Turbo, it is not just the final glide bar. If it was just the bar than we could just ignore it. But as I said, it is all the arrival altitude info boxes AND all the waypoint details. I guess the labels as well, but they typically not showing when you below glide so I can't confirm this. So yes, the misleading calculation is everywhere.
Ramy On Nov 22, 2011, at 12:29 AM, Tobias Bieniek <[email protected]> wrote: > Too be honest, I've haven't entirely understood yet where the issue is > actually happening. Is it just the final glide bar or also the arrival > height labels for airports on the map?! I'm hoping to get some more > input from the other developers before making any fast decisions. > > Turbo > > > 2011/11/21 Ramy Yanetz <[email protected]>: >> Sounds like most of the repliers prefer the conventional way of calculating >> arrival altitude without assuming that the only lift I will find along the >> way is 0.5 knot since I am using conservative STF and that I will be silly >> enough to circle in it while drifting more than climbing. I can't imagine >> why someone would prefer it this way but I realize that there will always be >> opposite opinions. >> So the conclusion is to make it configurable. I am concerned that such a >> critical change was made without making it an option. >> I would like to request that any enhancement made going forward will be >> *always* made configurable if it will change any existing behavior. This is >> crucial to make XCS safe and reliable. >> Turbo, please let me know if I still need to open a ticket. I think this >> should be fixed ASAP, I personally wouldn't want to fly with it again this >> way, after almost picking up an alternate landing believing XCS which was >> telling me there is no way I can make it... I may need to switch back to my >> old PDA running WinPilot until this bug is fixed.. >> Ramy >> >> On Nov 21, 2011, at 7:05 PM, Sascha Haffner <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> regarding speeds to fly - I use my LX5000 for speed to fly indication (beep >> sounds) and therefore I set my best guess for MC at the LX5000 (Cambridge >> etc). XCS I use with a safety MC value (higher, than the MC in the LX) >> with Vers. 6.0.10 (old solver) to give me conservative values of AltRequired >> / Arrival Height. While comparing the arrival heights of the two >> instruments it gives me a nice redundancy (using even two GPS sources, Flarm >> and LX) and ease of mind. >> But again, I understand not everyone flies that way or has two instruments - >> therefore please please make the solver use configuable. >> >> Thank you guys. >> >> Cheers, >> Sascha >> Von: Evan Ludeman <[email protected]> >> An: [email protected] >> Gesendet: 17:52 Montag, 21.November 2011 >> Betreff: Re: [Xcsoar-user] About MC and tasks >> >> No, you're certainly not alone. I've been trading email with JW privately >> this morning. >> >> Ramy, I agree with everything you've said here. I fly the same way. >> >> FWIW, I never use a PDA for final glide... there's too darned many ways to >> get it wrong and XCS seems to be exacerbating the trend here. I rag on >> other aspects of the 302/303, but one thing it does pretty well is calculate >> a glide to a turnpoint. It will also do a final glide with HW/TW component >> wind which is *really* useful. and yet to be picked up by XCS. >> >> Another thing I pretty much never do is take speed to fly information from >> any instrument. You understand why! >> >> There's a critical need in soaring software to separate speed to fly from >> glide calculation that so far hasn't been met by anyone. It is often the >> case that the fast (and safe) way home is Mc 1 or 2 speed to fly and Mc 3 or >> better on final glide. Likewise, speed on task need not be calculated by >> your speed to fly Mc setting. >> >> -Evan Ludeman / T8 >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Ramy Yanetz <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> After using XCSoar for a while I am very impressed with it but at the same >> time surprise that it assumes that everybody fly according to MC theroy and >> with pre defined tasks. Most pilots I know, which are serious XC pilots, do >> not set tasks and do not fly according to MC theory, which is way overrated. >> In most place in western US you will want to fly at low MC to stay at the >> sweet spot above the mountains and near the clouds. But it looks like XCSoar >> insists that if you don't fly according to MC you can't go anywhere since >> you can't climb, and that if you fly for OLC than you also have a task pre >> declared. >> Flying strictly according to MC is a guarantee way to land out often. An >> example from my last flight: release at 1500 feet, made 3 turns in 3 knots >> and hit the inversion at 2000 feet, next thing you know XCSoar tells you to >> dive to the ground at 80+ knots at MC 3. Instead of flying at best glide to >> stay aloft. And if I change to mc zero it assumed I can not go anywhere >> upwind since I can not climb. If so, how did I manage to fly 200km tip >> toeing from one thermal to next at MC between zero and 0.5? >> I think this is a flaw to assume this. Am I alone thinking this? >> >> Ramy >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure >> contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, >> security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this >> data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d >> _______________________________________________ >> Xcsoar-user mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure >> contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, >> security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this >> data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d >> _______________________________________________ >> Xcsoar-user mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure >> contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, >> security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this >> data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Xcsoar-user mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure >> contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, >> security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this >> data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d >> _______________________________________________ >> Xcsoar-user mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d _______________________________________________ Xcsoar-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xcsoar-user
