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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
required LD versus required MC to make it home ??
snip
For typical days where there is lift available and as you become more comfortable with thermaling I would encourage you to try to start with Mc near 1. Mc == 0 means you really are in desperation mode and don't really plan to go anywhere. See the discussion in Reichman about this. Mc=0 quickly becomes a kind of boat anchor dragging on you. If you are dialing the Mc into a flight computer (or STF ring on a winter vario) it also starts giving you a feel for how excess Mc helps you if you run into worse conditions than you expect. You can increase the Mc setting you fly at up from there as you gain confidence, but dont' go crazy with it. A rule of thumb often used especially for new XC folks it to set the Mc conservatively at 1/2 to 1/3 of what you think your next average climb will be - and even then its just to give you an idea of average speed to fly, don't go chasing it. Sounds like you have a good approach as is. The last thermal average climb stats in SeeYou Mobile can be interesting to check, it will often be much less than you think, and even then it often misses time wasted mucking around trying to find lift. This brings up something I may have overlooked as I described how I get home safely. I use MC more as a way to judge my wiggle room to my home airport rather than STF. If my SeeYou is showing 10mc to get home based on winds and safety altitude, I generally don't fly that MC unless I'm very close and can see I have it made. Instead I fly conservatively within 10kts of best L/D and use that high required MC as my safety margin. Sort of like always being within half your best L/D to your target airport. akiley BTW details of wind effects and Mc may not be obvious, search for past r.a.s. postings by John Cochrane and others on this. [snip] Darryl |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
required LD versus required MC to make it home ??
On Aug 23, 1:14*pm, johngalloway wrote:
All glide angles converge at the destination so any glide angle that I can keep constant will bring me to home at my arrival reserve altitude. With the very, very, big caveat that there is no intervening terrain. There is actually significant potential for advancement in gliding computers. That is the display of a vertical profile view of the final glide, complete with terrain. This display is known as the VSD (Vertical Situation Display) in some non gliding display applications. This type of display can clearly depict a multi-angle final glide path when that is required to clear terrain and also make the goal at the required finish altitude. I suspect that this type of display would also be very useful for understanding the effect on glide path and optimum MC when there is a significant wind change when rounding the final turnpoint. Andy (GY) |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Getting rid of the bugs and gotchas!
On 8/23/2010 8:17 AM, akiley wrote:
Well, I've flown long enough to know not to trust electronics. I have 600 power hours using all sorts of navigators. Funny, when you use a Garmin 396 on a computer, it sets magnetic variation to user set instead of auto. SeeYou has quite a few bugs and gochas too. So my primary is look at the down angle back to the airport. 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. Your statement "So my primary is look at the down angle back to the airport" suggests to me it's not SeeYou, but more likely your setup or interpretation of what Mobile is telling you. If you are that close, the computer should be working with no problems. Flight computers can be a real aid to efficient, enjoyable soaring, so I hate to see someone having problems with them. What version of mobile are you using? Can you describe the two biggest bugs and gotchas? -- 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 |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Getting rid of the bugs and gotchas!
I'm with Mike. You can't get any simpler than using the "Arrival
Altitude" navbox. It takes into account all available parameters (distance, Mc, bugs, ballast, wind), and is corrected for reserve altitude. This requires you have reasonable polar info entered for the ship you're flying. This feature is perfect for first forays into xc flying. You can use this to "hop" from one airfield to the next. A quick glance at the navbox will show whether you can make the current waypoint from your current position. Negative value = climb, 0 or higher = good to go. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
required LD versus required MC to make it home ??
On Aug 23, 11:11*pm, Andy wrote:
On Aug 23, 1:14*pm, johngalloway wrote: All glide angles converge at the destination *so any glide angle that I can keep constant will bring me to home at my arrival reserve altitude. With the very, very, big caveat that there is no intervening terrain. There is actually significant potential for advancement in gliding computers. That is the display of a vertical profile view of the final glide, complete with terrain. *This display is known as the VSD (Vertical Situation Display) in some non gliding display applications. *This type of display can clearly depict a multi-angle final glide path when that is required to clear terrain and also make the goal at the required finish altitude. I suspect that this type of display would also be very useful for understanding the effect on glide path and optimum MC when there is a significant wind change when rounding the final turnpoint. Andy (GY) I use Condor soaring simulator with my iPaq running from the serial port. It's a great way to test if/then situations and to get familiar with your navigator. One interesting way of looking at terrain is also the program XC-Soar. It draws a dotted, terrain aware, wind aware, polar aware circle around your current position that indicates the terrain strike point at your current MC. For terrain, this dotted line spills into other valley's through lower gaps and valleys. Also SeeYou has a red box on the course line indicating any ridge you will hit before reaching you destination. You can run somewhat parallel to this ridge way before you get to it and if SeeYou finds a gap, the red box disappears and you can proceed direct. akiley |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
required LD versus required MC to make it home ??
On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 11:56:48 -0700 (PDT), Joseph Kiley
wrote: I don't think SeeYou does very well with winds. This is what I've experienced and read in other posts. I get winds aloft from several sources/stations during my home briefing. I enter those directly into SeeYou and always check them before I do my MC required to target. Well, actually SeeYou's wind calculations are actually very good, even if its only data source is GPS. But you have to remember that the wind is only calculated while you are circling, and that it might take a couple of minutes to get accurate data. My SeeYou is not plugged into anything so it's all GPS. To be honest, I use it mostly to analyze me flight when I get home. I look at it in flight to backup a possible creepy feeling because I look a bit low for my liking. I fly MC zero generally because I'm flying local working on my thermal technique. If I encounter sink I speed up maybe 10 or 15 knots depending on how large the sink area is. If I have a headwind I'm trying to penetrate, I will speed up somewhat as well. I guess what I really want to be sure of is NOT landing out. Try this for your Cirrus: - set MC on your PDA to 2 meters/second (do the maths for the units you use) - set bug factor to 30 percent - set arrival altitude to a value of your liking, say, 600 to 900 ft With these settings you can be nearly 100% sure that you are going to reach the chosen airport with the desired arrival altitude. If you know of any bugs in SeeYou Mobile, please report then to Naviter. Have done that. Which bugs did you observe? I've been flying with the relatively old SeeYou 2.71 for the last 15.000 kilometers and found no bugs worth mentioning. Greetings from germany Andreas |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
required LD versus required MC to make it home ??
On Aug 23, 11:11*pm, Andy wrote:
On Aug 23, 1:14*pm, johngalloway wrote: All glide angles converge at the destination *so any glide angle that I can keep constant will bring me to home at my arrival reserve altitude. With the very, very, big caveat that there is no intervening terrain. There is actually significant potential for advancement in gliding computers. That is the display of a vertical profile view of the final glide, complete with terrain. *This display is known as the VSD (Vertical Situation Display) in some non gliding display applications. *This type of display can clearly depict a multi-angle final glide path when that is required to clear terrain and also make the goal at the required finish altitude. I suspect that this type of display would also be very useful for understanding the effect on glide path and optimum MC when there is a significant wind change when rounding the final turnpoint. Andy (GY) Personally I love the SoarPilot final glide table. There's a picture of it at http://www.soaringpilot.org/dokuwiki...l_glide_screen It displays a table of MC settings (values 0-5, or 0-10 by 2) along with the speed to fly and a choice of arrival altitude, required altitude, or difference from glide slope. I find it very easy to follow on final glide -- if I'm picking up energy I can see how fast I can fly and still arrive, or if I'm losing energy I can see how much I need to slow up and still make it back. The only problem with SoarPilot is that it runs on PalmOS, which goes on outdated hardware these days. There's a version of StyleTap that runs on the iPhone, but there's no serial port or bluetooth to connect it to any other devices in your plane. I don't know if anyone has gotten it to work on the PNDs that are being used nowadays. -- Matt |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Getting rid of the bugs and gotchas!
On Aug 24, 6:39*am, Westbender wrote:
I'm with Mike. You can't get any simpler than using the "Arrival Altitude" navbox. It takes into account all available parameters (distance, Mc, bugs, ballast, wind), and is corrected for reserve altitude. This requires you have reasonable polar info entered for the ship you're flying. This feature is perfect for first forays into xc flying. You can use this to "hop" from one airfield to the next. A quick glance at the navbox will show whether you can make the current waypoint from your current position. Negative value = climb, 0 or higher = good to go. Seems like many pilots are using multiple complicated methods to determine their final glides. Most are using MC settings for that purpose. Is it just me who never use MC setting to determine arrival, but using bug factor instead? Following the KISS principal, this is the simplest way. No need to compare L/D, guesstimate MC, disconnect the vario or ignore the MC speed to fly, etc. Just set your bug factor to degrade your polar to something you are comfortable with (I found 70-75% to work fine most of the time), set your MC to zero and watch your arrival altitude. Once you are comfortable with the arrival altitude just keep maintain the same number by either speeding up or slowing down. Works perfect for me. Ramy |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Getting rid of the bugs and gotchas!
On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 11:09:01 -0700 (PDT), Ramy
wrote: Seems like many pilots are using multiple complicated methods to determine their final glides. Most are using MC settings for that purpose. Is it just me who never use MC setting to determine arrival, but using bug factor instead? Following the KISS principal, this is the simplest way. No need to compare L/D, guesstimate MC, disconnect the vario or ignore the MC speed to fly, etc. Just set your bug factor to degrade your polar to something you are comfortable with (I found 70-75% to work fine most of the time), set your MC to zero and watch your arrival altitude. Once you are comfortable with the arrival altitude just keep maintain the same number by either speeding up or slowing down. Works perfect for me. .... but is neither accurate, nor fast, not safer. Most pilots don't want to waste time (or simply don't have the weather) to climb extremely high in the last thermal, hence they follow McCready's advice that has been proven for the last 50 years: Set the average climb rate of the last thermal as MC setting, add the bug factor, and leave the thermal once the arrival altitude is to your liking. Works like a charm, and is extremely easy to use. To be honest, I have difficulties to find an explanation why something different (your settings, for example) should be less complicated. What you are doing is simply to abandon the performance of your 56:1 ship and fly it like a 30:1 Ka-6. Works, but is far, far away from the optimum. Cheers Andreas |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
required LD versus required MC to make it home
On Aug 24, 11:33*am, Andreas Maurer wrote:
On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 11:09:01 -0700 (PDT), Ramy wrote: Seems like many pilots are using multiple complicated methods to determine their final glides. Most are using MC settings for that purpose. Is it just me who never use MC setting to determine arrival, but using bug factor instead? Following the KISS principal, this is the simplest way. No need to compare L/D, guesstimate MC, disconnect the vario or ignore the MC speed to fly, etc. Just set your bug factor to degrade your polar to something you are comfortable with (I found 70-75% to work fine most of the time), set your MC to zero and watch your arrival altitude. Once you are comfortable with the arrival altitude just keep maintain the same number by either speeding up or slowing down. Works perfect for me. ... but is neither accurate, nor fast, not safer. Most pilots don't want to waste time (or simply don't have the weather) to climb extremely high in the last thermal, hence they follow McCready's advice that has been proven for the last 50 years: Set the average climb rate of the last thermal as MC setting, add the bug factor, and leave the thermal once the arrival altitude is to your liking. Works like a charm, and is extremely easy to use. To be honest, I have difficulties to find an explanation why something different (your settings, for example) should be less complicated. What you are doing is simply to abandon the performance of your 56:1 ship and fly it like a 30:1 Ka-6. Works, but is far, far away from the optimum. Cheers Andreas Nope. We both are going to leave the thermal at the same time and glide at the same speed. In my case the MC will be zero and the bug factor 75%, in your case MC=3 and bug factor = 95-100%. However you will need to ignore the speed to fly as John suggested unless you are willing to risk landout to save couple of minutes (which may make sense only in contest). Using the last average climb in the thermal is often meaningless in my opinion. In many places I fly (Truckee, Hollister, Byron), the last average thermal is maybe 5 knots but the next is zero since this was the last thermal. This is true for many soaring sites which are in the valley and not on the top of the montain range you just left, as well as long XC flight where the likelyhood to find another thermal late in the day is small. So using the method of dialing MC = last average climb and then follow STF is guaranty landout, and a very silly one... So my recomendation to all non contest XC pilots will be to degrade your performance using bug factor 70-75%, which will give you enough buffer for unexpected sink or head wind (which can also be very different from the wind measured in your last turn) and fly MC=0 until you are comfrtable with your arrival altitude and then speed up if your arrival altitude start increasing. This will usually result in slower glide speed at the beginning of the final glide, gradually increasing as you get closer, much safer than the other way around. Ramy |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I.D required | Glenn[_2_] | Aviation Photos | 8 | November 12th 08 10:22 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 08:11 PM |
Good Home Required | Ged McKnight | Soaring | 6 | January 27th 04 10:00 PM |