ARCC Moulton and the Process of Getting There (LONG)

[Deleted member 4366]

Interesting specs Dan. Thanks.

I bought the anemometer because sometimes I can't believe how hopeless the forecasts are when I am out on the bike. One piece of software in particular made me give up on it when it predicted 66 mph winds and it was actually 6 mph. Usually though I suspect that the wind is higher than is being forecast and I want to check it. I am actually interested in the boundary layer effect as that is what I am riding in. I was pushed off the road once on my motorbike by the effects of the wind in a whistling around a hill. I was once lifted off my feet here by the wind coming around the corner of a building, and at 85kg I am not exactly light. Windfinder sounds interesting nonetheless, and I am sure that it is useful when a mobile signal is available if outside the house.

Windfinder isn't a forecast. It reads professional anenometers in real time. It uses that data and other weather information to predict forward. Obviously, the further forward you look at the prediction, the more likely it can have errors, but at the present time, it's 100% accurate. The real-time data means that you don't have to go out of the house with your hand-held, so you can use your phone while it's connected to the house broadband. Incidentally, you can get all these things for the iPad too. Put your iPad to work. It can do more than Facebook and Skype.

A local reading with a hand-held anenometer is as good as useless, because you get different anomalies depending on which way the wind is blowing and whether there's hills and troughs. if you know the prevailing wind, you can estimate what the effects will be along your rides. The main thing is the speed of the prevailing airstream, which tells you whether it's windy or not and the general direction of the wind.

I have a hand-held anemometer for my boat, but it's totally useless because the airflow has to accelerate and change direction to go from the flat sea over my boat where I'm sitting. The one on the masthead 35ft up is totally reliable and tells a completely different story to the handheld even when I'm standing on the coachroof with it above my head.

Any comments on the photos?

 

[Danidl]

Windfinder isn't a forecast. It reads professional anenometers in real time. It uses that data and other weather information to predict forward. Obviously, the further forward you look at the prediction, the more likely it can have errors, but at the present time, it's 100% accurate. The real-time data means that you don't have to go out of the house with your hand-held, so you can use your phone while it's connected to the house broadband. Incidentally, you can get all these things for the iPad too. Put your iPad to work. It can do more than Facebook and Skype.

A local reading with a hand-held anenometer is as good as useless, because you get different anomalies depending on which way the wind is blowing and whether there's hills and troughs. if you know the prevailing wind, you can estimate what the effects will be along your rides. The main thing is the speed of the prevailing airstream, which tells you whether it's windy or not and the general direction of the wind.

I have a hand-held anemometer for my boat, but it's totally useless because the airflow has to accelerate and change direction to go from the flat sea over my boat where I'm sitting. The one on the masthead 35ft up is totally reliable and tells a completely different story to the handheld even when I'm standing on the coachroof with it above my head.

Any comments on the photos?

The photos of the insects are stunning. You own photos are excellent and you obviously have a steadier hand than I when doing close-ups.

 

[Templogin]

Is there a difference between predicting forward and forecasting then?

Facebook? Never used it. I understand that the non-Luddites find it popular.

Although the masthead anemometer and the handheld tell different stories, there is an important one, the story of the wind acting on all of your boat, not just the masthead.

Comments on the photos? Yes, wow! It's amazing the improvement that a point and shoot camera lens can make to a modern mobile phone camera.

 

[Deleted member 4366]

Comments on the photos? Yes, wow! It's amazing the improvemnt that a point and shoot camera lens can make to a modern mobile phone camera.

You must be a better photographer than these guys then. At first glance, to me, they look worse than the ones above that were taken with the smartphone, but I guess that's because it can't get close enough to show the real detail:

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Canon+S95+macro+photo&biw=1280&bih=590&tbm=isch&imgil=w-_9WDtd5ofibM%3A%3Bw6NaQjjkv08fSM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.austinareaphoto.com%252F2011%252F03%252F26%252Fcanon-s95-macro%252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=w-_9WDtd5ofibM%3A%2Cw6NaQjjkv08fSM%2C_&usg=__hEwgMYK3zMueuuJg1-9zMx2vdUM=&ved=0ahUKEwissN2diZ_RAhVsJsAKHdRPCLkQyjcIMw&ei=WPpnWKykGOzMgAbUn6HICw#imgrc=IgbBjw2wGX72RM:

Anyway, you're deviating away from the point again. Who stops to take a picture of an interesting ant when they're out riding their bike?

 

[Templogin]

I make no claims on my skill levels with a camera, but the images earlier in this thread were not taken with a smartphone, they were taken with a smartphone with a better lens from a point and shoot camera. The pictures you have picked in the last post are just random S95 macro pics from Google from a range of compostion and skill levels.

 

[Danidl]

I make no claims on my skill levels with a camera, but the images earlier in this thread were not taken with a smartphone, they were taken with a smartphone with a better lens from a point and shoot camera. The pictures you have picked in the last post are just random S95 macro pics from Google from a range of compostion and skill levels.

As I understand it the lenses taken from the older camera are placed in front of the total camera belonging to the smartphone so the lens sensor and electronics of the smartphone are still in operation. The older camera lens does not replace but augments the smartphone optics. It is therefore unfair to make the statement that it is the older optics which provide the better lens. All the light entering the smartphone has traversed the limitations of the smartphone optics.
In the case of the second set of photos , they are undeniably softer with less resolution. But since we do not know the levels of compression used or the pixel density, your objection is fair comment.

 

[Croxden]

The best camera is the one you have with you.

 

[Danidl]

As I understand it the lenses taken from the older camera are placed in front of the total camera belonging to the smartphone so the lens sensor and electronics of the smartphone are still in operation. The older camera lens does not replace but augments the smartphone optics. It is therefore unfair to make the statement that it is the older optics which provide the better lens. All the light entering the smartphone has traversed the limitations of the smartphone optics.
In the case of the second set of photos , they are undeniably softer with less resolution. But since we do not know the levels of compression used or the pixel density, your objection is fair comment.

As a point of clarification the second set refers to the images taken with the canon s95 camera

 

[Templogin]

Yes, the type of camera that I own.

 

[Retyred1]

The best camera is the one you have with you.

Which is usually a phone because who wants a DSLR and all the required paraphernalia hanging around their neck when out biking?

 

[Croxden]

Which is usually a phone because who wants a DSLR and all the required paraphernalia hanging around their neck when out biking?

I carry an Olympus Tough TG4 that has a first class lens, a larger sensor and is very robust. Not a large camera, is waterproof, shockproof and has the advantage that I can't be contacted or tracked.

 

[Deleted member 4366]

I carry an Olympus Tough TG4 that has a first class lens, a larger sensor and is very robust. Not a large camera, is waterproof, shockproof and has the advantage that I can't be contacted or tracked.

Hmm! Strange comment. That doesn't make sense. Surely, if you don't want to be contacted, you put it into flight mode, then you can still use it for navigating and photos, and if you get in an emergency situation, you switch it back on and call whoever you want.

 

[Templogin]

Which is usually a phone because who wants a DSLR and all the required paraphernalia hanging around their neck when out biking?

Would a compact camera be acceptable to you for others to carry? What about an SLR if they are a keen photographer and want the quality? My other half uses her bike to get to the places to take the pictures.

 

[Retyred1]

Would a compact camera be acceptable to you for others to carry? What about an SLR if they are a keen photographer and want the quality? My other half uses her bike to get to the places to take the pictures.

It's all a bit tongue in cheek Templogin, I carry what suits me. If someone wants to look like a dork and have their pockets bulging,backpack filled to overflowing and all types of gear hanging off their bike then that's their progative. Me? I'm bike shorts (not Lycra!) cycle top and small backpack. My camera, Nav device, music player, emergency beacon, weather forecaster etc. etc. all fit in a very small pocket on my shorts. But very seldom do I cycle on roads - our area in New Zealand is blessed with mountain tracks and trails.

I'll post some photos taken with my iPhone 7 sometime soon.

 

[Danidl]

Would a compact camera be acceptable to you for others to carry? What about an SLR if they are a keen photographer and want the quality? My other half uses her bike to get to the places to take the pictures.

This thread is getting very grumpy. Whether you or others wish or choose to carry Mobilephones, Hasselblads, or any other form of camera is purely your choice and none of our business. What d8veh and I have attempted to point out is that smartphones are a convenient alternative and could if you wished, afford some additional functions for little or no extra cost. You did seem however to have a number of preconceived and erronous notions about these devices.

Your iPad can give you the vast majority of these functions ... Except GPS should you wish.

As an other aside some even of the lower tier mobile phones provide "hotspot " where by it would provide the 4g 3g mobile network to your iPad should you desire... But you do not.
Can we leave it at that?

 

[Deleted member 4366]

I've just been looking at the photos in your photobucket. I hope you don't think I'm being nasty, but, if I'm honest, they don't look anything special compared with the ones I took with my samsung Galaxy smartphone. I didn't use any settings or adjustments (I don't know how, actually). I just switch on the camera and press the button.

Any comments?

If that's not your photobucket, can we have a link to it because I'd like to see what I am missing by not having a decent camera.

http://s204.photobucket.com/user/shetlink/media/TSR Part Done.jpg.html
http://s451.photobucket.com/user/d8veh/library/Trek Top Fuel 99?sort=3&page=1

 

[Templogin]

Yes by all means, although I am not getting grumpy. This conversation started with me mentioning some things that I was doing/buying to add co-ords to my photos in the future. I wasn't actually trying to get myself converted, and all attempts have failed. People keep telling me how good smartphones are, and they may be where you live. With the poor mobile reception here it is not a good solution for me, and the reason that I have chosen my multi-device approach. I have tried to highlight this, but it seems to be falling on deaf ears, I have nonetheless enjoyed the attempts of those who obviously think that they know better, despite the fact that there is a good chance that they have never been here!

Provision of functionality at little or no extra cost is a bit wide of the mark. £16 has been stated, per month, for the rest of my life presumably.

 

[Templogin]

I use Photobucket for snapshots to put on the net. The camera is set to auto and I just point and click. I wouldn't put anything worthwhile on the net. I have nothing to prove.

 

[Deleted member 4366]

Provision of functionality at little or no extra cost is a bit wide of the mark. £16 has been stated, per month, for the rest of my life presumably.

Don't forget that you're already paying £12 a month, so it's only £4 a month extra for internet on the go and all those other things we spoke about, plus you get a free smartphone and tablet. If you don't want the free things, you can pay £9 a month, which is £3 a month less than what you're already paying for 1500 minutes and 2 GB data. You can use the savings to buy a Smartphone on Ebay for about £30 to £40. That means that you get all those nice things for the same cost in the next 12 months, after which you'll be saving money.

One more thing. If you have dodgy internet, you can get internet by making your smartphone a mobile hotspot, which you can connect your computer of ipad to. That gives you two sources of broadband. Look up "tethering".

 

[Templogin]

I get the feeling that you're only listening to yourself!

I don't need internet on the go. I am more than happy to wait until I can get a decent connection through wifi. I don't need to Facebook pictures of my dinner, snapchat or whatever it is that is so important to people.

Some time ago I decided to get connected to the net so I could have access wherever I wanted, as long as there was a signal, which there often isn't up here. I think that the allowance was about 5GB per month for £15, the best deal available at the time with one of the two providers that I can connect to most often, Soon I was exceeding the allowance, so I upgraded to 10GB a month at £25, and I was regularly using 7.5-8GB a month. My provider told me that I was exceeding the fair use policy. I pointed out to them that I was only using up to 80% of my allowance, but this cut no ice with them. They warned me again when I didn't change my habits then strangled the speed until it felt like being back on a 28k modem. It rather highlighted the problem that no only have we got poor coverage here, where we have coverage there is poor levels of capacity. There was no point having a service that was not delievering what it promised, so I ended the contract. Perhaps I should have spoken to Ofcom, but I decided that I didn't really need the internet 24 hours a day.

The two providers who supplied a signal in Voe were T-Mobile and Orange. Later they combined to become EE. EE provide services for Virgin. I have had contracts with both EE and Orange. I noticed the capacity problem with EE some considerable time ago. The signal at my house is not bad. The mast is about 3-400 yards away, but behind a hill. The problem was that often there wasn't a "line" available when I wanted to make a call.

My contract is a 30-day contract, so I could reduce my costs further by changing the contract. I think it was about £2 a month less if I signed up for a longer term. £12 is my absolute ceiling in the same way that I do not want a screen smaller than the iPad has. I don't actually want a mobile phone at all, but my other half insists that I have one so that she can contact me at home. As far as I am concerned it is £144 that I could spend on something useful, but sometimes one has to appease people.