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

required LD versus required MC to make it home ??



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old August 25th 10, 05:32 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Ramy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 746
Default required LD versus required MC to make it home

On Aug 24, 5:16*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Aug 24, 5:06*pm, Ramy wrote:





On Aug 24, 2:54*pm, mattm wrote:


On Aug 24, 4:44*pm, Ramy wrote:


On Aug 24, 1:11*pm, mattm wrote:


Reichmann points out that MC 1 is a better setting if you are in
desparation mode, because you give up only a little glide distance
but you get to sample more air in a given time.


Are you sure about that? MC=0 will give you more time and more air to
sample (beeing the best L/D speed) than MC=1. I always use MC=0 when I
switch to survival mode unless I am also battling significant head
wind.


Ramy


Yes, it's true. *It's on the last page of this paper:http://www.dragonnorth.com/djpresent...training_for_c...


"A lot of pilots flew and fly unnecessarily low average
speeds when they get low, because they are anxious
and fly with a zero setting. They don’t know that with a
setting at 1 knot they have almost the same glide angle
and lose much less average speed in case they recover
and complete the task."


In my plane (ASW-19) MC=0 speed is 53kts, and L/D is 38:1.
MC=1 speed is 61kts, and L/D is 35:1. *Granted my sink rate
is about 30fpm faster, but I'll have almost 20% greater range to find
that thermal I need to get back up again.


-- Matt


Matt I'm afraid you missunderstood Reichmann comment. He claimed that
you will lose less average speed with MC1 which is true. But you will
not gain 20% greater range. On the contrary, Your search range will
always be less if you fly faster than MC=0 (unless you have
significant head wind which requires flying faster than best L/D).
Bottom line, as other pointed out, it all depends on your goal. If you
are flying contest, in which every second counts, then flying correct
MC is important. If you fly for OLC or distance, like I believe the
majority of XC flights are, and your main objection is to make it back
home at the end of the day (as the subject lline says), than fly *MC 0
when you are in survival mode or starting your final glide.


Ramy


But, but, but, (and I think I can hear John Cochrane pounding his head
on his desk in Chicago...) when about to go on final glide and you are
in that last thermal you know what the theoretical final glide Mc
should be. And by all means factor in safety margins but if you have a
climb significantly over your Mc="0" value then keep climbing and bump
the Mc appropriately to match that climb. I mean why not? I know
sometimes pilots like to float past the home airport and stretch a few
more OLC miles then turn back. Personally the call of that cold beer
makes me want to fly that final glide as fast as possible.

What is really annoying about arguing with Ramy on this point (which I
think I've done before) is no matter what I can argue on paper I have
no hope of keeping up with him in practice.

Sigh

Darryl- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Funny, I guess I can fly better than I can explain myself :-)
All I am trying to say about the final glide is that if you are not
competing (or competing against the sun as in my case sometimes) the
exact speed you fly on your final glide wouldn't matter much. And
instead of dialing MC according to your last climb to determine when
to leave the thermal and then ignore this MC on your glide if you want
to ensure you get back home even with no lift, just degrade your polar
instead, climb as high as you feel comfortable, then fly as fast as
you can without loosing glide. Simple. Of course while on course and
high crank up the MC as high as you dare, just make sure you stay in
the desired lift band.
But honestly, I don't understand how many of you fly XC safely if you
don't degrade your polar. How do you determine you are within safe
glide from airports at any point in time? using your published polar
and a safety altitude margin? Good luck if you hit any sink or head
wind on the way unless you use a big altitude margin which will
significantly hurt your decision down lower. The suggestion to use bug
factor to degrade your polar is basically an implementation of the
common rule of thumb to use 50%-75% of your published polar to
determine arrival altitude.

Ramy
  #42  
Old August 25th 10, 05:47 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,403
Default required LD versus required MC to make it home

On Aug 24, 9:32*pm, Ramy wrote:
On Aug 24, 5:16*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:



On Aug 24, 5:06*pm, Ramy wrote:


On Aug 24, 2:54*pm, mattm wrote:


On Aug 24, 4:44*pm, Ramy wrote:


On Aug 24, 1:11*pm, mattm wrote:


Reichmann points out that MC 1 is a better setting if you are in
desparation mode, because you give up only a little glide distance
but you get to sample more air in a given time.


Are you sure about that? MC=0 will give you more time and more air to
sample (beeing the best L/D speed) than MC=1. I always use MC=0 when I
switch to survival mode unless I am also battling significant head
wind.


Ramy


Yes, it's true. *It's on the last page of this paper:http://www.dragonnorth.com/djpresent...training_for_c...


"A lot of pilots flew and fly unnecessarily low average
speeds when they get low, because they are anxious
and fly with a zero setting. They don’t know that with a
setting at 1 knot they have almost the same glide angle
and lose much less average speed in case they recover
and complete the task."


In my plane (ASW-19) MC=0 speed is 53kts, and L/D is 38:1.
MC=1 speed is 61kts, and L/D is 35:1. *Granted my sink rate
is about 30fpm faster, but I'll have almost 20% greater range to find
that thermal I need to get back up again.


-- Matt


Matt I'm afraid you missunderstood Reichmann comment. He claimed that
you will lose less average speed with MC1 which is true. But you will
not gain 20% greater range. On the contrary, Your search range will
always be less if you fly faster than MC=0 (unless you have
significant head wind which requires flying faster than best L/D).
Bottom line, as other pointed out, it all depends on your goal. If you
are flying contest, in which every second counts, then flying correct
MC is important. If you fly for OLC or distance, like I believe the
majority of XC flights are, and your main objection is to make it back
home at the end of the day (as the subject lline says), than fly *MC 0
when you are in survival mode or starting your final glide.


Ramy


But, but, but, (and I think I can hear John Cochrane pounding his head
on his desk in Chicago...) when about to go on final glide and you are
in that last thermal you know what the theoretical final glide Mc
should be. And by all means factor in safety margins but if you have a
climb significantly over your Mc="0" value then keep climbing and bump
the Mc appropriately to match that climb. I mean why not? I know
sometimes pilots like to float past the home airport and stretch a few
more OLC miles then turn back. Personally the call of that cold beer
makes me want to fly that final glide as fast as possible.


What is really annoying about arguing with Ramy on this point (which I
think I've done before) is no matter what I can argue on paper I have
no hope of keeping up with him in practice.


Sigh


Darryl- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Funny, I guess I can fly better than I can explain myself :-)
All I am trying to say about the final glide is that if you are not
competing (or competing against the sun as in my case sometimes) the
exact speed you fly on your final glide wouldn't matter much. And
instead of dialing MC according to your last climb to determine when
to leave the thermal and then ignore this MC on your glide if you want
to ensure you get back home even with no lift, just degrade your polar
instead, climb as high as you feel comfortable, then fly as fast as
you can without loosing glide. Simple. Of course while on course and
high crank up the MC as high as you dare, just make sure you stay in
the desired lift band.
But honestly, I don't understand how many of you fly XC safely if you
don't degrade your polar. How do you determine you are within safe
glide from airports at any point in time? using your published polar
and a safety altitude margin? Good luck if you hit any sink or head
wind on the way unless you use a big altitude margin which will
significantly hurt your decision down lower. The suggestion to use bug
factor to degrade your polar is basically an implementation of the
common rule of thumb to use 50%-75% of your published polar to
determine arrival altitude.

Ramy


Now you are going to start another argument. Oh well, here goes... I
degrade my ASH-26E book polar by 5% bugs if the wings are clean, just
want to take the edge off and it seems to match pretty close to what I
can get. I want the computer to tell me what I can really do and I'll
factor safety margins (including using arrival height padding, Mc
etc.) depending on how I assess the risk. And that is not just because
I flying a motorglider, I'll use similar low bugs when flying the Duo
etc.

I payed all that money for that 50:1 L/D -- I'm not going to just
throw it away :-)

(yes for new XC pilots, padding with bugs is entirely different).

Darryl
  #43  
Old August 25th 10, 05:53 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Mike[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 199
Default required LD versus required MC to make it home

On Aug 24, 10:32*pm, Ramy wrote:
On Aug 24, 5:16*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:



On Aug 24, 5:06*pm, Ramy wrote:


On Aug 24, 2:54*pm, mattm wrote:


On Aug 24, 4:44*pm, Ramy wrote:


On Aug 24, 1:11*pm, mattm wrote:


Reichmann points out that MC 1 is a better setting if you are in
desparation mode, because you give up only a little glide distance
but you get to sample more air in a given time.


Are you sure about that? MC=0 will give you more time and more air to
sample (beeing the best L/D speed) than MC=1. I always use MC=0 when I
switch to survival mode unless I am also battling significant head
wind.


Ramy


Yes, it's true. *It's on the last page of this paper:http://www.dragonnorth.com/djpresent...training_for_c...


"A lot of pilots flew and fly unnecessarily low average
speeds when they get low, because they are anxious
and fly with a zero setting. They don’t know that with a
setting at 1 knot they have almost the same glide angle
and lose much less average speed in case they recover
and complete the task."


In my plane (ASW-19) MC=0 speed is 53kts, and L/D is 38:1.
MC=1 speed is 61kts, and L/D is 35:1. *Granted my sink rate
is about 30fpm faster, but I'll have almost 20% greater range to find
that thermal I need to get back up again.


-- Matt


Matt I'm afraid you missunderstood Reichmann comment. He claimed that
you will lose less average speed with MC1 which is true. But you will
not gain 20% greater range. On the contrary, Your search range will
always be less if you fly faster than MC=0 (unless you have
significant head wind which requires flying faster than best L/D).
Bottom line, as other pointed out, it all depends on your goal. If you
are flying contest, in which every second counts, then flying correct
MC is important. If you fly for OLC or distance, like I believe the
majority of XC flights are, and your main objection is to make it back
home at the end of the day (as the subject lline says), than fly *MC 0
when you are in survival mode or starting your final glide.


Ramy


But, but, but, (and I think I can hear John Cochrane pounding his head
on his desk in Chicago...) when about to go on final glide and you are
in that last thermal you know what the theoretical final glide Mc
should be. And by all means factor in safety margins but if you have a
climb significantly over your Mc="0" value then keep climbing and bump
the Mc appropriately to match that climb. I mean why not? I know
sometimes pilots like to float past the home airport and stretch a few
more OLC miles then turn back. Personally the call of that cold beer
makes me want to fly that final glide as fast as possible.


What is really annoying about arguing with Ramy on this point (which I
think I've done before) is no matter what I can argue on paper I have
no hope of keeping up with him in practice.


Sigh


Darryl- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Funny, I guess I can fly better than I can explain myself :-)
All I am trying to say about the final glide is that if you are not
competing (or competing against the sun as in my case sometimes) the
exact speed you fly on your final glide wouldn't matter much. And
instead of dialing MC according to your last climb to determine when
to leave the thermal and then ignore this MC on your glide if you want
to ensure you get back home even with no lift, just degrade your polar
instead, climb as high as you feel comfortable, then fly as fast as
you can without loosing glide. Simple. Of course while on course and
high crank up the MC as high as you dare, just make sure you stay in
the desired lift band.
But honestly, I don't understand how many of you fly XC safely if you
don't degrade your polar. How do you determine you are within safe
glide from airports at any point in time? using your published polar
and a safety altitude margin? Good luck if you hit any sink or head
wind on the way unless you use a big altitude margin which will
significantly hurt your decision down lower. The suggestion to use bug
factor to degrade your polar is basically an implementation of the
common rule of thumb to use 50%-75% of your published polar to
determine arrival altitude.

Ramy


Within safe glide to an airport at any one time?

What a concept!
  #44  
Old August 25th 10, 06:47 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Andy[_10_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 261
Default required LD versus required MC to make it home

On Aug 24, 9:32*pm, Ramy wrote:
On Aug 24, 5:16*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:





On Aug 24, 5:06*pm, Ramy wrote:


On Aug 24, 2:54*pm, mattm wrote:


On Aug 24, 4:44*pm, Ramy wrote:


On Aug 24, 1:11*pm, mattm wrote:


Reichmann points out that MC 1 is a better setting if you are in
desparation mode, because you give up only a little glide distance
but you get to sample more air in a given time.


Are you sure about that? MC=0 will give you more time and more air to
sample (beeing the best L/D speed) than MC=1. I always use MC=0 when I
switch to survival mode unless I am also battling significant head
wind.


Ramy


Yes, it's true. *It's on the last page of this paper:http://www.dragonnorth.com/djpresent...training_for_c...


"A lot of pilots flew and fly unnecessarily low average
speeds when they get low, because they are anxious
and fly with a zero setting. They don’t know that with a
setting at 1 knot they have almost the same glide angle
and lose much less average speed in case they recover
and complete the task."


In my plane (ASW-19) MC=0 speed is 53kts, and L/D is 38:1.
MC=1 speed is 61kts, and L/D is 35:1. *Granted my sink rate
is about 30fpm faster, but I'll have almost 20% greater range to find
that thermal I need to get back up again.


-- Matt


Matt I'm afraid you missunderstood Reichmann comment. He claimed that
you will lose less average speed with MC1 which is true. But you will
not gain 20% greater range. On the contrary, Your search range will
always be less if you fly faster than MC=0 (unless you have
significant head wind which requires flying faster than best L/D).
Bottom line, as other pointed out, it all depends on your goal. If you
are flying contest, in which every second counts, then flying correct
MC is important. If you fly for OLC or distance, like I believe the
majority of XC flights are, and your main objection is to make it back
home at the end of the day (as the subject lline says), than fly *MC 0
when you are in survival mode or starting your final glide.


Ramy


But, but, but, (and I think I can hear John Cochrane pounding his head
on his desk in Chicago...) when about to go on final glide and you are
in that last thermal you know what the theoretical final glide Mc
should be. And by all means factor in safety margins but if you have a
climb significantly over your Mc="0" value then keep climbing and bump
the Mc appropriately to match that climb. I mean why not? I know
sometimes pilots like to float past the home airport and stretch a few
more OLC miles then turn back. Personally the call of that cold beer
makes me want to fly that final glide as fast as possible.


What is really annoying about arguing with Ramy on this point (which I
think I've done before) is no matter what I can argue on paper I have
no hope of keeping up with him in practice.


Sigh


Darryl- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Funny, I guess I can fly better than I can explain myself :-)
All I am trying to say about the final glide is that if you are not
competing (or competing against the sun as in my case sometimes) the
exact speed you fly on your final glide wouldn't matter much. And
instead of dialing MC according to your last climb to determine when
to leave the thermal and then ignore this MC on your glide if you want
to ensure you get back home even with no lift, just degrade your polar
instead, climb as high as you feel comfortable, then fly as fast as
you can without loosing glide. Simple. Of course while on course and
high crank up the MC as high as you dare, just make sure you stay in
the desired lift band.
But honestly, I don't understand how many of you fly XC safely if you
don't degrade your polar. How do you determine you are within safe
glide from airports at any point in time? using your published polar
and a safety altitude margin? Good luck if you hit any sink or head
wind on the way unless you use a big altitude margin which will
significantly hurt your decision down lower. The suggestion to use bug
factor to degrade your polar is basically an implementation of the
common rule of thumb to use 50%-75% of your published polar to
determine arrival altitude.

Ramy


Hi Ramy,

I know you are an OLC stud. Nevertheless I will take a crack at
spanning the gap between you and Mr. Cochrane - who is a competition
strategy stud.

There are two potential objectives in calculating how to look for and
manage the last climb leading to final glide: 1) maximize the
probability of getting home when time is not a factor, and 2)
maximizing expected speed (and hence expected contest points) adjusted
for probability of landing out. In the first case, if you are low and
desperate you pull back to best L/D and fly in the direction of the
most likely lift, even if it means backtracking on course. In the
second case you are trading off your best estimate of probability of
landing out against speed, with the tradeoff in contests dictated by
the ratio of speed points to distance points. Reichmann's point here
is quite relevant - a 1.0 McCready keeps up progress toward the goal
and dilutes your total speed less quickly than Mc = 0, which trades
landout probability for speed at a suboptimal rate - that is, you gain
expected finish points less quickly than you lose speed points - all
probability adjusted. The stronger the lift the more you want to fly a
little faster while searching to make sure that you don't give up
speed points.

As to the final glide itself (and I understand the unique issues
associated with returning to an elevated airport like Truckee, where
you need to set up the final glide quite far out with little chance to
recover if you miss low). The basic issue here is how to balance the
glide margin - how much should be based on glide angle margin and how
much should be based on finish height margin? There are two potential
estimation errors you need to deal with: 1) error associated with mis-
estimating the actual glide angle you can achieve at any given glide
speed and 2) errors associated with short-term losses in altitude from
sink enroute. Ideally you can account for 1) by managing your glide
speed to make sure your achieved glide angle is shallower than needed.
You can do this in one of two ways. First you can artificially steepen
up the glide angle at any given speed through manipulating the polar,
or you can set the Mc for higher than the speed you actually fly (or
some combination of the two). The basic objective under both
approaches is to ensure you gain a bit on the glide rather than losing
a bit. The problem with using bugs and flying with a zero Mc is that
you fly too slow to optimize speed and you tend to leave strong final
thermals too soon.

As to issue 2), the issue to keep in mind is the risk of hitting a
line of sink and losing your glide. As John points out, this risk
goes up as you get closer to home because you get progressively lower
and have a declining chance of being able to find a saving climb after
a sink street. This is why the better strategy when there is a lot of
uncertainty about lift/sink on the way home is to add finish altitude
rather than steepen the glide - steepening the glide give you a margin
that decrements to zero feet as you approach the finish whereas
altitude margin doesn't. This says that you are better off adding
finish height than steepening the glide angle as a glide angle margin
goes away as you get closer to home. It also argues for leaving the
final thermal at with a Mc setting that is a bit higher than you
actual climb rate, then setting speed-to-fly a bit slower so yo gain
on the glide going home.

I will observe that in my experience the first glider to leave the
thermal gets home first. I have left thermals before getting to the
the height indicated by the Mc setting and won by a couple of minutes
and have stuck with 10-knot thermals only to be unable to catch
gliders leaving before me. It has never worked any other way. This
must mean that either pilots are able to "bump up' the final glide on
the way home, or that final thermal isn't as strong as I think. In
either case it means I generally stay with my final climb too long.

9B

Hope that helps,

9B
  #45  
Old August 25th 10, 06:25 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
David[_13_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default required LD versus required MC to make it home

On Aug 24, 9:32*pm, Ramy wrote:
On Aug 24, 5:16*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:





On Aug 24, 5:06*pm, Ramy wrote:


On Aug 24, 2:54*pm, mattm wrote:


On Aug 24, 4:44*pm, Ramy wrote:


On Aug 24, 1:11*pm, mattm wrote:


Reichmann points out that MC 1 is a better setting if you are in
desparation mode, because you give up only a little glide distance
but you get to sample more air in a given time.


Are you sure about that? MC=0 will give you more time and more air to
sample (beeing the best L/D speed) than MC=1. I always use MC=0 when I
switch to survival mode unless I am also battling significant head
wind.


Ramy


Yes, it's true. *It's on the last page of this paper:http://www.dragonnorth.com/djpresent...training_for_c...


"A lot of pilots flew and fly unnecessarily low average
speeds when they get low, because they are anxious
and fly with a zero setting. They don’t know that with a
setting at 1 knot they have almost the same glide angle
and lose much less average speed in case they recover
and complete the task."


In my plane (ASW-19) MC=0 speed is 53kts, and L/D is 38:1.
MC=1 speed is 61kts, and L/D is 35:1. *Granted my sink rate
is about 30fpm faster, but I'll have almost 20% greater range to find
that thermal I need to get back up again.


-- Matt


Matt I'm afraid you missunderstood Reichmann comment. He claimed that
you will lose less average speed with MC1 which is true. But you will
not gain 20% greater range. On the contrary, Your search range will
always be less if you fly faster than MC=0 (unless you have
significant head wind which requires flying faster than best L/D).
Bottom line, as other pointed out, it all depends on your goal. If you
are flying contest, in which every second counts, then flying correct
MC is important. If you fly for OLC or distance, like I believe the
majority of XC flights are, and your main objection is to make it back
home at the end of the day (as the subject lline says), than fly *MC 0
when you are in survival mode or starting your final glide.


Ramy


But, but, but, (and I think I can hear John Cochrane pounding his head
on his desk in Chicago...) when about to go on final glide and you are
in that last thermal you know what the theoretical final glide Mc
should be. And by all means factor in safety margins but if you have a
climb significantly over your Mc="0" value then keep climbing and bump
the Mc appropriately to match that climb. I mean why not? I know
sometimes pilots like to float past the home airport and stretch a few
more OLC miles then turn back. Personally the call of that cold beer
makes me want to fly that final glide as fast as possible.


What is really annoying about arguing with Ramy on this point (which I
think I've done before) is no matter what I can argue on paper I have
no hope of keeping up with him in practice.


Sigh


Darryl- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Funny, I guess I can fly better than I can explain myself :-)
All I am trying to say about the final glide is that if you are not
competing (or competing against the sun as in my case sometimes) the
exact speed you fly on your final glide wouldn't matter much. And
instead of dialing MC according to your last climb to determine when
to leave the thermal and then ignore this MC on your glide if you want
to ensure you get back home even with no lift, just degrade your polar
instead, climb as high as you feel comfortable, then fly as fast as
you can without loosing glide. Simple. Of course while on course and
high crank up the MC as high as you dare, just make sure you stay in
the desired lift band.
But honestly, I don't understand how many of you fly XC safely if you
don't degrade your polar. How do you determine you are within safe
glide from airports at any point in time? using your published polar
and a safety altitude margin? Good luck if you hit any sink or head
wind on the way unless you use a big altitude margin which will
significantly hurt your decision down lower. The suggestion to use bug
factor to degrade your polar is basically an implementation of the
common rule of thumb to use 50%-75% of your published polar to
determine arrival altitude.

Ramy


Ramy et al,

Part of the different views in this discussion is the different kinds
of final
glides people are talking about.

For example, in Ramy's case (and mine as well), a typical "final
glide" means:
it is is around 6:30 pm or even later, lift is dying, you are 40 to 50
nautical
miles away from home, you are in the last obvious lift which could be
very well
be a 5 knot thermal, but still the last one. A westerly wind is
pushing everything
east, the nature of the airmass ahead is unknown with a potential
strong headwind
component (funny how winds play havoc on the PDA's estimate of your
situation
when you are 40~50 miles from home).

And to make things even more interesting, "home" means you also need
to cross
Lake Tahoe to get there.

Under this situation it is not unusual to climb to the top of the
thermal or even
bump up against class A airspace, and you barely have it at MC 0. The
bug factor
Ramy talks about is to account for the significant uncertainty in the
airmass/wind
on the 40 nm leg (which can easily span a couple of airmasses).

Waiting for an MC 5 altitude under those conditions, not going to
happen.

David
  #46  
Old August 25th 10, 07:35 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Eric Greenwell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,096
Default Getting rid of the bugs and gotchas!

On 8/24/2010 7:53 PM, akiley wrote:
On Aug 24, 12:08 am, Eric wrote:


I've used SeeYou Mobile for 1000+ hours all over the USA, and I'm not
aware of any bugs or gotchas. I would never go back to paper charts,
whiz wheels, or just looking out the window. For example, most of my
final glides begin 30 to 50 miles from the airport, where I can't even
see it, yet they work out well most of the time.

Eric,
What happens if your electronics fry? Hope you have a backup
something.

I've used 4 PDAs over 10 years, 2000 hours total, with no failures, so I
haven't had to pull out the charts and ruler I always carry with me
(mostly out of habit). But, a PDA going bad isn't a SeeYou Mobile problem.
There are plenty of gochas I
can think of is SeeYouM. All you have to do is not double check what
your goto waypoint is, forget to add winds, polar, safety altitude.
Maybe they aren't gochas, but they sort of are for new users.

These aren't SeeYou Mobile gotchas either, they are part of using a
"soaring computer", whether it's a map with circles, paper sheets with
tables of glide distances, or an electronic computer.

The polar and safety altitude (I assume you mean the "arrival altitude",
are settings you should do at home; i.e. "set and forget".

I'm not sure what you mean by "add winds", as SYM automatically uses the
winds in it's computations. Perhaps you mean "adjusting the winds"?
Sometimes you have to do that when you realize the winds ahead of you
are different from the winds SYM has calculated.
It
takes a lot of thinking to make sure you know what you are doing.

Yep, the cockpit is a busy place in a glider if you are going
cross-country, and it takes a while to get accustomed to a flight
computer. I had the advantage of 20 years of soaring before using PDA
flight computers, so the transition was much easier for me.
I have the latest version of SeeYouM that I bought last fall. One
known bug is that the wing loading changes when you leave the polar
screen then come back. Try it.

It doesn't change on my setup (Ipaq 3835 with ver 3.11). Maybe it's a
3.12 issue.
I think they fixed the one with Oudie
that didn't allow the user to set NM in units. You would have to
reset it every time you loaded SeeYouM. I haven't gotten an answer on
my Magnetic Track NavBox yet. It's off by 12 degrees.

I have to admit I've never used any kind of track bearing. I just put
the two different track bearing boxes on my PDA (simulator mode), and
they both read correctly (Washington state area); however, I get the
same error you do when I try to "fly" in Michigan.
Maybe it's
party to do with old PDA hardware but I've had a lot of problems with
logging not starting, and NavBoxes showing no data, and lockups.
Other have had these problem too. Some days my statistic page that is
supposed to show thermal graphs doesn't.

There is a quirk in the older Ipaqs that can cause symptoms like this.
The fix is to disable the IR port, which is sensitive to sunlight, and
slows down the system. Make sure the beam is off on your Ipaq. Do
something like this: Start, Settings, Connections, Beam, uncheck box.

It also might be your hardware, as I've had none of those problems on my
fairly old 3835. What PDA are you using? Do you have GPS problems (you
might be able to determine that by looking at the flight trace in
SeeYou)? What GPS do you use?
I'm slowly replacing components of my iPaq to see if that's the
problem. I just replaced the CF card adapter back, I've tried a
different CF card. We'll see.

I'm definitely a navigator user. I have a Garmin 395, I've put quite
a lot of hours on Garmin G1000's in IFR flight. My point is one has
to be careful throwing full trust into these things.

Agreed. Start out conservatively, get comfortable with it, and then you
can reduce the margins bit by bit to make cross-country flying easier
and more enjoyable.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (netto to net to email me)


  #47  
Old August 25th 10, 10:41 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Eric Greenwell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,096
Default required LD versus required MC to make it home

On 8/24/2010 9:32 PM, Ramy wrote:
On Aug 24, 5:16 pm, Darryl R
But honestly, I don't understand how many of you fly XC safely if you
don't degrade your polar. How do you determine you are within safe
glide from airports at any point in time? using your published polar
and a safety altitude margin? Good luck if you hit any sink or head
wind on the way unless you use a big altitude margin which will
significantly hurt your decision down lower. The suggestion to use bug
factor to degrade your polar is basically an implementation of the
common rule of thumb to use 50%-75% of your published polar to
determine arrival altitude.


Point #1: I think what you are doing is essentially the same as keeping
the bugs at "no bugs", but using a high MC setting to figure the "safety
glide". A high MC means a steep glide angle compared to 0 MC - there's
the "degradation" in the polar you are wondering about. I normally use a
4 MC for my "safety glide" computation, which gives an L/D of 70% of my
max L/D.

Point #2: In addition to the 4 MC setting, I usually carry excess
altitude above the 4 MC glide slope to absorb strong sink and
unexpectedly strong headwinds. Over friendly ground in moderate
conditions, 500' excess has proven adequate; in strong conditions over
unfriendly ground, it might be as much as 2000' excess. These numbers
are trimmed as the distance to the airport decreases, starting about
10-20 miles out, because my 1000' AGL arrival height begins to provide
the "sink absorption" buffer.

Of course, I don't use the 4 MC setting as my speed to fly if I have to
head towards my safety airport; instead, I use a 1 MC setting (or zero
MC if I'm truly desperate). My MC setting for the "safety glide" is
separate from my "speed to fly" setting on my Cambridge 302, which is
usually set at 1 (moderate conditions) or 2 (strong conditions).

The above MC and excess altitude settings have proved satisfactory for
all my gliders, from a Ka-6e to an ASH 26 E. Of course, the speeds flown
were quite different for each glider.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (netto to net to email me)

- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz

  #48  
Old August 26th 10, 05:51 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Andy[_10_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 261
Default required LD versus required MC to make it home

On Aug 25, 2:41*pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 8/24/2010 9:32 PM, Ramy wrote:

On Aug 24, 5:16 pm, Darryl R
But honestly, I don't understand how many of you fly XC safely if you
don't degrade your polar. How do you determine you are within safe
glide from airports at any point in time? using your published polar
and a safety altitude margin? Good luck if you hit any sink or head
wind on the way unless you use a big altitude margin which will
significantly hurt your decision down lower. The suggestion to use bug
factor to degrade your polar is basically an implementation of the
common rule of thumb to use 50%-75% of your published polar to
determine arrival altitude.


Point #1: I think what you are doing is essentially the same as keeping
the bugs at "no bugs", but using a high MC setting to figure the "safety
glide". A high MC means a steep glide angle compared to 0 MC - there's
the "degradation" in the polar you are wondering about. I normally use a
4 MC for my "safety glide" computation, which gives an L/D of 70% of my
max L/D.

Point #2: In addition to the 4 MC setting, I usually carry excess
altitude above the 4 MC glide slope to absorb strong sink and
unexpectedly strong headwinds. Over friendly ground in moderate
conditions, 500' excess has proven adequate; in strong conditions over
unfriendly ground, it might be as much as 2000' excess. These numbers
are trimmed as the distance to the airport decreases, starting about
10-20 miles out, because my 1000' AGL arrival height begins to provide
the "sink absorption" buffer.

Of course, I don't use the 4 MC setting as my speed to fly if I have to
head towards my safety airport; instead, I use a 1 MC setting (or zero
MC if I'm truly desperate). My MC setting for the "safety glide" is
separate from my "speed to fly" setting on my Cambridge 302, which is
usually set at 1 (moderate conditions) or 2 (strong conditions).

The above MC and excess altitude settings have proved satisfactory for
all my gliders, from a Ka-6e to an ASH 26 E. Of course, the speeds flown
were quite different for each glider.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (netto to net to email me)

- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarmhttp://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz


I generally do something similar to what Eric describes. In my
computer setup it's a lot easier to fiddle with the Mc setting than
adjust the bugs setting. The basic idea is to have a steeper glide
dialed and fly slightly slower until you establish that you are on
glidepath or better, but also to keep a constant arrival altitude
margin to account for the "2 miles of 10 kts down" scenario - for that
you need an arrival altitude buffer, not a glide angle buffer. If you
are way out on final glide you might start with a negative arrival
margin in an attempt to bump it up over time, but you need to get up
to glidepath by the time you are about 20 mile out or you will be out
of search range to find some lift to get up to glidepath.

9B
  #49  
Old August 27th 10, 03:16 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
akiley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Getting rid of the bugs and gotchas!

On Aug 25, 2:35*pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 8/24/2010 7:53 PM, akiley wrote: On Aug 24, 12:08 am, Eric *wrote:

I've used SeeYou Mobile for 1000+ hours all over the USA, and I'm not
aware of any bugs or gotchas. I would never go back to paper charts,
whiz wheels, or just looking out the window. For example, most of my
final glides begin 30 to 50 miles from the airport, where I can't even
see it, yet they work out well most of the time.


Eric,
What happens if your electronics fry? *Hope you have a backup
something.


I've used 4 PDAs over 10 years, 2000 hours total, with no failures, so I
haven't had to pull out the charts and ruler I always carry with me
(mostly out of habit). But, a PDA going bad isn't a SeeYou Mobile problem.. There are plenty of gochas I
can think of is SeeYouM. *All you have to do is not double check what
your goto waypoint is, forget to add winds, polar, safety altitude.
Maybe they aren't gochas, but they sort of are for new users.


These aren't SeeYou Mobile gotchas either, they are part of using a
"soaring computer", whether it's a map with circles, paper sheets with
tables of glide distances, or an electronic computer.

The polar and safety altitude (I assume you mean the "arrival altitude",
are settings you should do at home; i.e. "set and forget".

I'm not sure what you mean by "add winds", as SYM automatically uses the
winds in it's computations. Perhaps you mean "adjusting the winds"?
Sometimes you have to do that when you realize the winds ahead of you
are different from the winds SYM has calculated. * *It
takes a lot of thinking to make sure you know what you are doing.


I mean clear the winds totally in SeeYou then enter the official winds
aloft forecast. Maybe SeeYou does a better job, I haven't really
tested this. I just look at my IGC file from this Wednesday and the
winds were supposed to be 320 at 12kts in the 3000 to 6000 range. At
a few points spanning several minutes, SeeYou came back with winds
from 160 at 2 kts. But maybe this happens and is to be believed. Or
I'm really bad a drawing circles with a glider. Probably the later.


Yep, the cockpit is a busy place in a glider if you are going
cross-country, and it takes a while to get accustomed to a flight
computer. I had the advantage of 20 years of soaring before using PDA
flight computers, so the transition was much easier for me. I have the latest version of SeeYouM that I bought last fall. *One
known bug is that the wing loading changes when you leave the polar
screen then come back. *Try it.


It doesn't change on my setup (Ipaq 3835 with ver 3.11). Maybe it's a
3.12 issue. * *I think they fixed the one with Oudie
that didn't allow the user to set NM in units. *You would have to
reset it every time you loaded SeeYouM. *I haven't gotten an answer on
my Magnetic Track NavBox yet. *It's off by 12 degrees.


I bought this used iPaq which was listed as a 3700 on the reciept from
Wings and Wheels. Just out of warrantee. The label is worn and
unreadable on the back. Don't know of a software way to positively ID
the unit. It uses the CF cards and an add-on sleeve adapter to hold
the CF card. I have the slightly newer SeeYou Mobil ver 3.12. I have
had lots of IGC files with broken track or perfectly straight lines or
both. Also, I have to reboot my iPaq on a daily basis. Not sure if I
replace the iPaq next or the GPS. I did get an uninterrupted file
this wednesday on a 2.5 hr flight in the Cirrus.

I have to admit I've never used any kind of track bearing. I just put
the two different track bearing boxes on my PDA (simulator mode), and
they both read correctly (Washington state area); however, I get the
same error you do when I try to "fly" in Michigan. * *Maybe it's
party to do with old PDA hardware but I've had a lot of problems with
logging not starting, and NavBoxes showing no data, and lockups.
Other have had these problem too. *Some days my statistic page that is
supposed to show thermal graphs doesn't.


I just have the navBox called "Magnetic track over ground" at the top
center used as a heading indicator, even though it really is'nt.

There is a quirk in the older Ipaqs that can cause symptoms like this.
The fix is to disable the IR port, which is sensitive to sunlight, and
slows down the system. Make sure the beam is off on your Ipaq. Do
something like this: Start, Settings, Connections, Beam, uncheck box.


I just checked, this box is unchecked. But thanks for the heads up.


It also might be your hardware, as I've had none of those problems on my
fairly old 3835. What PDA are you using? Do you have GPS problems (you
might be able to determine that by looking at the flight trace in
SeeYou)? What GPS do you use? I'm slowly replacing components of my iPaq to see if that's the
problem. *I just replaced the CF card adapter back, I've tried a
different CF card. *We'll see.


I had the guys on the Navitar forum looking at these IGC files and
trying to help me with all my issues. They never came to any
conclusion on the broken flight tracks.

.... akiley

I'm definitely a navigator user. *I have a Garmin 395, I've put quite
a lot of hours on Garmin G1000's in IFR flight. *My point is one has
to be careful throwing full trust into these things.


Agreed. Start out conservatively, get comfortable with it, and then you
can reduce the margins bit by bit to make cross-country flying easier
and more enjoyable.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (netto to net to email me)


  #50  
Old August 27th 10, 06:36 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Eric Greenwell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,096
Default Getting rid of the bugs and gotchas!

On 8/26/2010 7:16 PM, akiley wrote:

I mean clear the winds totally in SeeYou then enter the official winds
aloft forecast. Maybe SeeYou does a better job, I haven't really
tested this. I just look at my IGC file from this Wednesday and the
winds were supposed to be 320 at 12kts in the 3000 to 6000 range. At
a few points spanning several minutes, SeeYou came back with winds
from 160 at 2 kts. But maybe this happens and is to be believed. Or
I'm really bad a drawing circles with a glider. Probably the later.

I always let Mobile fill in the blanks. It does a good job of measuring
the wind while circling, so I think it's better to use the actual wind
instead of a forecast wind; less trouble, too. I will sometimes change
the wind settings when I know I am flying into an area where the wind is
different from what Mobile has measured. This is usually the final glide
to the home airport, and since I haven't flown near home for the last
few hours, the wind it measured after the takeoff and the first couple
of thermals as I headed out on course may no longer be correct.
I bought this used iPaq which was listed as a 3700 on the reciept from
Wings and Wheels. Just out of warrantee. The label is worn and
unreadable on the back. Don't know of a software way to positively ID
the unit. It uses the CF cards and an add-on sleeve adapter to hold
the CF card. I have the slightly newer SeeYou Mobil ver 3.12. I have
had lots of IGC files with broken track or perfectly straight lines or
both. Also, I have to reboot my iPaq on a daily basis. Not sure if I
replace the iPaq next or the GPS. I did get an uninterrupted file
this wednesday on a 2.5 hr flight in the Cirrus.

Mobile for PDAs is a mature, stable program. These problems are almost
certainly hardware related. Can you borrow another Ipaq for a flight or
two?
I just have the navBox called "Magnetic track over ground" at the top
center used as a heading indicator, even though it really is'nt.

Unless you are really in love with magnetic bearings, I suggest you
switch to "track over ground" to use True bearings instead.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (netto to net to email me)

- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

- "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation Mar/2004" Much of what you need to know tinyurl.com/yfs7tnz

 




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
I.D required Glenn[_2_] Aviation Photos 8 November 12th 08 11:22 PM
ELT Required for all SSA sanctioned contests starting 2006 ELT Required for all SSA sanctione Steve Leonard Soaring 2 September 14th 05 03:49 AM
There is no penalty for failing to make the required FAA reports or investigation! Larry Dighera Piloting 9 October 12th 04 04:06 AM
New Home Required Ged McKnight Soaring 0 February 1st 04 09:11 PM
Good Home Required Ged McKnight Soaring 6 January 27th 04 11:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:57 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.