>>pilots and got into this
>>business building aircraft instruments totally from
>>other business but their
>>instruments have been the standard for the sailplane
>>industry for decades
>>and remain the best and most recognized in their field.
>>Winter also has a
>>full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
>>tim
>>Wings & Wheels
>>www.wingsandwheels.com
>>
>>'Paul Remde' wrote in message
>>news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I just updated my Winter instruments web site with
>>>a few photos from the
>>> factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few
>>>photos of the town the
>>> company is located in. This year they sent me a few
>>>photos showing the
>>> instrument assembly area and the stand on which they
>>>adjust altimeters. I
>>> enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more
>>>about the company and
>>> the people that make the instruments. Most glider
>>>pilots fly with Winter
>>> instruments and we have come to trust and rely on
>>>them.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

[Tim Mara]

New airspeed markings are added on each as required by hand with transfer
tapes at Winter per the aircraft manufactures specifications or custom to
the buyers request.
tim
Wings & Wheels
www.wingsandwheels.com

"5Z" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
>
> On Dec 8, 11:01 am, "Paul Remde" wrote:
>
>> ...and the stand on which they adjust altimeters.
>
> All the airspeed indicators on the test stand have no markings, and it
> looks like the technician is using a grease pencil to add a marking.
> So I'd wager a guess that each airspeed indicator has a custom face to
> correspond to the variances in the mechanisms.
>
> -Tom
>

[Andrew Wood]

Hi Tim

thanks for your comments. I believe that Winter's work
is indeed good, and completely as advertised. My comment
is that Winter's published altimeter tolerances are
suprisingly loose by US standards. I assume this is
ok with the FAA so long as pilots are aware of the
possible altimeter error. My other question was which
of my three altimeters was the 'legal' one. The Cambridge
seems the best one, on my glider anyway. But a question
to Cambridge could not reassure me that their altimeter
was even legal to use at all. Sorry guys, I am not
trying to criticise you good people who make these
instruments, because I'm grateful for your work, and
I understand that everyone is doing their best. I'm
just trying to understand and move forward with a discussion.

regards, andrew


At 06:54 09 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>All (certified at least)altimeters will come with
>calibration data along
>with their approval data including those from Winter.
>There was some problem
>with earlier versions of the small FGH40 altimeters
>which has been corrected
>and Winter has been quite good about repairing those
>with this specific
>problem as a warranty repair of course within reasonable
>time
>limits....Current versions should have no difficulties.
>Also it might be
>noted that few other manufacturers have even attempted
>offering these 3
>needle 20K type altimeters at all in the small 57mm
>size simply due to the
>difficulties of building such an instrument in this
>scale. You may find some
>cheap knock off Chinese type altimeters in 57mm but
>none that I know of in
>the 20K 3 needle design and you may also find some
>from other manufactures
>but certainly noting in the less than thousands of
>$'s outside those
>manufactured by Winter. Winter does also make several
>variations of the
>small altimeters in 1, 2 and 3 needle designs with
>a variety of scales
>including Metric and Feet scale types in varying prices
>ranges as well.
>Tim
>Wings & Wheels
>www.wingsandwheels.com
>
>
>
>'Andrew Wood' wrote in message
...
>>I have always thought that Winter instruments are excellent,
>> and their repair/calibration support has been very
>> good in my limited experience (I've only needed Winter
>> support once, and got good service). But there is
>>one
>> caution that I am aware of: the compact Winter altimeters
>> have possible errors that US pilots should be aware
>> of. It's not a secret: the possible errors are listed
>> in the Winter altimeter data sheet. This is important
>> to know, for pilots flying under a class B ceiling
>> (as I do), and especially for pilots who fly up to
>> the 18000ft ceiling, since the Winter data sheet
>>errors
>> are surprisingly large at higher altitudes. Take a
>> look and see. As an experiment, I tested my three
>>altimeters
>> (my Winter 4FGH40, my Cambridge 302, and my SN10b)
>> at my local airport, using my airport barometric setting,
>> to see if the three altimeters agreed with the published
>> airport elevation (1000ft msl). The errors were respectively
>> 140ft, 2ft and 80ft. The Winter error is at the very
>> limit of the Winter data sheet error for 1000ft msl,
>> which is surprising since it had just been recalibrated
>> by the factory (because it had previously had an even
>> larger error). The other instruments were about 2
>>years
>> from calibration. In comparison, most US aircraft
>>altimeters
>> that I've seen in (IFR qualified) power planes have
>> been very accurate under this test, not more than
>>50ft
>> error at the very most. The US IFR altimeter accuracy
>> requirement for this test is 75ft. So under the US
>> altimeter test, the Winter altimeter would fail, the
>> Cambridge would be perfect, and the SN10b just acceptable.
>> I've been asking around as to which of my three altimeters
>> is the 'legal' altimeter to use, but (of course) have
>> got no clear answer.
>>
>>
>> At 19:01 08 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>>>I've actually been there in their shop and gone out
>>>for dinner with Achim
>>>Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with
>>>everyone working
>>>meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses
>>>each hand building 3 or
>>>4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly,
>>>the owner, his
>>>father and his father before him were none of them
>>>pilots and got into this
>>>business building aircraft instruments totally from
>>>other business but their
>>>instruments have been the standard for the sailplane
>>>industry for decades
>>>and remain the best and most recognized in their field.
>>>Winter also has a
>>>full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
>>>tim
>>>Wings & Wheels
>>>www.wingsandwheels.com
>>>
>>>'Paul Remde' wrote in message
>>>news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I just updated my Winter instruments web site with
>>>>a few photos from the
>>>> factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few
>>>>photos of the town the
>>>> company is located in. This year they sent me a few
>>>>photos showing the
>>>> instrument assembly area and the stand on which they
>>>>adjust altimeters. I
>>>> enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more
>>>>about the company and
>>>> the people that make the instruments. Most glider
>>>>pilots fly with Winter
>>>> instruments and we have come to trust and rely on
>>>>them.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

[Tim Mara]

Cambridge does not make an altimeter.....though they may have altitude
readout on one of their instruments, it is not legal "as an altimeter" as a
part of the required equipment in any sense. I often do get questions from
mechanics and even FAA types who may not even know their own rules and
regulations but go more on hearsay and common (mistake) knowledge, but few
is any variometers (aside from Winter and PZL) have even had any
approvals...are not TSO'd or certified in any way.....but since these are
not part of the "required" equipment don't really need to be approved or for
that matter, aircraft instruments.they are, for the matter, simply no more
approved than the lunch you may carry on board with you...
But....Winter ASI's Altimeters and Variometers and other instruments do in
fact have JTSO or Form One approvals.....just so you know
tim
Wings & Wheels
www.wingsandwheels.com

"Andrew Wood" > wrote in message
...
> Hi Tim
>
> thanks for your comments. I believe that Winter's work
> is indeed good, and completely as advertised. My comment
> is that Winter's published altimeter tolerances are
> suprisingly loose by US standards. I assume this is
> ok with the FAA so long as pilots are aware of the
> possible altimeter error. My other question was which
> of my three altimeters was the 'legal' one. The Cambridge
> seems the best one, on my glider anyway. But a question
> to Cambridge could not reassure me that their altimeter
> was even legal to use at all. Sorry guys, I am not
> trying to criticise you good people who make these
> instruments, because I'm grateful for your work, and
> I understand that everyone is doing their best. I'm
> just trying to understand and move forward with a discussion.
>
> regards, andrew
>
>
> At 06:54 09 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>>All (certified at least)altimeters will come with
>>calibration data along
>>with their approval data including those from Winter.
>>There was some problem
>>with earlier versions of the small FGH40 altimeters
>>which has been corrected
>>and Winter has been quite good about repairing those
>>with this specific
>>problem as a warranty repair of course within reasonable
>>time
>>limits....Current versions should have no difficulties.
>>Also it might be
>>noted that few other manufacturers have even attempted
>>offering these 3
>>needle 20K type altimeters at all in the small 57mm
>>size simply due to the
>>difficulties of building such an instrument in this
>>scale. You may find some
>>cheap knock off Chinese type altimeters in 57mm but
>>none that I know of in
>>the 20K 3 needle design and you may also find some
>>from other manufactures
>>but certainly noting in the less than thousands of
>>$'s outside those
>>manufactured by Winter. Winter does also make several
>>variations of the
>>small altimeters in 1, 2 and 3 needle designs with
>>a variety of scales
>>including Metric and Feet scale types in varying prices
>>ranges as well.
>>Tim
>>Wings & Wheels
>>www.wingsandwheels.com
>>
>>
>>
>>'Andrew Wood' wrote in message
...
>>>I have always thought that Winter instruments are excellent,
>>> and their repair/calibration support has been very
>>> good in my limited experience (I've only needed Winter
>>> support once, and got good service). But there is
>>>one
>>> caution that I am aware of: the compact Winter altimeters
>>> have possible errors that US pilots should be aware
>>> of. It's not a secret: the possible errors are listed
>>> in the Winter altimeter data sheet. This is important
>>> to know, for pilots flying under a class B ceiling
>>> (as I do), and especially for pilots who fly up to
>>> the 18000ft ceiling, since the Winter data sheet
>>>errors
>>> are surprisingly large at higher altitudes. Take a
>>> look and see. As an experiment, I tested my three
>>>altimeters
>>> (my Winter 4FGH40, my Cambridge 302, and my SN10b)
>>> at my local airport, using my airport barometric setting,
>>> to see if the three altimeters agreed with the published
>>> airport elevation (1000ft msl). The errors were respectively
>>> 140ft, 2ft and 80ft. The Winter error is at the very
>>> limit of the Winter data sheet error for 1000ft msl,
>>> which is surprising since it had just been recalibrated
>>> by the factory (because it had previously had an even
>>> larger error). The other instruments were about 2
>>>years
>>> from calibration. In comparison, most US aircraft
>>>altimeters
>>> that I've seen in (IFR qualified) power planes have
>>> been very accurate under this test, not more than
>>>50ft
>>> error at the very most. The US IFR altimeter accuracy
>>> requirement for this test is 75ft. So under the US
>>> altimeter test, the Winter altimeter would fail, the
>>> Cambridge would be perfect, and the SN10b just acceptable.
>>> I've been asking around as to which of my three altimeters
>>> is the 'legal' altimeter to use, but (of course) have
>>> got no clear answer.
>>>
>>>
>>> At 19:01 08 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>>>>I've actually been there in their shop and gone out
>>>>for dinner with Achim
>>>>Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with
>>>>everyone working
>>>>meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses
>>>>each hand building 3 or
>>>>4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly,
>>>>the owner, his
>>>>father and his father before him were none of them
>>>>pilots and got into this
>>>>business building aircraft instruments totally from
>>>>other business but their
>>>>instruments have been the standard for the sailplane
>>>>industry for decades
>>>>and remain the best and most recognized in their field.
>>>>Winter also has a
>>>>full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
>>>>tim
>>>>Wings & Wheels
>>>>www.wingsandwheels.com
>>>>
>>>>'Paul Remde' wrote in message
>>>>news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I just updated my Winter instruments web site with
>>>>>a few photos from the
>>>>> factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few
>>>>>photos of the town the
>>>>> company is located in. This year they sent me a few
>>>>>photos showing the
>>>>> instrument assembly area and the stand on which they
>>>>>adjust altimeters. I
>>>>> enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more
>>>>>about the company and
>>>>> the people that make the instruments. Most glider
>>>>>pilots fly with Winter
>>>>> instruments and we have come to trust and rely on
>>>>>them.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

[[email protected]]

The guy who put my glider together, and he is a
glider/instrument/designer/manufacturer with tens of years of
expirience told me that Winter altimeters are worth nothing and the
matter of fact they are outright dengerous. They should not be used at
all. The same goes for Winter airspeed instruments. Go figure.
PZL do not make their W-13S with 1000ft per rotation, so it looks like
we are left with the only smart choice of United.
RK

And yeas, the photos of the town are great.


Andrew Wood wrote:
> I have always thought that Winter instruments are excellent,
> and their repair/calibration support has been very
> good in my limited experience (I've only needed Winter
> support once, and got good service). But there is one
> caution that I am aware of: the compact Winter altimeters
> have possible errors that US pilots should be aware
> of. It's not a secret: the possible errors are listed
> in the Winter altimeter data sheet. This is important
> to know, for pilots flying under a class B ceiling
> (as I do), and especially for pilots who fly up to
> the 18000ft ceiling, since the Winter data sheet errors
> are surprisingly large at higher altitudes. Take a
> look and see. As an experiment, I tested my three altimeters
> (my Winter 4FGH40, my Cambridge 302, and my SN10b)
> at my local airport, using my airport barometric setting,
> to see if the three altimeters agreed with the published
> airport elevation (1000ft msl). The errors were respectively
> 140ft, 2ft and 80ft. The Winter error is at the very
> limit of the Winter data sheet error for 1000ft msl,
> which is surprising since it had just been recalibrated
> by the factory (because it had previously had an even
> larger error). The other instruments were about 2 years
> from calibration. In comparison, most US aircraft altimeters
> that I've seen in (IFR qualified) power planes have
> been very accurate under this test, not more than 50ft
> error at the very most. The US IFR altimeter accuracy
> requirement for this test is 75ft. So under the US
> altimeter test, the Winter altimeter would fail, the
> Cambridge would be perfect, and the SN10b just acceptable.
> I've been asking around as to which of my three altimeters
> is the 'legal' altimeter to use, but (of course) have
> got no clear answer.
>
>
> At 19:01 08 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
> >I've actually been there in their shop and gone out
> >for dinner with Achim
> >Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with
> >everyone working
> >meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses
> >each hand building 3 or
> >4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly,
> >the owner, his
> >father and his father before him were none of them
> >pilots and got into this
> >business building aircraft instruments totally from
> >other business but their
> >instruments have been the standard for the sailplane
> >industry for decades
> >and remain the best and most recognized in their field.
> >Winter also has a
> >full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
> >tim
> >Wings & Wheels
> >www.wingsandwheels.com
> >
> >'Paul Remde' wrote in message
> >news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I just updated my Winter instruments web site with
> >>a few photos from the
> >> factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few
> >>photos of the town the
> >> company is located in. This year they sent me a few
> >>photos showing the
> >> instrument assembly area and the stand on which they
> >>adjust altimeters. I
> >> enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more
> >>about the company and
> >> the people that make the instruments. Most glider
> >>pilots fly with Winter
> >> instruments and we have come to trust and rely on
> >>them.
> >>
> >
> >
> >

[Wayne Paul]

RK,

I don't know anything about Winter altimeters, never have had one. However,
I have had Winter ASI in all three of the sailplanes that I have owned and
never had any indication that they were not accurate.

The Winter indicated airspeed coincided with the stall speeds in the
designer's publications. Same with best glide speeds and speed comparisons
with other glider. I have never had a failure. What kind of problems are
you talking about?

Wayne

> wrote in message
ps.com...
> The guy who put my glider together, and he is a
> glider/instrument/designer/manufacturer with tens of years of
> expirience told me that Winter altimeters are worth nothing and the
> matter of fact they are outright dengerous. They should not be used at
> all. The same goes for Winter airspeed instruments. Go figure.
> PZL do not make their W-13S with 1000ft per rotation, so it looks like
> we are left with the only smart choice of United.
> RK
>

[Bruce Greef]

wrote:
> The guy who put my glider together, and he is a
> glider/instrument/designer/manufacturer with tens of years of
> expirience told me that Winter altimeters are worth nothing and the
> matter of fact they are outright dengerous. They should not be used at
> all. The same goes for Winter airspeed instruments. Go figure.

Figured -
Once again we have a demonstration of the difference between rational analysis
and the exercise of free speech.

Winter instruments dominate their market around the world. They may not be the
most accurate (to be explicit here - I do not know their relative accuracy)But
their functionality and durability are extremely well proven.

In my personal glider, as well as the club aircraft, all sorts of other
manufacturers equipment has died over the years. The Winter ASI and varios are
still working. Accurately enough.

As an example - my ASI says my Cirrus stalls at about one needle width below
70km/h. The manual says 68km/h - given the stall speed changes with CG and the
stall behaviour of the Std Cirrus I have other things to attend to than
wondering about the last decimal point of accuracy.

My LX20 FAI "certified for world records GNSS logger" agrees within 100 to 500
feet at FL115 with my Winter Altimeter, last calibrated by the factory in 1983...

Cheers
Bruce

> PZL do not make their W-13S with 1000ft per rotation, so it looks like
> we are left with the only smart choice of United.
> RK
>
> And yeas, the photos of the town are great.
>
>
> Andrew Wood wrote:
>
>>I have always thought that Winter instruments are excellent,
>>and their repair/calibration support has been very
>>good in my limited experience (I've only needed Winter
>>support once, and got good service). But there is one
>>caution that I am aware of: the compact Winter altimeters
>>have possible errors that US pilots should be aware
>>of. It's not a secret: the possible errors are listed
>>in the Winter altimeter data sheet. This is important
>>to know, for pilots flying under a class B ceiling
>>(as I do), and especially for pilots who fly up to
>>the 18000ft ceiling, since the Winter data sheet errors
>>are surprisingly large at higher altitudes. Take a
>>look and see. As an experiment, I tested my three altimeters
>>(my Winter 4FGH40, my Cambridge 302, and my SN10b)
>>at my local airport, using my airport barometric setting,
>>to see if the three altimeters agreed with the published
>>airport elevation (1000ft msl). The errors were respectively
>>140ft, 2ft and 80ft. The Winter error is at the very
>>limit of the Winter data sheet error for 1000ft msl,
>>which is surprising since it had just been recalibrated
>>by the factory (because it had previously had an even
>>larger error). The other instruments were about 2 years
>>from calibration. In comparison, most US aircraft altimeters
>>that I've seen in (IFR qualified) power planes have
>>been very accurate under this test, not more than 50ft
>>error at the very most. The US IFR altimeter accuracy
>>requirement for this test is 75ft. So under the US
>>altimeter test, the Winter altimeter would fail, the
>>Cambridge would be perfect, and the SN10b just acceptable.
>>I've been asking around as to which of my three altimeters
>>is the 'legal' altimeter to use, but (of course) have
>>got no clear answer.
>>
>>
>>At 19:01 08 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>>
>>>I've actually been there in their shop and gone out
>>>for dinner with Achim
>>>Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with
>>>everyone working
>>>meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses
>>>each hand building 3 or
>>>4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly,
>>>the owner, his
>>>father and his father before him were none of them
>>>pilots and got into this
>>>business building aircraft instruments totally from
>>>other business but their
>>>instruments have been the standard for the sailplane
>>>industry for decades
>>>and remain the best and most recognized in their field.
>>>Winter also has a
>>>full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
>>>tim
>>>Wings & Wheels
>>>www.wingsandwheels.com
>>>
>>>'Paul Remde' wrote in message
>>>news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
>>>
>>>>Hi,
>>>>
>>>>I just updated my Winter instruments web site with
>>>>a few photos from the
>>>>factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few
>>>>photos of the town the
>>>>company is located in. This year they sent me a few
>>>>photos showing the
>>>>instrument assembly area and the stand on which they
>>>>adjust altimeters. I
>>>>enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more
>>>>about the company and
>>>>the people that make the instruments. Most glider
>>>>pilots fly with Winter
>>>>instruments and we have come to trust and rely on
>>>>them.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>

[Andrew Wood]

Bruce, I've never known a Winter instrument to stop
working, so they are indeed reliable in that sense.
Your altitude comparison measurements between your
Winter altimeter and a LX20 readout roughly agree with
the possible errors listed on the Winter 4FGH40 altimeter
data sheet for 12000ft of about plus/minus 180ft (at
20C) to plus/minus 360ft (at -30C) and a possible friction
error of 45ft, which I assume could add to the overall
error. Maybe your LX20 is the more reliable 'altimeter'
even if it isn't an approved altimeter? Since I became
aware of these possible Winter altimeter errors, I
take care to stay several hundred feet below the various
controlled airspace ceilings in my area. Altimeter
errors of this magniture would be unacceptable in a
power aircraft I think (it would make a nonsense of
the hemispherical heading rules, for example, which
provide 500ft of separation between VFR and IFR traffic).
Anyone flying close to the 18000ft Class A ceiling
should be aware of possible Winter altimeter errors
(from the data sheet)of about plus/minus 250ft to plus/minus
500ft.





At 08:24 10 December 2006, Bruce Greef wrote:
wrote:
>> The guy who put my glider together, and he is a
>> glider/instrument/designer/manufacturer with tens
>>of years of
>> expirience told me that Winter altimeters are worth
>>nothing and the
>> matter of fact they are outright dengerous. They should
>>not be used at
>> all. The same goes for Winter airspeed instruments.
>>Go figure.
>
>Figured -
>Once again we have a demonstration of the difference
>between rational analysis
>and the exercise of free speech.
>
>Winter instruments dominate their market around the
>world. They may not be the
>most accurate (to be explicit here - I do not know
>their relative accuracy)But
>their functionality and durability are extremely well
>proven.
>
>In my personal glider, as well as the club aircraft,
>all sorts of other
>manufacturers equipment has died over the years. The
>Winter ASI and varios are
>still working. Accurately enough.
>
>As an example - my ASI says my Cirrus stalls at about
>one needle width below
>70km/h. The manual says 68km/h - given the stall speed
>changes with CG and the
>stall behaviour of the Std Cirrus I have other things
>to attend to than
>wondering about the last decimal point of accuracy.
>
>My LX20 FAI 'certified for world records GNSS logger'
>agrees within 100 to 500
>feet at FL115 with my Winter Altimeter, last calibrated
>by the factory in 1983...
>
>Cheers
>Bruce
>
>> PZL do not make their W-13S with 1000ft per rotation,
>>so it looks like
>> we are left with the only smart choice of United.
>> RK
>>
>> And yeas, the photos of the town are great.
>>
>>
>> Andrew Wood wrote:
>>
>>>I have always thought that Winter instruments are excellent,
>>>and their repair/calibration support has been very
>>>good in my limited experience (I've only needed Winter
>>>support once, and got good service). But there is one
>>>caution that I am aware of: the compact Winter altimeters
>>>have possible errors that US pilots should be aware
>>>of. It's not a secret: the possible errors are listed
>>>in the Winter altimeter data sheet. This is important
>>>to know, for pilots flying under a class B ceiling
>>>(as I do), and especially for pilots who fly up to
>>>the 18000ft ceiling, since the Winter data sheet errors
>>>are surprisingly large at higher altitudes. Take a
>>>look and see. As an experiment, I tested my three altimeters
>>>(my Winter 4FGH40, my Cambridge 302, and my SN10b)
>>>at my local airport, using my airport barometric setting,
>>>to see if the three altimeters agreed with the published
>>>airport elevation (1000ft msl). The errors were respectively
>>>140ft, 2ft and 80ft. The Winter error is at the very
>>>limit of the Winter data sheet error for 1000ft msl,
>>>which is surprising since it had just been recalibrated
>>>by the factory (because it had previously had an even
>>>larger error). The other instruments were about 2 years
>>>from calibration. In comparison, most US aircraft altimeters
>>>that I've seen in (IFR qualified) power planes have
>>>been very accurate under this test, not more than 50ft
>>>error at the very most. The US IFR altimeter accuracy
>>>requirement for this test is 75ft. So under the US
>>>altimeter test, the Winter altimeter would fail, the
>>>Cambridge would be perfect, and the SN10b just acceptable.
>>>I've been asking around as to which of my three altimeters
>>>is the 'legal' altimeter to use, but (of course) have
>>>got no clear answer.
>>>
>>>
>>>At 19:01 08 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>>>
>>>>I've actually been there in their shop and gone out
>>>>for dinner with Achim
>>>>Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with
>>>>everyone working
>>>>meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses
>>>>each hand building 3 or
>>>>4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly,
>>>>the owner, his
>>>>father and his father before him were none of them
>>>>pilots and got into this
>>>>business building aircraft instruments totally from
>>>>other business but their
>>>>instruments have been the standard for the sailplane
>>>>industry for decades
>>>>and remain the best and most recognized in their field.
>>>>Winter also has a
>>>>full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
>>>>tim
>>>>Wings & Wheels
>>>>www.wingsandwheels.com
>>>>
>>>>'Paul Remde' wrote in message
>>>>news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
>>>>
>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>I just updated my Winter instruments web site with
>>>>>a few photos from the
>>>>>factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few
>>>>>photos of the town the
>>>>>company is located in. This year they sent me a few
>>>>>photos showing the
>>>>>instrument assembly area and the stand on which they
>>>>>adjust altimeters. I
>>>>>enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more
>>>>>about the company and
>>>>>the people that make the instruments. Most glider
>>>>>pilots fly with Winter
>>>>>instruments and we have come to trust and rely on
>>>>>them.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>

[Bruce Greef]

Hi Andrew

I am a personal convert to solid state electronic - being an IT type, my cockpit
is full of very accurate solid state varios (no mechanical parts) and GPS
devices with barometric and GPS altitude. The LX with 12 channel GPS and a
pressure transducer barometric altimeter are indeed very accurate, although it
is interesting to see just how much pressure and absolute altitude vary over the
course of a cross country flight.

Using these wonders of the modern age I am able to tell exactly how inaccurate
my winter mechanical instruments are. What I am not convinced of is whether
there is always that much utility in this knowledge.

Consider - If my battery dies (and they always do) the ONLY indication I have of
altitude and vario is the mechanical units. So no matter how accurate the new
stuff is - there are times when the only reliable instruments are the old
mechanical ones. In my case winter instruments, which are wonders of that quaint
1890's watchmaking technology...

Now comes the part that gives me concern - If I am pushing the boundaries on
that airspace - which do I want to rely on. I can be 100% accurate, and dead if
the other aircraft I meet is depending on a mechanical device with the same
errors under similar circumstances as the Winter alti.


I don't have an answer to the conundrum, I just tend to stay a little away from
the edges of airspace. The number of people on autopilot with 30+ year old
instruments is enough to convince me that discretion is called for. It will be
no consolation to anyone if my heirs are able to prove to within 5m that I was
technically right to be flying at for example 17,999MSL when I experienced the
little mid-air with the guy who relied on an old mechanical altimeter who
thought he was at 18,500feet...

Andrew Wood wrote:
> Bruce, I've never known a Winter instrument to stop
> working, so they are indeed reliable in that sense.
> Your altitude comparison measurements between your
> Winter altimeter and a LX20 readout roughly agree with
> the possible errors listed on the Winter 4FGH40 altimeter
> data sheet for 12000ft of about plus/minus 180ft (at
> 20C) to plus/minus 360ft (at -30C) and a possible friction
> error of 45ft, which I assume could add to the overall
> error. Maybe your LX20 is the more reliable 'altimeter'
> even if it isn't an approved altimeter? Since I became
> aware of these possible Winter altimeter errors, I
> take care to stay several hundred feet below the various
> controlled airspace ceilings in my area. Altimeter
> errors of this magniture would be unacceptable in a
> power aircraft I think (it would make a nonsense of
> the hemispherical heading rules, for example, which
> provide 500ft of separation between VFR and IFR traffic).
> Anyone flying close to the 18000ft Class A ceiling
> should be aware of possible Winter altimeter errors
> (from the data sheet)of about plus/minus 250ft to plus/minus
> 500ft.
>
>
>
>
>
> At 08:24 10 December 2006, Bruce Greef wrote:
>
wrote:
>>
>>>The guy who put my glider together, and he is a
>>>glider/instrument/designer/manufacturer with tens
>>>of years of
>>>expirience told me that Winter altimeters are worth
>>>nothing and the
>>>matter of fact they are outright dengerous. They should
>>>not be used at
>>>all. The same goes for Winter airspeed instruments.
>>>Go figure.
>>
>>Figured -
>>Once again we have a demonstration of the difference
>>between rational analysis
>>and the exercise of free speech.
>>
>>Winter instruments dominate their market around the
>>world. They may not be the
>>most accurate (to be explicit here - I do not know
>>their relative accuracy)But
>>their functionality and durability are extremely well
>>proven.
>>
>>In my personal glider, as well as the club aircraft,
>>all sorts of other
>>manufacturers equipment has died over the years. The
>>Winter ASI and varios are
>>still working. Accurately enough.
>>
>>As an example - my ASI says my Cirrus stalls at about
>>one needle width below
>>70km/h. The manual says 68km/h - given the stall speed
>>changes with CG and the
>>stall behaviour of the Std Cirrus I have other things
>>to attend to than
>>wondering about the last decimal point of accuracy.
>>
>>My LX20 FAI 'certified for world records GNSS logger'
>>agrees within 100 to 500
>>feet at FL115 with my Winter Altimeter, last calibrated
>>by the factory in 1983...
>>
>>Cheers
>>Bruce
>>
>>
>>>PZL do not make their W-13S with 1000ft per rotation,
>>>so it looks like
>>>we are left with the only smart choice of United.
>>>RK
>>>
>>>And yeas, the photos of the town are great.
>>>
>>>
>>>Andrew Wood wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I have always thought that Winter instruments are excellent,
>>>>and their repair/calibration support has been very
>>>>good in my limited experience (I've only needed Winter
>>>>support once, and got good service). But there is one
>>>>caution that I am aware of: the compact Winter altimeters
>>>>have possible errors that US pilots should be aware
>>>>of. It's not a secret: the possible errors are listed
>>>>in the Winter altimeter data sheet. This is important
>>>>to know, for pilots flying under a class B ceiling
>>>>(as I do), and especially for pilots who fly up to
>>>>the 18000ft ceiling, since the Winter data sheet errors
>>>>are surprisingly large at higher altitudes. Take a
>>>>look and see. As an experiment, I tested my three altimeters
>>>>(my Winter 4FGH40, my Cambridge 302, and my SN10b)
>>>>at my local airport, using my airport barometric setting,
>>>>to see if the three altimeters agreed with the published
>>>>airport elevation (1000ft msl). The errors were respectively
>>>>140ft, 2ft and 80ft. The Winter error is at the very
>>>>limit of the Winter data sheet error for 1000ft msl,
>>>>which is surprising since it had just been recalibrated
>>>>by the factory (because it had previously had an even
>>>>larger error). The other instruments were about 2 years
>>>
>>>>from calibration. In comparison, most US aircraft altimeters
>>>
>>>>that I've seen in (IFR qualified) power planes have
>>>>been very accurate under this test, not more than 50ft
>>>>error at the very most. The US IFR altimeter accuracy
>>>>requirement for this test is 75ft. So under the US
>>>>altimeter test, the Winter altimeter would fail, the
>>>>Cambridge would be perfect, and the SN10b just acceptable.
>>>>I've been asking around as to which of my three altimeters
>>>>is the 'legal' altimeter to use, but (of course) have
>>>>got no clear answer.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>At 19:01 08 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I've actually been there in their shop and gone out
>>>>>for dinner with Achim
>>>>>Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with
>>>>>everyone working
>>>>>meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses
>>>>>each hand building 3 or
>>>>>4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly,
>>>>>the owner, his
>>>>>father and his father before him were none of them
>>>>>pilots and got into this
>>>>>business building aircraft instruments totally from
>>>>>other business but their
>>>>>instruments have been the standard for the sailplane
>>>>>industry for decades
>>>>>and remain the best and most recognized in their field.
>>>>>Winter also has a
>>>>>full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
>>>>>tim
>>>>>Wings & Wheels
>>>>>www.wingsandwheels.com
>>>>>
>>>>>'Paul Remde' wrote in message
>>>>>news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I just updated my Winter instruments web site with
>>>>>>a few photos from the
>>>>>>factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few
>>>>>>photos of the town the
>>>>>>company is located in. This year they sent me a few
>>>>>>photos showing the
>>>>>>instrument assembly area and the stand on which they
>>>>>>adjust altimeters. I
>>>>>>enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more
>>>>>>about the company and
>>>>>>the people that make the instruments. Most glider
>>>>>>pilots fly with Winter
>>>>>>instruments and we have come to trust and rely on
>>>>>>them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
>
>

[HL Falbaum]

The guy at 18,500 is a) IFR, b) alt set on 29.92, c) his ALT should have had
a static check for IFR, d) in contact with ATC, squawking ALT on his mode C
transponder. e) moving fast and bigger than you!

If you are there ---you should have a TPAS or TCAS or a transponder.

--
Hartley Falbaum
DG800B "KF" USA

"Bruce Greef" > wrote in message
...
> Hi Andrew
>
> I don't have an answer to the conundrum, I just tend to stay a little away
> from the edges of airspace. The number of people on autopilot with 30+
> year old instruments is enough to convince me that discretion is called
> for. It will be no consolation to anyone if my heirs are able to prove to
> within 5m that I was technically right to be flying at for example
> 17,999MSL when I experienced the little mid-air with the guy who relied on
> an old mechanical altimeter who thought he was at 18,500feet...
>

[Eric Greenwell]

HL Falbaum wrote:
> The guy at 18,500 is a) IFR, b) alt set on 29.92, c) his ALT should have had
> a static check for IFR, d) in contact with ATC, squawking ALT on his mode C
> transponder. e) moving fast and bigger than you!
>
> If you are there ---you should have a TPAS or TCAS or a transponder.

And I believe ATC won't allow him to fly at FL185 if that is only 500
feet above 18,000 msl. Isn't the minimum clearance to 18,000'msl at
least 1000 feet?

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
* "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

[HL Falbaum]

"Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
news:H93fh.3320$Z67.2248@trndny02...
> HL Falbaum wrote:
>> The guy at 18,500 is a) IFR, b) alt set on 29.92, c) his ALT should have
>> had a static check for IFR, d) in contact with ATC, squawking ALT on his
>> mode C transponder. e) moving fast and bigger than you!
>>
>> If you are there ---you should have a TPAS or TCAS or a transponder.
>
> And I believe ATC won't allow him to fly at FL185 if that is only 500 feet
> above 18,000 msl. Isn't the minimum clearance to 18,000'msl at least 1000
> feet?
>
> --
> Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
> * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
> * "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
> * "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org


I think youy are right, but it depends on the sea level barometric
pressure---might be more than 1000'. But that was the altitude proposed in
the discussion.
Just to add to the discussion---some years ago, while prospecting for the
diamond at Minden, I flew several ships--6 wave flights in five
days---finally got it right! One of the ships had a 57mm Winter ALT. On the
face was the inscription "20,000 ft". The hands stopped at 24,000 ! The
vario still showed "up" so I continued. The Replogle eventually recorded
27,000 ft. The hands started moving again on the way down, after a while. I
guess the movement runs out of excursion.

Hartley Falbaum
DG800B "KF" USA

[[email protected]]

Bruce, there is more to it.
Rational analysis, yes, but open your eyes. Read what the other users
are saying. 302, no- altimeter is 100 or so times more acurate than
Winter altimeter.....?
Exercise of free speech?. I don't care who is right. I'm a glider
pilot, the end user and not a dealer. After all I really care only for
what is on my panel.
Money invested in selsmanship and marketing do not impress me at all
and I don't think they are improving any of the Winter instruments.
Regards
RK


> Figured -
> Once again we have a demonstration of the difference between rational analysis
> and the exercise of free speech.
>

> Cheers
> Bruce
>

[Bruce Greef]

Hi Richard

I agree with you - there are other more accurate altimeters. I have two of them.
The problem is that the majority of the instruments in use are the inaccurate
mechanical bellows connected to impossibly complex/fine gear train variety that
have the errors we see on the Winters. I don't know if Winter are any worse than
the average - seem to compare well with the others (PZLs) in my limited experience.

If everybody flies to the same referrence with the same error - we are all
fairly close to having the relative seperation we should have. If some of us are
using accurate instruments and others not then we could have a problem. It's the
same problem they have in applying the reduced vertical seperation is Europe.

So - ignoring salesmanship what do we do? We know they are in common use, and
have a fairly big intrinsic error. As long as the regulations demand a
mechanical ASI and Altimeter we will continue to have the "problem".

Personally - I think the altimeters make smaller errors on average than the
pilots using them. IF the pilot knows the potential error, surely he/she can
compensate.

wrote:
> Bruce, there is more to it.
> Rational analysis, yes, but open your eyes. Read what the other users
> are saying. 302, no- altimeter is 100 or so times more acurate than
> Winter altimeter.....?
> Exercise of free speech?. I don't care who is right. I'm a glider
> pilot, the end user and not a dealer. After all I really care only for
> what is on my panel.
> Money invested in selsmanship and marketing do not impress me at all
> and I don't think they are improving any of the Winter instruments.
> Regards
> RK
>
>
>
>>Figured -
>>Once again we have a demonstration of the difference between rational analysis
>>and the exercise of free speech.
>>
>
>
>>Cheers
>>Bruce
>>
>
>

[Tim Mara]

> wrote in message ps.com...
> The guy who put my glider together, and he is a
> glider/instrument/designer/manufacturer with tens of years of
> expirience told me that Winter altimeters are worth nothing and the
> matter of fact they are outright dengerous.

I'm glad you trust completely, and bought a glider from someone who is a glider/instrument/designer/manufacturer with tens of years expirience

10 years experience in this arena is a blink of the eye...he surely must be a fast learner!
tim
Wings & Wheels
www.wingsandwheels.com




They should not be used at
> all. The same goes for Winter airspeed instruments. Go figure.
> PZL do not make their W-13S with 1000ft per rotation, so it looks like
> we are left with the only smart choice of United.
> RK
>
> And yeas, the photos of the town are great.
>
>
> Andrew Wood wrote:
>> I have always thought that Winter instruments are excellent,
>> and their repair/calibration support has been very
>> good in my limited experience (I've only needed Winter
>> support once, and got good service). But there is one
>> caution that I am aware of: the compact Winter altimeters
>> have possible errors that US pilots should be aware
>> of. It's not a secret: the possible errors are listed
>> in the Winter altimeter data sheet. This is important
>> to know, for pilots flying under a class B ceiling
>> (as I do), and especially for pilots who fly up to
>> the 18000ft ceiling, since the Winter data sheet errors
>> are surprisingly large at higher altitudes. Take a
>> look and see. As an experiment, I tested my three altimeters
>> (my Winter 4FGH40, my Cambridge 302, and my SN10b)
>> at my local airport, using my airport barometric setting,
>> to see if the three altimeters agreed with the published
>> airport elevation (1000ft msl). The errors were respectively
>> 140ft, 2ft and 80ft. The Winter error is at the very
>> limit of the Winter data sheet error for 1000ft msl,
>> which is surprising since it had just been recalibrated
>> by the factory (because it had previously had an even
>> larger error). The other instruments were about 2 years
>> from calibration. In comparison, most US aircraft altimeters
>> that I've seen in (IFR qualified) power planes have
>> been very accurate under this test, not more than 50ft
>> error at the very most. The US IFR altimeter accuracy
>> requirement for this test is 75ft. So under the US
>> altimeter test, the Winter altimeter would fail, the
>> Cambridge would be perfect, and the SN10b just acceptable.
>> I've been asking around as to which of my three altimeters
>> is the 'legal' altimeter to use, but (of course) have
>> got no clear answer.
>>
>>
>> At 19:01 08 December 2006, Tim Mara wrote:
>> >I've actually been there in their shop and gone out
>> >for dinner with Achim
>> >Winter..It's very much like a small watch shop with
>> >everyone working
>> >meticulously with tiny tools and magnifying glasses
>> >each hand building 3 or
>> >4 instruments from start to finish at a time. Interestingly,
>> >the owner, his
>> >father and his father before him were none of them
>> >pilots and got into this
>> >business building aircraft instruments totally from
>> >other business but their
>> >instruments have been the standard for the sailplane
>> >industry for decades
>> >and remain the best and most recognized in their field.
>> >Winter also has a
>> >full catalog on line at http://www.winter-bordgeraete.de/
>> >tim
>> >Wings & Wheels
>> >www.wingsandwheels.com
>> >
>> >'Paul Remde' wrote in message
>> >news:qMheh.263996$FQ1.171910@attbi_s71...
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I just updated my Winter instruments web site with
>> >>a few photos from the
>> >> factory. Last year at this time they sent me a few
>> >>photos of the town the
>> >> company is located in. This year they sent me a few
>> >>photos showing the
>> >> instrument assembly area and the stand on which they
>> >>adjust altimeters. I
>> >> enjoy photos like these because they show a bit more
>> >>about the company and
>> >> the people that make the instruments. Most glider
>> >>pilots fly with Winter
>> >> instruments and we have come to trust and rely on
>> >>them.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>