awos
2005-11-04 19:27:48 UTC
Not soooo SuperAWOS
http://piperowner.org/viewforumtopic.asp?id=3D39090
Author: Dave
Date: 3/20/2005 10:55:50 AM
SuperUnicom (manufactured by Potomac Aviation
Technology)
is an AWOS wannabe, they are also light years from
being
where they need to be!
SuperAWOS only has: 1) certified barometer,
and 2) certified visibility sensor (procured
from a foreign company)
Ten reasons to NOT buy SuperUnicom:
1) no certified wind speed <--- plastic crap
2) no certified wind direction <--- more plastic crap
3) no certified temperature
4) no certified dewpoint
5) no certified density altitude
6) no certified visibility
7) no certified precipitation measurement
8) no certified precipitation discriminator
9) no certified ceiling measurement
10) no certified lightning detection
No internet uploads, no telephone dial-in!
It's also DAMN EXPENSIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Author: turbo dave
Date: 3/22/2005 1:04:26 PM
I'm not sure what your point is. Did you actually buy
one?
Author: David Wartofsky - E-Mail Address
Date: 6/8/2005 1:49:51 PM
Good Afternoon!
Apparently you either work for an AWOS manufacturer,
or you have some economic interest in preserving the
traditional AWOS industry. (?)
The biggest constraints to airports getting AWOS'es is
smaller airports not having the typical $10-15,000 per
year to keep maintaining a traditional AWOS systems,
even when some government agency buys the system for
them.
State and Federal budgets can't pay for traditional
AWOS systems anymore, so imagine having THAT annuakl
cost tacked onto your tie-down, hangar and fuel costs!
I cannot speak for the DigiWX, as that is a
'knock-off' that has been trying to follow in our path
for the last few years. They've recognized that
weather sensing is child's play. Operating over a
unicom frequency in a non-interfering manner, now
that's where the voodoo comes in.
As airport OWNERS and as a PILOT (see
www.potomac-airfield.com), we were developing this
system at a time we were pushing over 70,000
operations per year at this small airport. in other
words, the unicom on a pleasant Saturday was like a
cattle auction.
To not make a mess of an airport's busy unicom it
became obvious that an automated unicom had to be
smart enough to know when to shut up, and about what.
In other words, to "adapt" the information it provides
over the unicom to nothing more than what is relevant
to flight operations at the moment a pilot is seeking
specific information.
Coming into DCA, listening to the AWOS to get the
winds, primarily, I tell pilots to check fuel,
throttle back, and be prepared to orbit for awhile.
The traditional AWOS message is 30 sec to 1 min of
SOMETIMES useful info.
But there is no point in tying up a unicom to tell
everyone the viz is better than 20 miles, or the temp
is a pleasant 72 degress. Under those conditions, the
information is useless and interferes with normal
unicom ops.
As the head of the AWOS program said to me, "AWOS
algorithms are designed for general trends, on the
assumption that the pilot will then turn to unicom or
tower for more current information."
So we came up with a system that 1
1=2E Responds to inbound pilots, to let them know the
system is there and how to use it.
2=2E Provides two-way radio-checks, essential to almost
any IFR flight and darn useful even for VFR these
days. And last, but not least,
3=2E Weather information.
As a pilot, FAA 'approval' or 'certification' of a
system's ALTIMETER is essential, not because it's hard
to do, technologically, that's easy, but because FAA
approval allows the PILOT to 'legally' use the
altimeter information to comply with the pilot's
FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS.
Next came opening IFR approaches to commercial ops,
which ONLY require the additional 'certification' of
visibility, to meet commercial FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS.
TA DA, certified altimeter & visibility, the only
values which are of regulatory benefit to pilots, and
thereby of economic value to the airports trying to
attract them.
So why not 'certify' temp, dewpoint, and other
non-required data? Why indeed?!
Each element that is certified imposes on the
AIRPORT's budget, (and yours too, if you're a pilot,
even if indirectly), significant maintenance and
technical costs. It is these costs that make AWOS
uneconomical for most smaller airports. We only
certified the specific weather values that are of
regulatory benefit TO PILOTS, allowing them to comply
with FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS, which is all they need.
Sensor accuracy is brain dead simple. Even the most
basic harry-homeowner systems are now available with
NIST traceability, meeting or exceeding the 1970's
AWOS standards.
Seeking 'government approval' is more a matter of
where you really want to have the government involved
with telling you how and when to fly.
I personally prefer less government jurisdiction than
more.
We've had systems in deserts and hurricanes for nearly
10 years, and never has any of them even been damaged.
In fact, often it was these same sensors that reported
the highest winds during hurricanes, after all the
other equipment in the area failed.
Our wind algorithms are interesting. Our long-line
data uses standard AWOS two-minute averaging, which is
great for forecasting and flight planning, but can
obvuiously be misleading during unstable conditions;
partiocularly if you are coming into a small airfield,
trying to figure out what to expect at the runway
threshold.
As the FAA's head of plans and procedures said to me,
after I explained the difference between what we do
over unicom and the regular AWOS winds, "That explains
all the trouble we've been having with these AWOS
systems. We've even tried relocating a bunch, and all
we hear is they give nutty winds."
QED
Our design goal was to select the LOWEST inertia wind
sensor, so that it could respond rapidly to changing
conditions. Our unicom wind algorithm reflects more a
talking windsock than a mathematical average of what
is otherwise ancient history, i.e. the last two
minutes.
So there is logic behind it all.
Feel free to give me a call sometime, be dleighted to
chat: 301 248-5720
David Wartofsky
Potomac Airfield
www.potomac-airfield.com www.superawos.cmo
Author:
Date: 6/9/2005 8:50:54 PM
The only thing "super" about SuperUnicom is the price.
It's "super expensive" at around $65K per system. The
other system that Mr. Wartofsky mentions (DigiWX)
compares most favorably (feature for feature) and
sells in the low $40K range instead. Mr. Wartofsky
comments "that's where the voodoo comes in." Do you
know anyone willing to pay $25K more for some "voodoo"
of the SuperUnicom kind when you can have an automated
Unicom DigiWX weather system that activates upon "mic
clicks," offers a "radio check" capability while also
"adapting" to frequency congestion? Hell, you can buy
an AWOS from Vaisala and All Weather Inc. with all the
weather sensors "certified" and you still won't pay
$65K even though Mr. Wartofsky claims you don't need
to have certified weather sensors in this day and age
of NIST traceable standards! An obvious question for
Mr. Wartofsky is why would someone pay for two
certified weather sensors (which SuperUnicom offers
for $65K) versus a whole suite of certified sensors as
found on the Vaisala and AWI systems? Also, where is a
current SuperUnicom user's list? And where is a
current SuperUnicom reference list? Mr. Wartofsky
currently lists three references on his website. All
three reference letters are dated from year 2000! Is
that the best SuperUnicom can offer? How many
SuperUnicom systems were actually bought and put into
service during 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001? At least
DigiWX lists about 40 installed systems on their
website. So that leaves several hundred remaining
AWOSs in the field that would have the Vaisala and AWI
name thereupon. Are there any with the SuperAWOS
imprinted on them? I WONDER!!! Mr. Wartofsky (like
most story-tellers and sales people) will tell you
what you WANT to hear. He won't tell you what you NEED
to hear. Now you know another side of this story. That
SuperUnicom product behind the curtain is NOT what it
seems!!!
Author: T PURCELL - E-Mail Address
Date: 6/12/2005 10:23:25 PM
I find it interesting that who ever you are you choose
to hide your identity.
We have had a Super-AWOS at our field and it has been
a blessing.
It never has broken or missed a radio call in the year
plus we've had it.
The Super-AWOS has greatly enhanced safety and
profits.
If you're going to continue to throw mud you should at
least have the decency and courage to identify who you
are and what your agenda is.
Tom Purcell
Author:
Date: 6/15/2005 8:07:21 PM
I find it interesting Mr. Purcell that you choose to
hide the identity of your airport. SuperAWOS did not
receive FAA Approval until June 28, 2004 yet you claim
you've had yours for a "year plus!" Me thinks you're
full of it!
Any weather station compared to a windsock will
greatly enhance safety and profits. SuperUnicom
doesn't have a corner on the safety and profits
markets!
The "anonymous" poster brought to light some really
good questions for which SuperUnicom doesn't appear to
have any equally good answers. Mr. Wartofsky just
rambled on!
So let the questions be asked again because inquiring
minds want to know:
1) What does one get for paying nearly a 40% premium
for SuperUnicom ($65K) versus a Digiwx ($40K) system?
2) Where is a current SuperUnicom user's list?
3) Where is a current SuperUnicom reference list?
4) How many SuperUnicom systems were actually bought
and put into service during 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002,
2001?
5) Does/can SuperAWOS provide "certified" ceiling
info?
DON'T attack the messenger because you don't like the
truthful message being promulgated!
BTW: Current is not info from the year 2000!
Author: David Wartofsky - E-Mail Address
Date: 6/16/2005 1:59:26 PM
Okay, I'll respond to your ongoing challenges!
PRICE
First of all, claiming that DigiWX must be better
"because it costs less" should immediately raise some
question as to WHY does the DigiWX cost less?
Maybe it doesn't exactly work as advertised?
You appear impressed by the information provided on
Belfort's DigiWX website.
As the Lost in Space robot used to say, "DANGER WILL
ROBINSON, DANGER, DANGER!"
To avoid making a mess of a busy unicom frequency
requires a ground-based transceiver to be sensitive
enough to detect almost all of the radio
communications chatter a pilot is exposed to AT
ALTITUDE, AT DISTANCE. What you typically hear on the
groubnd is only a small fraction of what an airborne
pilot is exposed to, as any pilot will confirm. If you
can't detect the airborne pilot's radio environment,
then you cannot really tell when your own
transmissions will step over others.
That kind of RF sensitivity ain't easy to do.
THEN, once you are accurately detecting ALL unicom
communications, then you need a refined 'AI' that can
adapt to congestion of the Unicom frequency.
WHEN the DigiWX replies, (IF!), it always does so with
a fixed-length message of about 30 seconds. How would
you like a robotic idiot to tie up your airport's
unicom for 30 secs at a time, regardless of how jammed
the frequency may be?
So, in sum, there is a not necessarily obvious
'voodoo' to create a system that is 'polite' on busy
unicom frequencies.
Installed, a 'traditional' AWOS system runs about
$125-$150,000. One recently installed for over
$180,000. The price of the boxes is one thing, it's
everything else that drives their cost over the
horizon for most airports.
So, to get a system that is proven and actually works,
the SuperAWOS offers a huge savings.
REFERENCES
The 'traditional' AWOS stuff actually works as
advertised. The major thing that comes out about
traditional AWOS manufacturers is their customer
support, it's cost and responsiveness. The equipment
does what it claims, no less, and NO MORE.
But try actually CALLING DigiWX's references. Try
asking if anyone actually HAS or HAS HAD the equipment
intalled and actually operating on their airport's
Unicom, or whether the few actually installed are
anything more than just pretty displays in the lobby.
(I agree, their lobby display IS pretty!)
It should also make you stop and think that DigiWX
lists the 'Baltimore Harbor' as the "Baltimore
Airport." There ain't no such thing, it's a test site
on top of their building; no airport there.
We will provide qualified parties interested in the
SuperAWOS with a complete list of REAL references,
many who have had our equipment working for many
years; but we respect and protect their privacy,
trying not to impose on their willingness to make
themselves available.
--------
In other words, unlike others, no vaporware from us.
We don't need to toot our horn so loud, because we
have never felt the need to.
Those that know, know. Those that don't know,
speculate., sometimes correctly, sometimes not.
We also refuse to compete on price against little more
than pretty brochures. Pretty brochures are not real
competition, as some folks have already discovered.
---------
Who are you, and what is the basis of your experience
or interest in automated weather?
I'm curious.
D
David Wartofsky
Author: T PURCELL
Date: 6/16/2005 4:53:15 PM
LIKE THE COWAED YOU ARE YOU CONTINUE TO HIDE YOUR
IDENTITY!!!
WE HAD A UNIT AT OUR FIELD OPERATING AS A SUPER-UNICOM
AND THEN ADDED VISIBILITY AFTER IT BECAME AVAILABLE.
WE LOOKED AT DIGIWX (I SUSPECT YOUR EMPLOYER) AND
AFTER FINDING MANY OF THEIR REFERENCES DID NOT EXIST
AND THOSE THAT DID WERE VERY SORRY FOR THE DECISION
PURCHASED SUPERUNICOM/AWOS.
WE SPOKE WITH OVER 25 AIPORTS WITH SUPER-UNICOM AND
AWOS AND THEY COULD NOT SAY ENOUGH POSITIVE
Author: T. PURCELL
Date: 6/16/2005 5:06:25 PM
TRUE TO YOUR COWARDLY FORM YOU CONTINUE TO HIDE WHO
YOU ARE.
TO ANSWER YOUR PERRY MASON MOMENT WE HAD A
SUPER-UNICOM THAT WE UPGRADED TO SUPER-AWOS WHEN THEIR
VISIBILITY SENSOR BECAME AVAILABLE.
UNLIKE DIGIWX WHOSE LIST OF USERS IS LARGELY FALSE
(TRY CALLING THEM)
SUPER-AWOS SUPPLIED ME WITH A LIST OF 25 AIPORTS AND
CONTACT NAMES WHO ARE EXTREMELY HAPPY WITH THEIR
DECISION. WHEN I DID REACH SOMEONE WITH A DIGIWX THEIR
RESPONSE WAS VERY NEGATIVE. ONE AIRPORT HAS EVEN
REPLACED THEIR DWX AFTER ONLY 2.5 YEARS BECAUSE "IT
NEVER WORKED".
I'M DONE RESPONDING TO YOU UNTIL YOU REVEAL WHO YOU
ARE, I THINK WE ALL KNOW WHO YOU WORK FOR.
TOM PURCELL
Author:
Date: 6/18/2005 10:14:52 AM
You SU cheerleaders don't read to well, do you? So let
the questions be asked again because inquiring minds
want to know:
1) What does one get for paying nearly a 40% premium
for SuperUnicom ($65K) versus a Digiwx ($40K) system?
2) Where is a current SuperUnicom user's list?
3) Where is a current SuperUnicom reference list?
4) How many SuperUnicom systems were actually bought
and put into service during 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002,
2001?
5) Does/can SuperAWOS provide "certified" ceiling
info?
DON'T attack the messenger because you don't like the
truthful message being promulgated!
BTW: Current is not info from the year 2000!
I got a chuckle out of the "privacy" concern raised
considering that SU is *supposedly* installed at
several public-use airports! How much more public does
an airport need to be to also be "private" and have
privacy rights? If the SU system is so great, people
should be having diarrhea of the mouth about it! I
have never pretended that DW has all the solutions but
from my research they have everything the SU has (and
more) for a lower price. It's just like the price of
PCs, they have been dropping since the 1990s! Modern
weather weathers utilize digital sensors plus PC
software and hardware. So the price of weather systems
should be dropping too, much like DW! Besides, the
makers of DW have only been around for a 100 plus
years, they are not a fly-by-night organization! Oh,
and another thing, I checked into that Baltimore
Harbor airport at:
http://www.digiwx-baltimore.com
It's not actually an airport, it's a floating heliport
on a pier according to the folks at:
http://www.baltimoremarinecenter.com
And no I don't work for the competition! But I do
belive in a fair competitive marketplace, do you SU
cheerleades concur? And I can't stand when some OEMs
will try to charge you the price of a Cadillac when a
Chevy will get you to your final destination with
maybe a little less comfort (if you really don't need
the heated seats)!
Author:
Date: 6/18/2005 12:26:52 PM
Long-Awaited Superunicom Repairs
After paying HOW MUCH and people are waiting HOW LONG?
Just how long does it take to repair a Superunicom?
http://www.co.pierce.wa.us/xml/services/transpo/airportnov2003.pdf
notes:
"Bruce and I have been told that the long-awaited
repairs to the SUPERUNICOM are complete and the unit
will be delivered within the next seven to ten days."
Author:
Date: 6/18/2005 12:31:15 PM
http://www.bowersflybaby.com/stories/messing.html
"Next to the pumps, I saw the new airport manager
(whom I know fairly well), one of the airport staff,
and a buddy huddled around an open equipment box
installed on the wind-swept ramp. The Superunicom was
down, and they were trying to get it working again."
Do you Superunicom fans want to explain this one?
Author:
Date: 6/18/2005 12:53:19 PM
Just how "adaptive" is that Superunicom technology?
Sounds like that "voodoo" needs some tweaking, huh?
"Don't know the cost difference (probably
substancial), but I'd rather have AWOS installed on
the field. My current field has both the AWOS and the
SuperUnicom installed. Drives you nuts to hear people
clicking away at the SuperUnicom every 5 minutes when
AWOS is available. Throw half a dozen planes in the
local pattern plus numerous other non-towered fields
within 100nm being on the same freq and it can be
pretty tough to get your position reports in between
the radio checks, automated advisories, and the
extended advisories. I love it when SuperUnicom tells
me "Caution! Density altitude 5000" when the field
elevation is 5820'."
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.aviation.piloting/browse_frm/thread=
/28a5ff849ff85306/db45ad8a4ab5d8b4?q=3Dsuperunicom&rnum=3D1#db45ad8a4ab5d8b4
With references like this, Superunicom or SuperAWOS
(nothing super here) doesn't need to publish any
lists?
:)
Author:
Date: 6/18/2005 1:03:00 PM
Gonna quit for now --- It's time to take the trash
out!
:)
Author: G S Loff - E-Mail Address
Date: 6/18/2005 2:47:18 PM
Any legitimate airport manager, board member or their
designated representative may request our information
package. We are not going to waste money on someone
with such an obvious axe to grind.
Dozens of airports are singing our praises but we
won't waste their time with someone like you who
obviously has plenty of time to waste.
What gives you the right to invade our clients privacy
when you go to such great lengths to hide who you are?
The long and the short of it is anyone needing AWOS
will contact the various manufacturers, do the due
diligence and make an informed decision. So lie,
mislead and blow all the smoke you want to.
Proudly signed,
GS Loff
Author: GSL - E-Mail Address
Date: 6/18/2005 4:30:15 PM
One question. How come none of the negative assertions
come with any identificaton or contact information?
Could they be from the same source?
Next time you "take out the trash" remember to feed
the chickens.
GL
Author: airport bum
Date: 6/19/2005 9:41:41 AM
as someone already pointed out, and i'm beginning to
believe.... don't fault the messenger if it's the
message that you object too. what difference would it
make if you actually knew the anonymous poster or not?
for as defensive as you superunicom folks seem to be,
there must be a lot of truth to the assertions leveled
at the superunicom product. it just seems to me that
some very valid questions have been raised and versus
providing answers "for those who want to know," that
you superunicom folks are now "waging war" because
someone or somebodies has unpleasant but truthful
things to say. i wouldn't want you guys showing up
uninvited on my front porch.... besides, i'd want you
to go thru a metal detector first!
the three references quoted in this forum are
eye-opening. it takes the assertions about the
superunicom product to a credible level (versus your
alleged phone calls to digiwx customers).... direct me
to something written by an actual digiwx user! why
would you superunicom folks be dialing up digiwx
customers anyway? are you looking to stir up
something? are you superunicom folks that threatened
and insecure? sounds like those chickens have come
back home to roost in the superunicom backyard....
imagine that!
if it was that easy to find three "unsatisfied" or
"frustrated" or "unhappy" superunicom owners who
decided to put their experiences and objections in
writing, how hard would it be to call your customer
base (just like you called the digiwx user base) and
find customers who have a bad taste in their mouth
where the superunicom name is involved? "remember to
feed the chickens".... your words seem petty and
unprofessional. they only serve to throw fuel on this
raging fire! hopefully, those chickens won't be fed
any superunicom product.... less they croak!
all of this leaving me pondering (as someone already
asked) how many superunicom products were located on
airports during 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000?
seems like a very fair and simple question to answer.
why did you folks run for cover? why are you folks
hiding? how would you superunicom folks be invading
your customer's privacy by providing a numbers
breakdown year by year?
in my opinion, i think the whole "privacy issue"
raised is nothing more than a cloak to cover
superunicom's woes. that my friends is really a damn
shame (and a sham)!
Author: airport bum 2
Date: 6/19/2005 12:59:51 PM
Why do any of you feel your entitled to this
information?
Are you going to buy their product,
for that matter anyones product?
These guys have already said they will supply
information to qualified airports and associates.
I will say as a businessman I'm tired of board
loudmouths on the internet talking about things they
know nothing about.
By the way I read several negative comments about
digiwx in this forum one which appears written by the
same gallent gentleman currently leading the charge
against SUPERCOM.
Author:
Date: 6/19/2005 7:18:37 PM
WILL ROBINSON'S TETHER LINE GOT CUT! PROBABLY THE SAME
THING HAPPENED TO THE SUPERUNICOM OFFERING!
Author:
Date: 6/20/2005 5:41:29 PM
There was a SuperUnicom on the The William T. Piper
Memorial Airport
(http://www.lockhavencity.org/airport.htm) for a brief
period of time. It was gleefully replaced with a
DigiWx (http://www.digiwx.com) weather system during
the Spring of 2004.
DigiWx is manufactured by the Belfort Instrument
Company which provided a weather station for the
Wright Brothers back on December 17th, 1903!
Needless to say, it was like going from hell to
heaven; hell, being the SuperUnicom product! The
DigiWx has been pumping out weather data ever since
much to the delight of the flying community in Lock
Haven, Pennsylvania.
Our airport manager Ed Watson (570-748-5123) would be
happy to extol the benefits and features of the DigiWx
system.
The William T. Piper Memorial AIrport is "Home to the
original Piper Cub"
Come on up (or down) and visit sometime!
Author:
Date: 6/22/2005 12:04:09 AM
As one of the authors of one of several letters
written in support of the super unicom product I can
tell you the super unicom waswanted here. The purchase
of DWX was strickly $ and no sense decision. The city
had very limited funds and settled for a far, far
second best.
The DWX constantly misses calls and when it does
respond it goes on and on and on.
Author:
Date: 6/26/2005 8:27:57 PM
Who was the Super$h*t (aka SuperUnicom) wanted by?
Name names! We all agreed as a voting body to ditch
the SuperUnicom product because it wouldn't shut-up
when activated. Several also objected to the inbound
greeting. The voice-reco feature of DigiWx worked for
those who took the time to attend training! As soon as
we learned that DigiWx could be upgraded to mic
clicks, we couldn't wait to get it. So it sounds like
you're saying that you can't even click a mic right
huh? DigiWx was the best product we saw for the
dollars. SuperUnicom is a laughing joke and earns last
place in my book!
Author:
Date: 6/29/2005 10:32:08 AM
A more exact heads to heads analysis would be:
Digiwx vs. Superunciom
and
All Weather Inc vs. Vaisala
Digiwx (made by Belfort) and Superawos only have dual
barometer and visibility... no ceilometer or present
weather at this time!
Digiwx is reportedly working on a ceilometer (at least
they had a beta-version of a working one at SATS
2005). Superunicom apparently has no interest in
adding a ceilometer to their inferior weather station!
And Belfort did make several weather sensors that one
would find on the ASOS platform. What has Superunicom
done?
I would agree that Superawos is a "nobody" in the
weather world! But the Digiwx product still needs a
lot of work! Don't count on a certified ceilometer or
present weather sensor anytime soon! An AWOS III is
the standard in the aviation world and both All
Weather and Vaisala can deliver on that note!
Author:
Date: 6/29/2005 8:11:20 PM
From: Michelle P
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr,
rec.aviation.marketplace, rec.aviation.student,
rec.aviation.owning
Subject: Re: Not soooo SuperAWOS
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 23:56:05 GMT
I fly into and out of Hyde field [in Maryland] five or
more days a week. It is located right next to Potomac
Field, Dave's playground. We share a unicom frequency.
I hate the damn thing! It steps on the reply from Hyde
on airport conditions. No the conditions at Potomac
and Hyde are not the same. Potomac sits down in a
hollow. They may have no wind or light wind and the
wind at Hyde may be blowing the opposite direction. We
have a DigiWX.
Michelle
Author:
Date: 7/2/2005 8:39:19 AM
Dave Wartofsky's playground =3D Potomac airfield
Dave has a SuperUnicom at Potomac airfield
Both Potomac and Hyde airfield (about a mile away)
share the same Unicom frequency (122.8)
Hyde airfield =3D Washington Executive airport
SuperUnicom is always stepping on Unicom
radio transmissions from Hyde airfield
The SuperUnicom is HATED
Hyde has a DigiWx which is NOT stepping on
any Unicom radio transmissions
IMAGINE THAT!
Author:
Date: 7/7/2005 12:50:00 PM
I hate the damn SuperAWOS product too. They have it at
Bader field near Atlantic City, NJ and I've always
said this thing cannot distinguish who is clicking
their mic. You can have three people in the pattern
and if each one activates their respective mic once,
then the damn SuperUnicom goes off like a rocket. It
clutters the Unicom frequency making the giving of
position reports within the pattern impossible to give
until the damn thing shuts up! Ocean City, NJ (just
down the road) has a DigiWx and you don't have this
problem with the Belfort system because it is voice
activated instead and you have to say the distinct
"digi - bravo" phrase to activate it! I'd choose a
DigiWx any day of the week before I'd have a SuperAWOS
on my airfield if I had one!
Author:
Date: 7/9/2005 9:32:00 AM
Geeeeez... me thinks Superunicom (Superawos) has more
bad references here than good ones as noted on their
website. Superunicom.com lists only 3 references, all
from year 2000 which is about 5 years agooooooooooooo!
Yet how many have chimed in here saying they "hate"
the Superawos product???
With an actual user's reference list (like that
catalogued here) versus a "sanitized" list prepared by
Superunicom, me thinks this uncensored version is
probably a better realistic depiction of the Superawos
product.
Would anyone other than Dave Wartofsky or G S Loff
from Superunicom disagree?
Author:
Date: 7/13/2005 10:52:44 AM
I was reading thru the postings here and I see some
Digiwx bashing and some SuperUnicom (aka SuperAWOS)
bashing. Nothing new here to begin with, but when one
starts digging deeper, a disturbing picture begins to
develop.
Dave Wartofsky and his other henchman GS Loff attack
the Digiwx product ruthlessly. They go as far as
posting some real rubbish on their website comparing
the 2 products (Digiwx vs SuperAWOS), some of which
are distortions and others which are full-blown lies!
This is troubling considering that Superunicom has
been around for maybe 10-12 years at most --- they
could be here today and gone tomorrow. Belfort has
been around how long --- over a 100 years. I know who
I'm more inclined to believe; and it ain't
Superunicom's rubbish.
And this comes to the next truly troubling revelation.
Superunicom states on their website regarding
references that you need to contact them for a user's
list as they are "protecting the privacy" of their
customers. This one I just don't get! So are they
saying that it's more important to protect the
identity of a few airport managers versus protecting
the rest of the flyng aviation community because of
"privacy" concerns. So who owns the AWOS and the info
it disseminates? Didn't the taxpayers in this country
pay for the AWOS (all of them)? Why would you not
publish where an AWOS is located? Is this a truly
idiotic decision that does nothing to improve or
enhance aviation safety? Unfortunately, Mr.
Wartofsky's agrument is something I can't stomach; and
neither should anyone else.
Meanwhile, in an effort to promote aviation safety,
Belfort publishes a Digiwx user's list (all of them)
which can be viewed at http://www.digiwx.com
I'm guessing that Superunicom (aka SuperAWOS) doesn't
want to publish a list because they don't want the
taxpayers to find out how problem-prone the
Superunicom (aka SuperAWOS) system really is!!!!
Author: Rick Polanski
Date: 7/26/2005 5:37:59 PM
Since this thread seems to be maintaning momemtum, I'm
going to unwind as well. WIth the satelite
communicatin option, SuperAWOS uploads data to a
website maintained by Potomac Aviation on the hour.
There are no other updates during this hour PERIOD. We
are in the midst of thunderstom season and I would
agrue that SuperAWOS could miss and not report a
thunderstorm altogether. THIS IS SCARY! Here is how
that could happen:
Let's say the SuperAWOS sends a weather report on the
hour (let's pick 2PM or 1400 hours). If the sky can be
seen getting dark in the distant at 1415 and a strong
thunderstrm passes thru at 1430 and it clears up again
by 1445, then when SuperAWOS goes to report it's next
hourly observation at 3PM or 1500 hours, conceivably
it could make the same weather obsevation that it did
at 2PM with no indication that a thunderstorm has just
blown thru! Why is this important AND SCARY? If you
are on your way back to an airport where SuperAWOS is
only updating weather hourly, and the storm is blowing
from the NW to the SE (as most weather in the US
does), and you happpen to be in the southeast headed
for the northwest about 75 miles away with no other
reporting weather stationns in between, you could run
smack-dab into this thunderstorm. SuperAWOS is the
only weather station that makes hourly reports versus
minute by minute reports from most other AWOSes
available in the marketplace. This is just one more
reason to consider buying something other than a
SuperAWOS for your airport! You really need to
consider an AWOS from Vaisala or ALl Weather Inc. To
choose any other is to risk life, limb and property!
Author:
Date: 7/27/2005 8:15:06 AM
I just heard that DigiWx added mic clicks as a way of
activating a weather broadcast on the Unicom
frequency. IMO: If it's the typical bugware released
by most companies these days, then it probably doesn't
work as advertised. I guess we shall see! Are mic
clicks really better than voice activation? On the
plus side, DigiWx is a cool looking system. It's
wireless and has digital sensors. The accompanying
wind sensors are located on a 15' tower unlike the
SuperAWOS where the wind sensors are mounted a mere 4'
or so from the ground. At this height, SuperAWOS does
a better job of monitoring eddy currents than
prevailing airport wind conditions!!!!!!!!!
I give the nod to DigiWx
Author:
Date: 8/2/2005 4:15:57 PM
I couldn't agree more. If I'm flying instrument
conditions, I can tell you I'd like to know where the
weather data is coming from and who measured it. And
at this point, I wouldn't trust a SuperUnicom or
SuperAWOS or SuperTURD as far as I could throw that
overpriced boat anchor! Who in the hell is Potomac
Aviation Technology? What national or government
sponsored weather projects did these "yahoos" ever
provide weather sensors for? Wait till the first
lawsuit gets filed against them becasue their
overpriced boat anchor incorrectly reported the
altimeter setting or visibility. Talk about
cockroaches that scatter when the light gets turned
on. You probably ain't seen nothing until Potomac
Avaition Technology picks up and leaves town in the
middle of the night! Good Luck (cause you're gonna
need it) if you have one of these systems!
Author:
Date: 8/13/2005 1:21:53 PM
Everything originally noted about SuperAWOS could also
be said about Belfort Instrument's DigiWX, namely:
DigiWX only has: 1) certified barometer,
and 2) certified visibility sensor
Ten reasons to NOT buy DigiWX:
1) no certified wind speed <--- plastic crap
2) no certified wind direction <--- more plastic crap
3) no certified temperature
4) no certified dewpoint
5) no certified density altitude
6) no certified visibility
7) no certified precipitation measurement
8) no certified precipitation discriminator
9) no certified ceiling measurement
10) no certified lightning detection
Fortunately, DigiWX is a more economically priced
alternative to the very expensive SuperAWOS!
And there is a greater likelihood (albeit not in
your lifetime) that Belfort will eventually after
a very long time add more certified sensors to
the DigiWX.
Don't count on SuperAWOS adding any. And if they
do, they will be priced like the rest of their
system and too costly for the average airport to buy!
With that said, SuperAWOS and DigiWX have added
some other AWOS choices for airports desiring weather,
but the choices being offered suffer from high costs
(in the case of SuperAWOS) and not enough reliable
weather sensors that the pilot community really needs!
I'd also applaud Belfort for moving to "mic clicks"
since the "voice activation" never seemed to work.
On the other hand, one can only hope that it is
better than the supposed "adaptive" technology being
peddled by SuperUnicom which is anything but adaptive!
IMO: the SuperAWOS folks just use a lot of choking
"smoke and mirrors" to sell their overpriced system.
Author: khan
Date: 8/13/2005 6:02:17 PM
Belfort Instruments moves like a tortoise does. They
can't seem to get out of their own way. As somebody
noted, Belfort *HAS* been around for a very long time
(~129 years), and they have a great company history to
talk about. Talk is cheap in this day and age. The
problem is they move like a 129 year old would be
expected to move. Belfort seemed to take *FOREVER* to
get their DigiWX approved by the FAA and after *ALL*
that wait, they only certified the dual barometer and
the visibility sensor (just like the SuperAWOS
product). So what they have in essence is the
equivalent of an AWOS II. Who wants an AWOS II in this
day and age of AWOS III and AWOS III P/T? DigiWX (nor
SuperAWOS) just don't cut it! There is talk of Belfort
adding a ceilometer - how long will it take to get
that certified? You could grow a lot of gray hair
*WAITING* for Belfort if they ever deliver. One final
note: The data from DigiWX and SuperAWOS is not
eligible for inclusion in the NADIN network. So good
luck finding their weather data when you really need
it!!!
Author: khan
Date: 8/14/2005 8:39:05 AM
When one compares the acquisition price of an AWOS II
from DigiWX (please *NOTE* that SuperAWOS costs approx
$25K more than the DigiWX), one will see that it
compares very favorably with the price of an AWOS II
purchased from either Vaisala or All Weather Inc. If
you later decide to upgrade your AWOS II, at least you
can upgrade it if you have a Vaisala or AWI. But if
you hope to upgrade your DigiWX (and god forbid your
SuperAWOS) anytime soon - GOOD LUCK! One final note,
the acquisition price of the AWOS II from SuperUnicom
is ~$65K. For this price, you could buy an AWOS III
(and maybe even an AWOS III P/T) from either Vaisala
or All Weather Inc. Something to think about, huh?
Author: sammy
Date: 8/15/2005 4:14:03 PM
Wasn't there a post here a couple of days ago (that
was possibly deleted by the webmaster) talking about
how the SuperAWOS people were "blowing smoke" where
quarterly calibrations of an AWOS are concerned? I can
tell you that the SuperUnicom people told us flat out
that no calibration is required, yet this is simply
not true. There is a FAA 150 series advisory circular
that describes the quarterly calibration required for
all AWOS including the SuperAWOS. So when the
SuperUnciome people come piping that their AWOS is
immune to this, just tell them to take a long walk
down a short pier because you know better!
Author:
Date: 8/19/2005 9:47:29 AM
Here is reference to the FAA discussions between Mark
Beisse (***@faa.gov) with David Wartofsky
regarding quarterly/annual calibration of all AWOS
(including SuperAWOS):
Federal Aviation Administration...
David, we discussed with Claude Jones today the
SuperUnicom automated weather observing system
approval as certified under Advisory Circular
150/5220-16C...
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=3Dcache:o5_0c-GDpUUJ:www.superawos.com/aip.h=
tm+150/5220-16C&hl=3Den
Author:
Date: 8/19/2005 10:13:15 AM
AWOS calibration/inspections are covered in:
FAA Order 6700.200
FAA Advisory Circular 150/5220-16C
The SuperAWOS people won't tell you this, I just did!
Author: Christopher P.
Date: 8/19/2005 12:13:41 PM
After reading thru this long thread, I get the feeling
that there is a lot we just don't know about
SuperUnicom. And not a whole lot more about DigiWx
either. There seems to be a lot of "lying, misleading
and blowing smoke" to quote a few people here. There
also seems to be a very compelling case more so
against the SuperAWOS versus the DigiWx system. I do
know the Belfort name. They have definitely been
around a long time! I don't know if this a good reason
to hence buy a DigiWx versus a SuperUnicom. DigiWx
does seem though to offer a lot of bang for the dollar
versus SuperAWOS. What is certain is that we need more
AWOS around the USA. I don't think I'd want a
SuperUnicom in my back yard, maybe somebody else's
given their propensity to be less than forthcoming (is
that another way of saying "don't lie, just tell the
truth"). Neither system seems capable of delivering
certified cloud base info which is necessary in
designating an alternate airport in case IFR
conditions prevent one from landing at their desired
location. I would also wager that an airport is really
not going to save that much money by buying a DigiWx
or SuperAWOS versus a Vaisala or All Weather Inc
weather station when all is said and done. That's my
two cents worth!
Author:
Date: 8/20/2005 9:06:50 AM
To follow-up on the last post:
The DigiWX and SuperAWOS systems both claim simplified
installation procedures. DigiWX says it takes 1 - 1/2
days to install their system while SuperAWOS claims 1
hour! I don't know if I'd want an AWOS that installs
in 1 hour, how about you? Think about it, I don't know
anything that installs in 1 hour, and then works
consistently and reliably.
The DigiWX and SuperAWOS systems both claim simplified
calibration and annual inspection procedures. And yes,
as noted, the SuperAWOS requires quarterly and annual
inspections even though they quote a $0.00 figure;
this is misleading on SuperUnicom's part! Quarterly
and annual inspections of an AWOS are not an optional
exercise, and somebody has to visit the AWOS to
perform this service. Is your time worth something?
Since SuperAWOS assigns a $0.00 figure to
quarterly/annual inspections, they apparently don't
think a tech's time is worth anything either.
Now apparently, the SuperAWOS has a expedited
calibration process that requires less time in the
field at the AWOS. But considering all the blowing
smoke that has gotten into our eyes, I have to wonder
how "expedited" the calibration process really is
since they already assign a $0.00 value to the
technician who will have to perform this service.
SuperAWOS also claims their Unicom broadcasts are
automatically adaptive to decrease frequency
congestion. DigiWX says their Unicom broadcasts are
manually adaptive. DigiWX also claims to be the only
AWOS in the world that can transmit AWOS info on both
the Unicom frequency and a discrete VHF frequency.
That is something the SuperAWOS can't do!
So what is one getting in a SuperAWOS for paying a
$25K premium over the DigiWX system? It's a damn good
question!
Author:
Date: 8/22/2005 8:13:01 PM
It has been noted in this thread that Digiwx and
SuperUnicom offer some additional AWOS choices to the
marketplace versus the traditional AWOS manufacturers
(eg. AWI, Vaisala). While that may be true, it would
appear that the marketplace is not beating a path to
SuperUnicom's door as they have been around for 12-13
years and only sold a mere 40 systems or so (which
averages to ~3 per year). Digiwx has done somewhat
better with 40 systems sold in the past 4-5 years
(which averages to ~8 per year). If Digiwx and
SuperAWOS were the best thing since sliced bread, one
would think they would have sold more systems to date.
Considering that Digiwx (and SuperAWOS) are nothing
more than a glorified AWOS II, why would airports be
interested in these non-scalable weather stations when
most AWOS's sold today by AWI and Vaisala offer much
more like ceiling info, precipitation, present weather
and in some cases lightning detection. One cannot get
these additional sensor options on either a Digiwx or
a SuperAWOS. At least the Digiwx is priced right about
where an AWOS II should be but this is simply not the
case where SuperAWOS is concerned as it costs about
$25,000 more!
David Wartofsky (of SuperUnicom fame) claims in his
sales bunk that ceiling info is not required by most
pilots. I'd like to meet the pilots (all 2 or 3 of
them) who would not like to have ceiling info on
either a VFR or IFR flight. One might not really need
it, but I would wager that most pilots would prefer to
have it versus not being able to have it at all if you
buy a SuperAWOS.
Lesson for Belfort: Get your ceilometer to market
PRONTO!
Author:
Date: 9/9/2005 9:25:19 PM
I can tell you that Belfort doesn't do anything
pronto, so don't count on a certified ceilometer
anytime soon.
On the other hand, I heard about this topic when I say
a note posted on a local airport bulletin board. I
couldn't believe my eyes when I saw the amazing and
incredible irrationalizations from D. Wartofsy and G.
Loff.
When I got back home, I later visited www.google.com
and entered "superawos" and I couldn't believe the
tally of results that popped up. Forget about "10
reasons to NOT buy a SuperUnicom," I must have 10
times "10 reasons to NOT buy a SuperUnicom."
I think that's all I need and want to know about
SuperAWOS!
Go DigiWx!
Author:
Date: 9/9/2005 9:42:30 PM
"I must have seen 10 times "10 reasons to NOT buy a
SuperUnicom."
Author: tony
Date: 9/16/2005 8:57:44 PM
trust me on this one. if superunicom (superawos) comes
calling or knocking on your door, run (don't walk) in
the opposite direction!
Author: gimesh
Date:
I called and talked with Gary Loff of Superunicom.
He's very negative about the digiwx product. Belfort
must be giving Superunicom a run for there money.
ANyway, I wanted to learn where a superunicom might be
near me so I could fly there and check it out. Well
Gary Loff just flat out refused to give me a user. Not
even one! I can't believe these people. why would you
guard a user's list? if you have a great product, then
you tell people about it! and people want to know
about it. I guess the superunicom product must not be
so great then! I would wager the superunicome people
have probably only placed two: at opposite ends of the
runway at Potomac airfield! I think i'll go see the
digiwx in Driggs, ID.
I give a thumbs down to superunicom for a s*****
attitude!
Author:
Date: 9/22/2005 5:04:36 PM
well they have a few more installations than two but
not that many more. i don=B4t know how anyone (including
the FAA AIP perople) could rationalize spending $67K
for an AWOS II. the prices of awos should be dropping
like the prices of personal computers. not so with the
superawos product. ugggh!
Author: dilly dally
Date: 9/23/2005 9:48:46 PM
why is the FAA spending $67K for superawos in montana
when you could buy a friggin AWOS III P/T for about
the same amount? who did superawos get into bed with?
the faa?
the engineering firm?
the airport manager pant's?
$67K is a lot of money to buy people/firms off with!
Author: robert
Date: 9/25/2005 8:49:39 AM
Those are some great questions (ie. did SuperAWOS buy
off the FAA, the engineering firms or the airport
manager)?
Do you have any proof that this actually happened?
Granted, prima facia evidence like this would be very
incriminatory and probably very hard to come by!
I've heard some disconcerting things, as well, about
SuperUnicom and the way they do business but we need
more than rumor. Granted where there is smoke, there
is fire!
Author:
Date: 10/6/2005 3:20:22 PM
there isn't just a fire, there is a blaze out of
control!
Author: gregory dunn
Date: 10/6/2005 9:46:11 PM
digiwx offers so much more bang for the dollar (versus
superawos) that there is no further comparison
necessay.
digiwx offers a lobby display for viewing in an fbo
while superawos offers nothing
digiwx offers live real-time updates minute by minute
over the web versus just hourly updates from superawos
digiwx offers wx broadcasts over both unicom and a
discreet frequency; superawos can only broadcast over
unicom
digiwx is working on adding a ceilometer; where will
superawos get a ceilometer to add to their wx station?
digiwx is approx $20-25K lower priced than the
superawos
digiwx has been around for over a century; superawos
has been around about 1/10 this time
digiwx made sensors for asos before building an awos;
superawos doesn't make any sensors themselves, they
buy them elsewhere and pass along these costs to you
superawos is less than forthcoming about the
voluminous digiwx installed customer base
superawos is less than forthcoming when they say their
superawos doesn't require any maintenance. the faa did
not give them a pass on this. maintenance, calibration
and quarterly inspections are required; superawos
won't tell you this, i just did!
there is a superior product: digiwx
and there is an inferior product: wanta guess which
one?
Author:
Date: 10/10/2005 6:21:24 AM
Anyone who has managed to read through this rather
destructive name bashing thread might wish to consider
whether the above comments are truly neutral and
representative of the user experience or are done with
other less noble intentions.
I truly hope that anyone who is considering the use of
automated equipment would contact the four companies
listed and make their own decision after having
demonstrations of the various equipment available and
considering the circumstances that are particularly
important to the particular airfield.
I personally would suggest that Belfort, Potomac,
Vaisala and AWI are responsible organisations trying
to support the aviation community each with a
different solution.
No one is being served by one or more individuals
desire to damage the reputations of these companies,
whatever reason they may have. It is unfortunate that
a useful technology which forums like this represent
are actually being used to bring about the disrepute
of these companies for whatever personal or commercial
reasons. The fervour that is shown in particular
towards both companies (Belfort and Potomac) is an
indication that the individual(s) are not acting in
the best interests of the community but rather to
ensure that the search engines reflect their ability
to cross post their comments.
Author:
Date: 10/18/2005 6:53:09 AM
I couldn't disagree more with the previous poster's
comments. Before the advent of Belfort's DigiWx or
Potomac Aviation Tech's SuperUnicom, there was Vaisala
and All Weather Inc who produced most all AWOSs
installed in the USA. Things became more complex when
DigiWx and SuperAWOS both received FAA Approval in
June 2004. Neither system has lived up to the
expectations advertised by either vendor. Both vendors
have been unable to deliver everything promised; both
are working to improve things. But one particular
vendor has been more unscrupulous and disingenuous
than the other. One is more worthy of your business
than the other. I'll leave it to the viewing audience
to ascertain which vendor that might be.
Author:
Date: 10/18/2005 7:03:07 AM
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dcpilots/message/3282
From: "Joe Della Barba"
Date: Sat Feb 26, 2005 10:21 am
Subject: Super Unicom at VKX ***@...
When I was instructing out of VKX we HATED that thing!
Imagine hearing it 24/7/365!
Joe
Author:
Date: 10/18/2005 7:07:17 AM
This thread may have got it starts at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dcpilots/message/3275
From: Stan Fetter
Date: Fri Feb 25, 2005 10:15 pm
Subject: Re: [dcpilots] "digi bravo" what? s10399
end
'responds'
times of lots of activity it shuts up, but time and
time again (three times today) somebody comes into the
pattern at Hyde, calls in for an advisory, and the
answer gets stepped on by the "Potomac Airfield,
automated unicom...click three times for
advisory...etc."
We run into this particularly in the early morning
when the traffic planes go out. Once somebody gets
airborne, many times there's a need for that plane to
pass something along to the next one who is probably
still on the ground. EVERY TIME, the response from the
plane on the ground is stepped on by a pop-up from the
box [SuperUnicom] at Potomac because it's simply
responding to the presence of radio traffic on the
frequency.
I have asked David [Wartofsky] again and again to set
it so it doesn't make the blind transmissions and
speaks only in response to the clicks. He keeps saying
he's doing it, and he never does.
I know this happens, because (1) the pilot coming in
invariably says "say again, you got stepped on by the
"automated box" or something to that effect and (2) I
can hear in most of the time on the base station
in the office.
says "Hyde" or "Potomac" and is smart enough to shut
up when an inbound is calling the other airport. Until
the box [SuperAWOS] gains that ability to reason, it
needs to
stifle.
spend upwards of 70 hours a week at that airport, and
I'm not hiding behind a desk. I see this all the time,
and I get continuous complaints on it. David keeps
promising to take care of it but doesn't and his other
half in Boston doesn't care. If he would set it so it
speaks only when spoken to that would be fine, but he
hasn't and in the current configuration I think it's a
hazard and a piece of crap.
Don't get me wrong...it's a neat box and when I was
based at Potomac I liked it although I got irritated
by the pop-up transmissions then too. (My wife's sign
shop made the little decals of the duck on the beach
chair.) But, it's got to be applied in moderation and
on that point he's missed the mark.
End of rant...I'll go take my pills now.
sbf
Author:
Date: 10/18/2005 7:21:28 AM
From: AJ Maltenfort
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:48 pm
Subject: Re: [dcpilots] Re: Super Unicom ...
maltena100
May have written earlier about the "Super Unicom" at
Princeton NJ that does a radio check for you. Click
the mike 5 times and it spits back to you what you
just said. Except I'm on downwind about to turn base
when some a*sh*le clicks the mike 5 times (something I
didn't know about at the time). I go ahead and call my
base and am approaching final when the d*mned Stuper
Unicom says "base, runway 28, Princeton." My head is
on a swivel. Nobody had announced they were in the
pattern behind me, so I'm wondering if someone is
making right traffic (which I had heard about 5 miles
out). I announce that I am on base, describe myself as
a green and white Mooney, and ask if I need to go
around because I can't find this other plane. Then a
real live person from the fbo chuckles that the super
unicom just spit back my radio call...
Author:
Date: 10/19/2005 7:16:19 AM
Imagine this....
A cool exciting new aviation weather product that:
1) claims to be adaptive but ISN'T
2) doesn't enhance safety of flight operations
3) has a radio check feature that doesn't shut up
4) ties up your unicom frequency when you need it most
5) has been characterized as "a hazard and a piece of
crap"
6) the manufacturer (Potomac Aviation Technology)
promises
to fix the on-going complaints and then does NOTHING!
You TOO can have one.... it's called SuperAWOS
Author: - E-Mail Address
Date: 10/21/2005 2:49:17 PM
Well, the same things could be voiced about Belfort's
Digiwx system which now uses "mic clicks" versus
Digiwx voice-recognition which was a miserable and
total failure. You can find the remnants of that
complete failure at Ocean City, NJ; Driggs ID and
Huntington, UT. Chiefly, Digiwx:
1) claims to be adaptive but ISN'T
2) doesn't enhance safety of flight operations
3) has a radio check feature that no one can activate
4) ties up your unicom frequency when you need it most
5) has been characterized as "a hazard and a piece of
crap"
6) the manufacturer (Belfort) promises to fix the
on-going complaints and then does NOTHING!
And regarding which company is unscrupulous and
disingenous, I hereby nominate and proclaim Belfort
Instruments as that company. Belfort has been sporting
Digiwx tee-shirts which claim "The Wright Brothers
Relied On Us." Other than Belfort's wild assertion,
there is no written record to document this alleged
fact.
None, nadda, didn't happen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In fact, the Wright Brothers wrote extensively about
using a Richard's handheld anemometer which was
French-made; not American made as Belfort would have
you believe. Visit http://www.google.com and search
for "Richard's anemometer" and see for yourself.
Digiwx does offer a cheaper price for an AWOS but be
forewarned, you get what you pay for.
Buy CRAP and you'll have CRAP!
http://piperowner.org/viewforumtopic.asp?id=3D39090
Author: Dave
Date: 3/20/2005 10:55:50 AM
SuperUnicom (manufactured by Potomac Aviation
Technology)
is an AWOS wannabe, they are also light years from
being
where they need to be!
SuperAWOS only has: 1) certified barometer,
and 2) certified visibility sensor (procured
from a foreign company)
Ten reasons to NOT buy SuperUnicom:
1) no certified wind speed <--- plastic crap
2) no certified wind direction <--- more plastic crap
3) no certified temperature
4) no certified dewpoint
5) no certified density altitude
6) no certified visibility
7) no certified precipitation measurement
8) no certified precipitation discriminator
9) no certified ceiling measurement
10) no certified lightning detection
No internet uploads, no telephone dial-in!
It's also DAMN EXPENSIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Author: turbo dave
Date: 3/22/2005 1:04:26 PM
I'm not sure what your point is. Did you actually buy
one?
Author: David Wartofsky - E-Mail Address
Date: 6/8/2005 1:49:51 PM
Good Afternoon!
Apparently you either work for an AWOS manufacturer,
or you have some economic interest in preserving the
traditional AWOS industry. (?)
The biggest constraints to airports getting AWOS'es is
smaller airports not having the typical $10-15,000 per
year to keep maintaining a traditional AWOS systems,
even when some government agency buys the system for
them.
State and Federal budgets can't pay for traditional
AWOS systems anymore, so imagine having THAT annuakl
cost tacked onto your tie-down, hangar and fuel costs!
I cannot speak for the DigiWX, as that is a
'knock-off' that has been trying to follow in our path
for the last few years. They've recognized that
weather sensing is child's play. Operating over a
unicom frequency in a non-interfering manner, now
that's where the voodoo comes in.
As airport OWNERS and as a PILOT (see
www.potomac-airfield.com), we were developing this
system at a time we were pushing over 70,000
operations per year at this small airport. in other
words, the unicom on a pleasant Saturday was like a
cattle auction.
To not make a mess of an airport's busy unicom it
became obvious that an automated unicom had to be
smart enough to know when to shut up, and about what.
In other words, to "adapt" the information it provides
over the unicom to nothing more than what is relevant
to flight operations at the moment a pilot is seeking
specific information.
Coming into DCA, listening to the AWOS to get the
winds, primarily, I tell pilots to check fuel,
throttle back, and be prepared to orbit for awhile.
The traditional AWOS message is 30 sec to 1 min of
SOMETIMES useful info.
But there is no point in tying up a unicom to tell
everyone the viz is better than 20 miles, or the temp
is a pleasant 72 degress. Under those conditions, the
information is useless and interferes with normal
unicom ops.
As the head of the AWOS program said to me, "AWOS
algorithms are designed for general trends, on the
assumption that the pilot will then turn to unicom or
tower for more current information."
So we came up with a system that 1
1=2E Responds to inbound pilots, to let them know the
system is there and how to use it.
2=2E Provides two-way radio-checks, essential to almost
any IFR flight and darn useful even for VFR these
days. And last, but not least,
3=2E Weather information.
As a pilot, FAA 'approval' or 'certification' of a
system's ALTIMETER is essential, not because it's hard
to do, technologically, that's easy, but because FAA
approval allows the PILOT to 'legally' use the
altimeter information to comply with the pilot's
FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS.
Next came opening IFR approaches to commercial ops,
which ONLY require the additional 'certification' of
visibility, to meet commercial FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS.
TA DA, certified altimeter & visibility, the only
values which are of regulatory benefit to pilots, and
thereby of economic value to the airports trying to
attract them.
So why not 'certify' temp, dewpoint, and other
non-required data? Why indeed?!
Each element that is certified imposes on the
AIRPORT's budget, (and yours too, if you're a pilot,
even if indirectly), significant maintenance and
technical costs. It is these costs that make AWOS
uneconomical for most smaller airports. We only
certified the specific weather values that are of
regulatory benefit TO PILOTS, allowing them to comply
with FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS, which is all they need.
Sensor accuracy is brain dead simple. Even the most
basic harry-homeowner systems are now available with
NIST traceability, meeting or exceeding the 1970's
AWOS standards.
Seeking 'government approval' is more a matter of
where you really want to have the government involved
with telling you how and when to fly.
I personally prefer less government jurisdiction than
more.
We've had systems in deserts and hurricanes for nearly
10 years, and never has any of them even been damaged.
In fact, often it was these same sensors that reported
the highest winds during hurricanes, after all the
other equipment in the area failed.
Our wind algorithms are interesting. Our long-line
data uses standard AWOS two-minute averaging, which is
great for forecasting and flight planning, but can
obvuiously be misleading during unstable conditions;
partiocularly if you are coming into a small airfield,
trying to figure out what to expect at the runway
threshold.
As the FAA's head of plans and procedures said to me,
after I explained the difference between what we do
over unicom and the regular AWOS winds, "That explains
all the trouble we've been having with these AWOS
systems. We've even tried relocating a bunch, and all
we hear is they give nutty winds."
QED
Our design goal was to select the LOWEST inertia wind
sensor, so that it could respond rapidly to changing
conditions. Our unicom wind algorithm reflects more a
talking windsock than a mathematical average of what
is otherwise ancient history, i.e. the last two
minutes.
So there is logic behind it all.
Feel free to give me a call sometime, be dleighted to
chat: 301 248-5720
David Wartofsky
Potomac Airfield
www.potomac-airfield.com www.superawos.cmo
Author:
Date: 6/9/2005 8:50:54 PM
The only thing "super" about SuperUnicom is the price.
It's "super expensive" at around $65K per system. The
other system that Mr. Wartofsky mentions (DigiWX)
compares most favorably (feature for feature) and
sells in the low $40K range instead. Mr. Wartofsky
comments "that's where the voodoo comes in." Do you
know anyone willing to pay $25K more for some "voodoo"
of the SuperUnicom kind when you can have an automated
Unicom DigiWX weather system that activates upon "mic
clicks," offers a "radio check" capability while also
"adapting" to frequency congestion? Hell, you can buy
an AWOS from Vaisala and All Weather Inc. with all the
weather sensors "certified" and you still won't pay
$65K even though Mr. Wartofsky claims you don't need
to have certified weather sensors in this day and age
of NIST traceable standards! An obvious question for
Mr. Wartofsky is why would someone pay for two
certified weather sensors (which SuperUnicom offers
for $65K) versus a whole suite of certified sensors as
found on the Vaisala and AWI systems? Also, where is a
current SuperUnicom user's list? And where is a
current SuperUnicom reference list? Mr. Wartofsky
currently lists three references on his website. All
three reference letters are dated from year 2000! Is
that the best SuperUnicom can offer? How many
SuperUnicom systems were actually bought and put into
service during 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001? At least
DigiWX lists about 40 installed systems on their
website. So that leaves several hundred remaining
AWOSs in the field that would have the Vaisala and AWI
name thereupon. Are there any with the SuperAWOS
imprinted on them? I WONDER!!! Mr. Wartofsky (like
most story-tellers and sales people) will tell you
what you WANT to hear. He won't tell you what you NEED
to hear. Now you know another side of this story. That
SuperUnicom product behind the curtain is NOT what it
seems!!!
Author: T PURCELL - E-Mail Address
Date: 6/12/2005 10:23:25 PM
I find it interesting that who ever you are you choose
to hide your identity.
We have had a Super-AWOS at our field and it has been
a blessing.
It never has broken or missed a radio call in the year
plus we've had it.
The Super-AWOS has greatly enhanced safety and
profits.
If you're going to continue to throw mud you should at
least have the decency and courage to identify who you
are and what your agenda is.
Tom Purcell
Author:
Date: 6/15/2005 8:07:21 PM
I find it interesting Mr. Purcell that you choose to
hide the identity of your airport. SuperAWOS did not
receive FAA Approval until June 28, 2004 yet you claim
you've had yours for a "year plus!" Me thinks you're
full of it!
Any weather station compared to a windsock will
greatly enhance safety and profits. SuperUnicom
doesn't have a corner on the safety and profits
markets!
The "anonymous" poster brought to light some really
good questions for which SuperUnicom doesn't appear to
have any equally good answers. Mr. Wartofsky just
rambled on!
So let the questions be asked again because inquiring
minds want to know:
1) What does one get for paying nearly a 40% premium
for SuperUnicom ($65K) versus a Digiwx ($40K) system?
2) Where is a current SuperUnicom user's list?
3) Where is a current SuperUnicom reference list?
4) How many SuperUnicom systems were actually bought
and put into service during 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002,
2001?
5) Does/can SuperAWOS provide "certified" ceiling
info?
DON'T attack the messenger because you don't like the
truthful message being promulgated!
BTW: Current is not info from the year 2000!
Author: David Wartofsky - E-Mail Address
Date: 6/16/2005 1:59:26 PM
Okay, I'll respond to your ongoing challenges!
PRICE
First of all, claiming that DigiWX must be better
"because it costs less" should immediately raise some
question as to WHY does the DigiWX cost less?
Maybe it doesn't exactly work as advertised?
You appear impressed by the information provided on
Belfort's DigiWX website.
As the Lost in Space robot used to say, "DANGER WILL
ROBINSON, DANGER, DANGER!"
To avoid making a mess of a busy unicom frequency
requires a ground-based transceiver to be sensitive
enough to detect almost all of the radio
communications chatter a pilot is exposed to AT
ALTITUDE, AT DISTANCE. What you typically hear on the
groubnd is only a small fraction of what an airborne
pilot is exposed to, as any pilot will confirm. If you
can't detect the airborne pilot's radio environment,
then you cannot really tell when your own
transmissions will step over others.
That kind of RF sensitivity ain't easy to do.
THEN, once you are accurately detecting ALL unicom
communications, then you need a refined 'AI' that can
adapt to congestion of the Unicom frequency.
WHEN the DigiWX replies, (IF!), it always does so with
a fixed-length message of about 30 seconds. How would
you like a robotic idiot to tie up your airport's
unicom for 30 secs at a time, regardless of how jammed
the frequency may be?
So, in sum, there is a not necessarily obvious
'voodoo' to create a system that is 'polite' on busy
unicom frequencies.
Installed, a 'traditional' AWOS system runs about
$125-$150,000. One recently installed for over
$180,000. The price of the boxes is one thing, it's
everything else that drives their cost over the
horizon for most airports.
So, to get a system that is proven and actually works,
the SuperAWOS offers a huge savings.
REFERENCES
The 'traditional' AWOS stuff actually works as
advertised. The major thing that comes out about
traditional AWOS manufacturers is their customer
support, it's cost and responsiveness. The equipment
does what it claims, no less, and NO MORE.
But try actually CALLING DigiWX's references. Try
asking if anyone actually HAS or HAS HAD the equipment
intalled and actually operating on their airport's
Unicom, or whether the few actually installed are
anything more than just pretty displays in the lobby.
(I agree, their lobby display IS pretty!)
It should also make you stop and think that DigiWX
lists the 'Baltimore Harbor' as the "Baltimore
Airport." There ain't no such thing, it's a test site
on top of their building; no airport there.
We will provide qualified parties interested in the
SuperAWOS with a complete list of REAL references,
many who have had our equipment working for many
years; but we respect and protect their privacy,
trying not to impose on their willingness to make
themselves available.
--------
In other words, unlike others, no vaporware from us.
We don't need to toot our horn so loud, because we
have never felt the need to.
Those that know, know. Those that don't know,
speculate., sometimes correctly, sometimes not.
We also refuse to compete on price against little more
than pretty brochures. Pretty brochures are not real
competition, as some folks have already discovered.
---------
Who are you, and what is the basis of your experience
or interest in automated weather?
I'm curious.
D
David Wartofsky
Author: T PURCELL
Date: 6/16/2005 4:53:15 PM
LIKE THE COWAED YOU ARE YOU CONTINUE TO HIDE YOUR
IDENTITY!!!
WE HAD A UNIT AT OUR FIELD OPERATING AS A SUPER-UNICOM
AND THEN ADDED VISIBILITY AFTER IT BECAME AVAILABLE.
WE LOOKED AT DIGIWX (I SUSPECT YOUR EMPLOYER) AND
AFTER FINDING MANY OF THEIR REFERENCES DID NOT EXIST
AND THOSE THAT DID WERE VERY SORRY FOR THE DECISION
PURCHASED SUPERUNICOM/AWOS.
WE SPOKE WITH OVER 25 AIPORTS WITH SUPER-UNICOM AND
AWOS AND THEY COULD NOT SAY ENOUGH POSITIVE
Author: T. PURCELL
Date: 6/16/2005 5:06:25 PM
TRUE TO YOUR COWARDLY FORM YOU CONTINUE TO HIDE WHO
YOU ARE.
TO ANSWER YOUR PERRY MASON MOMENT WE HAD A
SUPER-UNICOM THAT WE UPGRADED TO SUPER-AWOS WHEN THEIR
VISIBILITY SENSOR BECAME AVAILABLE.
UNLIKE DIGIWX WHOSE LIST OF USERS IS LARGELY FALSE
(TRY CALLING THEM)
SUPER-AWOS SUPPLIED ME WITH A LIST OF 25 AIPORTS AND
CONTACT NAMES WHO ARE EXTREMELY HAPPY WITH THEIR
DECISION. WHEN I DID REACH SOMEONE WITH A DIGIWX THEIR
RESPONSE WAS VERY NEGATIVE. ONE AIRPORT HAS EVEN
REPLACED THEIR DWX AFTER ONLY 2.5 YEARS BECAUSE "IT
NEVER WORKED".
I'M DONE RESPONDING TO YOU UNTIL YOU REVEAL WHO YOU
ARE, I THINK WE ALL KNOW WHO YOU WORK FOR.
TOM PURCELL
Author:
Date: 6/18/2005 10:14:52 AM
You SU cheerleaders don't read to well, do you? So let
the questions be asked again because inquiring minds
want to know:
1) What does one get for paying nearly a 40% premium
for SuperUnicom ($65K) versus a Digiwx ($40K) system?
2) Where is a current SuperUnicom user's list?
3) Where is a current SuperUnicom reference list?
4) How many SuperUnicom systems were actually bought
and put into service during 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002,
2001?
5) Does/can SuperAWOS provide "certified" ceiling
info?
DON'T attack the messenger because you don't like the
truthful message being promulgated!
BTW: Current is not info from the year 2000!
I got a chuckle out of the "privacy" concern raised
considering that SU is *supposedly* installed at
several public-use airports! How much more public does
an airport need to be to also be "private" and have
privacy rights? If the SU system is so great, people
should be having diarrhea of the mouth about it! I
have never pretended that DW has all the solutions but
from my research they have everything the SU has (and
more) for a lower price. It's just like the price of
PCs, they have been dropping since the 1990s! Modern
weather weathers utilize digital sensors plus PC
software and hardware. So the price of weather systems
should be dropping too, much like DW! Besides, the
makers of DW have only been around for a 100 plus
years, they are not a fly-by-night organization! Oh,
and another thing, I checked into that Baltimore
Harbor airport at:
http://www.digiwx-baltimore.com
It's not actually an airport, it's a floating heliport
on a pier according to the folks at:
http://www.baltimoremarinecenter.com
And no I don't work for the competition! But I do
belive in a fair competitive marketplace, do you SU
cheerleades concur? And I can't stand when some OEMs
will try to charge you the price of a Cadillac when a
Chevy will get you to your final destination with
maybe a little less comfort (if you really don't need
the heated seats)!
Author:
Date: 6/18/2005 12:26:52 PM
Long-Awaited Superunicom Repairs
After paying HOW MUCH and people are waiting HOW LONG?
Just how long does it take to repair a Superunicom?
http://www.co.pierce.wa.us/xml/services/transpo/airportnov2003.pdf
notes:
"Bruce and I have been told that the long-awaited
repairs to the SUPERUNICOM are complete and the unit
will be delivered within the next seven to ten days."
Author:
Date: 6/18/2005 12:31:15 PM
http://www.bowersflybaby.com/stories/messing.html
"Next to the pumps, I saw the new airport manager
(whom I know fairly well), one of the airport staff,
and a buddy huddled around an open equipment box
installed on the wind-swept ramp. The Superunicom was
down, and they were trying to get it working again."
Do you Superunicom fans want to explain this one?
Author:
Date: 6/18/2005 12:53:19 PM
Just how "adaptive" is that Superunicom technology?
Sounds like that "voodoo" needs some tweaking, huh?
"Don't know the cost difference (probably
substancial), but I'd rather have AWOS installed on
the field. My current field has both the AWOS and the
SuperUnicom installed. Drives you nuts to hear people
clicking away at the SuperUnicom every 5 minutes when
AWOS is available. Throw half a dozen planes in the
local pattern plus numerous other non-towered fields
within 100nm being on the same freq and it can be
pretty tough to get your position reports in between
the radio checks, automated advisories, and the
extended advisories. I love it when SuperUnicom tells
me "Caution! Density altitude 5000" when the field
elevation is 5820'."
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.aviation.piloting/browse_frm/thread=
/28a5ff849ff85306/db45ad8a4ab5d8b4?q=3Dsuperunicom&rnum=3D1#db45ad8a4ab5d8b4
With references like this, Superunicom or SuperAWOS
(nothing super here) doesn't need to publish any
lists?
:)
Author:
Date: 6/18/2005 1:03:00 PM
Gonna quit for now --- It's time to take the trash
out!
:)
Author: G S Loff - E-Mail Address
Date: 6/18/2005 2:47:18 PM
Any legitimate airport manager, board member or their
designated representative may request our information
package. We are not going to waste money on someone
with such an obvious axe to grind.
Dozens of airports are singing our praises but we
won't waste their time with someone like you who
obviously has plenty of time to waste.
What gives you the right to invade our clients privacy
when you go to such great lengths to hide who you are?
The long and the short of it is anyone needing AWOS
will contact the various manufacturers, do the due
diligence and make an informed decision. So lie,
mislead and blow all the smoke you want to.
Proudly signed,
GS Loff
Author: GSL - E-Mail Address
Date: 6/18/2005 4:30:15 PM
One question. How come none of the negative assertions
come with any identificaton or contact information?
Could they be from the same source?
Next time you "take out the trash" remember to feed
the chickens.
GL
Author: airport bum
Date: 6/19/2005 9:41:41 AM
as someone already pointed out, and i'm beginning to
believe.... don't fault the messenger if it's the
message that you object too. what difference would it
make if you actually knew the anonymous poster or not?
for as defensive as you superunicom folks seem to be,
there must be a lot of truth to the assertions leveled
at the superunicom product. it just seems to me that
some very valid questions have been raised and versus
providing answers "for those who want to know," that
you superunicom folks are now "waging war" because
someone or somebodies has unpleasant but truthful
things to say. i wouldn't want you guys showing up
uninvited on my front porch.... besides, i'd want you
to go thru a metal detector first!
the three references quoted in this forum are
eye-opening. it takes the assertions about the
superunicom product to a credible level (versus your
alleged phone calls to digiwx customers).... direct me
to something written by an actual digiwx user! why
would you superunicom folks be dialing up digiwx
customers anyway? are you looking to stir up
something? are you superunicom folks that threatened
and insecure? sounds like those chickens have come
back home to roost in the superunicom backyard....
imagine that!
if it was that easy to find three "unsatisfied" or
"frustrated" or "unhappy" superunicom owners who
decided to put their experiences and objections in
writing, how hard would it be to call your customer
base (just like you called the digiwx user base) and
find customers who have a bad taste in their mouth
where the superunicom name is involved? "remember to
feed the chickens".... your words seem petty and
unprofessional. they only serve to throw fuel on this
raging fire! hopefully, those chickens won't be fed
any superunicom product.... less they croak!
all of this leaving me pondering (as someone already
asked) how many superunicom products were located on
airports during 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000?
seems like a very fair and simple question to answer.
why did you folks run for cover? why are you folks
hiding? how would you superunicom folks be invading
your customer's privacy by providing a numbers
breakdown year by year?
in my opinion, i think the whole "privacy issue"
raised is nothing more than a cloak to cover
superunicom's woes. that my friends is really a damn
shame (and a sham)!
Author: airport bum 2
Date: 6/19/2005 12:59:51 PM
Why do any of you feel your entitled to this
information?
Are you going to buy their product,
for that matter anyones product?
These guys have already said they will supply
information to qualified airports and associates.
I will say as a businessman I'm tired of board
loudmouths on the internet talking about things they
know nothing about.
By the way I read several negative comments about
digiwx in this forum one which appears written by the
same gallent gentleman currently leading the charge
against SUPERCOM.
Author:
Date: 6/19/2005 7:18:37 PM
WILL ROBINSON'S TETHER LINE GOT CUT! PROBABLY THE SAME
THING HAPPENED TO THE SUPERUNICOM OFFERING!
Author:
Date: 6/20/2005 5:41:29 PM
There was a SuperUnicom on the The William T. Piper
Memorial Airport
(http://www.lockhavencity.org/airport.htm) for a brief
period of time. It was gleefully replaced with a
DigiWx (http://www.digiwx.com) weather system during
the Spring of 2004.
DigiWx is manufactured by the Belfort Instrument
Company which provided a weather station for the
Wright Brothers back on December 17th, 1903!
Needless to say, it was like going from hell to
heaven; hell, being the SuperUnicom product! The
DigiWx has been pumping out weather data ever since
much to the delight of the flying community in Lock
Haven, Pennsylvania.
Our airport manager Ed Watson (570-748-5123) would be
happy to extol the benefits and features of the DigiWx
system.
The William T. Piper Memorial AIrport is "Home to the
original Piper Cub"
Come on up (or down) and visit sometime!
Author:
Date: 6/22/2005 12:04:09 AM
As one of the authors of one of several letters
written in support of the super unicom product I can
tell you the super unicom waswanted here. The purchase
of DWX was strickly $ and no sense decision. The city
had very limited funds and settled for a far, far
second best.
The DWX constantly misses calls and when it does
respond it goes on and on and on.
Author:
Date: 6/26/2005 8:27:57 PM
Who was the Super$h*t (aka SuperUnicom) wanted by?
Name names! We all agreed as a voting body to ditch
the SuperUnicom product because it wouldn't shut-up
when activated. Several also objected to the inbound
greeting. The voice-reco feature of DigiWx worked for
those who took the time to attend training! As soon as
we learned that DigiWx could be upgraded to mic
clicks, we couldn't wait to get it. So it sounds like
you're saying that you can't even click a mic right
huh? DigiWx was the best product we saw for the
dollars. SuperUnicom is a laughing joke and earns last
place in my book!
Author:
Date: 6/29/2005 10:32:08 AM
A more exact heads to heads analysis would be:
Digiwx vs. Superunciom
and
All Weather Inc vs. Vaisala
Digiwx (made by Belfort) and Superawos only have dual
barometer and visibility... no ceilometer or present
weather at this time!
Digiwx is reportedly working on a ceilometer (at least
they had a beta-version of a working one at SATS
2005). Superunicom apparently has no interest in
adding a ceilometer to their inferior weather station!
And Belfort did make several weather sensors that one
would find on the ASOS platform. What has Superunicom
done?
I would agree that Superawos is a "nobody" in the
weather world! But the Digiwx product still needs a
lot of work! Don't count on a certified ceilometer or
present weather sensor anytime soon! An AWOS III is
the standard in the aviation world and both All
Weather and Vaisala can deliver on that note!
Author:
Date: 6/29/2005 8:11:20 PM
From: Michelle P
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr,
rec.aviation.marketplace, rec.aviation.student,
rec.aviation.owning
Subject: Re: Not soooo SuperAWOS
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 23:56:05 GMT
I fly into and out of Hyde field [in Maryland] five or
more days a week. It is located right next to Potomac
Field, Dave's playground. We share a unicom frequency.
I hate the damn thing! It steps on the reply from Hyde
on airport conditions. No the conditions at Potomac
and Hyde are not the same. Potomac sits down in a
hollow. They may have no wind or light wind and the
wind at Hyde may be blowing the opposite direction. We
have a DigiWX.
Michelle
Author:
Date: 7/2/2005 8:39:19 AM
Dave Wartofsky's playground =3D Potomac airfield
Dave has a SuperUnicom at Potomac airfield
Both Potomac and Hyde airfield (about a mile away)
share the same Unicom frequency (122.8)
Hyde airfield =3D Washington Executive airport
SuperUnicom is always stepping on Unicom
radio transmissions from Hyde airfield
The SuperUnicom is HATED
Hyde has a DigiWx which is NOT stepping on
any Unicom radio transmissions
IMAGINE THAT!
Author:
Date: 7/7/2005 12:50:00 PM
I hate the damn SuperAWOS product too. They have it at
Bader field near Atlantic City, NJ and I've always
said this thing cannot distinguish who is clicking
their mic. You can have three people in the pattern
and if each one activates their respective mic once,
then the damn SuperUnicom goes off like a rocket. It
clutters the Unicom frequency making the giving of
position reports within the pattern impossible to give
until the damn thing shuts up! Ocean City, NJ (just
down the road) has a DigiWx and you don't have this
problem with the Belfort system because it is voice
activated instead and you have to say the distinct
"digi - bravo" phrase to activate it! I'd choose a
DigiWx any day of the week before I'd have a SuperAWOS
on my airfield if I had one!
Author:
Date: 7/9/2005 9:32:00 AM
Geeeeez... me thinks Superunicom (Superawos) has more
bad references here than good ones as noted on their
website. Superunicom.com lists only 3 references, all
from year 2000 which is about 5 years agooooooooooooo!
Yet how many have chimed in here saying they "hate"
the Superawos product???
With an actual user's reference list (like that
catalogued here) versus a "sanitized" list prepared by
Superunicom, me thinks this uncensored version is
probably a better realistic depiction of the Superawos
product.
Would anyone other than Dave Wartofsky or G S Loff
from Superunicom disagree?
Author:
Date: 7/13/2005 10:52:44 AM
I was reading thru the postings here and I see some
Digiwx bashing and some SuperUnicom (aka SuperAWOS)
bashing. Nothing new here to begin with, but when one
starts digging deeper, a disturbing picture begins to
develop.
Dave Wartofsky and his other henchman GS Loff attack
the Digiwx product ruthlessly. They go as far as
posting some real rubbish on their website comparing
the 2 products (Digiwx vs SuperAWOS), some of which
are distortions and others which are full-blown lies!
This is troubling considering that Superunicom has
been around for maybe 10-12 years at most --- they
could be here today and gone tomorrow. Belfort has
been around how long --- over a 100 years. I know who
I'm more inclined to believe; and it ain't
Superunicom's rubbish.
And this comes to the next truly troubling revelation.
Superunicom states on their website regarding
references that you need to contact them for a user's
list as they are "protecting the privacy" of their
customers. This one I just don't get! So are they
saying that it's more important to protect the
identity of a few airport managers versus protecting
the rest of the flyng aviation community because of
"privacy" concerns. So who owns the AWOS and the info
it disseminates? Didn't the taxpayers in this country
pay for the AWOS (all of them)? Why would you not
publish where an AWOS is located? Is this a truly
idiotic decision that does nothing to improve or
enhance aviation safety? Unfortunately, Mr.
Wartofsky's agrument is something I can't stomach; and
neither should anyone else.
Meanwhile, in an effort to promote aviation safety,
Belfort publishes a Digiwx user's list (all of them)
which can be viewed at http://www.digiwx.com
I'm guessing that Superunicom (aka SuperAWOS) doesn't
want to publish a list because they don't want the
taxpayers to find out how problem-prone the
Superunicom (aka SuperAWOS) system really is!!!!
Author: Rick Polanski
Date: 7/26/2005 5:37:59 PM
Since this thread seems to be maintaning momemtum, I'm
going to unwind as well. WIth the satelite
communicatin option, SuperAWOS uploads data to a
website maintained by Potomac Aviation on the hour.
There are no other updates during this hour PERIOD. We
are in the midst of thunderstom season and I would
agrue that SuperAWOS could miss and not report a
thunderstorm altogether. THIS IS SCARY! Here is how
that could happen:
Let's say the SuperAWOS sends a weather report on the
hour (let's pick 2PM or 1400 hours). If the sky can be
seen getting dark in the distant at 1415 and a strong
thunderstrm passes thru at 1430 and it clears up again
by 1445, then when SuperAWOS goes to report it's next
hourly observation at 3PM or 1500 hours, conceivably
it could make the same weather obsevation that it did
at 2PM with no indication that a thunderstorm has just
blown thru! Why is this important AND SCARY? If you
are on your way back to an airport where SuperAWOS is
only updating weather hourly, and the storm is blowing
from the NW to the SE (as most weather in the US
does), and you happpen to be in the southeast headed
for the northwest about 75 miles away with no other
reporting weather stationns in between, you could run
smack-dab into this thunderstorm. SuperAWOS is the
only weather station that makes hourly reports versus
minute by minute reports from most other AWOSes
available in the marketplace. This is just one more
reason to consider buying something other than a
SuperAWOS for your airport! You really need to
consider an AWOS from Vaisala or ALl Weather Inc. To
choose any other is to risk life, limb and property!
Author:
Date: 7/27/2005 8:15:06 AM
I just heard that DigiWx added mic clicks as a way of
activating a weather broadcast on the Unicom
frequency. IMO: If it's the typical bugware released
by most companies these days, then it probably doesn't
work as advertised. I guess we shall see! Are mic
clicks really better than voice activation? On the
plus side, DigiWx is a cool looking system. It's
wireless and has digital sensors. The accompanying
wind sensors are located on a 15' tower unlike the
SuperAWOS where the wind sensors are mounted a mere 4'
or so from the ground. At this height, SuperAWOS does
a better job of monitoring eddy currents than
prevailing airport wind conditions!!!!!!!!!
I give the nod to DigiWx
Author:
Date: 8/2/2005 4:15:57 PM
I couldn't agree more. If I'm flying instrument
conditions, I can tell you I'd like to know where the
weather data is coming from and who measured it. And
at this point, I wouldn't trust a SuperUnicom or
SuperAWOS or SuperTURD as far as I could throw that
overpriced boat anchor! Who in the hell is Potomac
Aviation Technology? What national or government
sponsored weather projects did these "yahoos" ever
provide weather sensors for? Wait till the first
lawsuit gets filed against them becasue their
overpriced boat anchor incorrectly reported the
altimeter setting or visibility. Talk about
cockroaches that scatter when the light gets turned
on. You probably ain't seen nothing until Potomac
Avaition Technology picks up and leaves town in the
middle of the night! Good Luck (cause you're gonna
need it) if you have one of these systems!
Author:
Date: 8/13/2005 1:21:53 PM
Everything originally noted about SuperAWOS could also
be said about Belfort Instrument's DigiWX, namely:
DigiWX only has: 1) certified barometer,
and 2) certified visibility sensor
Ten reasons to NOT buy DigiWX:
1) no certified wind speed <--- plastic crap
2) no certified wind direction <--- more plastic crap
3) no certified temperature
4) no certified dewpoint
5) no certified density altitude
6) no certified visibility
7) no certified precipitation measurement
8) no certified precipitation discriminator
9) no certified ceiling measurement
10) no certified lightning detection
Fortunately, DigiWX is a more economically priced
alternative to the very expensive SuperAWOS!
And there is a greater likelihood (albeit not in
your lifetime) that Belfort will eventually after
a very long time add more certified sensors to
the DigiWX.
Don't count on SuperAWOS adding any. And if they
do, they will be priced like the rest of their
system and too costly for the average airport to buy!
With that said, SuperAWOS and DigiWX have added
some other AWOS choices for airports desiring weather,
but the choices being offered suffer from high costs
(in the case of SuperAWOS) and not enough reliable
weather sensors that the pilot community really needs!
I'd also applaud Belfort for moving to "mic clicks"
since the "voice activation" never seemed to work.
On the other hand, one can only hope that it is
better than the supposed "adaptive" technology being
peddled by SuperUnicom which is anything but adaptive!
IMO: the SuperAWOS folks just use a lot of choking
"smoke and mirrors" to sell their overpriced system.
Author: khan
Date: 8/13/2005 6:02:17 PM
Belfort Instruments moves like a tortoise does. They
can't seem to get out of their own way. As somebody
noted, Belfort *HAS* been around for a very long time
(~129 years), and they have a great company history to
talk about. Talk is cheap in this day and age. The
problem is they move like a 129 year old would be
expected to move. Belfort seemed to take *FOREVER* to
get their DigiWX approved by the FAA and after *ALL*
that wait, they only certified the dual barometer and
the visibility sensor (just like the SuperAWOS
product). So what they have in essence is the
equivalent of an AWOS II. Who wants an AWOS II in this
day and age of AWOS III and AWOS III P/T? DigiWX (nor
SuperAWOS) just don't cut it! There is talk of Belfort
adding a ceilometer - how long will it take to get
that certified? You could grow a lot of gray hair
*WAITING* for Belfort if they ever deliver. One final
note: The data from DigiWX and SuperAWOS is not
eligible for inclusion in the NADIN network. So good
luck finding their weather data when you really need
it!!!
Author: khan
Date: 8/14/2005 8:39:05 AM
When one compares the acquisition price of an AWOS II
from DigiWX (please *NOTE* that SuperAWOS costs approx
$25K more than the DigiWX), one will see that it
compares very favorably with the price of an AWOS II
purchased from either Vaisala or All Weather Inc. If
you later decide to upgrade your AWOS II, at least you
can upgrade it if you have a Vaisala or AWI. But if
you hope to upgrade your DigiWX (and god forbid your
SuperAWOS) anytime soon - GOOD LUCK! One final note,
the acquisition price of the AWOS II from SuperUnicom
is ~$65K. For this price, you could buy an AWOS III
(and maybe even an AWOS III P/T) from either Vaisala
or All Weather Inc. Something to think about, huh?
Author: sammy
Date: 8/15/2005 4:14:03 PM
Wasn't there a post here a couple of days ago (that
was possibly deleted by the webmaster) talking about
how the SuperAWOS people were "blowing smoke" where
quarterly calibrations of an AWOS are concerned? I can
tell you that the SuperUnicom people told us flat out
that no calibration is required, yet this is simply
not true. There is a FAA 150 series advisory circular
that describes the quarterly calibration required for
all AWOS including the SuperAWOS. So when the
SuperUnciome people come piping that their AWOS is
immune to this, just tell them to take a long walk
down a short pier because you know better!
Author:
Date: 8/19/2005 9:47:29 AM
Here is reference to the FAA discussions between Mark
Beisse (***@faa.gov) with David Wartofsky
regarding quarterly/annual calibration of all AWOS
(including SuperAWOS):
Federal Aviation Administration...
David, we discussed with Claude Jones today the
SuperUnicom automated weather observing system
approval as certified under Advisory Circular
150/5220-16C...
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=3Dcache:o5_0c-GDpUUJ:www.superawos.com/aip.h=
tm+150/5220-16C&hl=3Den
Author:
Date: 8/19/2005 10:13:15 AM
AWOS calibration/inspections are covered in:
FAA Order 6700.200
FAA Advisory Circular 150/5220-16C
The SuperAWOS people won't tell you this, I just did!
Author: Christopher P.
Date: 8/19/2005 12:13:41 PM
After reading thru this long thread, I get the feeling
that there is a lot we just don't know about
SuperUnicom. And not a whole lot more about DigiWx
either. There seems to be a lot of "lying, misleading
and blowing smoke" to quote a few people here. There
also seems to be a very compelling case more so
against the SuperAWOS versus the DigiWx system. I do
know the Belfort name. They have definitely been
around a long time! I don't know if this a good reason
to hence buy a DigiWx versus a SuperUnicom. DigiWx
does seem though to offer a lot of bang for the dollar
versus SuperAWOS. What is certain is that we need more
AWOS around the USA. I don't think I'd want a
SuperUnicom in my back yard, maybe somebody else's
given their propensity to be less than forthcoming (is
that another way of saying "don't lie, just tell the
truth"). Neither system seems capable of delivering
certified cloud base info which is necessary in
designating an alternate airport in case IFR
conditions prevent one from landing at their desired
location. I would also wager that an airport is really
not going to save that much money by buying a DigiWx
or SuperAWOS versus a Vaisala or All Weather Inc
weather station when all is said and done. That's my
two cents worth!
Author:
Date: 8/20/2005 9:06:50 AM
To follow-up on the last post:
The DigiWX and SuperAWOS systems both claim simplified
installation procedures. DigiWX says it takes 1 - 1/2
days to install their system while SuperAWOS claims 1
hour! I don't know if I'd want an AWOS that installs
in 1 hour, how about you? Think about it, I don't know
anything that installs in 1 hour, and then works
consistently and reliably.
The DigiWX and SuperAWOS systems both claim simplified
calibration and annual inspection procedures. And yes,
as noted, the SuperAWOS requires quarterly and annual
inspections even though they quote a $0.00 figure;
this is misleading on SuperUnicom's part! Quarterly
and annual inspections of an AWOS are not an optional
exercise, and somebody has to visit the AWOS to
perform this service. Is your time worth something?
Since SuperAWOS assigns a $0.00 figure to
quarterly/annual inspections, they apparently don't
think a tech's time is worth anything either.
Now apparently, the SuperAWOS has a expedited
calibration process that requires less time in the
field at the AWOS. But considering all the blowing
smoke that has gotten into our eyes, I have to wonder
how "expedited" the calibration process really is
since they already assign a $0.00 value to the
technician who will have to perform this service.
SuperAWOS also claims their Unicom broadcasts are
automatically adaptive to decrease frequency
congestion. DigiWX says their Unicom broadcasts are
manually adaptive. DigiWX also claims to be the only
AWOS in the world that can transmit AWOS info on both
the Unicom frequency and a discrete VHF frequency.
That is something the SuperAWOS can't do!
So what is one getting in a SuperAWOS for paying a
$25K premium over the DigiWX system? It's a damn good
question!
Author:
Date: 8/22/2005 8:13:01 PM
It has been noted in this thread that Digiwx and
SuperUnicom offer some additional AWOS choices to the
marketplace versus the traditional AWOS manufacturers
(eg. AWI, Vaisala). While that may be true, it would
appear that the marketplace is not beating a path to
SuperUnicom's door as they have been around for 12-13
years and only sold a mere 40 systems or so (which
averages to ~3 per year). Digiwx has done somewhat
better with 40 systems sold in the past 4-5 years
(which averages to ~8 per year). If Digiwx and
SuperAWOS were the best thing since sliced bread, one
would think they would have sold more systems to date.
Considering that Digiwx (and SuperAWOS) are nothing
more than a glorified AWOS II, why would airports be
interested in these non-scalable weather stations when
most AWOS's sold today by AWI and Vaisala offer much
more like ceiling info, precipitation, present weather
and in some cases lightning detection. One cannot get
these additional sensor options on either a Digiwx or
a SuperAWOS. At least the Digiwx is priced right about
where an AWOS II should be but this is simply not the
case where SuperAWOS is concerned as it costs about
$25,000 more!
David Wartofsky (of SuperUnicom fame) claims in his
sales bunk that ceiling info is not required by most
pilots. I'd like to meet the pilots (all 2 or 3 of
them) who would not like to have ceiling info on
either a VFR or IFR flight. One might not really need
it, but I would wager that most pilots would prefer to
have it versus not being able to have it at all if you
buy a SuperAWOS.
Lesson for Belfort: Get your ceilometer to market
PRONTO!
Author:
Date: 9/9/2005 9:25:19 PM
I can tell you that Belfort doesn't do anything
pronto, so don't count on a certified ceilometer
anytime soon.
On the other hand, I heard about this topic when I say
a note posted on a local airport bulletin board. I
couldn't believe my eyes when I saw the amazing and
incredible irrationalizations from D. Wartofsy and G.
Loff.
When I got back home, I later visited www.google.com
and entered "superawos" and I couldn't believe the
tally of results that popped up. Forget about "10
reasons to NOT buy a SuperUnicom," I must have 10
times "10 reasons to NOT buy a SuperUnicom."
I think that's all I need and want to know about
SuperAWOS!
Go DigiWx!
Author:
Date: 9/9/2005 9:42:30 PM
"I must have seen 10 times "10 reasons to NOT buy a
SuperUnicom."
Author: tony
Date: 9/16/2005 8:57:44 PM
trust me on this one. if superunicom (superawos) comes
calling or knocking on your door, run (don't walk) in
the opposite direction!
Author: gimesh
Date:
I called and talked with Gary Loff of Superunicom.
He's very negative about the digiwx product. Belfort
must be giving Superunicom a run for there money.
ANyway, I wanted to learn where a superunicom might be
near me so I could fly there and check it out. Well
Gary Loff just flat out refused to give me a user. Not
even one! I can't believe these people. why would you
guard a user's list? if you have a great product, then
you tell people about it! and people want to know
about it. I guess the superunicom product must not be
so great then! I would wager the superunicome people
have probably only placed two: at opposite ends of the
runway at Potomac airfield! I think i'll go see the
digiwx in Driggs, ID.
I give a thumbs down to superunicom for a s*****
attitude!
Author:
Date: 9/22/2005 5:04:36 PM
well they have a few more installations than two but
not that many more. i don=B4t know how anyone (including
the FAA AIP perople) could rationalize spending $67K
for an AWOS II. the prices of awos should be dropping
like the prices of personal computers. not so with the
superawos product. ugggh!
Author: dilly dally
Date: 9/23/2005 9:48:46 PM
why is the FAA spending $67K for superawos in montana
when you could buy a friggin AWOS III P/T for about
the same amount? who did superawos get into bed with?
the faa?
the engineering firm?
the airport manager pant's?
$67K is a lot of money to buy people/firms off with!
Author: robert
Date: 9/25/2005 8:49:39 AM
Those are some great questions (ie. did SuperAWOS buy
off the FAA, the engineering firms or the airport
manager)?
Do you have any proof that this actually happened?
Granted, prima facia evidence like this would be very
incriminatory and probably very hard to come by!
I've heard some disconcerting things, as well, about
SuperUnicom and the way they do business but we need
more than rumor. Granted where there is smoke, there
is fire!
Author:
Date: 10/6/2005 3:20:22 PM
there isn't just a fire, there is a blaze out of
control!
Author: gregory dunn
Date: 10/6/2005 9:46:11 PM
digiwx offers so much more bang for the dollar (versus
superawos) that there is no further comparison
necessay.
digiwx offers a lobby display for viewing in an fbo
while superawos offers nothing
digiwx offers live real-time updates minute by minute
over the web versus just hourly updates from superawos
digiwx offers wx broadcasts over both unicom and a
discreet frequency; superawos can only broadcast over
unicom
digiwx is working on adding a ceilometer; where will
superawos get a ceilometer to add to their wx station?
digiwx is approx $20-25K lower priced than the
superawos
digiwx has been around for over a century; superawos
has been around about 1/10 this time
digiwx made sensors for asos before building an awos;
superawos doesn't make any sensors themselves, they
buy them elsewhere and pass along these costs to you
superawos is less than forthcoming about the
voluminous digiwx installed customer base
superawos is less than forthcoming when they say their
superawos doesn't require any maintenance. the faa did
not give them a pass on this. maintenance, calibration
and quarterly inspections are required; superawos
won't tell you this, i just did!
there is a superior product: digiwx
and there is an inferior product: wanta guess which
one?
Author:
Date: 10/10/2005 6:21:24 AM
Anyone who has managed to read through this rather
destructive name bashing thread might wish to consider
whether the above comments are truly neutral and
representative of the user experience or are done with
other less noble intentions.
I truly hope that anyone who is considering the use of
automated equipment would contact the four companies
listed and make their own decision after having
demonstrations of the various equipment available and
considering the circumstances that are particularly
important to the particular airfield.
I personally would suggest that Belfort, Potomac,
Vaisala and AWI are responsible organisations trying
to support the aviation community each with a
different solution.
No one is being served by one or more individuals
desire to damage the reputations of these companies,
whatever reason they may have. It is unfortunate that
a useful technology which forums like this represent
are actually being used to bring about the disrepute
of these companies for whatever personal or commercial
reasons. The fervour that is shown in particular
towards both companies (Belfort and Potomac) is an
indication that the individual(s) are not acting in
the best interests of the community but rather to
ensure that the search engines reflect their ability
to cross post their comments.
Author:
Date: 10/18/2005 6:53:09 AM
I couldn't disagree more with the previous poster's
comments. Before the advent of Belfort's DigiWx or
Potomac Aviation Tech's SuperUnicom, there was Vaisala
and All Weather Inc who produced most all AWOSs
installed in the USA. Things became more complex when
DigiWx and SuperAWOS both received FAA Approval in
June 2004. Neither system has lived up to the
expectations advertised by either vendor. Both vendors
have been unable to deliver everything promised; both
are working to improve things. But one particular
vendor has been more unscrupulous and disingenuous
than the other. One is more worthy of your business
than the other. I'll leave it to the viewing audience
to ascertain which vendor that might be.
Author:
Date: 10/18/2005 7:03:07 AM
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dcpilots/message/3282
From: "Joe Della Barba"
Date: Sat Feb 26, 2005 10:21 am
Subject: Super Unicom at VKX ***@...
When I was instructing out of VKX we HATED that thing!
Imagine hearing it 24/7/365!
Joe
Author:
Date: 10/18/2005 7:07:17 AM
This thread may have got it starts at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dcpilots/message/3275
From: Stan Fetter
Date: Fri Feb 25, 2005 10:15 pm
Subject: Re: [dcpilots] "digi bravo" what? s10399
The infamous Super Unicom at Potomac is the other
of the spectrum; it broadcasts all the time in the
blind every time it hears traffic on the frequency.
Stan that's not true. The Super Unicom onlyblind every time it hears traffic on the frequency.
to a pilot query which are three or four mic clicks
made in the same way a pilot makes those clicks to
turn on runway lights.
That is absolute, total bunk. It may be that duringmade in the same way a pilot makes those clicks to
turn on runway lights.
times of lots of activity it shuts up, but time and
time again (three times today) somebody comes into the
pattern at Hyde, calls in for an advisory, and the
answer gets stepped on by the "Potomac Airfield,
automated unicom...click three times for
advisory...etc."
We run into this particularly in the early morning
when the traffic planes go out. Once somebody gets
airborne, many times there's a need for that plane to
pass something along to the next one who is probably
still on the ground. EVERY TIME, the response from the
plane on the ground is stepped on by a pop-up from the
box [SuperUnicom] at Potomac because it's simply
responding to the presence of radio traffic on the
frequency.
I have asked David [Wartofsky] again and again to set
it so it doesn't make the blind transmissions and
speaks only in response to the clicks. He keeps saying
he's doing it, and he never does.
I know this happens, because (1) the pilot coming in
invariably says "say again, you got stepped on by the
"automated box" or something to that effect and (2) I
can hear in most of the time on the base station
in the office.
When two airports are as close together as Hyde and
Potomac, there will always be steppings on whether
they be from a human or a machine.
The difference is that a human can tell when somebodyPotomac, there will always be steppings on whether
they be from a human or a machine.
says "Hyde" or "Potomac" and is smart enough to shut
up when an inbound is calling the other airport. Until
the box [SuperAWOS] gains that ability to reason, it
needs to
stifle.
As I travel around the country, I often wish there
weremore SuperUnicoms out there because 90% of the times
itseems what there is out there is, well, nothing.
We're just going to have to disagree on this one. Ispend upwards of 70 hours a week at that airport, and
I'm not hiding behind a desk. I see this all the time,
and I get continuous complaints on it. David keeps
promising to take care of it but doesn't and his other
half in Boston doesn't care. If he would set it so it
speaks only when spoken to that would be fine, but he
hasn't and in the current configuration I think it's a
hazard and a piece of crap.
Don't get me wrong...it's a neat box and when I was
based at Potomac I liked it although I got irritated
by the pop-up transmissions then too. (My wife's sign
shop made the little decals of the duck on the beach
chair.) But, it's got to be applied in moderation and
on that point he's missed the mark.
End of rant...I'll go take my pills now.
sbf
Charles A. Fazio
President & Executive Producer
Vision Creative LLc
'Cool People, Creating Cool Stuff for Cool Clients.
You In?'President & Executive Producer
Vision Creative LLc
'Cool People, Creating Cool Stuff for Cool Clients.
Author:
Date: 10/18/2005 7:21:28 AM
From: AJ Maltenfort
Date: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:48 pm
Subject: Re: [dcpilots] Re: Super Unicom ...
maltena100
May have written earlier about the "Super Unicom" at
Princeton NJ that does a radio check for you. Click
the mike 5 times and it spits back to you what you
just said. Except I'm on downwind about to turn base
when some a*sh*le clicks the mike 5 times (something I
didn't know about at the time). I go ahead and call my
base and am approaching final when the d*mned Stuper
Unicom says "base, runway 28, Princeton." My head is
on a swivel. Nobody had announced they were in the
pattern behind me, so I'm wondering if someone is
making right traffic (which I had heard about 5 miles
out). I announce that I am on base, describe myself as
a green and white Mooney, and ask if I need to go
around because I can't find this other plane. Then a
real live person from the fbo chuckles that the super
unicom just spit back my radio call...
Author:
Date: 10/19/2005 7:16:19 AM
Imagine this....
A cool exciting new aviation weather product that:
1) claims to be adaptive but ISN'T
2) doesn't enhance safety of flight operations
3) has a radio check feature that doesn't shut up
4) ties up your unicom frequency when you need it most
5) has been characterized as "a hazard and a piece of
crap"
6) the manufacturer (Potomac Aviation Technology)
promises
to fix the on-going complaints and then does NOTHING!
You TOO can have one.... it's called SuperAWOS
Author: - E-Mail Address
Date: 10/21/2005 2:49:17 PM
Well, the same things could be voiced about Belfort's
Digiwx system which now uses "mic clicks" versus
Digiwx voice-recognition which was a miserable and
total failure. You can find the remnants of that
complete failure at Ocean City, NJ; Driggs ID and
Huntington, UT. Chiefly, Digiwx:
1) claims to be adaptive but ISN'T
2) doesn't enhance safety of flight operations
3) has a radio check feature that no one can activate
4) ties up your unicom frequency when you need it most
5) has been characterized as "a hazard and a piece of
crap"
6) the manufacturer (Belfort) promises to fix the
on-going complaints and then does NOTHING!
And regarding which company is unscrupulous and
disingenous, I hereby nominate and proclaim Belfort
Instruments as that company. Belfort has been sporting
Digiwx tee-shirts which claim "The Wright Brothers
Relied On Us." Other than Belfort's wild assertion,
there is no written record to document this alleged
fact.
None, nadda, didn't happen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In fact, the Wright Brothers wrote extensively about
using a Richard's handheld anemometer which was
French-made; not American made as Belfort would have
you believe. Visit http://www.google.com and search
for "Richard's anemometer" and see for yourself.
Digiwx does offer a cheaper price for an AWOS but be
forewarned, you get what you pay for.
Buy CRAP and you'll have CRAP!