How does pp keep the speed up?

[lkb]

To maintain a certain speed, it 's just common sense that the speed controls have to react to the drag that a skier creates when he's on the pulling edge. ZO does it in a way that can definitely be heard. How does PP do it? Less throttle(not enough to hear) for a longer period of time? I have never heard it gas a skier in the course but it has to do something to correct for the extra drag when you load the ski.

[lkb]

Brent, do you mean that w/o the switch it trys to maintain a constant rpm that is chosen based on corrections for wind, crew and skier weight? And it keeps this same rpm when you are loaded at the first wake and the same rpm when you are in the preturn?

[Director Darwin]

With Zero Off and to a lesser extent PP Star Gazer, the public seems to be fascinated by the fact that the end course times are within .02 of actual every time.  That is impressive but what remains to be determined is "how" that is accomplished.  What are the one ball times?  What are the 3 ball times?  With ZO it provides a virtual time based on the fact that it is going 34.2mph (supposedly).   The problems with PP Star Gazer have been the mid course times.  The end course is always accurate but the 3 ball times have not.  Hopefully, PP has resolved this issue.   I can't imagine that ZO has.  But without magnet timing, you'll never know.  A correct assumption can be made that the timing system must "make up" for the pull of the skier.  Where this "make up" occurs will ultimately determine the success or failure of a particular system in the eyes of the skiers using it.  We'll have both systems running on our lake sometime around the first of March.  We have an 08 Response w/ Star Gazer (and PP classic) and an 08 Nautique w/ ZO.  We'll have numerous skiers of different skill levels skiing behind both.  It will be interesting to get their (our) impressions of both.

 

jhd 

[lkb]

I wasn't skiing when accuski was around, but I have heard several people(other than schnitz!) talk about how good it was. What was it that made it feel good?

[Horton]

But I ski at normal /O and sometimes put the rope on the poll. I never noticed a diff. It seem like the switch does not do anything for me. (Believe me I pull)

[Deke]

Brent, PP does get feedback from the skier without the switch.  The "program" attempts to maintain rpm, including all of the inputs you mentioned and reacts to a reduction in rpm due to skier's load.  If the switch is added, the reaction is delayed until the switch is closed.

As far as algorithms are concerned, that is how the correction is made.  In otherwords, when the reaction is timed and the rate of the correction and also for how long.  This is why different systems have different feel.  It is my understanding that the older Accuski was able to apply throttle at a rate based on the rate that rpms were lost, whereas PP only applies throttle at the same rate regardless of how fast rpms were lost.  At least this was the case when Accuski was still around.  I am not sure what PP does now.

Deke

[Horton]

yea but was that with Normal - Zero or with .... whatever the KX PX thing is that reads off the switch?