Best performing Vario?

we are talking about http://www.winpilot.com/images4/PRO_1.gif right?

actually the xcsoar representation is quite similar, only that the climb values are not drawn in a 3D way, but using a polar diagram. The arrow that WinPilot shows is also available in XCSoar, just not as emphasized and it will get larger once the suggestion to recenter gets stronger. could you elaborate on what exactly you think is better in the WinPilot representation?

On Friday, September 28, 2012 2:22:46 AM UTC-7, Tobias Bieniek wrote:
we are talking about http://www.winpilot.com/images4/PRO_1.gif right? actually the xcsoar representation is quite similar, only that the climb values are not drawn in a 3D way, but using a polar diagram. The arrow that WinPilot shows is also available in XCSoar, just not as emphasized and it will get larger once the suggestion to recenter gets stronger. could you elaborate on what exactly you think is better in the WinPilot representation?

It is the arrow that makes it accurate and easy to use- more visual. It simply gets shorter as one gets closer to the core and when it just becomes a dot you are at the core.
I'm very impressed with XCSoar but I'm not aware of the arrow like WinPilot or even SYM ?? XCSoar's Thermal Assist works good but when I use it one has to look -head down-rather than just to "refer" to the arrow at a glance keeping heads out of the cockpit. My 5 C worth. 6PK

you can see the current implementation of XCSoar at http://bugs.xcsoar.org/raw-attachmen...51197415_n.jpg

if you look close, you notice a blue line originating from the center of the thermal assistant. the other end of the line marks the point of the proposed thermal core and shows you the direction in which you would need to recenter. from what you've mentioned in the previous posting I understand that this indicator needs to be larger and possibly in an arrow-like form, correct?!

there is also an alternative implementation proposed that looks like this: http://bugs.xcsoar.org/raw-attachmen...lassistant.png
feel free to comment on that one too. we are always open to suggestions and constructive criticism.

On Sep 28, 12:08*pm, Tobias Bieniek
wrote:
you can see the current implementation of XCSoar athttp://bugs.xcsoar.org/raw-attachment/ticket/2301/552152_459984440688...

if you look close, you notice a blue line originating from the center of the thermal assistant. the other end of the line marks the point of the proposed thermal core and shows you the direction in which you would need to recenter. from what you've mentioned in the previous posting I understand that this indicator needs to be larger and possibly in an arrow-like form, correct?!

there is also an alternative implementation proposed that looks like this:http://bugs.xcsoar.org/raw-attachmen...iedthermalassi...
feel free to comment on that one too. we are always open to suggestions and constructive criticism.

I think the current solution is better. Just make the arrow like in
WinPilot and the aircraft somewhat bigger or replace with the triangle
like in the proposed solution. The new solution is not as good as the
current one, gives less granular information.

What happened to a good pair of eyes, a sensitive butt and any of the above varios?

On Friday, September 28, 2012 6:25:17 PM UTC-7, Wheaton wrote:
What happened to a good pair of eyes, a sensitive butt and any of the above varios?

They are still needed. But what is wrong with progress?!

On 9/28/2012 6:25 PM, Wheaton wrote:
What happened to a good pair of eyes, a sensitive butt and any of the above varios?

One good reason is fiberglass construction, modern airfoils, and heavy
gliders. Fly slowly at 1-26 or K-6 speeds, and even a pellet vario can
work well. Blast through the thermal at 90-100 knots, full of water ...

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

One good reason is fiberglass construction, modern airfoils, and heavy
gliders. Fly slowly at 1-26 or K-6 speeds, and even a pellet vario can
work well. Blast through the thermal at 90-100 knots, full of water ...
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to


So, the question becomes, what software is best for what conditions? This post assumes that the varios input to the software shows true lift without gusts etc.

The PC SeeYou stats showed that on 200 km of distance yesterday, with overdeveloped cloudbases as low as 2500 ft AGL, average climbs were as low as 1 knot or zero, getting blown home on wind. Most "circles" showed lift and 4 knot gusts at opposite sides of the circle, and sink everywhere else. Moving to one direction to the other resulted in the same thing with a different set of short term lift bubbles. That's trying both slow 45 degree banks, or back and forth sniffing in the bubbly area that had more lift than sink. When you're that low you have to do what you have to do.

Other people's flights on the OLC that day showed pretty mush the same conditions/results, but I didn't see anyone doing the "sniff around" method.

Sometimes you just have to fly around a bubbly area that has more lift than sink, and a 1 minute average lift option on a very weak bubble day would help. That's about the size of a "sniff around" area, which isn't a thermal at all even if there is more lift than sink. "Last thermal" stats on software I've used/seen so far stops working as soon as you go straight for any length of time.

So, what I'm saying is that the software development and discussion seems to be optimized for classic Texas lift silos on nice days, not for overdeveloped low weak days when you'r relying on the circulation from latent heat of liquidization just under cloudbase.

The suggested XCSOAR thermal assistant screen http://bugs.xcsoar.org/raw-attachmen...lassistant.png would work well for these conditions if it would show a one mile sniffing area with bubble clusters, even if you're flying back and forth rather than circling. The outer ring would still work for the classic thermal situation.

So, I would suggest that Tobias' proposal works for more situations than Andrzej's objection, since not all of us can assume classic thermal silos of lift on non-classic lift days.

On 9/28/2012 2:22 AM, Tobias Bieniek wrote:
we are talking about http://www.winpilot.com/images4/PRO_1.gif
right?

actually the xcsoar representation is quite similar, only that the
climb values are not drawn in a 3D way, but using a polar diagram.
The arrow that WinPilot shows is also available in XCSoar, just not
as emphasized and it will get larger once the suggestion to recenter
gets stronger. could you elaborate on what exactly you think is
better in the WinPilot representation?

SeeYou Mobile uses circles of differing size and color around the
thermal circle to show the thermal strength. It also has an arrow
suggesting the direction to move, and an audio alert when you should
level your wings to move the circle. The circles and arrow can be
assessed in a glance, or the audio alone can be used to avoid even the
need for a glance, all of which seem at least as useful as Winpilot's
depiction.

Mobile doesn't have the chart of lift versus time. How is this useful?

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

On Friday, September 28, 2012 9:36:01 AM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 9/28/2012 2:22 AM, Tobias Bieniek wrote:

we are talking about http://www.winpilot.com/images4/PRO_1.gif

right?



actually the xcsoar representation is quite similar, only that the

climb values are not drawn in a 3D way, but using a polar diagram.

The arrow that WinPilot shows is also available in XCSoar, just not

as emphasized and it will get larger once the suggestion to recenter

gets stronger. could you elaborate on what exactly you think is

better in the WinPilot representation?



SeeYou Mobile uses circles of differing size and color around the

thermal circle to show the thermal strength. It also has an arrow

suggesting the direction to move, and an audio alert when you should

level your wings to move the circle. The circles and arrow can be

assessed in a glance, or the audio alone can be used to avoid even the

need for a glance, all of which seem at least as useful as Winpilot's

depiction.



Mobile doesn't have the chart of lift versus time. How is this useful?



--

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

email me)

The circles used by SYM are very coarse and do not convey much information, nor are they as easily interpreted at a glance. The arrow on SYM does not change length in any meaningful way. In contrast, the Winplot arrow will go from a dot (centered) to a huge thing all across the screen (you are WAY off!), conveying much more instantly. The graph of thermal strength is not useful for centering the thermal, but is useful in deciding when to leave.

On XCSoar, I think the current polar chart is much better than the proposed solutions. The polar chart gives about the same info as the Winpilot cylinder graph, though perhaps not quite as intuitive (up should after all be up, not out....). The arrow though is key, the computer is much fairer at integrating the climb around the circle than your butt or your eyes on a needle. Especially true of a whacky thermal or when your TE is messed up from prop wash. Just make sure the arrow changes length very obviously with lift asymmetry.