Received: from opus.hpl.hp.com by jr.hpl.hp.com with ESMTP (1.37.109.24/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA030400380; Thu, 22 Jul 1999 23:13:00 -0700 Return-Path: <j-gordon@pacbell.net-DeleteThis> Received: from hplms26.hpl.hp.com by opus.hpl.hp.com with ESMTP (1.37.109.24/15.5+ECS 3.3+HPL1.1) id AA166000373; Thu, 22 Jul 1999 23:12:53 -0700 Received: from mta1.snfc21.pbi.net (mta1.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.122]) by hplms26.hpl.hp.com (8.9.1a/HPL-PA Relay) with ESMTP id XAA06211 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 22 Jul 1999 23:12:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from northpoint (adsl-216-102-69-163.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [216.102.69.163]) by mta1.snfc21.pbi.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA21743 for <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis>; Thu, 22 Jul 1999 23:02:35 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: <j-gordon@pacbell.net-DeleteThis> From: "Justin Gordon" <j-gordon@pacbell.net-DeleteThis> To: <wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis> Subject: RE: Why are the reports useless? Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 23:08:49 -0700 Message-Id: <000901bed4d1$d58e9fe0$a34566d8@northpoint> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <003401bed3a7$ae9d82f0$52e137ce@pokey.windcall.com-DeleteThis>
How about having COTW always report the wind, even when it is below
threshold. Sometimes, a light breeze, or the right temperature is a good
indicator that it will blow later in the day.
Justin
-----Original Message-----
From: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis [mailto:wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis]On
Behalf Of David St. John
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 11:47 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: RE: Why are the reports useless?
Greg,
Yes, what you describe (and much more) is exactly the information we will
have on the next iteration of the site.
-- David St. John Call of the Wind http://www.windcall.com/> -----Original Message----- > From: Greg Harris [mailto:harris@Synopsys.COM-DeleteThis] > Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 11:59 AM > To: wind_talk@opus.hpl.hp.com-DeleteThis; david@windcall.com-DeleteThis > Subject: Re: Why are the reports useless? > > > > I think you touched on it at the end of your message but I wasn't 100% > percent sure what you guys were thinking of incorporating to the > website, so this is a request of what I want. I'd like to see exactly > how they are calibrated for all the wind directions and to have it on > the web. Maybe even a note as to where the sensor is. It would clue > people in to what's going on with the sensors far better. There is an > issue of trust now - we don't really know what's going on with the > sensors and we know calibrations are made and we're really sensitive to > anything that is happens to them. > > Being told "it changed, it's more accurate now" is not something people > want to hear because all our experience with the sensor is suddenly > thrown out the window. For the directions 250-290 degrees it's adding > 10% to the readings is more exact and something people can incorporate. > > Being able to simply look at all calibration values at the web would > make it so we can check whenever we want to see if any changes were made > as well. That way, even if we miss an announcement we can still find > out whether or not it's changed instead of repeatedly going out to the > sailing site to see that it looks like it's a great time to go > waterskiing. Thanks. > > Greg > > "David St. John" wrote: > > > > Hi Sergei, > > > > Thanks for the comments. Sorry for the late response, but my wife and I > > (mostly my wife ;) were busy having a baby boy! A brand new little > > windsurfer-to-be. How soon can he start? Anyone know what the youngest > > kid's rig made is? > > > > I've followed most of this thread, I think. And I think I can > answer some > > of your questions. > > > > > As callwind is concerned, it's more clear. The guys calibrate their > > > readers. I.e., what they show us is not what they get from sensors. > > > They make corrections trying to project what is on the water from > > > what they measure on shore. > > > > Yes, it's true that we *sometimes* calibrate the readings our > sensors give > > us in an effort to give our members the most accurate data > possible. Since > > we don't have sensors out on the water (yet!), we adjust the reading for > > certain directions when the anemometer does not have a clear view of the > > wind out on the water. Crissy field is the classic example - it can be > > glassy on the beach and a steady 25 knots at Anita Rock. So, we make > > adjustments to certain directions (about 20% to the SW reading) to give > > members the closest estimate of what the wind is doing. But > sometimes the > > best the sensors can give you is just that: an estimate. > > > > However, for the vast majority of our sensors, you are seeing the actual > > reading - for most sites the wind on the shore is a pretty good > gauge of the > > wind on the water. We make adjustments only after receiving > lots and lots > > of feedback from from sailors at the particular site who have > volunteered > > their input to help us make the system better. The adjustments usually > > happen in the first couple months of service - we rarely change > them once > > the initial calibration is set. Since we know that people who sail > > particular sites regularly make their own mental calibrations (as you > > mentioned), we send out a message on the pager if ever a site's > calibration > > is changed (again, that's very rare after the first few months > a sensor is > > in service). > > > > The "field research" we've done confirms that the vast majority of our > > members would rather have the sensors calibrated than not. > > > > > Trouble is, their correction function > > > is apparently does not take into consideration the wind direction. > > > > Actually, as I mentioned above, our correction does take direction into > > consideration. We can adjust each of the 16 direction points > individually > > from -50% to +50% actual reading. > > > > > I believe the callwind guys who carge for their service > should consider > > > investing part of the proceeds into installing sensors on > buoys, bridge > > > pillars, barges at 3rd, Anita rock, etc. Who needs wires in > the midst of > > > Silicon Valley these days? > > > > We would love to have wireless wind sensors on the pillars, > barges, buoys, > > everywhere! The technology, however, is not really the issue - > it's getting > > the permission to put our sensors there. The vast majority of > our revenue > > goes into the legwork necessary to acquire rights to, and > install sensors > > at, new windsurfing sites; the rest goes into better technology > and better > > information delivery mechanisms. No one is getting rich here, or even > > making a profit - we do this because we love it. > > > > > 1. Post TWO wind reports, with: > > > - raw data > > > - corrected data > > > > Posting two reports - raw and corrected - is a nice idea, but > sure would be > > a pain to implement, and I think more confusing to most of our members. > > > > > 2. Announce any changes to the correction coefficients > > > > Finally, as I mentioned above, we *do* notify members when a > change is made > > after the first "breaking-in" phase of a new sensor. And in the next > > iteration of our website we will have much more local > information, including > > sensor notes and correction factors. So stay tuned!! > > -- > > David St. John > > Call of the Wind > > http://www.windcall.com/ >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Dec 10 2001 - 02:35:51 PST