Calypso Ultrasonic Anemometer
- Thread starter Hal Whyt
- Start date
apophenia
Anarchist
remenich
Anarchist
Kaimana
New member
Kaimana
New member
If it was NEMA 2000 it couldn't have worked on my autohelm. Much lower bandwidth needed for 0183 and this device has no need for 2000 data calling and sharing. Lastly you can convert up to 2000 through many devices.
That’s great it offers a solution for you, but my point still stands about the unacceptable lack of NMEA 2000. Yes you can get converters, and yes you can force things to play nice, but at this point in time, anything new that I’m purchasing must have NMEA 2000 compatibility period. The only exception would be things links load cells and other more esoteric devices.
Left Shift
Super Anarchist
My LCJ ultrasonic seems to work quite well. Passed every accuracy test, even in the rain. Lighter, less windage and accurate. The whole carbon wand and unit weighs 7 oz. As noted above, they have the patent and claim to be a generation ahead of the others. Don't know if that's smoke.
It's NEMA 2000 based, but we have old Ockhams for now, so we use the 0183 output for that with a conversion factory box.
It's NEMA 2000 based, but we have old Ockhams for now, so we use the 0183 output for that with a conversion factory box.
Last edited by a moderator:
Kaimana
New member
Sorry about the delay on posting.
Worked fine on a four day run around the island. I used AWA autohelm upwind well. Downwind was not so good. As it would chase the wind more then I could bear.
All in all happy with how it connects up and speed of data.
Moonduster
Super Anarchist
- 4,823
- 231
Use TWA downwind.
Dogfish4255
Member
I'm all for the upstarts, but I agree with the others; NMEA 0183 for a new product is just preying on sketchy old mismatch systems.
In a moment of weakness, I installed a fresh N2k backbone with an autopilot upgrade, and at the same time added the Airmar 220Wx to a powerboat. If you're going to go after weather, including true and apparent wind, reputable instrument makers are sometimes worth the extra coin. Depends on your needs, but if you want no moving parts, this was reliable and once we had done a bit of calibration both True and Apparent wind are pretty close for a thing with no moving parts.
Just an opinion. I dislike things that cost money that don't last long.
In a moment of weakness, I installed a fresh N2k backbone with an autopilot upgrade, and at the same time added the Airmar 220Wx to a powerboat. If you're going to go after weather, including true and apparent wind, reputable instrument makers are sometimes worth the extra coin. Depends on your needs, but if you want no moving parts, this was reliable and once we had done a bit of calibration both True and Apparent wind are pretty close for a thing with no moving parts.
Just an opinion. I dislike things that cost money that don't last long.
Moonduster
Super Anarchist
- 4,823
- 231
True and Apparent wind are pretty close for a thing with no moving parts. Just an opinion. I dislike things that cost money that don't last long.
Close? A stone will give you True and Apparent that are identical, costs nothing and lasts the better part of a billion years.
Close? A stone will give you True and Apparent that are identical, costs nothing and lasts the better part of a billion years.
Kaimana
New member
Left Shift
Super Anarchist
Not really advisable to steer to a derivative calculation unless you have it calibrated on a regular basis. Errors creep in everywhere. And then there is the built in lag time. You can get pretty lost trying to chase a TWA on an instrument that has a 30-second rolling average using data from sensors that also are averaging their output.
My suggestion: Learn what apparent wind angles get you the best VMG in various wind speeds and sail to the windex, the puffs and the waves.
Analog information is the most reliable.
Moonduster
Super Anarchist
- 4,823
- 231
When you get your auto pilot seeing to your Windex, let me know.
Mine has delaminated over the solar cell in 7 months of use
https://imgur.com/gallery/6BDhykx
no reply from Calypso
https://imgur.com/gallery/6BDhykx
no reply from Calypso
So in other words, not very accurate at all, at the low end.
+/- .5ms = 20% inaccurate at 5kts and 10% at 10kts.
What is the problem that the ultrasonic is solving, over the standard anemometer with cups?
WillyT123
Member
- 131
- 53
I've been considering one to put on the mast of the 505 I sail as a way to get wind speed and direction data from a compact unit with no moving parts. The aim being to feed that data into a raspberry pi/arduino or something of the like along with GPS speed/heading so I can get a readout of my true wind VMG for speed testing without other boats around.
Titi
New member
I am very interested to fit Calypso's Ultrasonic Portable Solar wind meter to the mast top on a Flow 19. When using Calypso's NMEA 2000 gateway, would the sensor feed wind data to a B&G Vulcan MFD through Simnet?
