rruff wrote:
It does look like Notio is treating it as an aid to field testing, which is good..Agreed. This is one of the reasons the initital releases worked with Golden Cheetah and specifically Aerolab in GC. I believe GC also provides a ton of stuff for analysis and understanding of test results
rruff wrote:
IReal time data isn't going to be very precise, unless there is a very precise way to determine elevation.Bang on. The precision and the sample time to get a precise number depends on the accuracy of the elevation/pitch mechanism. I discussed this at length with one competitor, that never came to market and has no intent of coming to market
rruff wrote:
The mounting location of the Notio seems like it would compromise results, since any changes you make to the front end would require recalibration.If you are make changes that affect the calibration of the air speed sensor yes a new calibration needs to be figured out. But that recalibration can be part of the test. It's not make change, calibrate, do test. Calibrate and do test can be combined. Imagine old power meters that required a zeroing by stopping, pressing zero vs a power meter that could re-zero based on no pedalling.
rruff wrote:
Really good airspeed measurement is key.Agreed. But some would argue elevation change is even harder to do. Dealing with the quirks of power meters, speed sensors and others is also fun.
rruff wrote:
ISoftware that evaluates the test data in the field would be very nice. Software that coaches the rider through the test protocol in the field would probably be necessary for wide adoption.Agreed