> If you get yours back in operation, kindly let me know how the temp
readings fair.
Will do.
On Friday, March 15, 2019 at 8:14:39 AM UTC-5, G Hammer wrote:
>
> I like the idea and the maker seems to be a high quality operation.
> I'm just concerned about the lack of a radiation shield.
> If
I like the idea and the maker seems to be a high quality operation.
I'm just concerned about the lack of a radiation shield.
If you get yours back in operation, kindly let me know how the temp
readings fair.
Should they be accurate, I'd certainly get one.
On Thursday, March 14, 2019 at 9:15:35
That's actually why I purchased a WS10. I had a weatherflow station that I
sent back due to inconsistent readings.
I'm in the middle of a move but I ran the WS10 for a few days when it
arrived and it did perform better than the weatherflow. I'm hoping to get
it setup again within the next
The data should be fairly simple to adapt the Interceptor driver to get.
With no real data on how well this performs, for the price, I'm anxious to
see someone with a unit report their experience.
If it is solid, I'd be very likely to get one as the WeatherFlow just isn't
very accurate at the
Yes, it does have a few drawbacks. However, The compact size, lack of
moving parts, and overall set of features make it an appealing option.
I'm guessing by the lack of responses though that WeeWx doe not support
the Lufft UMB protocol or the TCP/IP interface of this station.
I have a ton on
The specs are ok, but the radar measurement of precipitation would be great.
I see no way to have a housing for temp measurement though.
Very cool device!
On Wednesday, March 13, 2019 at 11:48:51 PM UTC-4, Andrew B wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Can anyone tell me if WeeWx supports the Lufft WS10 station?
>
