XC Skies usefulness?

Hey there,

Could someone with a history using this program comment on it please.
I would like to know how the predictions, along with it's various models, have turned out compared to actual conditions flown.
Are there many people using it?

Thanks

On Jan 12, 12:12*pm, POPS wrote:
Hey there,

Could someone with a history using this program comment on it please.
I would like to know how the predictions, along with it's various
models, have turned out compared to actual conditions flown.
Are there many people using it?

Thanks

--
POPS

In 2009 I found the NAM forecast VERY accurate for New Mexico. In 2010
it was not as accurate, but still ok (strange NM weather last year).
It is well worth the subscription price.

I think it is quite popular with the soaring community.

Worth every penny. Perfect? No. The best soaring weather info I
have found in an easy to use platform including mobile? Yes.

Bruno - B4

In article ,
POPS wrote:

Hey there,

Could someone with a history using this program comment on it please.
I would like to know how the predictions, along with it's various
models, have turned out compared to actual conditions flown.
Are there many people using it?

I've been using it for about two and a half years, I think. It's
fantastic. I've had it accurately predict significant differences in
conditions just a few miles apart, and in general its accuracy is
excellent, at least here in Virginia. It's good enough to have high
confidence in general conditions two days out, and to plan in good
detail the night before. To me it is well worth the small cost, and has
helped reduce my frustration factor in soaring by a significant degree.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

On 1/12/2011 11:12 AM, POPS wrote:
Hey there,

Could someone with a history using this program comment on it please.
I would like to know how the predictions, along with it's various
models, have turned out compared to actual conditions flown.
Are there many people using it?

Where do you fly? I've had better experiences with Blipmaps in the
Washington, Oregon, Idaho region than XC Skies.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)

On Jan 12, 7:59*pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 1/12/2011 11:12 AM, POPS wrote:

Hey there,

Could someone with a history using this program comment on it please.
I would like to know how the predictions, along with it's various
models, have turned out compared to actual conditions flown.
Are there many people using it?

Where do you fly? I've had better experiences with Blipmaps in the
Washington, Oregon, Idaho region than XC Skies.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)

I fly from Jean, NV. Like others, I found XCSkies darn good in 2009,
less so in 2010. OTOH,, I think 2010 was just 'less so' in general!
2011 will be better!
UF

Originally Posted by Grider Pirate

On Jan 12, 7:59*pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 1/12/2011 11:12 AM, POPS wrote:

Hey there,

Could someone with a history using this program comment on it please.
I would like to know how the predictions, along with it's various
models, have turned out compared to actual conditions flown.
Are there many people using it?

Where do you fly? I've had better experiences with Blipmaps in the
Washington, Oregon, Idaho region than XC Skie

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)

I fly from Jean, NV. Like others, I found XCSkies darn good in 2009,
less so in 2010. OTOH,, I think 2010 was just 'less so' in general!
2011 will be better!
UF

Well than, sounds like it is worth placing some bets with XC Skies.
I fly in So Cal mostly.
Thanks for the reply's

On Jan 13, 7:58*am, Grider Pirate wrote:
On Jan 12, 7:59*pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:

On 1/12/2011 11:12 AM, POPS wrote:

Hey there,

Could someone with a history using this program comment on it please.
I would like to know how the predictions, along with it's various
models, have turned out compared to actual conditions flown.
Are there many people using it?

Where do you fly? I've had better experiences with Blipmaps in the
Washington, Oregon, Idaho region than XC Skies.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)

I fly from Jean, NV. *Like others, I found XCSkies darn good in 2009,
less so in 2010. *OTOH,, I think 2010 was just 'less so' in general!
2011 will be better!
UF

Blipmaps and XC Skies use the same basic data and produce soaring
forecasts only as good as this underlying data. XC Skies gives you
three choices of models and some experience will tell you which are
most useful for your area.I t also is much more user-friendly and has
good support from the developers. I also do a sanity check by looking
at forecast soundings using the latest experimental models. The
latest Rapid Refresh models are showing great promise and will soon
take over from the present RUC. (Perhaps someone more directly
involved could comment?)

In any event, XC Skies has the best and most flexible display.

Mike

I've been using RASP's, BLIPMaps and XCSkies for a number of years.
As our RASP coverage in Central California has improved, my faith in
XCSkies has waned. In our area we have a marine airmass and an inland
airmass with somewhat complex topography and I don't think XCSkies has
the resolution in its underlying models to deal with those
differences.

For us, the RASP's are generally the best, though the full BLIPMaps
NAM often are better predictors of max heights or clouds.

I do subscribe to XCSkies though, it's worth supporting anyone trying
to build these tools since it is the only way to expect them to have
the resources to improve. The interface is great, even if the output
isn't terribly reliable for us. I do find that it is very optimistic,
so if you're looking for motivation to get excited about the weekend
it can be a great tool.

On 1/13/2011 4:33 AM, Mike the Strike wrote:
On Jan 13, 7:58 am, Grider wrote:
On Jan 12, 7:59 pm, Eric wrote:


Where do you fly? I've had better experiences with Blipmaps in the
Washington, Oregon, Idaho region than XC Skies.



I fly from Jean, NV. Like others, I found XCSkies darn good in 2009,
less so in 2010. OTOH,, I think 2010 was just 'less so' in general!
2011 will be better!
UF

Blipmaps and XC Skies use the same basic data and produce soaring
forecasts only as good as this underlying data.

Oddly, the RUC blipmap works best for me; the closest XCS forecasts came
from their NAM model. So, same underlying data, but the processing is
different.

XC Skies gives you
three choices of models and some experience will tell you which are
most useful for your area.

Unfortunately, the intriguing features like the routes, etc, all use the
GFS model (no other selection was/is available), which is usually too
"enthusiastic" in the WA-OR-ID area I fly while at home.

It also is much more user-friendly and has
good support from the developers. I also do a sanity check by looking
at forecast soundings using the latest experimental models. The
latest Rapid Refresh models are showing great promise and will soon
take over from the present RUC. (Perhaps someone more directly
involved could comment?)

In any event, XC Skies has the best and most flexible display.

I initially also thought so, but after a couple of years, including the
start of 2010 season, I decided the Blipmap interface is just as useful,
and I could actually flip between the different displays faster than on
XCS. Higher speed access might change that, but I found the extra detail
in the topography was useless, because the detail in the forecasts is
still limited by the 13 to 20 km grid size used to produce them.

I wish them well, I think XCS has a lot of promise, I ocasionally pester
them to add features (I'd love to see a wave forecast), and I will
continue to check their forecasts with the Blipmaps. You can do this
easily in the evening, which I do after a flight.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)