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. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Cambridge 302/303 users - feedback please
The new glider is ordered and we consider what vario
to instal. Having had a 302/303 for 6 years; 4 repairs and some doubts could you please let me have your experiences of the instrument re the following to assist in our decision - Borgelt or Cambridge. 1. Reliability 2. Wind calculation ( Intermittantly final glides are mad numbers and the wind is at that point very wrong ) 3. On thermal entry it overreads then calms down after a half turn ( Maybe our plumbing) 4. We have never been convinced that netto relative works. Many thanks , Colin |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Cambridge 302/303 users - feedback please
May I suggest you look at the SN10? Particularly if you are interested
in racing, it's a really nice (and easy to use) system. I've had mine for 6 years now with absolutely no problems. Add a PDA for backup moving map/landing fields, and a backup minivario (Tasman, B-400, Ilec, VW 910) and you have the whole deal. You do need a GPS source, I use a dedicated Garmin 35. The SN10 has a good but non-.igc logger, OK for OLC classic. It will work well with any Garmin, or real .igc logger, too. It also now talks to PDA software, such as MCU and Strepla. I figure, if it's good enough for Dick Butler and George Moffat, it's good enough for me! (and no, I don't work for Ilec...) Kirk |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Cambridge 302/303 users - feedback please
kirk.stant wrote:
May I suggest you look at the SN10? Particularly if you are interested in racing, it's a really nice (and easy to use) system. I had an SN10 a few years back, and found it to be excellent for assigned tasks, but painful for flying without a set task. It was hard to create a task on the fly, and there was no easy way to determine what turnpoints were nearby. Perhaps this has been fixed in recent years... Marc |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Cambridge 302/303 users - feedback please
Marc Ramsey wrote: I had an SN10 a few years back, and found it to be excellent for assigned tasks, but painful for flying without a set task. It was hard to create a task on the fly, and there was no easy way to determine what turnpoints were nearby. Perhaps this has been fixed in recent years... I find it extremely easy to change task on the fly - much easier than any PDA program I've tried (I've flown with MCU, Winpilot, and pocketStrePla, and played with GNII). You do have to know where the turnpoints are - either a marked map, or a PDA map work well in this case. Helps if they are numbered. But I agree it is best for assigned tasks (which is what I prefer, naturally...). A bit awkward for AATs, but I've yet to find a device that does that well (without too much heads down time). It now shows closest alternates, not the same as closest turnpoints. Cheers, Kirk |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Cambridge 302/303 users - feedback please
If you live in the USA, the advantage of the 302 is that when it breaks
down (and it will), you can get a very quick turnaround on repairs. However, when I had an SN-10, it once had to be sent to Germany for repairs, and Dave Nadler sent me a loaner SN-10 to use in the meantime. Great service from Dave. Due to a lack of panel space in my A fuselage Schempp-Hirth, I don't have the option of using the SN-10, but instead am running a PDA hooked up to a 302. However, I probably would use the SN-10 if I had the space. kirk.stant wrote: May I suggest you look at the SN10? Particularly if you are interested in racing, it's a really nice (and easy to use) system. I've had mine for 6 years now with absolutely no problems. Add a PDA for backup moving map/landing fields, and a backup minivario (Tasman, B-400, Ilec, VW 910) and you have the whole deal. You do need a GPS source, I use a dedicated Garmin 35. The SN10 has a good but non-.igc logger, OK for OLC classic. It will work well with any Garmin, or real .igc logger, too. It also now talks to PDA software, such as MCU and Strepla. I figure, if it's good enough for Dick Butler and George Moffat, it's good enough for me! (and no, I don't work for Ilec...) Kirk |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Cambridge 302/303 users - feedback please
I have used a 302, without the 303, but with Glide Nav for several
years: 1.Reliability. 2 cases of internal seal failure otherwise no problems 2. Wind calculation - not done in 302 3. Good TE compensation no problem with over-read on thermal entry. I use 1.7 audio and 2.3 vario and see good correlation with B40 readings. 4. Reads lower sink than B40 in cruise but never ran the numbers to see if difference matched polar. No problem finding thermals in cruise. Not an issue. I did replace the display as I had one with incorrect polarization. Not a reliability issue but a poor parts screening process. Andy |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Cambridge 302/303 users - feedback please
I've had mine since late 2001 (302 only). It was jumpy and tended to
overshoot early on but Marty Eiler at Caracole worked some magic with the plumbing and it now matches my B-40 in response as well as strength. The only problem has been with the gear warning system which failed intermittently and finally gave up the ghost (yes, we checked the switches and wiring all the way to the connections on the 302). Next time the unit comes out for calibration, I'll send it back to have this checked. I use it with WinPilot Pro and am quite satisfied. The 302 is the only system I've used, so I can't be of any help on comparisons with others. Ray Warshaw Andy wrote: I have used a 302, without the 303, but with Glide Nav for several years: 1.Reliability. 2 cases of internal seal failure otherwise no problems 2. Wind calculation - not done in 302 3. Good TE compensation no problem with over-read on thermal entry. I use 1.7 audio and 2.3 vario and see good correlation with B40 readings. 4. Reads lower sink than B40 in cruise but never ran the numbers to see if difference matched polar. No problem finding thermals in cruise. Not an issue. I did replace the display as I had one with incorrect polarization. Not a reliability issue but a poor parts screening process. Andy |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Cambridge 302/303 users - feedback please
Andy wrote:
2. Wind calculation - not done in 302 The 302 does calculate wind, and it is used by the 303 and several third party software packages. I've found it to be fairly accurate, but I'd be a bit skeptical about what it's reporting after long periods of cruise... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Cambridge 302/303 users - feedback please
Marc Ramsey wrote: Andy wrote: 2. Wind calculation - not done in 302 The 302 does calculate wind, and it is used by the 303 and several third party software packages. I've found it to be fairly accurate, but I'd be a bit skeptical about what it's reporting after long periods of cruise... Ok I suppose I should have said - not displayed by 302. In my setup the wind is displayed by GNII on a PDA . Those winds estimates seem reasonable but I don't know if GNII uses the wind data directly from the 302 or computes its own wind estimate. According to the interace spec the 302 sends the following wind info: 1 Vector wind direction in degrees 2 Vector wind speed in 10ths of meters per second 3 Vector wind age in seconds 4 Component wind in 10ths of Meters per second + 500 (500 = 0, 495 = 0.5 m/s tailwind) So it advises user systems how stale the wind estimate is. GNII does not pass that info on to the pilot. Does the 303? Andy |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Cambridge 302/303 users - feedback please
Marc Ramsey wrote:
Andy wrote: 2. Wind calculation - not done in 302 The 302 does calculate wind, and it is used by the 303 and several third party software packages. I've found it to be fairly accurate, but I'd be a bit skeptical about what it's reporting after long periods of cruise... I'm read, and it seemed to be the case while I was using GN II, the wind will update when you change course by about 20-30 degrees for at least 10 seconds. I believe this is true for most glide computers that don't have heading information available to them. -- Note: email address new as of 9/4/2006 Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA "Transponders in Sailplanes" on the Soaring Safety Foundation website www.soaringsafety.org/prevention/articles.html "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Themi Users Feedback | [email protected] | Soaring | 8 | February 10th 06 02:17 AM |
Another Cambridge 302 logger bug | [email protected] | Soaring | 8 | July 19th 05 04:05 PM |
PPC/PFPS Users Feedback | OldRanger | Military Aviation | 0 | January 14th 04 06:24 AM |
All feedback stick users....read this! | FaxCap | Simulators | 13 | January 1st 04 08:26 PM |
FS Cambridge 302/303 | H201b | Soaring | 2 | December 21st 03 09:05 PM |