What output would you like for the weather stations to read

Kilometres per hour
62% (13 votes)
Knots
38% (8 votes)
Total votes: 21

Comments

What about metres per second?

Tony's picture

What about metres per second?

If you double m/s you get knots. Neat hey!

Or we could supply a small conversion table.

knots     6     8     10     12     14     16     18     20

ft/min 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

kph      11   15     18     22     26     30     33     37

m/s        3     4       5       6       7       8       9     10

 

Smile

knots are most common GA.

knots are most common GA.

I prefer furlongs per

Wayne's picture

I prefer furlongs per fortnight.

Sometimes I think my glide

Sometimes I think my glide should be measured in fathoms per second and wind speed in beaufort.

Aviation and marine = knots

Leslie's picture

I don't think should be considering anything but the general standards for aviation and marine wind readings in knots.

This also ties in with RASP forecasts in knots.

Why are we even considering a non-standard reading?

Safety in standardization

John's picture

I agree with Les on this one.

In the interests of safety, I think we should stick with general aviation standards and have the weather stations read out in knots. As Les noted, it will make it easier to compare weather station readings with various weather webpages, including RASP.

Non-standard read-outs create a potential danger if the person calling the weather station hangs up before the computer reads out the units (at the very end of the message). The caller may go away assuming that the wind reading is in knots (when it is in km/h).

 

John

Not metres, read the meter in knots. I get it.

Tony's picture

The danger being that they would miss a perfectly flyable day. Bummer.

Smile

No, I think the danger would

No, I think the danger would be that they would end up at the hill and find there wasn't enough wind to fly, thus risking a nervous breakdown. Better go for knots, safety first and all that :)

Be prepared.

Tony's picture

I am going to convert all my glider specs, you know, accelerated, trim, minimum sink, stall, just in case I have to fly when the wind is in knots. I suggest you do the same.

Here's the formula:

(km/hour * 42 * 0.534) / 42 = knots

Of course you shouldn't need to ask what the 42 has to do with it.

Smile

42? It's six times nine,

42? It's six times nine, isn't it?

Hmmm, let me think ....

Tony's picture

Yes you are right!

69 is more appropriate.

Embarassed

...what the 42 has to do with it

John's picture

Geez, Tony,

 

You're not a Douglas Adams fan, are you?!Wink

Not me, ta.

Tony's picture

Not me, ta.

42

John's picture

Re: The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

km/hr are for auto vehicles not for aviation !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can someone explain how & where km/hr was ever been introduced & or evolved into General Aviation? Frown

Logic should always prevail. Best stick to a universal standards (Knots) rather than trying to deviate from the norm. Smile

Most of the paraglider pilots

Jeff Ripley's picture

Most of the paraglider pilots that I have met from Europe use metric for everything ,even for their altitude. This is technicaly wrong but it did make flying calcs easier in your head before fancy integrated GPS/ Altimiters were introduced. Even the paragliding manufactures quote glider speeds in kph! 

I did vote to keep the windspeed reading in Kph but now I think maybe we should keep with the norm and have them all in knots. (Can Wayne change my vote?) 

By the way if the Dills weather station is reading peak 29 - 33kph it is way too strong for standard sized paragliders as I found yesterday. (Looked pretty good for the hangies that were there though!)Smile

Thanks Tony. I can appreciate

Thanks Tony. I can appreciate that most paraglider manufactures in Europe may use metric measurements.

But here in NZ we have different standards. I think asking this question was simply a wined up. Unfortunately some individuals are voting for km/hr. If standardization can avoid one accident surely this must be the ultimate goal for both sporting disciplines.

I voted for knots, but how in

I voted for knots, but how in god's name could having the thing read in km/h cause an accident?

I got wined up, but had a headache the next day.

Tony's picture

You just have to look at how many people die in car crashes, cars using KPH on their speedos. Its a conspiracy.

KPH gives me an idea of how far, in kilometres, I could drift downwind if I could manage to stay aloft long enough. Knots and Nautical Miles are of less use. But I only have to convert them, no big deal.

 

how in god's name could having the thing read in km/h

READ CAREFULLY It was never stated that km/hr causes accidents !!!!

42

Tony's picture

 

Smile

WRITE MORE CAREFULLY. It's

WRITE MORE CAREFULLY. It's certainly what you implied. Furthermore, nobody is retarded enough to launch into 30 knots because they thought the weather station said 30km/h. It doesn't matter which units are used.

(No subject)

Surprised

Deviation is the Standard

Tony's picture

We are talking about a "Club" Weather Station here.

You ring it, it says "blah blah blah", you say "oh jolly bad form, blown-out" or "jolly good, meet you at launch". You hang up. That's it.

Who "really" cares whether the data is to a standard? As long as you know what it means.

Was it useful is more important.

Wink x 42

 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.