Final glide

On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 4:46:00 PM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 6:55:24 PM UTC-4, waremark wrote:
Have you confirmed for each whether or not they are using total energy arrival height, ie including the expected height recovery from pull up to best glide height? That could easily account for a difference of 400 feet.

Is the difference a fixed value regardless of distance to go, rather than a percentage?

Have you checked whether the elevation of your arrival airfield is set the same in both devices?

It's either a user set up or database problem. There's no other likely possibility.

OT... but using a preset margin is sooooo 1986. Set the margin to zero and let the device tell you your predicted arrival height. If you don't like the numbers you see, do that PIC thing....

T8
snip
"OT... but using a preset margin is sooooo 1986"

I beg to disagree with you sir. This is YOUR preference and opinion and maybe other's too and that is ok... but, using a safety margin is strictly a personal preference of others and no it does not go out of style like you so imply above..

On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 8:54:25 PM UTC-4, 6PK wrote:
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 4:46:00 PM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 6:55:24 PM UTC-4, waremark wrote:
Have you confirmed for each whether or not they are using total energy arrival height, ie including the expected height recovery from pull up to best glide height? That could easily account for a difference of 400 feet.

Is the difference a fixed value regardless of distance to go, rather than a percentage?

Have you checked whether the elevation of your arrival airfield is set the same in both devices?

It's either a user set up or database problem. There's no other likely possibility.

OT... but using a preset margin is sooooo 1986. Set the margin to zero and let the device tell you your predicted arrival height. If you don't like the numbers you see, do that PIC thing....

T8
snip
"OT... but using a preset margin is sooooo 1986"

I beg to disagree with you sir. This is YOUR preference and opinion and maybe other's too and that is ok... but, using a safety margin is strictly a personal preference of others and no it does not go out of style like you so imply above..

It was dumb in 1986 too :-).

No one arrival height covers all situations.

T8

On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 6:13:12 PM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 8:54:25 PM UTC-4, 6PK wrote:
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 4:46:00 PM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 6:55:24 PM UTC-4, waremark wrote:
Have you confirmed for each whether or not they are using total energy arrival height, ie including the expected height recovery from pull up to best glide height? That could easily account for a difference of 400 feet.

Is the difference a fixed value regardless of distance to go, rather than a percentage?

Have you checked whether the elevation of your arrival airfield is set the same in both devices?

It's either a user set up or database problem. There's no other likely possibility.

OT... but using a preset margin is sooooo 1986. Set the margin to zero and let the device tell you your predicted arrival height. If you don't like the numbers you see, do that PIC thing....

T8
snip
"OT... but using a preset margin is sooooo 1986"

I beg to disagree with you sir. This is YOUR preference and opinion and maybe other's too and that is ok... but, using a safety margin is strictly a personal preference of others and no it does not go out of style like you so imply above..

It was dumb in 1986 too :-).

No one arrival height covers all situations.

T8

Of course not but it is still personal a personal preference, no need to be opiniated, there is always more than one way to skin a cat.

On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 9:30:25 PM UTC-4, 6PK wrote:
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 6:13:12 PM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 8:54:25 PM UTC-4, 6PK wrote:
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 4:46:00 PM UTC-7, Tango Eight wrote:
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 6:55:24 PM UTC-4, waremark wrote:
Have you confirmed for each whether or not they are using total energy arrival height, ie including the expected height recovery from pull up to best glide height? That could easily account for a difference of 400 feet.

Is the difference a fixed value regardless of distance to go, rather than a percentage?

Have you checked whether the elevation of your arrival airfield is set the same in both devices?

It's either a user set up or database problem. There's no other likely possibility.

OT... but using a preset margin is sooooo 1986. Set the margin to zero and let the device tell you your predicted arrival height. If you don't like the numbers you see, do that PIC thing....

T8
snip
"OT... but using a preset margin is sooooo 1986"

I beg to disagree with you sir. This is YOUR preference and opinion and maybe other's too and that is ok... but, using a safety margin is strictly a personal preference of others and no it does not go out of style like you so imply above..

It was dumb in 1986 too :-).

No one arrival height covers all situations.

T8

Of course not but it is still personal a personal preference, no need to be opiniated, there is always more than one way to skin a cat.

Try it the other way, you'll see.

Happy landings,
T8

Tango Eight wrote on 9/23/2019 7:01 PM:
No one arrival height covers all situations.

T8
Of course not but it is still personal a personal preference, no need to be opiniated, there is always more than one way to skin a cat.
Try it the other way, you'll see.

After 40 years of using a 1000' arrival height as my "aim point", I probably
shouldn't be changing it now :^)

But, I have always added a few hundred (or more) feet if I thought there were
going to be difficulties at the landing area, or (rarely) subtracted a few hundred
when close to a landing place that had no problems, and the extra search time
might find me thermal.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1

At 03:27 24 September 2019, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Tango Eight wrote on 9/23/2019 7:01 PM:
No one arrival height covers all situations.

T8
Of course not but it is still personal a personal
preference, no need to
be opiniated, there is always more than one way to skin
a cat.
Try it the other way, you'll see.

After 40 years of using a 1000' arrival height as my
"aim point", I
probably
shouldn't be changing it now :^)

But, I have always added a few hundred (or more) feet
if I thought there
were
going to be difficulties at the landing area, or (rarely)
subtracted a few
hundred
when close to a landing place that had no problems,
and the extra search
time
might find me thermal.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change
".netto" to ".us" to email
me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"

https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications
/download-the-guide-1

Probably shouldn't comment but anyway..

Setting a fixed margin and then doing airborne sums
based on the current situation and that (remembered)
margin, is more difficult for me than just setting Zero
and seeing what AH is predicted on screen.

When I look at others' LXXXX devices I often find they
have 628feet (aka 200m), which suggests they may not
know what margin is set and indeed may never have
looked at the page.

Zander ZS-1 had the answer - AH welded at zero.
wysiwyg.

Steve has mentioned the key here. If you are about to head home, and find yourself saying somthing like the following, "I am 1000 over, my 1000ft reserve" then your reserve is doing you a disservice. It is somewhat of catch 22. You need to be aware of your reserve in case things go south and you fall below it, but the purpose is to keep you from needing to think about it (always have 1000 ft in reserve).

The biggest problem is when things go south. If you are close in, you fall below 0, now you need to subtract from your reserve to figure out your true arrival height. If you use somthing other than 1000 ft it gets harder. So right when you most need clear information you are doing mental math. Bad timing to insert a math problem before you need to make a critical decision. Some (in the admiralty), if not most, know how I know this.

It has been described as setting your watch ahead so you are not late.

I too had flown with a reserve for years, and was worried about switching, but just a few flights and you adjust. And a few more and you realy start to appreciate the fact that you are, for the first time, realy getting the number you want out of your flight computer.

How high will I be when I get there...

RR
Commodore

I'm stuck back in 1986 (87, actually).Â* I set my CNII to arrive at
1,000' AGL over mid field and it never works out for me.Â* I get lower
and lower and, as I get nervous, I arrive well above where I want to be.

I can set the XCSoar unit to Automatic McCready and it directs scary
fast speeds with MC 9.0 or more.

So, Evan, precisely how do you read your expected arrival height after
setting your safety factor to zero?Â* I'd like to give it a try.

On 9/23/2019 8:01 PM, Tango Eight wrote:
O
It was dumb in 1986 too :-).

No one arrival height covers all situations.

T8
Of course not but it is still personal a personal preference, no need to be opiniated, there is always more than one way to skin a cat.
Try it the other way, you'll see.

Happy landings,
T8

--
Dan, 5J