Frank van Lindert <Frank.van@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Davis is considered a very good brand of weather station for amateur
> to private semi-professional use, e.g. in agriculture. ...
> But the quality applies only for measuring, not for predicting the
> weather! No single weather station can do that appropriately.
Would sheer numbers help much? There's a lot of connectivity
options these days. If someone came up with a really cheap
basic instrument pack and deployed thousands of them (maybe
one on every farm?) with communications to some central
computer, would prediction get any better?
You don't need much bandwidth. Temperature over a 200
degree range with 1/10 degree accuracy takes 11 bits
A 128-bit packet would likely do everything you could
possibly want; an ordinary phone line or cell phone
connection can handle 512 of those a second.
Designing the cheap weather station might be hard.
Getting the receiving computer to make sense of all
that data almost certainly would be.
But if someone did all that, would there be much
payoff? Or is the problem in forecasting something
else, so more data would make little difference.
--
Sandy Harris,
Nanjing, China
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|