JJ Sinclair wrote:
Just a bit of information for all the *rule-followers*, out there. Your ships
manufacturer specifies the pitot and static sources that must be used in order
to make the airspeed read the same as it did when the design was certified. The
computer manufacturers tell us to use the same pitot and static that our
airspeed indicator uses. SO, we should use the same one that is specified by
the sailplane manufacturer. This applies to type certificated ships as well as
those licenced in the experimental category. Because, your experimental
airworthiness certificate says something like, This ship will be operated in
accordance with its flight and maintenance manuals, and that specifies the
source of pitot and static.

JJ,

not sure how to interpret what you wrote but suspect you may have been
thinking that my ASI/altimeter were connected to the triple (TE) probe
coming out of the stabilizer, which was not the case. My ship was set
up (as it came to me, not from any change by me) with the ASI/altimeter
connected to the forward pitot/static ports (which I believe are the
"correct" ones) and the Cambridge computer being connected to the triple
probe and the only connection to it. (The mechanical vario was connected
to the altimeter static port, not to the TE probe)

Having the computer on its own probe set into the free-stream flow
seemed like a good idea to me offhand (assuming the air speed adjustment
was done correctly), but I now gather there are differences of opinion
as to what the "best" setup is. My response whenever I see something
like "the computer manufacturers tell us to use the same pitot and
static that our airspeed indicator uses" is to ask why, to make sure the
reasons are those which apply in my case, but in this case I don't know
enough to answer that question.

Will write a separate post regarding present status, as am presently in
triage status.

Jack