On 10 Apr, 09:19, "Anne Burgess" wrote:
Thank you for your input and advice.

The cheap and cheerful option always looks appealing. *I am
first to admit. When it comes to safety and aviation I am
somewhat surprised to hear that a £400 expenditure is
considered too much.

In principle, I agree. However at the moment, unfortunately, we
are extremely strapped for cash at the moment owing to recent
changes in the regulations surrounding aviation - in brief,
officialdom is applying to gliders the same maintenance and
certification rules that apply to jumbo jets, which involves us
in huge additional expenditure this year, and ongoing higher
costs for ever.

I believe inthe addage you get what you pay for.

Correct.

I have owned Davis instruments for 10 years now and have
little trouble.

I do not doubt it.

I doubt whether the cheap and cheerful equipment will give you
trouble free and accurate readings for this length of time, so
realiabilty, accuracy and robustness must be considered when
purchasing any wind recording equipment.

We do not wish, intend or require to keep long-term weather
records. We are interested solely in the current wind strength
and especially gusting within the past, say, 30 minutes, so that
we can take that into consideration when the wind is approaching
limits. We have no problem assessing the average wind strength,
but is is much more difficult to assess the strength of gusts.

£400 is not expensive when you consider most professional
recording equipment at airfields

Indeed not.
We are, however, a small entirely voluntary club operating
mainly at weekends, and cannot justify installing the sort of
equipment that would be necessary at a full-scale airfield.

Anne

Agreeing with the above comments re robustness, etc (most of these
cheap plastic toys won't last longer than a year or two in a
reasonably exposed position, such as I'd expect on an airfield rather
than a suburban garden), but you should also factor in exposure and
how you wish the readings (direction and speed, mean and gust) to be
displayed in your choice of unit.

Clearly it'll need a good all-round exposure (which probably means
some form of wireless sensor unless you can conveniently locate it
above a roof of e.g. control tower or similar structure), but more
important is the height. Standard exposure is 10 m of course, exposing
at a lower height or in an obstructed location can give dangerously
misleading under-indication of mean and gust speeds - very important
for light and relatively fragile craft such as gliders - both on
takeoff, approach/landing and of course parked on site. Might be best
to consider available exposure options, and how the sensor needs to
communicate with e.g. control tower display (wired/wireless), before
finally deciding on an instrument.

HTH.

--
Stephen Burt
Stratfield Mortimer, Berkshire