A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

XCSkies and Skysight



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 7th 20, 04:17 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default XCSkies and Skysight

Up to this point, I've used XCSkies, but I keep hearing more and more about Skysight. I'm trying to determine if I should switch over for the 2020 soaring season. (For U.S. thermal soaring, no ridge/wave.) I've done a trial, but it was only seven days and I didn't really get enough experience with it to determine if I should make the switch.

They both have the HRRR model, but the only other option on Skysight is it's own model which I know nothing about. XCSkies have several models to chose from, of varying vertical/horizontal resolutions.

It also seems to me that Skysight updates the model less frequently the day prior and day of soaring compared to the RAP/HRRR models on XCSkies. That would negate a lot of the benefit of the HRRR model, wouldn't it?

If I'm wrong about any of these assumptions, please educate me. I'm still a neophyte when it comes to using weather products for soaring.

Can someone with knowledge on the models and these websites' methods for employing them describe which is more powerful in predicting actual soaring conditions?

What makes Skysight worth the cost, being twice as expensive as XCSkies?
  #2  
Old June 7th 20, 04:36 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11
Default XCSkies and Skysight

You may be interested in the SkySight webinar we did last year as part of the SSA webinar series. www.ssa/webinars.com
  #3  
Old June 7th 20, 04:53 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11
Default XCSkies and Skysight

My apologies. The 1st address I wrote was incorrect. Please use the following:

https://www.ssa.org/Webinar/TOP%203%...%20A%20PRO.mp4
  #4  
Old June 7th 20, 06:11 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
John Foster
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 354
Default XCSkies and Skysight

On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 9:17:57 PM UTC-6, wrote:
Up to this point, I've used XCSkies, but I keep hearing more and more about Skysight. I'm trying to determine if I should switch over for the 2020 soaring season. (For U.S. thermal soaring, no ridge/wave.) I've done a trial, but it was only seven days and I didn't really get enough experience with it to determine if I should make the switch.

They both have the HRRR model, but the only other option on Skysight is it's own model which I know nothing about. XCSkies have several models to chose from, of varying vertical/horizontal resolutions.

It also seems to me that Skysight updates the model less frequently the day prior and day of soaring compared to the RAP/HRRR models on XCSkies. That would negate a lot of the benefit of the HRRR model, wouldn't it?

If I'm wrong about any of these assumptions, please educate me. I'm still a neophyte when it comes to using weather products for soaring.

Can someone with knowledge on the models and these websites' methods for employing them describe which is more powerful in predicting actual soaring conditions?

What makes Skysight worth the cost, being twice as expensive as XCSkies?


I'm still a neophyte with SkySight, but even so, I prefer it to XC Skies. My experience so far (limited) is that SkySight is more accurate. The colors have an adjustable translucency where the base topography can show through better, and SkySight also has the ability to use Google satellite imagery for the base map, which is quite helpful. You also get a "point forecast" with SkySight for any point on the map, as well as Skew-T charts for any point on the map, if you like to use them. There is a route-planning function with SkySight that you don't get with XCSkies, as well as a route suggestion function with SkySight. All in all, there are many more useful features to SkySight than XC Skies--well worth the money, in my limited opinion.
  #5  
Old June 7th 20, 03:28 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Jonathan Foster
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 27
Default XCSkies and Skysight

On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 11:11:17 PM UTC-6, John Foster wrote:
On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 9:17:57 PM UTC-6, wrote:
Up to this point, I've used XCSkies, but I keep hearing more and more about Skysight. I'm trying to determine if I should switch over for the 2020 soaring season. (For U.S. thermal soaring, no ridge/wave.) I've done a trial, but it was only seven days and I didn't really get enough experience with it to determine if I should make the switch.

They both have the HRRR model, but the only other option on Skysight is it's own model which I know nothing about. XCSkies have several models to chose from, of varying vertical/horizontal resolutions.

It also seems to me that Skysight updates the model less frequently the day prior and day of soaring compared to the RAP/HRRR models on XCSkies. That would negate a lot of the benefit of the HRRR model, wouldn't it?

If I'm wrong about any of these assumptions, please educate me. I'm still a neophyte when it comes to using weather products for soaring.

Can someone with knowledge on the models and these websites' methods for employing them describe which is more powerful in predicting actual soaring conditions?

What makes Skysight worth the cost, being twice as expensive as XCSkies?


I'm still a neophyte with SkySight, but even so, I prefer it to XC Skies. My experience so far (limited) is that SkySight is more accurate. The colors have an adjustable translucency where the base topography can show through better, and SkySight also has the ability to use Google satellite imagery for the base map, which is quite helpful. You also get a "point forecast" with SkySight for any point on the map, as well as Skew-T charts for any point on the map, if you like to use them. There is a route-planning function with SkySight that you don't get with XCSkies, as well as a route suggestion function with SkySight. All in all, there are many more useful features to SkySight than XC Skies--well worth the money, in my limited opinion.

  #6  
Old June 7th 20, 04:43 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
MNLou
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 271
Default XCSkies and Skysight

I believe you are asking a false question "either / or". Why not both?

I use 2 models and really like it. When they converge, I'm happy. When they diverge, I try to understand why.

Lou
  #7  
Old June 7th 20, 04:49 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Ron Gleason
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 483
Default XCSkies and Skysight

On Saturday, 6 June 2020 21:17:57 UTC-6, wrote:
Up to this point, I've used XCSkies, but I keep hearing more and more about Skysight. I'm trying to determine if I should switch over for the 2020 soaring season. (For U.S. thermal soaring, no ridge/wave.) I've done a trial, but it was only seven days and I didn't really get enough experience with it to determine if I should make the switch.

They both have the HRRR model, but the only other option on Skysight is it's own model which I know nothing about. XCSkies have several models to chose from, of varying vertical/horizontal resolutions.

It also seems to me that Skysight updates the model less frequently the day prior and day of soaring compared to the RAP/HRRR models on XCSkies. That would negate a lot of the benefit of the HRRR model, wouldn't it?

If I'm wrong about any of these assumptions, please educate me. I'm still a neophyte when it comes to using weather products for soaring.

Can someone with knowledge on the models and these websites' methods for employing them describe which is more powerful in predicting actual soaring conditions?

What makes Skysight worth the cost, being twice as expensive as XCSkies?


Here is a great discussion and overall approach to weather darta gathering and forecasting

https://www.cloudbasemayhem.com/epis...r-forecasting/

Lisa Verzella is a long time champion and record holder HG and PG pilot. SHe now works for the NWS in SLC.

If you do not listen to the podcast Cloudbase Mayhem you should subscribe, great discussions, approaches to flying safely discussions, weather forecasting around the world, etc. DO not get turned off by the fact that it is PG focused, it covers many aspects of of soaring and hits topics any field of aviation needs to cover and understand.

Enjoy

Ron GLeason
  #8  
Old June 7th 20, 05:42 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 35
Default XCSkies and Skysight

On Sunday, 7 June 2020 05:17:57 UTC+2, wrote:
They both have the HRRR model, but the only other option on Skysight is it's own model which I know nothing about. XCSkies have several models to chose from, of varying vertical/horizontal resolutions.

It also seems to me that Skysight updates the model less frequently the day prior and day of soaring compared to the RAP/HRRR models on XCSkies. That would negate a lot of the benefit of the HRRR model, wouldn't it?

What makes Skysight worth the cost, being twice as expensive as XCSkies?


You might enjoy my lecture from a few weeks ago, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ez9Xjo4llT8

To directly answer some of your questions though:
1) If you are only going to use government weather models (GFS/RAP/HRRR etc), HRRR is the one you want - it's head and shoulders ahead of all the others for soaring purposes. It has a very high level of detail, and very precise physics, and updates hourly. The only problem is the forecast range, just ~36 hours. The other models are a significant regression for soaring purposes compared to HRRR (or SkySight).

HRRR validates very well against conventional validation parameters (better than SkySight mostly due to radar assimilation and cycling), but they do little to no validation of boundary layer 'soaring' parameters.
Because we run our own model, we can and do validate then adjust the model accordingly to get the best results for soaring pilots. Running weather models comparable to national weather services is extraordinarily expensive, we have ~1000 cores forecasting 24x7, and this factors into our pricing as does the ongoing development we do and maintaining the integrations with LX9000's, Oudies etc.

2) We have updates scheduled for the SkySight model at ~2am/8am/2pm for today and ~5pm for tomorrow, and beyond that update every forecast 1-2x a day. Running any model yourself is a balance of forecast duration, cost and detail, and by scheduling for these times we think we can offer maximum benefit at useful times for minimal cost. HRRR updates on SkySight hourly for today, and every 6 hours for tomorrow. I don't think hourly updates for longer than 24 hours ahead add meaningful information.

You can contact me directly via the website if you have any further questions.
  #9  
Old June 9th 20, 03:30 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 46
Default XCSkies and Skysight

Any opinions on Top Meteo's forecast models?

https://europe.topmeteo.eu/en-gb/
  #10  
Old June 13th 20, 07:54 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bret Hess
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 121
Default XCSkies and Skysight

It seems that NAM forecasts (12 km and 3 km) on XCSkies are very helpful for soaring in Utah. I haven't seen a benefit of HRRR over NAM. I'd be interested in hearing from other pilots who fly in the mountains comparing NAM with HRRR or Skysight for thermal predictions.

I'd also like to hear a discussion of why a 3 km resolution model is a great improvement for soaring over a 12 km model, for example. Higher resolution models generate more detailed forecasts, and maybe they show better what kind of variation you might see, but the variations at this scale don't seem pinned to the earth at an accuracy of 3 km.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Xcskies Dan Mockler Soaring 15 September 9th 16 02:14 AM
XCSkies [email protected] Soaring 23 April 23rd 16 02:52 AM
XCSkies Unavailable?? Jim Kellett Soaring 9 January 6th 16 04:50 AM
Xcskies [email protected] Soaring 4 January 5th 16 09:02 PM
XCSkies CAPE Spam Soaring 4 July 7th 09 06:26 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.