SkyTrak Launch Monitor

[Maverick]

http://www.skytrakgolf.com/

iPad app:

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/com.sporttrak.skytrak/id876548058?mt=8

[hks8888]

Another finding.
Using Flightscope Trajectory Optimizer, if I just increase the back spin numbers (6000-7000 rpm), I get the carry numbers closed to the Skytrak carry numbers.
Maybe, Skytrak's flight model doesn't know what to do with (abnormally) low spin numbers??

[Mike Z]

I have used my SkyTrak a lot over the last couple of weeks and while I have noted the distance issues, I am of the belief that the unit itself is is taking accurate readings. My goals for the winter are to make my ball striking more consistent, generate lower launch angles and remove the "big miss". In its current state, the unit will allow me to do that. I also want to work on consistent distance control and that is where its a little more difficult. Having said that, its not impossible. Even if an 80-yard wedge shot flies 60 according to the software, if I can hit that shot a consistent 60 with consistent spin numbers and launch angle, then the unit will help me achieve my goals. I just have to be mindful that the absolute number is not the issue. Its a lot like playing in the wind (or to a different elevation) when you have a number but you have to play it another - you're making those adjustments all the time on the course. You're not playing in a lab. For the money, I am delighted with what I will be able to accomplish. Would extra accuracy be nice? Absolutely. And I am sure it will come. But until then, devoting my effort to using the tool to accomplish my game goals is much more important to me than focusing on the unit's flaws.

[DougieMn]

I'm with Z although as a leftie I'm frustrated over the long awaited release of 1.7 so my shots aren't all pushes! It was nice when Seth would chime in to give us updates and only wish this company would be a little more pro-active with the information.

[Spudly]

Another finding.
Using Flightscope Trajectory Optimizer, if I just increase the back spin numbers (6000-7000 rpm), I get the carry numbers closed to the Skytrak carry numbers.
Maybe, Skytrak's flight model doesn't know what to do with (abnormally) low spin numbers??

Props to you for doing this work, this type of information if used by skytrak can only make the unit better. I guess I am not sure the reasons for all the hate, maybe some of you guys who have been in this game longer than me can chime in, but is this not what other launch monitors went through? do you not have to correct calculations and make adjustments, and release updates? after a new product is launched? Seriously, I don't know, not trying to be sarcastic.

I dont use the unit for my short game, (under 80 yards) I need feel for that, so I am hitting long irons, drivers and fairway woods, and I am dead on as far as accuracy. I do know that if they want to incorporate simulation into the unit, then it will have to work on all shots, especially the scoring ones.

BTW, If anyone wants to sell their unit, contact me, because their is nothing on ebay or amazon yet, I will buy.

[hks8888]

Right, Spudly!
All I want to do is to get my Skytrak better. Not to abandon this. I actually love this unit, believe it or not.

Okay. I contacted the guy who developed Optimal Flight. He is responsive and very kind. With his help, I was able to run it.
Interestingly, the numbers are actually close to Skytrak numbers.


More interestingly, when I increase the spin numbers, the distance gets shorter. This is exactly the opposite of Flightscope Tracjectory Optimizer. Ahhhhhh...
My brain is now full. I need an expert's opinion on this.

[Throttle]

hks888 you are not inputting the data correctly. You need to put in the side spin numbers. Hit the little "ss" button in the total spin column on the left. That will change the mode to allow you to use side spin vs spin axis. Then put in your sky track side spin number in the box to the right of the back spin number. It should now give you more comparable results. BTW I use optimal flight to convert side spin to spin axis, then pop those numbers into the Flightscope Optimizer just to compare those two tools. It does make a difference of a few yards and offline number etc.

[hks8888]

hks888 you are not inputting the data correctly. You need to put in the side spin numbers. Hit the little "ss" button in the total spin column on the left. That will change the mode to allow you to use side spin vs spin axis. Then put in your sky track side spin number in the box to the right of the back spin number. It should now give you more comparable results. BTW I use optimal flight to convert side spin to spin axis, then pop those numbers into the Flightscope Optimizer just to compare those two tools. It does make a difference of a few yards and offline number etc.

Thanks for the info. But, since the side spin is minimal, the difference is +- 0.2. So, no point of posting the recalculated numbers here.

[jacksonlui]

I have used my SkyTrak a lot over the last couple of weeks and while I have noted the distance issues, I am of the belief that the unit itself is is taking accurate readings. My goals for the winter are to make my ball striking more consistent, generate lower launch angles and remove the "big miss". In its current state, the unit will allow me to do that. I also want to work on consistent distance control and that is where its a little more difficult. Having said that, its not impossible. Even if an 80-yard wedge shot flies 60 according to the software, if I can hit that shot a consistent 60 with consistent spin numbers and launch angle, then the unit will help me achieve my goals. I just have to be mindful that the absolute number is not the issue. Its a lot like playing in the wind (or to a different elevation) when you have a number but you have to play it another - you're making those adjustments all the time on the course. You're not playing in a lab. For the money, I am delighted with what I will be able to accomplish. Would extra accuracy be nice? Absolutely. And I am sure it will come. But until then, devoting my effort to using the tool to accomplish my game goals is much more important to me than focusing on the unit's flaws.

You need to know your exact distances for every club in the bag for a stock shot so you can compensate based on conditions. You can't do that when your numbers are off. Relatively speaking it works fine, but we need it to be exact. We didn't pay 2k for something that kinda works. It's advertised to the public with an accuracy spec. These fine golfers here are holding them up to that and I'm grateful for these guys, especially hks who has put in a lot of work. It'll also help ST make a better product. All products have to start somewhere and we're excited about the prospects. It's a great unit, just needs a lot of tweaking and that takes time.

[hks8888]

In 'Optimal Flight', I added temperature, altitude and humidity. The difference was less than 2 yards, so the flight conditions don't explain the big gap.
My temporary conclusion is that Flightscope Trajectory Optimizer produces better predictions by reflecting the characteristics of my shots in short distances. Based on my experience and feel, Skytrak was accurate for my 8, 7 and 6 irons. (I don't hit longer irons in my basement.)

It would be great if somebody compares long shots against Flightscope or Trackman. The company claims that they did, but no data available at all.

I would try my new pitching wedge which spins the ball better and hit short distance shots outdoor again when the weather permits.

[FaultyClubs]

...Okay. I contacted the guy who developed Optimal Flight. ...<snip>...
Interestingly, the numbers are actually close to Skytrak numbers.

Sounds like a good question for the Optimal Flight developer. Given the same input why are his numbers different (longer) than Flightscope? And why does he believe his are more correct (if indeed he does)?

You might also ask why adding spin shortens the carry while in Flightscope it lengthens the carry.

Providing real data points to the developer might be useful to him (besides helping you sort out the Skytrak issues).

[hks8888]

Sounds like a good question for the Optimal Flight developer. Given the same input why are his numbers different (longer) than Flightscope? And why does he believe his are more correct (if indeed he does)?

You might also ask why adding spin shortens the carry while in Flightscope it lengthens the carry.

Providing real data points to the developer might be useful to him (besides helping you sort out the Skytrak issues).

Good idea. Actually, I've been communicating with the developer. He's been very kind and responsive so far. I didn't hear back for those questions, though.
My humble data are not big enough, I would say, so that I am not trying to debunk anything here. As you said, they might be useful for the developers and myself.

[Jel]

Personally I'm going to reserve judgment about ST's distance accuracy until version 1.8 but so far I'm pretty happy with the units ball direction.

[hks8888]

A little more dig-in.
For my pitch shot tests, I mentioned that I used a worn out and uncleaned 54 degree wedge. I realized that I have a groove sharpener and I cleaned the wedge and sharpened the grooves for 20 minutes. And, I hit some shots in my basement. I changed the set-up a bit to create more spins and lower the launch angle a bit. This time I got around 5000 rpm (from shot 2 to shot 9). When I put these numbers to Flightscope Trajectory Optimizer its carry numbers are very close to the Skytrak carry distances. I guess that if you have a fair amount of spins on your shots, you might not need to worry about Skytrak's predictions. I still plan to test this outdoors.

[Maverick]

Looks like they're still waiting for approval from Apple.

Quick update on the latest version of our SkyTrak app (1.7).

Version 1.7 is currently under review by Apple and we will let everyone know when it’s approved and available. The new version streamlines the connection experience, improves ground bounce and adds alignment mode to settings for targeting. On the practice range, you can choose between viewing either side spin or spin axis.

[diesel1]

I sure hope the fix for lefties is in 1.7.... It's getting very annoying watching an inverted flight path.

[DougieMn]

Agreed. As a fellow leftie I haven't used mine much for that reason.