SkySight Wave Forecast....Not!

I was able to contact wave during last Monday's flight.  After the flight I went back to see what SkySight had forecast for the day.

The thermal forecast was pretty accurate:

 

When I got to Twin Mountain (the mountain not the airport), it was completely blue to the North and East.   I was below 5,000' and the lift was broken up.   I figured if Mt. Washington wasn't working and there was sink between Twin Mountain and the Presidentials that I would end up scratching at 1000' over Twin Mountain airport (been-there-and-done-that-before) and I wasn't in the mood.  So I chickened out and instead of heading towards Mt. Washington I turned around. 

When I got back to Franconia I was able to find weak wave and work it up to about 8,000' where SkySight predicted no wave lift:

 

Once I was in wave I could maintain 7,500-8,000' as I drift back towards Twin Mountain (In an area SkySight predicted no wave lift).  At 7,500' over Twin Mountain I felt I could make a run at Mt. Washington and if it didn't work, return to Twin Mountain without too much stress.  As it turned out I flew over the summit with 1000' to spare and contacted weak wave right over the horn.  At times the lift averaged over 3 kts and I topped out at 13,500'.  SkySight was predicting 0.4 kts of lift:

 Recently Matthew Scutter wrote in RAS:

I'm biased because I wrote it, but;
For wave flying, the wave forecasts are so useful you'll wonder how you did it without it. Don't believe me - ask Dennis Tito or Morgan Sandercock, an OLC comment from on one of their 2000km flights, using SkySight in the cockpit:
“The SkySight forecast is so precise that we did not need to look at clouds to find lift. When the clouds went one way and SkySight went another way we found it was better to follow the SkySight prediction. We literally do not need to look out the window to find lift.
I have flown blue wave personally multiple times with SkySight and it really opened possibilities that were not there before. Predicting wave is quite easy because mountains don't move very fast and mid-to-upper level winds change slowly. The same applies to orographic convergences (i.e. wind splitting and joining behind an obstacle) or along the edge of plateaus/ridges. Overlay some wave flights on the forecast with the IGC Upload to see for yourself.
In highly dynamic or unstable wave conditions (fronts passing through etc) though your mileage may vary as to the placement of the wave hour by hour.

While SkySight might be good at predicting wave with big mountains in places like the Owens Valley, Patagonia, the Pyrenees, etc.  I think it still pays for us in New England to look out the window.

One thing that SkySight might have gotten right is the convergence forecast.  Often the transition from Twin Mountain to Mt. Washington is stressful because you are flying downwind, into rising terrain and there is often sink, and if things don't work out, you have to turn around and go upwind through the same sink to make it to the safety of Twin Mountain Airport.  On Monday the transition was easy, there was lift in this area (or zero sink) and little altitude was lost during the transition.  SkySight had predicted 0.4 kts of convergence lift:

P.S. - Thanks for the tow Andy!