Am 22.11.2011 15:54, schrieb Max Kellermann:
> Yes, it is a mistake! It's setting a bad example of "I'll change the
> MacCready setting to ridiculous values until the result matches my
> pre-defined expectations". And this kind of thinking is what causes
> the misunderstandings among users here. MacCready is for when you
> expect to circle, and nothing else. If you want something else (for
> example ridge soaring, or other types of soaring), you need a new
> theory with new formulas. XCSoar does not support that, neither does
> any other glide computer I know. Max
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
Hello Max,
yes it might be "wrong" from a purely theoretical point of view. However
as Turbo stated before changing MC-Value is the only way to tell the
flight computer how fast we intend to fly.
Please acknowlegde that there is a large portion of pilots who use MC in
this way for final glides and it has proven to be a good (and fast!)
concept, although according to the "pure MC Theory" not correct.
In fact on my airfield the former multiple German champion often starts
his final glide 100m below the glidepath if the airmass is still active
and gains the rest on the way even in the flatlands.
In this situation (as Ramy and others wrote before) what is needed is an
objective value (how many meters am I below GP) is needed. Not an
estimate based on a hypothetical circling in a lift of a guessed strength.
This ist THE basic requirement for a glide computer to me.
There are obviously two different opinions on this, but for my part I
want XCS as a tool to support my decisions. Therefore I prefer "hard"
values based on as little assumptions as possible.
There must be a choice to switch the new behaviour off. The software
should be there to support the pilot, not to try to educate him and
force him to adapt to a specific technique, which are the subject of
discussion/belief.
Greets Henrik
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
