Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

wind meter

Started by Email address hidden · · Last activity · 38 posts · 1,847 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
11 February 2005
Last activity
20 February 2005
Original author
Email address hidden
Posts
38
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,847
Views / 30 days
0
Topics

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 38
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Oh, how I rue the time wasted on mere speedometers!

    The birthday toy that I specified this year was a Windscribe
    Ultrasonic Wind Meter, so at 3 p.m. I carved it out of its
    horrible plastic display case and began playing with it.

    http://www.davisnet.com/weather/products/weather_product.asp?pnum=276

    http://www.ambientweather.com/dainwi.html

    After determining that a pompous windbag could produce a 40
    mph reading by blowing hard into one end of the tunnel, I
    began pushing the buttons hopefully and occasionally looking
    at the directions.

    About the size of my hand, the Windscribe has a tunnel for
    the wind to blow through, various mounts on the back, and
    three buttons (On, Wind, Temp) around a large display that's
    set at an odd 45 degrees to the wind tunnel.

    A cr2032 coin cell is expected to run it for 600 hours, with
    an auto-off like a cyclocomputer and a low-battery warning.
    A nice touch is that "CR2032" is embossed in large
    characters over the battery housing.

    Pushing the buttons or holding them cycles through options,
    much like a bicycle speedometer. There's even a light option
    for owls curious about their night-time speed. It reads in
    mph, feet per second, feet per minute, kph, metters per
    second, and even knots, which I'm trying to find an excuse
    for using.

    Accuracy is claimed to be +/-3% for speeds from 0.4 to 150
    mph, and +/- 2 degrees F.

    The temperature screen, needed for calibration, comes in
    only two flavors, F or C, but it does calculate wind chill.

    To calibrate, you just put a thumb and finger over either
    end of the wind tunnel, push a button, and wait a few
    moments.

    A padded V-mount screws into the bottom of the Windscribe
    and lets you lash it to a handlebar with an included velcro
    strap. A screwdriver is all that's needed to adjust the wind
    tunnel to point dead ahead.

    Like a cyclocomputer, it offers minimum and maximum and so
    forth, with the wrinkle that the minimum is -x.x mph wind
    speed for tailwinds. (I expect that the rider would shield
    it somewhat from tailwinds.)

    After strapping it to the left side of my touring bike's
    handlebar and zeroing and calibrating everything, I set off
    on an exceptionally calm afternoon.

    Right away, I noticed that in instant mode the wind meter
    zoomed up faster than my Nashbar cyclocomputer, which takes
    an average over several seconds. (The Windscribe has a 5
    second average mode and and running average mode, but I
    chose instant for the first ride and didn't fool with the
    buttons while riding.)

    This instant reading showed what I had long suspected,
    namely that my true speed drops much lower in braking than
    the average shown by cyclocomputer, and then rises much more
    quickly afterward.

    In several corners and short, sharp rises, the Windscribe
    showed my speed dropping to 12 mph, while the
    cyclocomputer's more flattering average stayed at 14-16 mph.
    After each corner, however, the Windscribe climbed back up
    to cruising speed much more quickly than the lagging
    cyclocomputer, making it look as if I was accelerating much
    faster than usual.

    It was so calm today that the two meters agreed to within
    less than 1 mph on most long sections of the asphalt bicycle
    path for the first 6 miles of my ride up the Arkansas River
    at an average of just over 20 mph. Long stretches of the
    river were smooth, unruffled water, and two fishing ponds
    about 5 miles upstream were perfect mirrors of the kind
    usually seen in paintings, with fishermen on the far shores
    duplicated upside-down.

    When I turned ninety degrees and began trudging up the road
    to the top of the dam and then the bluffs above that, the
    Windscribe began to differ from the cyclocomputer,
    suggesting a tiny headwind of under 2 mph.

    Out on a wide, deserted road, I naturally experimented by
    putting one hand in front of the wind tunnel. The speed
    reading promptly plunged and then delighted me by going
    negative, confirming Jobst Brandt's comment that the 150 mph
    bicycles on the salt flats can enjoy a tailwind because of
    the windscreen in front of them, much like the wind blowing
    forward behind the deep windshield of a convertible.

    At the top of my daily climb, the road begins to flatten out
    as it reaches a twenty-foot deep notch through a large
    ridge. The Windscribe showed what I had long suspected,
    namely that the headwind increases toward the top,
    cancelling out some of the effect of the road flattening
    out.

    Heading back down a 2-mile highway descent, there were two
    problems. First, the Windscribe has to be level with the
    handlebars, so I couldn't see its display without raising my
    head from where I like to tuck.

    Second, I wasn't too sure about the reading--it was
    generally about 5 mph lower than the cyclocomputer, but I
    think that it was not so much a tailwind as a sidewind in an
    exposed section of road. I'd been hoping to see much higher
    Windscribe readings to explain lower speeds, but much of the
    fun of this toy will be figuring out what happens with
    quartering and side winds.

    Back down in the river bottom in very calm air, I found that
    the Windscribe would register passing cars nicely. You may
    have to be very close to draft a bicycle, but a pickup truck
    doing about 25 mph has a surprisingly long plume of
    turbulence--the Windscribe registered what seemed to be a
    draft until I fell more than 50 feet behind.

    It also noticed cars zipping by in either direction in a 65
    mph zone.

    Regrettably, I pushed the wrong button at the end of the
    ride and lost all the averages (I want to see what the
    average wind speed is compared to the average cyclocomputer
    speed on a really slow ride). Given the wind around here, I
    expect to find out in a few days what the wind is that
    knocks me down to 14 mph on one long, level curve.

    I like to flip my bike upside down in the garage and was
    wondering how hard it would be to remove the Windscribe, but
    it turns out that the strap that keeps the Windscribe
    pointing into the wind can be twisted around to hang under
    the handlebars with a flick of the wrist, so it's no
    problem.

    It's easily removable and comes with a hand lanyard, so I
    may have more fun sticking it out car windows or even
    attaching it to an off-road motorcycle. I don't plan to lend
    it to a nephew who rows on a college crew team, but his
    parents might want to mount one on the prow of the the
    shell. Mounting it on various spots on a bicycle might
    produce some interesting figures concerning streamlining.
    I've already had an inquiry from a skier--in calm air, it's
    about as close to a speedometer as a skier can carry. (I've
    rejected with scorn a suggestion to mount it on the collar
    on the back of a basset hound's neck.)

    I note with apprehension that there's absolutely no mention
    of how to clean the wind tunnel, so I don't plan to take it
    out in cold, wet weather or when the bald eagles and great
    blue herons appear to be particularly thick in the sky to
    the west.

    Again, it's worth pointing out that the readings show only
    the speed of the wind through the tunnel, which is not the
    same as the speed of a wind at any angle to the bicycle's
    path. A small slot allows mounting a yarn tell-tale of the
    kind beloved by sailors. (I'd provide a link to Jobst's
    wind-tunnel data, but it's his data, so he may enjoy
    pointing it out himself.)

    Windily,

    Carl Fogel

  2. Great product report, Carl, thanks!

    --
    "Bicycling is a healthy and manly pursuit with much
    to recommend it, and, unlike other foolish crazes,
    it has not died out." -- The Daily Telegraph (1877)

  3. Mine overflow after 45 minutes or so of averaging, so note the average
    before you get to 45 minutes, if you want an average to compare to
    something. I have three of them, the idea is going to be someday
    to measure the wind speed at 3 places at once, when the weather gets
    nicer. I suspect a bicycle bow wave exists, that I'd like to measure.

    The one I use all the time seems not to be bothered by rain sleet or
    snow, for what that's worth. Nor has the first battery given out yet.

    The most interesting display turns out to be the temperature.

    Mounting the thing so you can aim it into the actual wind, or making
    it weather-vane itself into that direction, would improve the relation
    to what you're actually experiencing.

    A side-wind increases the amount of air you have to move, without
    increasing the forward wind speed. So of course the forward speed
    drops at constant power, and so does the indicated airspeed as a result.

    A weather-vaned aiming would show the increase you expect instead.
    --
    Ron Hardin
    [email hidden]

    On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

  4. Incidentally $79 at http://www.celestaire.com/catalog/products/3806.html

    (noticing the davis site lists it rather a lot higher $129)

    --
    Ron Hardin
    [email hidden]

    On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

  5. Quoted message said:

    Oh, how I rue the time wasted on mere speedometers!

    Quoted message said:

    It's easily removable and comes with a hand lanyard, so I
    may have more fun sticking it out car windows or even
    attaching it to an off-road motorcycle. I don't plan to lend
    it to a nephew who rows on a college crew team, but his
    parents might want to mount one on the prow of the the
    shell. Mounting it on various spots on a bicycle might
    produce some interesting figures concerning streamlining.
    I've already had an inquiry from a skier--in calm air, it's
    about as close to a speedometer as a skier can carry. (I've
    rejected with scorn a suggestion to mount it on the collar
    on the back of a basset hound's neck.)

    I am appalled by your speciist bigotry which has produced a staggeringly
    incurious and ascientific outlook. Your refusal to test the windspeed of a
    basset hound has denied the world of science a brilliant opportunity for
    research. Nevermind the chew testing that will remain undone.

    Otherwise a brilliant report. Now, get back to us when you've got some wind of
    the meteorological sort.

    Ron

  6. RonSonic said:
    Quoted message said:

    Oh, how I rue the time wasted on mere speedometers!

    Quoted message said:

    It's easily removable and comes with a hand lanyard, so I
    may have more fun sticking it out car windows or even
    attaching it to an off-road motorcycle. I don't plan to lend
    it to a nephew who rows on a college crew team, but his
    parents might want to mount one on the prow of the the
    shell. Mounting it on various spots on a bicycle might
    produce some interesting figures concerning streamlining.
    I've already had an inquiry from a skier--in calm air, it's
    about as close to a speedometer as a skier can carry. (I've
    rejected with scorn a suggestion to mount it on the collar
    on the back of a basset hound's neck.)

    I am appalled by your speciist bigotry which has produced a staggeringly
    incurious and ascientific outlook. Your refusal to test the windspeed of a
    basset hound has denied the world of science a brilliant opportunity for
    research. Nevermind the chew testing that will remain undone.

    Otherwise a brilliant report. Now, get back to us when you've got some wind of
    the meteorological sort.

    Ron

    Dear Ron,

    A basset hound already has a far more precise set of
    built-in wind meters--you just watch the rise and fall of
    the ears in a headwind.

    Carl Fogel

  7. Quoted message said:

    A basset hound already has a far more precise set of
    built-in wind meters--you just watch the rise and fall of
    the ears in a headwind.

    IIRC, a basset hound also has a rather formidable talent for /creating/ its
    own wind--a potentially confounding variable.

  8. Ron Hardin said:

    Mine overflow after 45 minutes or so of averaging, so note the average
    before you get to 45 minutes, if you want an average to compare to
    something. I have three of them, the idea is going to be someday
    to measure the wind speed at 3 places at once, when the weather gets
    nicer. I suspect a bicycle bow wave exists, that I'd like to measure.

    The one I use all the time seems not to be bothered by rain sleet or
    snow, for what that's worth. Nor has the first battery given out yet.

    The most interesting display turns out to be the temperature.

    Mounting the thing so you can aim it into the actual wind, or making
    it weather-vane itself into that direction, would improve the relation
    to what you're actually experiencing.

    A side-wind increases the amount of air you have to move, without
    increasing the forward wind speed. So of course the forward speed
    drops at constant power, and so does the indicated airspeed as a result.

    A weather-vaned aiming would show the increase you expect instead.

    Dear Ron,

    I'd be surprised if there's any measurable bow wave effect
    in air on the handlebar within a few inches of the stem at
    bicycling speeds.

    Imagine a handlebar moving through water at 20 mph. It's
    awfully small and rounded, so it has only a tiny compression
    wave even in such a dense medium.

    Basically, the water piles up a little bit in front of the
    moving handlebar because it's so dense and so viscous that
    it can't all get out of the way--the huge drag is another
    effect.

    Now imagine the same bar moving through air at 20 mph. The
    density of air is about 1/781 of water. This means that the
    bow wave would be something like 1/781 as large.

    Even the much larger bow wave of the rider behind the
    handlebar suffers the same overwhelming reduction in air. A
    one-foot bow wave in water would shrink to about 0.015
    inches in air. The atmosphere is just too thin and slippery
    to compress much in front of a slowly moving object---you
    need to be going Mach 1 or to have an anti-streamlined shape
    that captures the air.

    It should be noted that the trailing plume of turbulence
    behind the rider is enormously larger than any compression
    wave in front. On a quiet fall afternoon, a car doing 20 mph
    down a deserted road will be followed for a surprising time
    by whirling leaves that show its turbulence. But no leaves
    will be captured to dance in front of its bumper.

    Regrettably, my favorite pictures have vanished, but some
    idea of how little bow wave exists can be seen in this
    water-tank picture:

    http://www.efluids.com/efluids/gallery/turbulence_pages/wake2_page.htm

    Water flowing from left to right hits the tiny tripwire ring
    on the left side of the sphere, produces a thin layer of
    turbulence, and greatly reduces the trailing plume of
    turbulence on the right. Notice that no bow-wave is even
    visible on the front in water. (The odd parallel lines in
    the wake are actually the high-lighted rod holding the
    sphere in the water tank.)

    Carl Fogel

  9. Quoted message said:

    Imagine a handlebar moving through water at 20 mph. It's
    awfully small and rounded, so it has only a tiny compression
    wave even in such a dense medium.

    Basically, the water piles up a little bit in front of the
    moving handlebar because it's so dense and so viscous that
    it can't all get out of the way--the huge drag is another
    effect.

    Now imagine the same bar moving through air at 20 mph. The
    density of air is about 1/781 of water. This means that the
    bow wave would be something like 1/781 as large.

    The bow wave would come from the rider, not the handlebar, I imagine
    for several feet ahead.
    --
    Ron Hardin
    [email hidden]

    On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

  10. Ron Hardin said:
    Quoted message said:

    Imagine a handlebar moving through water at 20 mph. It's
    awfully small and rounded, so it has only a tiny compression
    wave even in such a dense medium.

    Basically, the water piles up a little bit in front of the
    moving handlebar because it's so dense and so viscous that
    it can't all get out of the way--the huge drag is another
    effect.

    Now imagine the same bar moving through air at 20 mph. The
    density of air is about 1/781 of water. This means that the
    bow wave would be something like 1/781 as large.

    The bow wave would come from the rider, not the handlebar, I imagine
    for several feet ahead.

    Dear Ron,

    Re-read the part that you snipped where I point out that the
    same holds true for a rider.

    You wouldn't expect a several-foot bow wave on a
    bicycle-sized object in water at 20 mph, would you?

    You can test the several-foot-in-front theory by riding in
    front of another rider on a deserted road and sticking your
    hand out a few feet in front of the other rider--you won't
    feel any difference when he swerves away from your hand.

    Similarly, think of riding on days when there's a little
    ground fog or "steam" off wet pavement when it's sunny after
    a light snow begins to melt. Look down at your wheels, and
    you won't see any bow wave effect ahead of your wheels.

    Air is simply too thin and slippery a medium for a pressure
    wave even an inch deep to build up in front of an object as
    small as a bicyclist doing only 20 mph.

    Consider that at over 20,000 rpm, the amazing 50cc
    multi-piston motorcycle engines built decades ago had no
    trouble filling their combustion chambers--that's how easily
    air moves under atmospheric pressure.

    Carl Fogel

  11. Quoted message said:

    You wouldn't expect a several-foot bow wave on a
    bicycle-sized object in water at 20 mph, would you?

    A bicycle in air is much lower reynolds number than in water.

    Did you ever slowly move a spoon in a cup of coffee trying to
    scoop a foreign object out? That's low reynolds number.
    Or stirring coffee, for that matter. You move water about equal
    in size to the spoon ahead.

    Or a canoe paddle.
    --
    Ron Hardin
    [email hidden]

    On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

  12. "Ron Hardin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Mine overflow after 45 minutes or so of averaging, so note the average
    before you get to 45 minutes, if you want an average to compare to
    something. I have three of them, the idea is going to be someday
    to measure the wind speed at 3 places at once, when the weather gets
    nicer. I suspect a bicycle bow wave exists, that I'd like to measure.

    The one I use all the time seems not to be bothered by rain sleet or
    snow, for what that's worth. Nor has the first battery given out
    yet.

    The most interesting display turns out to be the temperature.

    Mounting the thing so you can aim it into the actual wind, or making
    it weather-vane itself into that direction, would improve the relation
    to what you're actually experiencing.

    A side-wind increases the amount of air you have to move, without
    increasing the forward wind speed. So of course the forward speed
    drops at constant power, and so does the indicated airspeed as a
    result.

    I'm not sure what you are getting at here Ron. Work is done against the
    road and is force times distance moved along the road. Unless forward
    direction drag increases, in theory there should be no difference. Any
    side vector force is reacted by tire traction. In practice, bike
    handling and power output can be disrupted in strong side winds.

    Phil H

  13. Ron Hardin said:
    Quoted message said:

    You wouldn't expect a several-foot bow wave on a
    bicycle-sized object in water at 20 mph, would you?

    A bicycle in air is much lower reynolds number than in water.

    Did you ever slowly move a spoon in a cup of coffee trying to
    scoop a foreign object out? That's low reynolds number.
    Or stirring coffee, for that matter. You move water about equal
    in size to the spoon ahead.

    Or a canoe paddle.

    Dear Ron,

    I'm sorry, but I'm not following your examples. Possibly
    we're missing each other.

    In liquids, which are enormously denser, you get a bow wave
    at even low speeds. (The spoon is an example of a
    displacement hull.)

    But in gases, as far as I know, you don't get a bow wave of
    any consquence at similar speeds.

    Jerk the palm of your outstretched hand half-way back toward
    your ear. Or wave it around in a smoky room. There's no
    leading effect--the trailing plume of entrained turbulence
    continues to swirl forward past your hand, but nothing
    preceded it by as much as an inch. Unlike liquids, air just
    isn't dense enough to pile up in front of objects the size
    of a bicyclist at bicycling speeds--it moves to the sides
    too easily.

    I think that most wind-tunnel views enhanced by smoke will
    show this.

    Carl Fogel

  14. RonSonic said:


    I am appalled by your speciist bigotry which has produced a staggeringly
    incurious and ascientific outlook. Your refusal to test the windspeed of a
    basset hound has denied the world of science a brilliant opportunity for
    research. Nevermind the chew testing that will remain undone.

    The measurement of basset hound windspeed would entail several scenarios.

    1. Attach the wind meter to the basset hound's back. Play "fetch" with
    an old slipper. That is, if the hound is so inclined.

    2. Mount the wind meter on a muzzle, to measure the speed of a pant,
    bark, or howl.

    3. Mount the wind meter on the rear-end, to measure the rear-facing
    wind emitter.

    Mounting feasibility is left as an exercise for the basset hound "owner".

    --
    BMO

  15. Philip Holman said:
    Quoted message said:

    A side-wind increases the amount of air you have to move, without
    increasing the forward wind speed. So of course the forward speed
    drops at constant power, and so does the indicated airspeed as a
    result.

    I'm not sure what you are getting at here Ron. Work is done against the
    road and is force times distance moved along the road. Unless forward
    direction drag increases, in theory there should be no difference. Any
    side vector force is reacted by tire traction. In practice, bike
    handling and power output can be disrupted in strong side winds.

    You bring all the air you hit up to your forward speed, and your path
    through the air is larger, ie. you hit more air, even with a straight
    crosswind. It will be felt as a quartering headwind, of course.

    Alternatively put, the forward component of the vector drag increases.
    v^2 isn't linear.
    --
    Ron Hardin
    [email hidden]

    On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

  16. quote='Boyle M. Owl'RonSonic said:


    I am appalled by your speciist bigotry which has produced a staggeringly
    incurious and ascientific outlook. Your refusal to test the windspeed of a
    basset hound has denied the world of science a brilliant opportunity for
    research. Nevermind the chew testing that will remain undone.

    The measurement of basset hound windspeed would entail several scenarios.

    1. Attach the wind meter to the basset hound's back. Play "fetch" with
    an old slipper. That is, if the hound is so inclined.

    2. Mount the wind meter on a muzzle, to measure the speed of a pant,
    bark, or howl.

    3. Mount the wind meter on the rear-end, to measure the rear-facing
    wind emitter.

    Mounting feasibility is left as an exercise for the basset hound "owner".

    --
    BMO[/QUOTE]

    4. Mounting wind meter on a forward projecting rod so as to have a control when measuring the bow (wow) wave of the basset hound.

  17. Quoted message said:

    In liquids, which are enormously denser, you get a bow wave
    at even low speeds. (The spoon is an example of a
    displacement hull.)

    But in gases, as far as I know, you don't get a bow wave of
    any consquence at similar speeds.

    I don't know if you're thinking of the surface wave (a gravity wave)
    as in the wake of a boat, or not. I'm not talking about a propagating
    wave but just motion in getting around the obstacle.

    What the fluid decides to do about the obstacle as it approaches depends
    on the reynolds number of the flow. Water speed has to be about 1/20
    of air speed to duplicate the flow. So think of water at 1 mph.

    At low speeds, the fluid moves out of the way well in advance of
    the object. Viscous forces give it ample warning and have time to act.

    Or think of a wind meter, and you put your hand a foot downstream
    of it, blocking the flow somewhat. How far downstream would you
    expect to see an effect from?
    --
    Ron Hardin
    [email hidden]

    On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

  18. meb said:


    Boyle M. Owl said:
    RonSonic said:


    I am appalled by your speciist bigotry which has produced a


    staggeringly

    Quoted message said:

    incurious and ascientific outlook. Your refusal to test the windspeed


    of a

    Quoted message said:

    basset hound has denied the world of science a brilliant opportunity


    for

    Quoted message said:

    research. Nevermind the chew testing that will remain undone.

    The measurement of basset hound windspeed would entail several
    scenarios.

    1. Attach the wind meter to the basset hound's back. Play "fetch"
    with
    an old slipper. That is, if the hound is so inclined.

    2. Mount the wind meter on a muzzle, to measure the speed of a pant,
    bark, or howl.

    3. Mount the wind meter on the rear-end, to measure the rear-facing
    wind emitter.

    Mounting feasibility is left as an exercise for the basset hound
    "owner".

    --
    BMO

    4. Mounting wind meter on a forward projecting rod so as to have a
    control when measuring the bow (wow) wave of the basset hound.

    Obviously, I grossly underestimated the complexity of bassetdynamics when I so
    rudely criticized Carl for his failure to explore the subject.

    A grant must be obtained to further this research.

    We will need at least four basset mount airspeed meters, time / motion study
    cameras and perhaps the use of a wind tunnel. Quantities of duct tape will also
    be required. Oh and don't forget the yarn tufts.

    Ron

  19. "Ron Hardin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    Philip Holman said:
    Quoted message said:

    A side-wind increases the amount of air you have to move, without
    increasing the forward wind speed. So of course the forward speed
    drops at constant power, and so does the indicated airspeed as a
    result.

    I'm not sure what you are getting at here Ron. Work is done against
    the
    road and is force times distance moved along the road. Unless forward
    direction drag increases, in theory there should be no difference.
    Any
    side vector force is reacted by tire traction. In practice, bike
    handling and power output can be disrupted in strong side winds.

    You bring all the air you hit up to your forward speed, and your path
    through the air is larger, ie. you hit more air, even with a straight
    crosswind. It will be felt as a quartering headwind, of course.

    Alternatively put, the forward component of the vector drag increases.
    v^2 isn't linear.

    If I'm traveling north at 8mph and there is a 6mph straight crosswind
    from the east, my pathway through the air is at10mph but in a direction
    that is N 36.87 E. Drag force will be proportional to 10^2 = 100 in this
    direction. The forward component of this will be proportional
    to100cos36.87 = 80. This is greater than when travelling at 8mph with no
    croswind i.e 8^2 = 64. Is this what you mean?

    Phil H

  20. Philip Holman said:
    Quoted message said:

    Alternatively put, the forward component of the vector drag increases.
    v^2 isn't linear.

    If I'm traveling north at 8mph and there is a 6mph straight crosswind
    from the east, my pathway through the air is at10mph but in a direction
    that is N 36.87 E. Drag force will be proportional to 10^2 = 100 in this
    direction. The forward component of this will be proportional
    to100cos36.87 = 80. This is greater than when travelling at 8mph with no
    croswind i.e 8^2 = 64. Is this what you mean?

    Yes. that's the effect. So you're riding along at 8mph, and your airspeed is
    8mph, and a sudden gust hits from the east. Both your actual speed and your
    forward airspeed fall together. That's a little unexpected, is all.

    If the wind meter were mounted to swivel into the wind, the airspeed would
    go up, which is what you expected.
    --
    Ron Hardin
    [email hidden]

    On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.