Regards,
Richard
Richard Gynes
Service Engineer
Trainer
richa...@designwyse.com.au
1 Fairborne Way
Keysborough
Vic 3173
03 9554 600
On 09/11/2011, at 12:14 PM, xcsoar-user-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net wrote:
> Send Xcsoar-user mailing list submissions to
> xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> xcsoar-user-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> xcsoar-user-ow...@lists.sourceforge.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Xcsoar-user digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Arrival Altitude and MC setting (Ramy Yanetz)
> 2. Re: Arrival Altitude and MC setting (Max Kellermann)
> 3. Re: Arrival Altitude and MC setting (Ramy Yanetz)
> 4. Highly experimental: XCSoar for Mac OS X (Max Kellermann)
> 5. Installed old XCsoar versions (Chad Nowak)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 23:25:49 -0800 (PST)
> From: Ramy Yanetz <ryan...@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Xcsoar-user] Arrival Altitude and MC setting
> To: "mar...@gregorie.org" <mar...@gregorie.org>,
> "xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net"
> <xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net>
> Message-ID:
> <1320650749.28871.yahoomail...@web81108.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Martin,
> ?
> Your method will get you home (or to your selected landout waypoint) if no
> unexpected sink or head wind is encountered on final glide. Reason is that it
> is based on average glide performance. Which means about half the time you
> will gain on your glide, or loose. And if you loose too much,?as you noted,
> you can landout. This may work well in flat land flying with many landout
> options. Where I fly, in the western US, there is often no other place
> to?land except the landout options in the database. Which means, I must keep
> at least one within glide, and I can not afford arriving too low or not
> arriving at all. As such, the need for polar degradation above and beyond the
> actual glider performance. I found that 1/3 degradation (32:1 for my ASW27)
> works for me over 90% of the time, some prefer 50% degradation.?
> Also your example about your club rule is a common?case and also demonstartes
> the need for polar degradation for those who fly locally. "Staying within
> gliding range of the field" surely does not mean using the factory polar to
> determine gliding range, otherwise many of those local flights would end with
> a landout. If you monitor the infobox and fly at MC=0 (which is the correct
> MC setting for most pilots flying locally) without polar degradation, you
> will most likely loose on glide and, depend on your safety altitude, may
> landout.? I know my club rule for gliding range uses 50% of?published polar,
> so club members need to be able to easily degrade the polar.
> So we need a consistant, persistant, easy and clear method to degrade polars
> for safe glide calculations. And frankly, I am a little surprised there isn't
> such a mechanism in XCSoar.
> ?
> Ramy
>
>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Martin Gregorie <mar...@gregorie.org>
>> To: xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net
>> Sent: Sunday, November 6, 2011 3:51 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Xcsoar-user] Arrival Altitude and MC setting
>>
>> On Sat, 2011-11-05 at 21:34 -0700, Ramy Yanetz wrote:
>>> So how do pilots address this?
>>>
>> What I do:
>>
>> - Check the polar against your glider with long enough final glides to
>> ? make this a sensible exercise, say 30 - 35 km. Note the predicted
>> ? arrival height at the start of the FG and check whether you were
>> ? above or below it on arrival. While you're doing this, there's no
>> ? need to push the margins - if you're 30 km out and the FG prediction
>> ? is an 1800 ft arrival, thats good. Fly the FG and see whether you
>> ? did arrive at 1800ft or not. If the polar is consistently
>> ? underestimating the glider's performance, fine. If not, consider
>> ? modifying it and using the modified polar from a file rather than
>> ? the polar built into XCSoar.
>>
>> ? In my case (Std Libelle with full span lower surface zigzag
>> ? turbulators) the Winpilot polar is pessimistic, probably due to the
>> ? turbs, which add about 1 point to the best glide ratio.
>>
>> - I set safety altitude to 1000 ft
>>
>> By now I've done finals glides under these conditions enough to be
>> confident that the FG prediction is reliable and, if unexpected sink
>> drops me more than 400 ft below my selected safety altitude when heading
>> home after abandoning a task due to weather, to take note and either
>> find a climb pronto, no matter how slow it may be, or to land out.
>>
>> I think the sort of exercise I described above is a good thing to do
>> early in the season when you're getting you eye back in for XC flights,
>> or on days when the good weather slot is predicted to be too short or
>> over too limited an area for an XC. BTW, in my club anyway, 'local
>> soaring' translates as "staying within gliding range of the field". If
>> you go local soaring with? a task running in XCSoar whose only TP is
>> your home field, you can easily see if you're in glide range of home by
>> monitoring the FG height infobox. If you fly upwind from the field on a
>> day when there are good thermals to 5500 ft or more and a steady 12-15
>> kt breeze, you'll find that you can comfortably get 30-35 km away and
>> still be in gliding range of home. Doing this is good preparation if
>> you're checking out XCSoar's FG calculations or if you're an early XC
>> pilot and want to practise FGs. If you're new to XCSoar, this is also a
>> very good way of getting to know how the program works and how to use
>> the information it is showing you.
>>
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> RSA(R) Conference 2012
>> Save $700 by Nov 18
>> Register now
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1
>> _______________________________________________
>> Xcsoar-user mailing list
>> Xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user
>>
>>
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 08:32:55 +0100
> From: Max Kellermann <m...@duempel.org>
> Subject: Re: [Xcsoar-user] Arrival Altitude and MC setting
> To: Ramy Yanetz <ryan...@yahoo.com>
> Cc: xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> Message-ID: <20111107073255.GA20490@Debian-60-squeeze-64-minimal>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On 2011/11/07 08:25, Ramy Yanetz <ryan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> So we need a consistant, persistant, easy and clear method to
>> degrade polars for safe glide calculations. And frankly, I am a
>> little surprised there isn't such a mechanism in XCSoar.
>
> No more surprises - somebody please write a ticket unless there is one
> already. I think we'll go for a persistent degradation factor, that
> is independent of the "bugs" setting. That is easy to use (no polar
> editing), easy to understand, and does not have the bad side effects
> of a high safety MC.
>
> Max
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 23:51:55 -0800 (PST)
> From: Ramy Yanetz <ryan...@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Xcsoar-user] Arrival Altitude and MC setting
> To: Max Kellermann <m...@duempel.org>
> Cc: "xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net"
> <xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net>
> Message-ID: <1320652315.3565.yahoomail...@web81106.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Sounds good. I plan to write a ticket for that (and few other issues)
> sometime this week, unless someone else already beat me to it.
> ?
> Thanks,
> ?
> Ramy
>
>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Max Kellermann <m...@duempel.org>
>> To: Ramy Yanetz <ryan...@yahoo.com>
>> Cc: xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net
>> Sent: Sunday, November 6, 2011 11:32 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Xcsoar-user] Arrival Altitude and MC setting
>>
>> On 2011/11/07 08:25, Ramy Yanetz <ryan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> So we need a consistant, persistant, easy and clear method to
>>> degrade polars for safe glide calculations. And frankly, I am a
>>> little surprised there isn't such a mechanism in XCSoar.
>>
>> No more surprises - somebody please write a ticket unless there is one
>> already.? I think we'll go for a persistent degradation factor, that
>> is independent of the "bugs" setting.? That is easy to use (no polar
>> editing), easy to understand, and does not have the bad side effects
>> of a high safety MC.
>>
>> Max
>>
>>
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 12:15:55 +0100
> From: Max Kellermann <m...@duempel.org>
> Subject: [Xcsoar-user] Highly experimental: XCSoar for Mac OS X
> To: xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> Message-ID: <20111107111555.GA21482@Debian-60-squeeze-64-minimal>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Hi,
>
> XCSoar has been working on Mac OS X for a while, natively, without
> emulation and without X11. Though we never really finished the port.
>
> As of XCSoar 6.2.3, we will publish packages for Mac OS X. To give
> you a chance to test it now, here's a preliminary and experimental
> package:
>
> http://max.kellermann.name/download/xcsoar/devel/osx/XCSoar.dmg
>
> This is a pre-release build of something between 6.2.2 and 6.2.3.
>
> Copy the XCSoarData directory from your PDA/PNA/phone or from your
> Windows PC to your Mac's home directory, install the DMG file, and
> launch XCSoar. It should work like it does on any other platform (but
> no program icon, no sound, and other minor quirks).
>
> Please report bugs to the bug tracker. It has a "Mac OS X" milestone
> now. The quality of the Mac version depends on your bug reports,
> since none of the most active XCSoar developers have a Mac.
>
> Max
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 11:14:17 +1000
> From: Chad Nowak <walkywo...@hotmail.com>
> Subject: [Xcsoar-user] Installed old XCsoar versions
> To: Xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> Message-ID: <blu0-smtp20775b19218211616e9eb72c5...@phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi all, for reasons I won't go into I have to install an old version of
> XCsoar (v5.1.8) onto my Altair for a short period of time but I can't seem to
> do it as the install ends up not working properly.
>
> Apparently there is a program which is needed for the Altair to enable you to
> go backwards to the old 5 series.
>
> Can anyone comment??
>
> Chad Nowak
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> RSA(R) Conference 2012
> Save $700 by Nov 18
> Register now
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xcsoar-user mailing list
> Xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user
>
>
> End of Xcsoar-user Digest, Vol 66, Issue 5
> ******************************************
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Save $700 by Nov 18
Register now
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1
_______________________________________________
Xcsoar-user mailing list
Xcsoar-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user
