Here are a few graphs and numbers, no real statistical analysis done, I shall do that when I have time. As you can see on the spreadsheet the FO anemometer consistently reads 20% faster than the Inspeed instrument. This is a considerable discrepancy but a fairly consistent difference. Some maths in the software may help to reduce this huge error.
The gust speeds have an even bigger discrepancy, 80 to 180% of Inspeed readings suggesting that the FO instrument registers all sorts of numbers in short bursts.
Working on the assumption that the Inspeed instruments are better calibrated it would appear from these figures that the FO instruments are very unstable, and certainly will not yield any data of scientific value. The rain gauge falls into the same category. At best, it would appear, the FO instruments offer a representation of the weather conditions rather than a moderately accurate set of data.
The gust speeds have an even bigger discrepancy, 80 to 180% of Inspeed readings suggesting that the FO instrument registers all sorts of numbers in short bursts.
Working on the assumption that the Inspeed instruments are better calibrated it would appear from these figures that the FO instruments are very unstable, and certainly will not yield any data of scientific value. The rain gauge falls into the same category. At best, it would appear, the FO instruments offer a representation of the weather conditions rather than a moderately accurate set of data.