A new leader in anemometer design for for wind resource assessment?

MeteoWind 2 anemometer - the Thies CLIMA First Class competitor

MeteoWind 2 anemometer - the Thies CLIMA First Class competitor

Will the most established player in the wind resource assessment industry soon copy the MeteoWind 2 anemometer with wind vane configuration from BARANI DESIGN to give up its lead in anemometer design? Would this finally lead to the adoption of combined wind sensors into the IEC 61400-12-1?

The "First Class" anemometer series are arguably the best anemometers the market has to offer. However, the recently released Advanced X anemometer from Thies CLIMA can be said to come in the footsteps of BARANI DESIGN's MeteoWind 2, which is arguably wind resource assessment market's best anemometer and wind vane combo. The adoption of RS-485 MODBUS communication with user selectable RTU or ASCII output and a body/bearing heater with exactly 25W can be read right out of MeteoWind's data sheet. Could this be a reaction of a well-established player in the wind resource assessment industry to a new challenger? 

BARANI DESIGN Technologies is known for their innovation and product quality. Let us wait and see whether they can take the lead away in anemometer design. If Thies CLIMA copies the MeteoWind 2 configuration, the answer will be clear.

TECHNICAL NOTE: A combined wind sensor integrates an anemometer together with a wind vane. MeteoWind 2 is able to meet MEASNET wind speed accuracy and linearity requirements with an integrated wind vane, while all other MEASNET capable anemometers are able to achieve MEASNET linearity and accuracy only in a stand-alone configuration. 

Why did MEASNET/IEC 61400-12-1:2017 EDITION 2.0 ignore anemometers with direction vanes?

MeteoWind anemometer with direction vane at the top of a lattice tower

MeteoWind anemometer with direction vane at the top of a lattice tower

In 2017, when MEASNET/61400-12-1 Edition 2.0 was approved, the Elliptic Anemometer had been around for at least 4 years and MeteoWind 2 for at least a year and both were excelling and passing MEASNET linearity requirements at MEASNET's favorite wind tunnel, Deutsche WindGuard GmbH.  Why did MEASNET choose to ignore these wind speed and direction sensors in their Edition 2.0 update?

Arguably, data quality from a wind sensor that measures wind speed and direction together at a single point like MeteoWind 2 is of higher quality than that from separate wind speed and direction sensors connected by tubes and separated by trusses of lattice towers, as is the status quo with current First Class or Class 1 anemometers. 

MeteoWind 2 MEASNET calibrated anemometer

MeteoWind 2 MEASNET calibrated anemometer

Outdated MEASNET mounting requirements of anemometers and wind vanes on lattice towers for wind energy assessment state that the wind vane must be at least 1.5 away from the anemometer.

Does this mean that IEC 61400-12-1: 2017 Edition 2.0 is already outdated at the time of publishing since it did not take into account existing technologies? Is MeteoWind 2 an exception? Since it is a single instrument, the 1.5 meter rule does not apply.