🚀 go-pugleaf

From: john r pierce <antispam@here.not>
> Heather Madrone  <heather@madrone.com> wrote:
> >Taken 1.25 miles north of Boulder Creek on Two Bar Creek:
> >
> >February 1	2.35"
> >February 2	9.125"
> >February 3	1.275"
> >February 5	2.1"
> >February 6	5.125"
> >February 7	4.6"
> >
> >Total rainfall for the first week of February 1998 - 24.575.  As of this evening,
> >the seasonal rainfall for this location stands at 69.8".
> 
> Thats almost exactly double, day by day, of what we got here on lower Graham
> Hill Rd 1 mile from 1&17.  I didn't record the amounts, but yesterday's dump was
> 2.3", and the 2nd I recall I emptied twice, once 2.5 and again 2.2 or so

That would be about what I would figure, although I'd guess we get a little
more than twice the rain you do.

> I have _got_ to get one of those Davis Instrument recording weather stations...
> No point in having a anemometer here, too many trees for accurate wind readings,
> but rain, temp, humidity, and baro pressure I'd like to log.

Me too.  I'm planning on buying myself one when the last installment of my
current contract fees comes in.  I *do* need an anemometer.

So, where are you planning on getting this device?  I've seen them in a
few catalogs, but I'm wondering if there are whole catalogs of weather
equipment out there for the salivating.

Heather Madrone  (heather@madrone.com)  http://www.madrone.com

The Goddess moves mountains -- bring a shovel.

I know what you mean !
I live in South South Felton. - As far down 9 as you can live.
Rain year to date: 73.4"
Feb: 20.40
Jan: 25.95

Take care up there and all over San Lorenzo!
Martin

Heather Madrone  <heather@madrone.com> wrote:

>Taken 1.25 miles north of Boulder Creek on Two Bar Creek:
>
>February 1	2.35"
>February 2	9.125"
>February 3	1.275"
>February 5	2.1"
>February 6	5.125"
>February 7	4.6"
>
>Total rainfall for the first week of February 1998 - 24.575.  As of this evening,
>the seasonal rainfall for this location stands at 69.8".

Thats almost exactly double, day by day, of what we got here on lower Graham
Hill Rd 1 mile from 1&17.  I didn't record the amounts, but yesterday's dump was
2.3", and the 2nd I recall I emptied twice, once 2.5 and again 2.2 or so

I have _got_ to get one of those Davis Instrument recording weather stations...
No point in having a anemometer here, too many trees for accurate wind readings,
but rain, temp, humidity, and baro pressure I'd like to log.

-jrp
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 This posting has a invalid email address to discourage bulk emailers
Due to the ever increasing volumes of spam, I do not mix mail and news
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Heather Madrone  <heather@madrone.com> wrote:
>So, where are you planning on getting this device?  I've seen them in a
>few catalogs, but I'm wondering if there are whole catalogs of weather
>equipment out there for the salivating.

Davis Instruments has a (somewhat slow and overly laden w/ graphics) website.
Quite naturally, lo and behold, I hit it on my first guess (who needs a search
engine...) http://www.davisinstruments.com/

From what I've seen they are reasonable and affordable.  Its not exactly NWS
grade stuff, but they are quite accurate.

A "Weather Wizard III" is about $195, and includes about everything but rainfall
(i.e inside humidity, indoor/outdoor temp, wind speed and direction).  The rain
gauge is an additional $75, accurate to 0.01" (or 0.2mm if you prefer metric).
You can add the 'Weatherlink data logger' and it will interface with your
computer (and store 1400 or so samples when your computer is offline, thats 24
hours of minute by minute, or 60 days of hour by hour), this with the (MS
Windows based) software is $165.  So it ends up costing around $450 or so with
the toys.

-jrp

----------------------------------------------------------------------
 This posting has a invalid email address to discourage bulk emailers
Due to the ever increasing volumes of spam, I do not mix mail and news
----------------------------------------------------------------------

john r pierce wrote:
> 
> Heather Madrone  <heather@madrone.com> wrote:
> >So, where are you planning on getting this device?  I've seen them in a
> >few catalogs, but I'm wondering if there are whole catalogs of weather
> >equipment out there for the salivating.

Davis Instruments is in Hayward and they have a catalog.
 
> Davis Instruments has a (somewhat slow and overly laden w/ graphics) website.
> Quite naturally, lo and behold, I hit it on my first guess (who needs a search
> engine...) http://www.davisinstruments.com/
> 
> From what I've seen they are reasonable and affordable.  Its not exactly NWS
> grade stuff, but they are quite accurate.
> 
> A "Weather Wizard III" is about $195, and includes about everything but rainfall
> (i.e inside humidity, indoor/outdoor temp, wind speed and direction).  The rain
> gauge is an additional $75, accurate to 0.01" (or 0.2mm if you prefer metric).
> You can add the 'Weatherlink data logger' and it will interface with your
> computer (and store 1400 or so samples when your computer is offline, thats 24
> hours of minute by minute, or 60 days of hour by hour)., this with the (MS
> Windows based) software is $165.  So it ends up costing around $450 or so with
> the toys.

I have had this setup for several years.  Sample data every 1/2 hour.
I download it to the pc every week or two.  Battery backup (9v) in the
unit lasts about 48 hours.  The software is lame (IMHO), reasons:
- 16 bit windows program (runs on win NT and win 95) tends to suck up
all
available cpu so I only run it when I want to look at it.  This means I
can't use some of it's features such as automatic download of data,
automatic resetting of daily highs/lows, etc.
- UI is from their old DOS version (doesn't use standard windows UI).
- downloads data at 1200 bps (not really a problem, just lame).

Otherwise works fine.  It was the only weather station that interfaced
to the pc at the time I bought it.  There may be alternatives now.

Email if you need more info.

Sorry for the excessive quoting but if you get your news from scruznet
you probably didn't see the original posts.

Mark Halliday <spam@laura.org> wrote:
>Sorry for the excessive quoting but if you get your news from scruznet
>you probably didn't see the original posts.

Hey, I resemble that!  :-�

-jrp
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 This posting has a invalid email address to discourage bulk emailers
Due to the ever increasing volumes of spam, I do not mix mail and news
----------------------------------------------------------------------