RV10-Archive.digest.vol-kn
May 10, 2015 - Present
>> Alan
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On May 10, 2015, at 7:24 PM, Jesse Saint > > wrote:
>>
>>> Ever is a long time. I am sure Foreflight will have to start
>>> supporting other ads-b formats before long or they will be unable to
>>> compete. They are very conservative, so they are late adopters of
>>> certain features/compatibilities, but when something is out, stable
>>> and dependable, they will be, IMHO, more open to adding compatibility.
>>>
>>> Jesse Saint
>>> Saint Aviation, Inc.
>>> 352-427-0285
>>> jesse(at)saintaviation.com
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>> On May 10, 2015, at 6:19 PM, Bob Leffler >> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bill is partially correct. I doubt that Foreflight will ever
>>>> support NavWorx. Now if you want to use WingX or another
>>>> application, it shouldn't be a problem.
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>
>>>> On May 10, 2015, at 5:14 PM, Tim Olson >>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Why do you say the NavWorX will never be able to be hooked to your
>>>>> iPad? I'm assuming you just have it connected to the GRT via
>>>>> RS232. If so, you can just split the TX wire and send it to the
>>>>> Wifi adapter. It should easily be able to do both GRT and iPad.
>>>>> Tim
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 10, 2015, at 3:58 PM, Bill Watson >>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I have an iPad running Foreflight pro with the Bad Elf GPS puck
>>>>>> (my original iPad was wifi only so it required a separate GPS
>>>>>> puck, my current iPad has the internal GPS but I still use the puck).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a separate Navworx ADSB receiver that will never be able
>>>>>> to be linked to my iPad - so no weather or traffic is displayed
>>>>>> on the iPad. Instead I look to my primary EFIS displays (Grand
>>>>>> Rapids HXs) for weather and traffic overlayed on the navigation
>>>>>> screens. The iPad is a supplement... but a drool worthy one that
>>>>>> I don't leave home without.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I file and fly IFR on practically every flight. Flight planning
>>>>>> and filing is done on the iPad using Foreflight. Every base is
>>>>>> well covered by Foreflight and it still manages to delight when I
>>>>>> need something new like filing an ICAO flight plan for an
>>>>>> international flight to the Bahamas. Often the planning and
>>>>>> filing is done in a hotel room, in a car or at the FBO. I rarely
>>>>>> use FBO flight planning rooms or equipment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I learned the art of chart folding and pencil management flying
>>>>>> single pilot IFR without an AP. But since then I've gone
>>>>>> paperless with the iPad and Foreflight. No charts, no pencils,
>>>>>> just a subscription, a stylus for writing clearances on the
>>>>>> Foreflight scratch pad, and an iPhone running Foreflight for
>>>>>> backup (the second copy is part of the basic or pro Foreflight
>>>>>> package).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The key to making this work for me was a good mount. I built a
>>>>>> fiberglass center console that 1) houses a O2 bottle and 2)
>>>>>> holds a RAM mount for the iPad that puts it right under my right
>>>>>> hand during flight so it can be easily used. You can see it here
>>>>>> Kitlog page of console construction
>>>>>> <http://www.mykitlog.com/users/category.php?user=MauleDriver&project=224&category=8533>
>>>>>> (I really need a picture of it being used in the cockpit). I
>>>>>> also added a USB charging port which typically gets used for my
>>>>>> wife's phone. The iPad's capacity is equivalent to the 10's range.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know where the sweet spot is but the iPad with Foreflight
>>>>>> Pro or it's equivalent is a required part of my IFR flying. I do
>>>>>> my 'tactical' flying with my panel mounted EFISs but all
>>>>>> planning, what-ifs, thinking and re-orienting is done with the
>>>>>> iPad. Geo-referenced taxi diagrams is almost worth the price if
>>>>>> you fly into a lot of new-to-you larger airports. It's a fair
>>>>>> price for a whole lot of benefit. It's a game changer, a
>>>>>> drooler, a "I'll never go back" kind of tool.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Looking at the bigger picture, portables enable us to keep our
>>>>>> cockpits current at a much more reasonable cost than a panel
>>>>>> upgrade. My panel was set in stone in late 2008. A lot has
>>>>>> happened since then. While software upgrades to my EFIS and
>>>>>> other components have helped keep them somewhat current, we rely
>>>>>> on the portable to get the latest functions implemented in the
>>>>>> best possible ways, e.g. touch screen functionality, faster
>>>>>> processors, higher resolution screens. None of these are 'must
>>>>>> haves' but they are very very nice to haves and they are
>>>>>> available for a fraction of the cost of panel upgrades.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/9/2015 10:46 AM, kearney wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For the past couple of weeks I have been working on renewing my IFR rating.
In the process I have started lusting / drooling over the IPAD my instructor
used. It had georefed plates. I on the other hand was using low tech paper.
His gear / subscription cost beaucoup de dineros.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Being a frugal (ie miserly pilot) I am wondering what IPAD / tablet /
mini PC and subscription options others are using. I am especially interested
in where the cost / benefit sweet spot is.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=441931#441931
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>> No virus found in this message.
>>>>>>> Checked by AVG -www.avg.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *
>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>> D============================================
>>>>> List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>>> D============================================
>>>>> //forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>>>>> D============================================
>>>>> ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>> D============================================
>>>>>
>>>>> *
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>> D============================================
>>>> List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>> D============================================
>>>> //forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>>>> D============================================
>>>> ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>> D============================================
>>>>
>>>> *
>>> *
>>>
>>> D============================================
>>> List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> D============================================
>>> //forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>>> D============================================
>>> ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> D============================================
>>>
>>> *
>> *
>>
>> D============================================
>> List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> D============================================
>> //forums.matronics.com
>> D============================================
>> ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> D============================================
>>
>> *
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pascal" <rv10flyer(at)live.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tech in the front office |
Shame Dynon wont work to get the Navworx to be seen on their Display. I
understand a possible conflict of their interest, as Dynon was on the
Navworx list, than disappeared once Dynon went on their "trig" route. For us
who had the display before the transponder and other products were released,
we're "on hold" until that happens.
-----Original Message-----
From: Kelly McMullen
Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2015 5:57 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Tech in the front office
I assume you mean their ADS-B In receiver. Trig makes the Avidyne 340
ADS-B Out for them. It is basically a TT31 with a different front
faceplate. Ditto the KN-74, and the Dynon 1090ES that is a TT21/22 with
Dynon label.
On 5/10/2015 5:19 PM, Tim Olson wrote:
> And NavWorX makes Avidyne's box for them...
> Tim
>
>
> On May 10, 2015, at 6:50 PM, Alan Mekler MD > wrote:
>
>> Jesse,
>> I heard Avidyne will be using wifi and Foreflight .
>> Alan
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On May 10, 2015, at 7:24 PM, Jesse Saint > > wrote:
>>
>>> Ever is a long time. I am sure Foreflight will have to start supporting
>>> other ads-b formats before long or they will be unable to compete. They
>>> are very conservative, so they are late adopters of certain
>>> features/compatibilities, but when something is out, stable and
>>> dependable, they will be, IMHO, more open to adding compatibility.
>>>
>>> Jesse Saint
>>> Saint Aviation, Inc.
>>> 352-427-0285
>>> jesse(at)saintaviation.com
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>> On May 10, 2015, at 6:19 PM, Bob Leffler >> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bill is partially correct. I doubt that Foreflight will ever support
>>>> NavWorx. Now if you want to use WingX or another application, it
>>>> shouldn't be a problem.
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>
>>>> On May 10, 2015, at 5:14 PM, Tim Olson >>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Why do you say the NavWorX will never be able to be hooked to your
>>>>> iPad? I'm assuming you just have it connected to the GRT via RS232.
>>>>> If so, you can just split the TX wire and send it to the Wifi adapter.
>>>>> It should easily be able to do both GRT and iPad.
>>>>> Tim
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 10, 2015, at 3:58 PM, Bill Watson >>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I have an iPad running Foreflight pro with the Bad Elf GPS puck (my
>>>>>> original iPad was wifi only so it required a separate GPS puck, my
>>>>>> current iPad has the internal GPS but I still use the puck).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a separate Navworx ADSB receiver that will never be able to be
>>>>>> linked to my iPad - so no weather or traffic is displayed on the
>>>>>> iPad. Instead I look to my primary EFIS displays (Grand Rapids HXs)
>>>>>> for weather and traffic overlayed on the navigation screens. The
>>>>>> iPad is a supplement... but a drool worthy one that I don't leave
>>>>>> home without.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I file and fly IFR on practically every flight. Flight planning and
>>>>>> filing is done on the iPad using Foreflight. Every base is well
>>>>>> covered by Foreflight and it still manages to delight when I need
>>>>>> something new like filing an ICAO flight plan for an international
>>>>>> flight to the Bahamas. Often the planning and filing is done in a
>>>>>> hotel room, in a car or at the FBO. I rarely use FBO flight planning
>>>>>> rooms or equipment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I learned the art of chart folding and pencil management flying
>>>>>> single pilot IFR without an AP. But since then I've gone paperless
>>>>>> with the iPad and Foreflight. No charts, no pencils, just a
>>>>>> subscription, a stylus for writing clearances on the Foreflight
>>>>>> scratch pad, and an iPhone running Foreflight for backup (the second
>>>>>> copy is part of the basic or pro Foreflight package).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The key to making this work for me was a good mount. I built a
>>>>>> fiberglass center console that 1) houses a O2 bottle and 2) holds a
>>>>>> RAM mount for the iPad that puts it right under my right hand during
>>>>>> flight so it can be easily used. You can see it here Kitlog page of
>>>>>> console construction
>>>>>> <http://www.mykitlog.com/users/category.php?user=MauleDriver&project=224&category=8533>
>>>>>> (I really need a picture of it being used in the cockpit). I also
>>>>>> added a USB charging port which typically gets used for my wife's
>>>>>> phone. The iPad's capacity is equivalent to the 10's range.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know where the sweet spot is but the iPad with Foreflight Pro
>>>>>> or it's equivalent is a required part of my IFR flying. I do my
>>>>>> 'tactical' flying with my panel mounted EFISs but all planning,
>>>>>> what-ifs, thinking and re-orienting is done with the iPad.
>>>>>> Geo-referenced taxi diagrams is almost worth the price if you fly
>>>>>> into a lot of new-to-you larger airports. It's a fair price for a
>>>>>> whole lot of benefit. It's a game changer, a drooler, a "I'll never
>>>>>> go back" kind of tool.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Looking at the bigger picture, portables enable us to keep our
>>>>>> cockpits current at a much more reasonable cost than a panel upgrade.
>>>>>> My panel was set in stone in late 2008. A lot has happened since
>>>>>> then. While software upgrades to my EFIS and other components have
>>>>>> helped keep them somewhat current, we rely on the portable to get the
>>>>>> latest functions implemented in the best possible ways, e.g. touch
>>>>>> screen functionality, faster processors, higher resolution screens.
>>>>>> None of these are 'must haves' but they are very very nice to haves
>>>>>> and they are available for a fraction of the cost of panel upgrades.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/9/2015 10:46 AM, kearney wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For the past couple of weeks I have been working on renewing my IFR
>>>>>>> rating. In the process I have started lusting / drooling over the
>>>>>>> IPAD my instructor used. It had georefed plates. I on the other hand
>>>>>>> was using low tech paper. His gear / subscription cost beaucoup de
>>>>>>> dineros.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Being a frugal (ie miserly pilot) I am wondering what IPAD / tablet
>>>>>>> / mini PC and subscription options others are using. I am especially
>>>>>>> interested in where the cost / benefit sweet spot is.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Les
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=441931#441931
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>> No virus found in this message.
>>>>>>> Checked by AVG -www.avg.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *
>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>> D============================================
>>>>> List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>>> D============================================
>>>>> //forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>>>>> D============================================
>>>>> ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>> D============================================
>>>>>
>>>>> *
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>> D============================================
>>>> List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>> D============================================
>>>> //forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>>>> D============================================
>>>> ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>> D============================================
>>>>
>>>> *
>>> *
>>>
>>> D============================================
>>> List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> D============================================
>>> //forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>>> D============================================
>>> ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> D============================================
>>>
>>> *
>> *
>>
>> D============================================
>> List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> D============================================
>> //forums.matronics.com
>> D============================================
>> ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> D============================================
>>
>> *
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tech in the front office |
Yes, that's what I meant. Whether the reasons are due to business
relationships or conservatism/stability, I have seen no indication that
there is any plan to link Navworx/ADSB Wx and traffic with Foreflight.
I'm sure it wouldn't hurt to continue to make noise about it. OTOH,
while it would be real nice to display at least Navworx generated Nexrad
imagery on Foreflight, I don't really miss it. I try to keep my
eyeballs on the EFIS displays as much as possible. In VMC conditions it
keeps my eyes closer to looking outside. In IMC it keeps my eyes on
what needs to be scanned to keep the airplane upright even if I let
Tiger do most of the flying.
So the first priority is having as much information as possible
displayed on the panel mounted EFISs including weather and traffic. The
iPad is for planning and what-ifs. For example, the iPad map is always
'north up', the EFIS map is always heading up. I never skew the map
display on the EFIS but constantly skew it on the iPad. I've spent zero
time checking out the AI and Syn Vision functions on Foreflight (I don't
think I have everything it takes to enable them). My primary and backup
instruments are all panel mounted. That is, if the stuff hits the fan I
want everything I need on the installed panel. Then I'm sure it would
be nice to have the iPad to help out if available.
My primary wish list involves upgraded EFISs for faster processors and
higher resolution displays so that things like plate overlays would work
satisfactorily. Upgraded GRT units are available but would require more
panel reengineering than is justified right now. That makes the iPad,
and in my case Foreflight, the sweet spot for investments.
But having had my initial IFR flying done with a six pack sans AP, my
GRT/Garmin/Trutrak panel continues to be wonderful and surprising....
the first time I saw some crossing traffic whiz by on my synthetic
visions display, I had to chuckle. I didn't know it would do that!
That was almost as good as sitting in my half built fuselage after
upgrading my GRTs with Synthetic Vision... sitting in a windowless
hangar, I powered it up and all of a sudden a picture of the runway and
lake outside appeared on the screens! Oh Yeah!!
Bill "think I'm going to Pittsburgh later today to see my Mom" Watson
On 5/10/2015 6:19 PM, Bob Leffler wrote:
> Bill is partially correct. I doubt that Foreflight will ever
> support NavWorx. Now if you want to use WingX or another
> application, it shouldn't be a problem.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On May 10, 2015, at 5:14 PM, Tim Olson > wrote:
>
>> Why do you say the NavWorX will never be able to be hooked to your
>> iPad? I'm assuming you just have it connected to the GRT via RS232.
>> If so, you can just split the TX wire and send it to the Wifi
>> adapter. It should easily be able to do both GRT and iPad.
>> Tim
>>
>>
>>
>> On May 10, 2015, at 3:58 PM, Bill Watson > > wrote:
>>
>>> I have an iPad running Foreflight pro with the Bad Elf GPS puck (my
>>> original iPad was wifi only so it required a separate GPS puck, my
>>> current iPad has the internal GPS but I still use the puck).
>>>
>>> I have a separate Navworx ADSB receiver that will never be able to
>>> be linked to my iPad - so no weather or traffic is displayed on the
>>> iPad. Instead I look to my primary EFIS displays (Grand Rapids HXs)
>>> for weather and traffic overlayed on the navigation screens. The
>>> iPad is a supplement... but a drool worthy one that I don't leave
>>> home without.
>>>
>>> I file and fly IFR on practically every flight. Flight planning and
>>> filing is done on the iPad using Foreflight. Every base is well
>>> covered by Foreflight and it still manages to delight when I need
>>> something new like filing an ICAO flight plan for an international
>>> flight to the Bahamas. Often the planning and filing is done in a
>>> hotel room, in a car or at the FBO. I rarely use FBO flight
>>> planning rooms or equipment.
>>>
>>> I learned the art of chart folding and pencil management flying
>>> single pilot IFR without an AP. But since then I've gone paperless
>>> with the iPad and Foreflight. No charts, no pencils, just a
>>> subscription, a stylus for writing clearances on the Foreflight
>>> scratch pad, and an iPhone running Foreflight for backup (the second
>>> copy is part of the basic or pro Foreflight package).
>>>
>>> The key to making this work for me was a good mount. I built a
>>> fiberglass center console that 1) houses a O2 bottle and 2) holds a
>>> RAM mount for the iPad that puts it right under my right hand during
>>> flight so it can be easily used. You can see it here Kitlog page of
>>> console construction
>>> <http://www.mykitlog.com/users/category.php?user=MauleDriver&project=224&category=8533>
>>> (I really need a picture of it being used in the cockpit). I also
>>> added a USB charging port which typically gets used for my wife's
>>> phone. The iPad's capacity is equivalent to the 10's range.
>>>
>>> I don't know where the sweet spot is but the iPad with Foreflight
>>> Pro or it's equivalent is a required part of my IFR flying. I do my
>>> 'tactical' flying with my panel mounted EFISs but all planning,
>>> what-ifs, thinking and re-orienting is done with the iPad.
>>> Geo-referenced taxi diagrams is almost worth the price if you fly
>>> into a lot of new-to-you larger airports. It's a fair price for a
>>> whole lot of benefit. It's a game changer, a drooler, a "I'll never
>>> go back" kind of tool.
>>>
>>> Looking at the bigger picture, portables enable us to keep our
>>> cockpits current at a much more reasonable cost than a panel
>>> upgrade. My panel was set in stone in late 2008. A lot has
>>> happened since then. While software upgrades to my EFIS and other
>>> components have helped keep them somewhat current, we rely on the
>>> portable to get the latest functions implemented in the best
>>> possible ways, e.g. touch screen functionality, faster processors,
>>> higher resolution screens. None of these are 'must haves' but they
>>> are very very nice to haves and they are available for a fraction of
>>> the cost of panel upgrades.
>>>
>>> On 5/9/2015 10:46 AM, kearney wrote:
>>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Tech in the front office |
I fully agree with Bill=99s statement on having what you need on
the EFIS display.
Attached is a screen shoot taken on an IFR trip from Macon Georgia back
to Fredericksburg Virginia with a lot of navigating around a stalled
weather line. While it is possible to do all this on an iPad, I would
not want to do this with the iPad as the primary information integration
tool.
Note =93 I normally have the engine data on the other display. I
added it to the primary display only to get everything on one screen
shoot. Typical set up is to have moving map and PDF on the pilot side
EFIS, engine display with IFR/VFR chart or approach plate on the
co-pilot EFIS.
Carl
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Watson
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Tech in the front office
Yes, that's what I meant. Whether the reasons are due to business
relationships or conservatism/stability, I have seen no indication that
there is any plan to link Navworx/ADSB Wx and traffic with Foreflight.
I'm sure it wouldn't hurt to continue to make noise about it. OTOH,
while it would be real nice to display at least Navworx generated Nexrad
imagery on Foreflight, I don't really miss it. I try to keep my
eyeballs on the EFIS displays as much as possible. In VMC conditions it
keeps my eyes closer to looking outside. In IMC it keeps my eyes on
what needs to be scanned to keep the airplane upright even if I let
Tiger do most of the flying.
So the first priority is having as much information as possible
displayed on the panel mounted EFISs including weather and traffic. The
iPad is for planning and what-ifs. For example, the iPad map is always
'north up', the EFIS map is always heading up. I never skew the map
display on the EFIS but constantly skew it on the iPad. I've spent zero
time checking out the AI and Syn Vision functions on Foreflight (I don't
think I have everything it takes to enable them). My primary and backup
instruments are all panel mounted. That is, if the stuff hits the fan I
want everything I need on the installed panel. Then I'm sure it would
be nice to have the iPad to help out if available.
My primary wish list involves upgraded EFISs for faster processors and
higher resolution displays so that things like plate overlays would work
satisfactorily. Upgraded GRT units are available but would require more
panel reengineering than is justified right now. That makes the iPad,
and in my case Foreflight, the sweet spot for investments.
But having had my initial IFR flying done with a six pack sans AP, my
GRT/Garmin/Trutrak panel continues to be wonderful and surprising....
the first time I saw some crossing traffic whiz by on my synthetic
visions display, I had to chuckle. I didn't know it would do that!
That was almost as good as sitting in my half built fuselage after
upgrading my GRTs with Synthetic Vision... sitting in a windowless
hangar, I powered it up and all of a sudden a picture of the runway and
lake outside appeared on the screens! Oh Yeah!!
Bill "think I'm going to Pittsburgh later today to see my Mom" Watson
On 5/10/2015 6:19 PM, Bob Leffler wrote:
Bill is partially correct. I doubt that Foreflight will ever support
NavWorx. Now if you want to use WingX or another application, it
shouldn't be a problem.
Sent from my iPad
On May 10, 2015, at 5:14 PM, Tim Olson wrote:
Why do you say the NavWorX will never be able to be hooked to your iPad?
I'm assuming you just have it connected to the GRT via RS232. If so,
you can just split the TX wire and send it to the Wifi adapter. It
should easily be able to do both GRT and iPad.
Tim
On May 10, 2015, at 3:58 PM, Bill Watson wrote:
I have an iPad running Foreflight pro with the Bad Elf GPS puck (my
original iPad was wifi only so it required a separate GPS puck, my
current iPad has the internal GPS but I still use the puck).
I have a separate Navworx ADSB receiver that will never be able to be
linked to my iPad - so no weather or traffic is displayed on the iPad.
Instead I look to my primary EFIS displays (Grand Rapids HXs) for
weather and traffic overlayed on the navigation screens. The iPad is a
supplement... but a drool worthy one that I don't leave home without.
I file and fly IFR on practically every flight. Flight planning and
filing is done on the iPad using Foreflight. Every base is well covered
by Foreflight and it still manages to delight when I need something new
like filing an ICAO flight plan for an international flight to the
Bahamas. Often the planning and filing is done in a hotel room, in a
car or at the FBO. I rarely use FBO flight planning rooms or equipment.
I learned the art of chart folding and pencil management flying single
pilot IFR without an AP. But since then I've gone paperless with the
iPad and Foreflight. No charts, no pencils, just a subscription, a
stylus for writing clearances on the Foreflight scratch pad, and an
iPhone running Foreflight for backup (the second copy is part of the
basic or pro Foreflight package).
The key to making this work for me was a good mount. I built a
fiberglass center console that 1) houses a O2 bottle and 2) holds a RAM
mount for the iPad that puts it right under my right hand during flight
so it can be easily used. You can see it here Kitlog page of console
construction
<http://www.mykitlog.com/users/category.php?user=MauleDriver&project=
224&category=8533> (I really need a picture of it being used in the
cockpit). I also added a USB charging port which typically gets used
for my wife's phone. The iPad's capacity is equivalent to the 10's
range.
I don't know where the sweet spot is but the iPad with Foreflight Pro or
it's equivalent is a required part of my IFR flying. I do my 'tactical'
flying with my panel mounted EFISs but all planning, what-ifs, thinking
and re-orienting is done with the iPad. Geo-referenced taxi diagrams is
almost worth the price if you fly into a lot of new-to-you larger
airports. It's a fair price for a whole lot of benefit. It's a game
changer, a drooler, a "I'll never go back" kind of tool.
Looking at the bigger picture, portables enable us to keep our cockpits
current at a much more reasonable cost than a panel upgrade. My panel
was set in stone in late 2008. A lot has happened since then. While
software upgrades to my EFIS and other components have helped keep them
somewhat current, we rely on the portable to get the latest functions
implemented in the best possible ways, e.g. touch screen functionality,
faster processors, higher resolution screens. None of these are 'must
haves' but they are very very nice to haves and they are available for a
fraction of the cost of panel upgrades.
On 5/9/2015 10:46 AM, kearney wrote:
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tech in the front office |
I agree 100%. Having it on the EFIS is the only way to go.
That said, having it ALSO on an ipad isn't a bad idea, if
you have the capability. It can't hurt...you can always
turn it off. In my case, the ipad apps display more of the
data types than the EFIS does, and, if you use it for
charts, it does actively put the TFR's on the ipad then
too, so at least WHEN you look at the ipad, you have
the data you need.
Tim
On 5/11/2015 10:37 AM, Carl Froehlich wrote:
> I fully agree with Bills statement on having what you need on the EFIS
> display.
>
> Attached is a screen shoot taken on an IFR trip from Macon Georgia back
> to Fredericksburg Virginia with a lot of navigating around a stalled
> weather line. While it is possible to do all this on an iPad, I would
> not want to do this with the iPad as the primary information integration
> tool.
>
> Note I normally have the engine data on the other display. I added it
> to the primary display only to get everything on one screen shoot.
> Typical set up is to have moving map and PDF on the pilot side EFIS,
> engine display with IFR/VFR chart or approach plate on the co-pilot EFIS.
>
> Carl
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rene" <rene(at)felker.com> |
| Subject: | Tech in the front office |
I agree with Tim, great to also have all the info on the ipad. I use the ipad
to look forward when in cruse while keeping my EFIS in the normal flight range.
Rene'
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Tech in the front office
I agree 100%. Having it on the EFIS is the only way to go.
That said, having it ALSO on an ipad isn't a bad idea, if you have the capability.
It can't hurt...you can always turn it off. In my case, the ipad apps display
more of the data types than the EFIS does, and, if you use it for charts,
it does actively put the TFR's on the ipad then too, so at least WHEN you look
at the ipad, you have the data you need.
Tim
On 5/11/2015 10:37 AM, Carl Froehlich wrote:
> I fully agree with Bills statement on having what you need on the
> EFIS display.
>
> Attached is a screen shoot taken on an IFR trip from Macon Georgia
> back to Fredericksburg Virginia with a lot of navigating around a
> stalled weather line. While it is possible to do all this on an iPad,
> I would not want to do this with the iPad as the primary information
> integration tool.
>
> Note I normally have the engine data on the other display. I added
> it to the primary display only to get everything on one screen shoot.
> Typical set up is to have moving map and PDF on the pilot side EFIS,
> engine display with IFR/VFR chart or approach plate on the co-pilot EFIS.
>
> Carl
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rene" <rene(at)felker.com> |
| Subject: | Tech in the front office |
Also, being able to get all the latest airport information via the ADS-B is great.
Rene'
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rene
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 10:39 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Tech in the front office
I agree with Tim, great to also have all the info on the ipad. I use the ipad
to look forward when in cruse while keeping my EFIS in the normal flight range.
Rene'
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Tech in the front office
I agree 100%. Having it on the EFIS is the only way to go.
That said, having it ALSO on an ipad isn't a bad idea, if you have the capability.
It can't hurt...you can always turn it off. In my case, the ipad apps display
more of the data types than the EFIS does, and, if you use it for charts,
it does actively put the TFR's on the ipad then too, so at least WHEN you look
at the ipad, you have the data you need.
Tim
On 5/11/2015 10:37 AM, Carl Froehlich wrote:
> I fully agree with Bills statement on having what you need on the
> EFIS display.
>
> Attached is a screen shoot taken on an IFR trip from Macon Georgia
> back to Fredericksburg Virginia with a lot of navigating around a
> stalled weather line. While it is possible to do all this on an iPad,
> I would not want to do this with the iPad as the primary information
> integration tool.
>
> Note I normally have the engine data on the other display. I added
> it to the primary display only to get everything on one screen shoot.
> Typical set up is to have moving map and PDF on the pilot side EFIS,
> engine display with IFR/VFR chart or approach plate on the co-pilot EFIS.
>
> Carl
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Tech in the front office |
| From: | "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu> |
I also agree with having the info up on the panel, especially for traffic. For
traffic you need to look every few minutes (or hear it - GRT now has audio alerts),
and that's too much head-down time if you're vfr and have an iPad on your
lap.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442027#442027
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | CSC / Lockheed get DUATS contract |
I know, it's not RV-10 related, but we did talk about the topic
a little a few years ago.
So Lockheed and Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) won the
contract to provide DUATS.
If you remember, CSC is somehow tied to the makers of FlightPrep,
who are the ones who went around suing everyone who was making
online flight planners. DTC was the "good" one, but they
are now out after 25 years of doing it. Lockheed has it's
own system in place. Users have a 60-day transition time to
switch to the new providers.
http://www.flyingmag.com/technique/flight-planning/lockheed-and-csc-offer-duats?cmpid=enews051415&spPodID=030&spMailingID=22653172&spUserID=NDc4NjE3MTE3OQS2&spJobID=561343644&spReportId=NTYxMzQzNjQ0S0
I know which one *I* will use....definitely not one provided
by the lawsuit happy corp.
It should also be noted that I believe a while back, foreflight
started working to directly interact with Lockheed Martin
for flight plan filing. If I remember right, you just have to
clear out your DUATS info and then it will use Lockheed.
At the time, they said it was better and faster anyway.
So I did that and haven't looked back.
I just thought I'd provide that food for thought as you all
go about tweaking your iPads and devices with the new
account settings. I'll have to even doublecheck what
WingX and FlyQ use, but hopefully everyone will have whatever
app updates are required so that we can file through
L.M. and can skip anything to do with CSC. Yes, when
a company acts like they did, I hold a grudge. Forever. :)
Tim
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Odyssey optimal charge voltage |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
Just wondering if anyone has researched what optimal alternator setting
should be using the Odyssey 925L battery? Whether it should be different
than the old wet cell set point between 13.8 and 14.2.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rob Kermanj <flysrv10(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Trutrak ADI W/GPS for sale |
I just installed my new Gimini and I am selling my ADI. It is in good
shape. Trutrak worked on it in May 2103.
Price is $450 including Two Day FedEx shipping. It will go on Ebay for
$495 next week. Ebay wants 10,-12% out of the deal.
Price for new is $1400 from Aircraft Spruce.
Thanks.
Rob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phillip Perry <philperry9(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey optimal charge voltage |
Based on how my Odyssey branded charger works, I'd guess that the answer is i
t depends.
If I rub my batteries down to 10-11.5 volts, I will see the charger hit them
with nearly 17 over a short period of time. In a matter of minutes I can b
ring a dead battery to 80% charged.
Then I see it taper off to 13.8 at the tail end of the charge after the batt
ery has already taken the bulk of the charge. Then I see the battery settle
in around 13.6-13.7.
So based on my observations of their charger, is say 13.8 is a very safe opt
ion.
Phil
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 14, 2015, at 3:41 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
> Just wondering if anyone has researched what optimal alternator setting sh
ould be using the Odyssey 925L battery? Whether it should be different than t
he old wet cell set point between 13.8 and 14.2.
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey optimal charge voltage |
| From: | "dmaib(at)me.com" <dmaib(at)me.com> |
I have an Odyssey brand charger for my 925. According to the documentation, it
initially charges at 14.3-14.7 volts (give or take) until the battery is charged.
Then it goes to the trickle charge mode at 13.6-13.8 volts (give or take).
It can be left in the trickle charge mode indefinitely, according to the manual.
--------
David Maib
RV-10 #40559
New Smyrna Beach, FL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442122#442122
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey optimal charge voltage |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
It is that charge phase that had me thinking that the alternator regulator
might need to be set above 14.2.
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 7:27 PM, dmaib(at)me.com wrote:
>
> I have an Odyssey brand charger for my 925. According to the
> documentation, it initially charges at 14.3-14.7 volts (give or take) until
> the battery is charged. Then it goes to the trickle charge mode at
> 13.6-13.8 volts (give or take). It can be left in the trickle charge mode
> indefinitely, according to the manual.
>
> --------
> David Maib
> RV-10 #40559
> New Smyrna Beach, FL
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442122#442122
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey optimal charge voltage |
I can tell you a stock Plane Power alternator works just fine with
Odyssey batteries. At full charge the buss voltage is 14.2 vdc.
I=99ve used this set up for over a decade (two Odyssey PC-625
battery system) without any issues. As these batteries maintain 90% of
their charge over six months I find no need to ever put a charger on the
batteries unless I=99m doing extended panel powered up stuff.
Even then I put a charger on with a volt meter and monitor to remove the
charger once terminal voltage gets to 14.2 or so. Leaving a standard
battery charger on a Odyssey battery is a good way to trash it as
battery terminal voltage will rapidly rise above 15vdc once you get pass
14.2vdc. At that point you are generating heat and hydrogen. If you
really must put a charger on it then get the Odyssey charger =93
then consider not using it unless you have good reason.
I change out one battery every two years as a routine maintenance item
(so neither battery is more than four years old). The pulled batteries
provide another four years or so of service in various tractors here at
the airpark. The only battery issue I had was when I left one of the
master switches on. While you might be able to beat a flat battery back
to life assume the damage will significantly degrade battery amp/hr
capacity and replace it.
Carl
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly
McMullen
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 11:20 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Odyssey optimal charge voltage
It is that charge phase that had me thinking that the alternator
regulator might need to be set above 14.2.
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 7:27 PM, dmaib(at)me.com wrote:
I have an Odyssey brand charger for my 925. According to the
documentation, it initially charges at 14.3-14.7 volts (give or take)
until the battery is charged. Then it goes to the trickle charge mode at
13.6-13.8 volts (give or take). It can be left in the trickle charge
mode indefinitely, according to the manual.
--------
David Maib
RV-10 #40559
New Smyrna Beach, FL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442122#442122
-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
FORUMS -
_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Clifford <davidsoutpost(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey optimal charge voltage |
I concur with Carl here about placing the Odyssey batteries on a charger. I
have a PC625 I placed in my wave runner about 15 years ago and its still g
oing strong. I don't even bother charging it up at the beginning of the sea
son. Its always ready to go. I also have them in lawn equipment. Same thing
with no issues. My buddy uses PC625's in his Cozy MKIV. He used to keep th
e Odyssey charger plugged in when the plane was parked. Batteries were toas
ted in 2 years. I have dual 680's in my -10 and only place a charger on it
when doing avionics work in the hanger. As soon as the green "charged" ligh
t comes on, it gets disconnected.
David Clifford
N646RV
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net>
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 9:17:11 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Odyssey optimal charge voltage
I can tell you a stock Plane Power alternator works just fine with Odyssey
batteries. At full charge the buss voltage is 14.2 vdc.
I=99ve used this set up for over a decade (two Odyssey PC-625 battery
system) without any issues. As these batteries maintain 90% of their charg
e over six months I find no need to ever put a charger on the batteries unl
ess I=99m doing extended panel powered up stuff. Even then I put a ch
arger on with a volt meter and monitor to remove the charger once terminal
voltage gets to 14.2 or so. Leaving a standard battery charger on a Odyssey
battery is a good way to trash it as battery terminal voltage will rapidly
rise above 15vdc once you get pass 14.2vdc. At that point you are generati
ng heat and hydrogen. If you really must put a charger on it then get the O
dyssey charger =93 then consider not using it unless you have good re
ason.
I change out one battery every two years as a routine maintenance item (so
neither battery is more than four years old). The pulled batteries provide
another four years or so of service in various tractors here at the airpark
. The only battery issue I had was when I left one of the master switches o
n. While you might be able to beat a flat battery back to life assume the d
amage will significantly degrade battery amp/hr capacity and replace it.
Carl
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 11:20 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Odyssey optimal charge voltage
It is that charge phase that had me thinking that the alternator regulator
might need to be set above 14.2.
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 7:27 PM, dmaib(at)me.com < dmaib(at)me.com > wrote:
I have an Odyssey brand charger for my 925. According to the documentation,
it initially charges at 14.3-14.7 volts (give or take) until the battery i
s charged. Then it goes to the trickle charge mode at 13.6-13.8 volts (give
or take). It can be left in the trickle charge mode indefinitely, accordin
g to the manual.
--------
David Maib
RV-10 #40559
New Smyrna Beach, FL
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442122#442122
===========
-List" target="_blank"> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
===========
FORUMS -
_blank"> http://forums.matronics.com
===========
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
target="_blank"> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===========
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Odyssey optimal charge voltage |
| From: | "bill.peyton" <peyton.b(at)sbcglobal.net> |
When I spoke with technical support at odyssey, they recommended charging both
the 680 and 925 batteries at a nominal voltage of 14.4-14.5 volts. Unfortunately,
if you have the plane power alternator, with th internal VR the only way
to increase the charging voltage is to add resistance in the field line going
to the alternator. The PP alternator uses the field line to sense the charge
voltage. What I did was to use a #20 gauge wire to feed the field voltage.
More than sufficient to carry the 5 amp load, but small enough diameter to create
a slight voltage drop. I charge at 14.5 volts. Almost 3 years and 380 hours,
and still going strong. Will 14.2 volts work? Probably
--------
Bill
WA0SYV
Aviation Partners, LLC
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442146#442146
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matthew Healy <mhealydds(at)gmail.com> |
Hey all - I am new to forum and I have been hesitant to post as I have been
able to find most of answers by looking at past posts or talking to my EAA
tech counselor, but I haven't found a good answer yet to my latest concern.
The build has gone great, but the cabin top has given my some problems. I
spent a lot of time getting it to fit and now that finally got it to slide
into place I have a gap problem - see pics. I assume I can add resin with
some filler to fill in gap and re-sand to fit, but my concern is that I
have a tight fit already and I think is has somewhat do with head of
universal rivets in door opening of fuselage, but then again I see other
builders with a better fit. Any suggestions on how to proceed?
Matt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
We usually lay in a fairly healthy head of medium thickness flox before sett
ing in the cabin top so it fills any voids like that. After we tighten all t
he screws we make sure to remove any excess before it cures. A tight and cle
an trim is the best way to achieve a good fit, but the flox helps in areas t
hat don't fit as well.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
352-427-0285
jesse(at)saintaviation.com
Sent from my iPad
> On May 16, 2015, at 9:06 PM, Matthew Healy wrote:
>
> Hey all - I am new to forum and I have been hesitant to post as I have bee
n able to find most of answers by looking at past posts or talking to my EAA
tech counselor, but I haven't found a good answer yet to my latest concern.
>
> The build has gone great, but the cabin top has given my some problems. I s
pent a lot of time getting it to fit and now that finally got it to slide in
to place I have a gap problem - see pics. I assume I can add resin with some
filler to fill in gap and re-sand to fit, but my concern is that I have a t
ight fit already and I think is has somewhat do with head of universal rivet
s in door opening of fuselage, but then again I see other builders with a be
tter fit. Any suggestions on how to proceed?
>
> Matt
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
| From: | "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu> |
I do not recall the fiberglass resting on any AN470 heads.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442179#442179
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fuel injection servo attachment - concerned ? |
| From: | "Gordon Anderson" <mregoan(at)hispeed.ch> |
I have the Van's Lycoming IO-540 and am ready to attach the fuel servo to the engine,
but cannot find any instructions or hardware. Only the nuts and plain
washers holding the plastic "preservation" cover plate on the sump together with
a blind gasket were supplied with the engine & servo.
Lycoming Service Instruction 1484C gives the torques to "refer to the Parts Catalogue
for the correct washers, lock washers, nuts, gaskets and spacers"
Can anyone provide a copy of the relevant page in the Lycoming parts catalogue?
Assuming a gasket is required, is it normal to use one both above and below the
control cable bracket?
Gordon Anderson
Switzerland
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442185#442185
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel injection servo attachment - concerned ? |
You want a gasket on both sides of the bracket and you want lock washers under
the nuts holding the servo on. The hardware, IIRC, should have been included with
the FWF kit.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
352-427-0285
jesse(at)saintaviation.com
Sent from my iPad
> On May 17, 2015, at 5:12 AM, Gordon Anderson wrote:
>
>
> I have the Van's Lycoming IO-540 and am ready to attach the fuel servo to the
engine, but cannot find any instructions or hardware. Only the nuts and plain
washers holding the plastic "preservation" cover plate on the sump together
with a blind gasket were supplied with the engine & servo.
>
> Lycoming Service Instruction 1484C gives the torques to "refer to the Parts Catalogue
for the correct washers, lock washers, nuts, gaskets and spacers"
>
> Can anyone provide a copy of the relevant page in the Lycoming parts catalogue?
>
> Assuming a gasket is required, is it normal to use one both above and below the
control cable bracket?
>
> Gordon Anderson
> Switzerland
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442185#442185
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuel injection servo attachment - concerned ? |
You might want to look again. Hardware and gaskets should be in a bag that
came with the engine. If it is not there give Van's a call.
Yes - a gasket goes on each side of the control cable bracket. If memory
serves, the bracket came with a gasket.
Carl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gordon Anderson
Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2015 5:13 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: Fuel injection servo attachment - concerned ?
I have the Van's Lycoming IO-540 and am ready to attach the fuel servo to
the engine, but cannot find any instructions or hardware. Only the nuts and
plain washers holding the plastic "preservation" cover plate on the sump
together with a blind gasket were supplied with the engine & servo.
Lycoming Service Instruction 1484C gives the torques to "refer to the Parts
Catalogue for the correct washers, lock washers, nuts, gaskets and spacers"
Can anyone provide a copy of the relevant page in the Lycoming parts
catalogue?
Assuming a gasket is required, is it normal to use one both above and below
the control cable bracket?
Gordon Anderson
Switzerland
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442185#442185
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
| From: | "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com> |
Hey, by chance do you have the QB fuselage? If so, go back through the plans and
you will find that those AN470 rivets that are in the way are REALLY supposed
to be AN426 flush rivets. I had this same issue and it literally took more
than an hour to find it in the plans. There should be NO AN470 rivet heads protruding
in the area where the cabin top sit in the fuselage sides.
I think it was about 8 rivets, four on each side. They were pretty easy to drill
out, dimple, and replace with AN426 rivets...
It is one of the issues I found with the QB kits...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442230#442230
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
| From: | "mhealydds" <mhealydds(at)gmail.com> |
I do have a QB fuse and indeed the 426 rivets are placed in error. That is why
Bob doesn't remember having them there. So now that I have already trimmed to
much and cannot get it to clamp flush in sides of door opening (sits flush on
bottom) how should I proceed. Obviously replace rivets, but then what do you think.
Epoxy resin with flox and re-sand to fit? If so, will it adhere and be strong
enough?
This is one of many problems I have had with QB fuse, just didn't catch this one
early enough- wish I would have just build it myself
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442247#442247
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bob Leffler <rv(at)thelefflers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
Yes, like Jesse mentioned, apply flox and bolt it down. It's a pain to sand,
so don't got crazy with the flox.
I got mine to fit pretty good. I used flox to fill in the door bottom on the
interior then added micro as a top coat and to fill in all the imperfections around
the edges.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 18, 2015, at 1:41 PM, mhealydds wrote:
I do have a QB fuse and indeed the 426 rivets are placed in error. That is why
Bob doesn't remember having them there. So now that I have already trimmed to
much and cannot get it to clamp flush in sides of door opening (sits flush on
bottom) how should I proceed. Obviously replace rivets, but then what do you think.
Epoxy resin with flox and re-sand to fit? If so, will it adhere and be strong
enough?
This is one of many problems I have had with QB fuse, just didn't catch this one
early enough- wish I would have just build it myself
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442247#442247
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
This is a single step fix after you replace the rivets. Apply a liberal
amount of flox, install the cabin top, clean up the excess flox once the top
is seated (and before it sets) and insert the bolts. Remember to not
tighten the bolts all the way until after the flox sets so you don't deform
the cabin top. As you will have a lot of flox to fill the gaps, check that
the sides and bottom are straight as you go. Once this is done the top is
there forever so don't scrimp on the flox. It is much easier to clean up
the flox as you go then to try to fill voids after the top is on. The flox
should not be too runny or dry. Something on the wet side of cake frosting.
When done there a several options to fill in the door bottom. On Van's demo
plane they used a piece of wood. The attached photos show how I added some
rigid foam and then 8 bids or so of glass over the top and down the inside
to aluminum. Some micro, sanding and ready for paint. The last two photos
show how I back fitted the aftermarket door cam lock. I suspect this turned
out easier than trying to glass around it. What would we do without Dremel
tools?
Carl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Leffler
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 2:01 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Cabin Cover Fit
Yes, like Jesse mentioned, apply flox and bolt it down. It's a pain to
sand, so don't got crazy with the flox.
I got mine to fit pretty good. I used flox to fill in the door bottom on
the interior then added micro as a top coat and to fill in all the
imperfections around the edges.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 18, 2015, at 1:41 PM, mhealydds wrote:
I do have a QB fuse and indeed the 426 rivets are placed in error. That is
why Bob doesn't remember having them there. So now that I have already
trimmed to much and cannot get it to clamp flush in sides of door opening
(sits flush on bottom) how should I proceed. Obviously replace rivets, but
then what do you think. Epoxy resin with flox and re-sand to fit? If so,
will it adhere and be strong enough?
This is one of many problems I have had with QB fuse, just didn't catch this
one early enough- wish I would have just build it myself
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442247#442247
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
| From: | Phillip Perry <philperry9(at)gmail.com> |
I'd consider rubbing a mold release all over the aluminum and then bolting
it into place with a handful of shims to fill the gap. This means the
shims would be the same width as an AN470 head rivet it tall.
That would locate the cabin time in the correct position. With it in that
position, I'd then squeeze some epoxy/flox into the gap where the shims are
between the aluminum and the cabin top. You can use a large syringe to
pack the flox way back into the gap first and then fill until you get the
the outer edge. Wipe the excess away.
Once it has cured, you can tap the shims out and fill the hole where the
shims were the same way.
Once that has cured, you can take the cabin top off and inspect it to make
sure there are no voids and if there are then you can just fill them to
match while it's off.
You will end up with the most perfectly fit cabin top of the group that
way. You're basically using your airframe as a mold and building the
cabin top to fit it perfectly.
Phil
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Bob Leffler wrote:
>
> Yes, like Jesse mentioned, apply flox and bolt it down. It's a pain to
> sand, so don't got crazy with the flox.
>
> I got mine to fit pretty good. I used flox to fill in the door bottom on
> the interior then added micro as a top coat and to fill in all the
> imperfections around the edges.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 18, 2015, at 1:41 PM, mhealydds wrote:
>
>
> I do have a QB fuse and indeed the 426 rivets are placed in error. That is
> why Bob doesn't remember having them there. So now that I have already
> trimmed to much and cannot get it to clamp flush in sides of door opening
> (sits flush on bottom) how should I proceed. Obviously replace rivets, but
> then what do you think. Epoxy resin with flox and re-sand to fit? If so,
> will it adhere and be strong enough?
>
> This is one of many problems I have had with QB fuse, just didn't catch
> this one early enough- wish I would have just build it myself
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442247#442247
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
| From: | "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com> |
Boy, I dunno if I would try to remove the top after the epoxy has set, even WITH
mold release. With the imperfect surfaces of the cabin top, I would think that
you would damage it trying to remove it with the perfect fit you created.
Unfortunately, you would then be stuck with a cabin top that is not bonded to
the surrounding epoxy due to the mold release, and no good way to remove it without
breaking it.
Make sure the cabin top is in the right position and fill'r'up with flox...then
tighten the bolts when flox is cured...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442263#442263
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
| From: | "mhealydds" <mhealydds(at)gmail.com> |
So my concern with this approach is that will I have a problem clamping cabin cover
to fuselage to match drill bolt holes with that large of a gap. You are saying
just not worry about gap until final seating and they secure with flox an
not try to build up prior to final seating?
Matt
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442266#442266
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
| From: | "mhealydds" <mhealydds(at)gmail.com> |
Sorry just saw post about using mold release before final seating before posting
last reply. Any thoughts what would be better?
Matt
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442267#442267
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
| From: | "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu> |
I am certainly no fiberglass expert, but I'd be tempted to lay down a couple of
layers of fiberglass/epoxy on the bottom of the top, where, you've sanded too
far, to minimize how much flox you need to fill the gap.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442268#442268
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
| From: | "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu> |
It also bears repeating Vans' instructions: QB builders must go thru the non-QB
instructions carefully (takes several hours!) to see where the "pro" guys screwed
up. Guaranteed you'll find a few things that need to be addressed.
My QB fuel tanks were installed with bolts one size too long, with a stack of washers
under each to make them fit!
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442269#442269
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
| From: | "mhealydds" <mhealydds(at)gmail.com> |
By the way, the lower or bottom portion seats fine, just sides, attached better
pictures
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442270#442270
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_1027_173.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_1028_181.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
| From: | "mhealydds" <mhealydds(at)gmail.com> |
I thought I went through the QB kit pretty well, found lots of errors actually
(to the point that I am not sure I would even recommend a QB fuse kit), guess
checking the head style of every rivet was not something I got into.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442271#442271
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rene" <rene(at)felker.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
Not to go against the trend.....but why take our the 470's. If you have it
fitting....already cut the top....then just leave the "wrong" rivets in and
flox around them. Will help keep everything lined up and the will not
affect the structure. Drilling out the rivets and putting in new rivets
only increases the risk of messing something up.
Rene'
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of mhealydds
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 3:13 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: Cabin Cover Fit
By the way, the lower or bottom portion seats fine, just sides, attached
better pictures
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442270#442270
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_1027_173.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_1028_181.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Saylor <saylor.dave(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Cabin Cover Fit |
I agree with Rene. If it fits, don't bother drilling out those rivets. I
would lay a thick layer of flox or milled fiber filler between the top and
the fuse to fill the gap before drilling for the attach screws. The
problem with a release in an area like that is some resin will inevitably
seep into some cavity or female section that makes it very difficulty to
remove. It can be done with a lot of prep and forethought but it wouldn't
be worth it. Filling will work just fine. Keep it a little "below grade"
to reduce having to remove cured material--you can always bodywork it for
cosmetics afterward.
Once the top is on, it's an integral part of the fuselage. Taking it off
in the future might be possible but you'd need a really good reason.
--Dave
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Rene wrote:
>
> Not to go against the trend.....but why take our the 470's. If you have it
> fitting....already cut the top....then just leave the "wrong" rivets in and
> flox around them. Will help keep everything lined up and the will not
> affect the structure. Drilling out the rivets and putting in new rivets
> only increases the risk of messing something up.
>
> Rene'
> 801-721-6080
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of mhealydds
> Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 3:13 PM
> To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: Re: Cabin Cover Fit
>
>
> By the way, the lower or bottom portion seats fine, just sides, attached
> better pictures
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442270#442270
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_1027_173.jpg
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_1028_181.jpg
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Gust Lock - Redux |
| From: | "kearney" <kearney(at)shaw.ca> |
Hi
A few weeks ago I inquired about gust locks. Most of the "commercial" options didn't
appeal. The one that did appeal never responded to my email query so I decided
to see what I could do on my own.
Most "commercial" options consisted of pushing the rudder pedals forward. Given
that I had an open bolt hole at the bottom of the firewall, I decided to install
an eyeball bolt and use that, in conjunction with a carabiner / strap / shock
cord to pull the pedals forward. I felt this was a better option.
My Grimstad rudder peals have a hollow tube that allowed me to insert a wooden
down between them. This was pulled forward by a strap threaded through the carabiner.
Two shock cords put tension on the straps so that the pedals stay forward
and the rudder centered. I attached the other end of the shock cords to the
outboard gear mount tube that is just in front of the pilot's seat.
The advantage of the shock cords is that it will allow the rudder to move under
to pressure - but not too much. The rudder never comes in contact with the stops
nor are the cables ever out if tension so that that rudder flops around.
All told, this could be duplicated for under $10. I expect something similar could
be done with stock pedals.
I plan to tinker a bit more with this but don't expect the basic design to change.
Cheers
Les
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442391#442391
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_4002_115.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_4001_138.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_3996_383.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/img_3995_147.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris Hukill" <cjhukill(at)cox.net> |
This is my rudder gust lock. I machined a part that bolts to the aft
bulkhead/vertical stab spar assembly. The eye-bolts protrude thru the skin
and there will be pins that lock the rudder in neutral position when
installed.
Chris Hukill
waiting for the FAA to bless me for flight
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> |
| Subject: | Fwd: TAS Calculator.xlsx |
See below.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
352-427-0285
jesse(at)saintaviation.com
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Chris Golden <chris(at)blueones.com>
> Date: May 23, 2015 at 3:36:21 PM EDT
> To: Saint Jesse
> Subject: TAS Calculator.xlsx
>
> Not sure if this is the one he is looking for, but it's what we used and s
eemed about right.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Flysrv10 <flysrv10(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: TAS Calculator.xlsx |
Thanks Jesse. I was looking for indicated airspeed calculation. I have two s
ources of AS and they are 10+ kt different.
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 23, 2015, at 3:42 PM, Jesse Saint wrote:
>
> See below.
>
> Jesse Saint
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
> 352-427-0285
> jesse(at)saintaviation.com
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Chris Golden <chris(at)blueones.com>
>> Date: May 23, 2015 at 3:36:21 PM EDT
>> To: Saint Jesse
>> Subject: TAS Calculator.xlsx
>> Not sure if this is the one he is looking for, but it's what we used and s
eemed about right.
>
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: TAS Calculator.xlsx |
I don't think you can very accurately calculate indicated airspeed. The bes
t way to check that is on the bench. That's the reference for all the other
s.
If indicated is off, it's time to use the manometer and figure out which one
is accurate.
Tim
> On May 23, 2015, at 2:55 PM, Flysrv10 wrote:
>
> Thanks Jesse. I was looking for indicated airspeed calculation. I have two
sources of AS and they are 10+ kt different.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On May 23, 2015, at 3:42 PM, Jesse Saint wrote:
>>
>> See below.
>>
>> Jesse Saint
>> Saint Aviation, Inc.
>> 352-427-0285
>> jesse(at)saintaviation.com
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>>> From: Chris Golden <chris(at)blueones.com>
>>> Date: May 23, 2015 at 3:36:21 PM EDT
>>> To: Saint Jesse
>>> Subject: TAS Calculator.xlsx
>>> Not sure if this is the one he is looking for, but it's what we used and
seemed about right.
>>
>
>
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ben" <n801bh(at)netzero.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: TAS Calculator.xlsx |
Agreed..... Easy to do,,, Well tested and accepted data to derive an acc
urate reading... http://www.rst-engr.com/rst/articles/KP89JUL.pdf Ben H
aas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
---------- Original Message ----------
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fwd: TAS Calculator.xlsx
Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 17:39:09 -0500
I don't think you can very accurately calculate indicated airspeed. The
best way to check that is on the bench. That's the reference for all t
he others.If indicated is off, it's time to use the manometer and figure
out which one is accurate.Tim
On May 23, 2015, at 2:55 PM, Flysrv10 wrote:
Thanks Jesse. I was looking for indicated airspeed calculation. I have t
wo sources of AS and they are 10+ kt different.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 23, 2015, at 3:42 PM, Jesse Saint wrote
:
See below.
Jesse SaintSaint Aviation, Inc.352-427-0285jesse(at)saintaviation.com Sent
from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
From: Chris Golden <chris(at)blueones.com>
Date: May 23, 2015 at 3:36:21 PM EDT
Subject: TAS Calculator.xlsx
Not sure if this is the one he is looking for, but it's what we used an
d seemed about right.
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3DList"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?
RV10-ListD=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D//forums.matronics.comD=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3Dot;">http://www.matronics
.com/contributionD=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
=================
____________________________________________________________
NetZero now offers 4G mobile broadband. Sign up now.
http://www.netzero.net/?refcd=NZINTISP0512T4GOUT1
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Fwd: TAS Calculator.xlsx |
Here is a PDF file with a scale that translates inches of water to knots.
This simple rig is very accurate. It also serves to find pitot/static leaks
before you have the guy on the clock doing your biannual check.
Carl
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ben
Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2015 7:44 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fwd: TAS Calculator.xlsx
Agreed.....
Easy to do,,, Well tested and accepted data to derive an accurate reading...
http://www.rst-engr.com/rst/articles/KP89JUL.pdf
Ben Haas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
---------- Original Message ----------
From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Fwd: TAS Calculator.xlsx
Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 17:39:09 -0500
I don't think you can very accurately calculate indicated airspeed. The
best way to check that is on the bench. That's the reference for all the
others.
If indicated is off, it's time to use the manometer and figure out which one
is accurate.
Tim
On May 23, 2015, at 2:55 PM, Flysrv10 wrote:
Thanks Jesse. I was looking for indicated airspeed calculation. I have two
sources of AS and they are 10+ kt different.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 23, 2015, at 3:42 PM, Jesse Saint wrote:
See below.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
352-427-0285
jesse(at)saintaviation.com
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
From: Chris Golden <chris(at)blueones.com>
Date: May 23, 2015 at 3:36:21 PM EDT
Subject: TAS Calculator.xlsx
Not sure if this is the one he is looking for, but it's what we used and
seemed about right.
D========================
===================
List""> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
D========================
===================
//forums.matronics.com
D========================
===================
ot;"> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
D========================
===================
===================================
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
===================================
ronics.com
===================================
<http://www.matronics.com/contribution> www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
____________________________________________________________
NetZero now offers 4G mobile broadband. Sign up now.
<http://www.netzero.net/?refcd=NZINTISP0512T4GOUT1>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: TAS Calculator.xlsx |
| From: | "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu> |
There are several programs available where you fly 3 different courses, note GPS
ground speeds, and the program calculates True airspeed, with the assumption
that the wind does not change while you make the measurements. Truth be told,
you can do just as well by finding the wind direction (max ground speed), then
do a 180 (minimum ground speed), and average the 2 numbers to get TAS. Note
the pressure altitude and the OAT, pull out your E6B and change TAS into IAS.
Water manometer is a good place to start, but it won't show static errors.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442512#442512
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ben" <n801bh(at)netzero.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: TAS Calculator.xlsx |
I do a pitot /static test on every third transponder check.. ie, every s
ix years.... The guy has the equipment already set up and it only adds 5
0 bucks to the bill... And his test rig is certified..... Well worth it
to me... YMMV... Ben Haas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
---------- Original Message ----------
From: "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu>
Subject: RV10-List: Re: Fwd: TAS Calculator.xlsx
Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 20:25:26 -0700
There are several programs available where you fly 3 different courses,
note GPS ground speeds, and the program calculates True airspeed, with t
he assumption that the wind does not change while you make the measureme
nts. Truth be told, you can do just as well by finding the wind directio
n (max ground speed), then do a 180 (minimum ground speed), and average
the 2 numbers to get TAS. Note the pressure altitude and the OAT, pull o
ut your E6B and change TAS into IAS.
Water manometer is a good place to start, but it won't show static error
s.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442512#442512
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
____________________________________________________________
Old School Yearbook Pics
View Class Yearbooks Online Free. Search by School & Year. Look Now!
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/55614efe451544efe62e5st03duc
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | New Aerosport Symmetrical Panel |
| From: | "EdKranz" <ed.kranz(at)gmail.com> |
Hey guys,
Just wanted to show off the redesigned AeroSport Symmetrical panel. This one fits
3 10" displays (like the big G3X touch, or the AFS 5600). It also includes
room for a 750 below the center screen, or like I chose to do, a 650, an audio
panel, and the GMC305 AP controller.
Because so much of the panel real estate is taken up with avionics, Aerosport designed
a new center console mounted throttle quadrant. It sits right where your
hand will naturally lay when you have your elbow on the center console.
A few other interesting things:
-With the G3X Touch screens, NO rib modification was necessary. A notch of about
2" was needed in the bottom of the sub-panel for the 650 in the location shown
in the pictures.
-There is a lip at the bottom of the center panel that is PERFECT as a "finger
shelf" to brace your hands to operate the 305 AP panel in turbulence. Now I obviously
haven't tested this out in the air, but from sitting in the garage, bouncing
around making airplane noises, it worked great :)
--------
Ed Kranz
RV10
Finishing
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442593#442593
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/aerosport_render_146.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/hdr_panel_cropped_172.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New Aerosport Symmetrical Panel |
| From: | "Berck E. Nash" <flyboy(at)gmail.com> |
Are you planning on a separate self-contained backup system? I ask because
it doesn't look like there's much room left over for one. While you can
protect against hardware failures with the multiple screens and ADAHRS/GPS
receivers across the G3X complex, there's always the issue of a common
software bug. I really like the idea of the console mounted quadrant.
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 9:06 AM, EdKranz wrote:
>
> Hey guys,
>
> Just wanted to show off the redesigned AeroSport Symmetrical panel. This
> one fits 3 10" displays (like the big G3X touch, or the AFS 5600). It also
> includes room for a 750 below the center screen, or like I chose to do, a
> 650, an audio panel, and the GMC305 AP controller.
>
> Because so much of the panel real estate is taken up with avionics,
> Aerosport designed a new center console mounted throttle quadrant. It sits
> right where your hand will naturally lay when you have your elbow on the
> center console.
>
> A few other interesting things:
>
> -With the G3X Touch screens, NO rib modification was necessary. A notch of
> about 2" was needed in the bottom of the sub-panel for the 650 in the
> location shown in the pictures.
>
> -There is a lip at the bottom of the center panel that is PERFECT as a
> "finger shelf" to brace your hands to operate the 305 AP panel in
> turbulence. Now I obviously haven't tested this out in the air, but from
> sitting in the garage, bouncing around making airplane noises, it worked
> great :)
>
> --------
> Ed Kranz
> RV10
> Finishing
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442593#442593
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/aerosport_render_146.jpg
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/hdr_panel_cropped_172.jpg
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New Aerosport Symmetrical Panel |
| From: | Ed Kranz <ed.kranz(at)gmail.com> |
I keep going back and forth. I do want some sort of non-garmin backup PFD.
RC Allen makes a nice 2.5" LCD attitude gauge that would fit to the left of
my PFD1, but I'd want altitude and airspeed info as well. So far, I don't
believe that anyone makes one that small, for a price I'm willing to pay.
The Midcontinent SAM might fit there, but it's quite spendy.
During the fly-off, I'm obviously day VFR, so I'm going to fly it as is...
but I'll probably end up with a Dynon D1 either up on the glareshield or
below the AP controller until someone comes out with a nice compact backup
PFD.
I've also considered some of the iPad based "PFDs"... which would probably
be fine in the unlikely scenario that I'm in IMC and suffer a full 3 screen
system failure... Enough to get me to VMC to get on the ground. But I'd
prefer a real backup PFD.
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Berck E. Nash wrote:
> Are you planning on a separate self-contained backup system? I ask
> because it doesn't look like there's much room left over for one. While you
> can protect against hardware failures with the multiple screens and
> ADAHRS/GPS receivers across the G3X complex, there's always the issue of a
> common software bug. I really like the idea of the console mounted
> quadrant.
>
> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 9:06 AM, EdKranz wrote:
>
>>
>> Hey guys,
>>
>> Just wanted to show off the redesigned AeroSport Symmetrical panel. This
>> one fits 3 10" displays (like the big G3X touch, or the AFS 5600). It also
>> includes room for a 750 below the center screen, or like I chose to do, a
>> 650, an audio panel, and the GMC305 AP controller.
>>
>> Because so much of the panel real estate is taken up with avionics,
>> Aerosport designed a new center console mounted throttle quadrant. It sits
>> right where your hand will naturally lay when you have your elbow on the
>> center console.
>>
>> A few other interesting things:
>>
>> -With the G3X Touch screens, NO rib modification was necessary. A notch
>> of about 2" was needed in the bottom of the sub-panel for the 650 in the
>> location shown in the pictures.
>>
>> -There is a lip at the bottom of the center panel that is PERFECT as a
>> "finger shelf" to brace your hands to operate the 305 AP panel in
>> turbulence. Now I obviously haven't tested this out in the air, but from
>> sitting in the garage, bouncing around making airplane noises, it worked
>> great :)
>>
>> --------
>> Ed Kranz
>> RV10
>> Finishing
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442593#442593
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Attachments:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/aerosport_render_146.jpg
>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/hdr_panel_cropped_172.jpg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ==========
>> -List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> ==========
>> FORUMS -
>> _blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> b Site -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New Aerosport Symmetrical Panel |
| From: | "Berck E. Nash" <flyboy(at)gmail.com> |
I suppose there's room for 3 round gauges off to the left. Any idea if
it's possible to move the center screen down so it's level with the others
and put the GMC305 on top, or are the holes for the screens pre-cut? I'm
rather used to the autopilot panel being top center...
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Ed Kranz wrote:
> I keep going back and forth. I do want some sort of non-garmin backup PFD.
> RC Allen makes a nice 2.5" LCD attitude gauge that would fit to the left of
> my PFD1, but I'd want altitude and airspeed info as well. So far, I don't
> believe that anyone makes one that small, for a price I'm willing to pay.
> The Midcontinent SAM might fit there, but it's quite spendy.
>
> During the fly-off, I'm obviously day VFR, so I'm going to fly it as is...
> but I'll probably end up with a Dynon D1 either up on the glareshield or
> below the AP controller until someone comes out with a nice compact backup
> PFD.
>
> I've also considered some of the iPad based "PFDs"... which would probably
> be fine in the unlikely scenario that I'm in IMC and suffer a full 3 screen
> system failure... Enough to get me to VMC to get on the ground. But I'd
> prefer a real backup PFD.
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Berck E. Nash wrote:
>
>> Are you planning on a separate self-contained backup system? I ask
>> because it doesn't look like there's much room left over for one. While you
>> can protect against hardware failures with the multiple screens and
>> ADAHRS/GPS receivers across the G3X complex, there's always the issue of a
>> common software bug. I really like the idea of the console mounted
>> quadrant.
>>
>> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 9:06 AM, EdKranz wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hey guys,
>>>
>>> Just wanted to show off the redesigned AeroSport Symmetrical panel. This
>>> one fits 3 10" displays (like the big G3X touch, or the AFS 5600). It also
>>> includes room for a 750 below the center screen, or like I chose to do, a
>>> 650, an audio panel, and the GMC305 AP controller.
>>>
>>> Because so much of the panel real estate is taken up with avionics,
>>> Aerosport designed a new center console mounted throttle quadrant. It sits
>>> right where your hand will naturally lay when you have your elbow on the
>>> center console.
>>>
>>> A few other interesting things:
>>>
>>> -With the G3X Touch screens, NO rib modification was necessary. A notch
>>> of about 2" was needed in the bottom of the sub-panel for the 650 in the
>>> location shown in the pictures.
>>>
>>> -There is a lip at the bottom of the center panel that is PERFECT as a
>>> "finger shelf" to brace your hands to operate the 305 AP panel in
>>> turbulence. Now I obviously haven't tested this out in the air, but from
>>> sitting in the garage, bouncing around making airplane noises, it worked
>>> great :)
>>>
>>> --------
>>> Ed Kranz
>>> RV10
>>> Finishing
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442593#442593
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Attachments:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/aerosport_render_146.jpg
>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/hdr_panel_cropped_172.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ==========
>>> -List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> ==========
>>> FORUMS -
>>> _blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>> ==========
>>> b Site -
>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> ==========
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> *
>>
>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> tp://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>> *
>>
>>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New Aerosport Symmetrical Panel |
| From: | Bob Condrey <condreyb(at)gmail.com> |
Per a discussion I had with Geoff a couple days ago, yes you can move the
center screen down and fit the GMC-305 AP controller above it.
Bob
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Berck E. Nash wrote:
> I suppose there's room for 3 round gauges off to the left. Any idea if
> it's possible to move the center screen down so it's level with the others
> and put the GMC305 on top, or are the holes for the screens pre-cut? I'm
> rather used to the autopilot panel being top center...
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Ed Kranz wrote:
>
>> I keep going back and forth. I do want some sort of non-garmin backup
>> PFD. RC Allen makes a nice 2.5" LCD attitude gauge that would fit to the
>> left of my PFD1, but I'd want altitude and airspeed info as well. So far, I
>> don't believe that anyone makes one that small, for a price I'm willing to
>> pay. The Midcontinent SAM might fit there, but it's quite spendy.
>>
>> During the fly-off, I'm obviously day VFR, so I'm going to fly it as
>> is... but I'll probably end up with a Dynon D1 either up on the glareshield
>> or below the AP controller until someone comes out with a nice compact
>> backup PFD.
>>
>> I've also considered some of the iPad based "PFDs"... which would
>> probably be fine in the unlikely scenario that I'm in IMC and suffer a full
>> 3 screen system failure... Enough to get me to VMC to get on the ground.
>> But I'd prefer a real backup PFD.
>>
>> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Berck E. Nash wrote:
>>
>>> Are you planning on a separate self-contained backup system? I ask
>>> because it doesn't look like there's much room left over for one. While you
>>> can protect against hardware failures with the multiple screens and
>>> ADAHRS/GPS receivers across the G3X complex, there's always the issue of a
>>> common software bug. I really like the idea of the console mounted
>>> quadrant.
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 9:06 AM, EdKranz wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>
>>>> Just wanted to show off the redesigned AeroSport Symmetrical panel.
>>>> This one fits 3 10" displays (like the big G3X touch, or the AFS 5600). It
>>>> also includes room for a 750 below the center screen, or like I chose to
>>>> do, a 650, an audio panel, and the GMC305 AP controller.
>>>>
>>>> Because so much of the panel real estate is taken up with avionics,
>>>> Aerosport designed a new center console mounted throttle quadrant. It sits
>>>> right where your hand will naturally lay when you have your elbow on the
>>>> center console.
>>>>
>>>> A few other interesting things:
>>>>
>>>> -With the G3X Touch screens, NO rib modification was necessary. A notch
>>>> of about 2" was needed in the bottom of the sub-panel for the 650 in the
>>>> location shown in the pictures.
>>>>
>>>> -There is a lip at the bottom of the center panel that is PERFECT as a
>>>> "finger shelf" to brace your hands to operate the 305 AP panel in
>>>> turbulence. Now I obviously haven't tested this out in the air, but from
>>>> sitting in the garage, bouncing around making airplane noises, it worked
>>>> great :)
>>>>
>>>> --------
>>>> Ed Kranz
>>>> RV10
>>>> Finishing
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>
>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442593#442593
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Attachments:
>>>>
>>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/aerosport_render_146.jpg
>>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/hdr_panel_cropped_172.jpg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ==========
>>>> -List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>> ==========
>>>> FORUMS -
>>>> _blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>> ==========
>>>> b Site -
>>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>> ==========
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> tp://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>> *
>>
>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> tp://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>> *
>>
>>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New Aerosport Symmetrical Panel |
| From: | Ed Kranz <ed.kranz(at)gmail.com> |
You can have the panels cut however you'd like. Another possible plus of
doing what you suggest is that I don't think you'd have to cut the subpanel
to fit the 650.
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Berck E. Nash wrote:
> I suppose there's room for 3 round gauges off to the left. Any idea if
> it's possible to move the center screen down so it's level with the others
> and put the GMC305 on top, or are the holes for the screens pre-cut? I'm
> rather used to the autopilot panel being top center...
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Ed Kranz wrote:
>
>> I keep going back and forth. I do want some sort of non-garmin backup
>> PFD. RC Allen makes a nice 2.5" LCD attitude gauge that would fit to the
>> left of my PFD1, but I'd want altitude and airspeed info as well. So far, I
>> don't believe that anyone makes one that small, for a price I'm willing to
>> pay. The Midcontinent SAM might fit there, but it's quite spendy.
>>
>> During the fly-off, I'm obviously day VFR, so I'm going to fly it as
>> is... but I'll probably end up with a Dynon D1 either up on the glareshield
>> or below the AP controller until someone comes out with a nice compact
>> backup PFD.
>>
>> I've also considered some of the iPad based "PFDs"... which would
>> probably be fine in the unlikely scenario that I'm in IMC and suffer a full
>> 3 screen system failure... Enough to get me to VMC to get on the ground.
>> But I'd prefer a real backup PFD.
>>
>> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Berck E. Nash wrote:
>>
>>> Are you planning on a separate self-contained backup system? I ask
>>> because it doesn't look like there's much room left over for one. While you
>>> can protect against hardware failures with the multiple screens and
>>> ADAHRS/GPS receivers across the G3X complex, there's always the issue of a
>>> common software bug. I really like the idea of the console mounted
>>> quadrant.
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 9:06 AM, EdKranz wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>
>>>> Just wanted to show off the redesigned AeroSport Symmetrical panel.
>>>> This one fits 3 10" displays (like the big G3X touch, or the AFS 5600). It
>>>> also includes room for a 750 below the center screen, or like I chose to
>>>> do, a 650, an audio panel, and the GMC305 AP controller.
>>>>
>>>> Because so much of the panel real estate is taken up with avionics,
>>>> Aerosport designed a new center console mounted throttle quadrant. It sits
>>>> right where your hand will naturally lay when you have your elbow on the
>>>> center console.
>>>>
>>>> A few other interesting things:
>>>>
>>>> -With the G3X Touch screens, NO rib modification was necessary. A notch
>>>> of about 2" was needed in the bottom of the sub-panel for the 650 in the
>>>> location shown in the pictures.
>>>>
>>>> -There is a lip at the bottom of the center panel that is PERFECT as a
>>>> "finger shelf" to brace your hands to operate the 305 AP panel in
>>>> turbulence. Now I obviously haven't tested this out in the air, but from
>>>> sitting in the garage, bouncing around making airplane noises, it worked
>>>> great :)
>>>>
>>>> --------
>>>> Ed Kranz
>>>> RV10
>>>> Finishing
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>
>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442593#442593
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Attachments:
>>>>
>>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/aerosport_render_146.jpg
>>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/hdr_panel_cropped_172.jpg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ==========
>>>> -List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>> ==========
>>>> FORUMS -
>>>> _blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>> ==========
>>>> b Site -
>>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>> ==========
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> tp://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>> *
>>
>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> tp://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>> *
>>
>>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New Aerosport Symmetrical Panel |
| From: | Ed Kranz <ed.kranz(at)gmail.com> |
Here's a quick and dirty photoshop of what that might look like. I gotta
say, I really like that too.
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Bob Condrey wrote:
> Per a discussion I had with Geoff a couple days ago, yes you can move the
> center screen down and fit the GMC-305 AP controller above it.
>
> Bob
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Berck E. Nash wrote:
>
>> I suppose there's room for 3 round gauges off to the left. Any idea if
>> it's possible to move the center screen down so it's level with the others
>> and put the GMC305 on top, or are the holes for the screens pre-cut? I'm
>> rather used to the autopilot panel being top center...
>>
>> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Ed Kranz wrote:
>>
>>> I keep going back and forth. I do want some sort of non-garmin backup
>>> PFD. RC Allen makes a nice 2.5" LCD attitude gauge that would fit to the
>>> left of my PFD1, but I'd want altitude and airspeed info as well. So far, I
>>> don't believe that anyone makes one that small, for a price I'm willing to
>>> pay. The Midcontinent SAM might fit there, but it's quite spendy.
>>>
>>> During the fly-off, I'm obviously day VFR, so I'm going to fly it as
>>> is... but I'll probably end up with a Dynon D1 either up on the glareshield
>>> or below the AP controller until someone comes out with a nice compact
>>> backup PFD.
>>>
>>> I've also considered some of the iPad based "PFDs"... which would
>>> probably be fine in the unlikely scenario that I'm in IMC and suffer a full
>>> 3 screen system failure... Enough to get me to VMC to get on the ground.
>>> But I'd prefer a real backup PFD.
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Berck E. Nash
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Are you planning on a separate self-contained backup system? I ask
>>>> because it doesn't look like there's much room left over for one. While you
>>>> can protect against hardware failures with the multiple screens and
>>>> ADAHRS/GPS receivers across the G3X complex, there's always the issue of a
>>>> common software bug. I really like the idea of the console mounted
>>>> quadrant.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 9:06 AM, EdKranz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>>
>>>>> Just wanted to show off the redesigned AeroSport Symmetrical panel.
>>>>> This one fits 3 10" displays (like the big G3X touch, or the AFS 5600). It
>>>>> also includes room for a 750 below the center screen, or like I chose to
>>>>> do, a 650, an audio panel, and the GMC305 AP controller.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because so much of the panel real estate is taken up with avionics,
>>>>> Aerosport designed a new center console mounted throttle quadrant. It sits
>>>>> right where your hand will naturally lay when you have your elbow on the
>>>>> center console.
>>>>>
>>>>> A few other interesting things:
>>>>>
>>>>> -With the G3X Touch screens, NO rib modification was necessary. A
>>>>> notch of about 2" was needed in the bottom of the sub-panel for the 650 in
>>>>> the location shown in the pictures.
>>>>>
>>>>> -There is a lip at the bottom of the center panel that is PERFECT as a
>>>>> "finger shelf" to brace your hands to operate the 305 AP panel in
>>>>> turbulence. Now I obviously haven't tested this out in the air, but from
>>>>> sitting in the garage, bouncing around making airplane noises, it worked
>>>>> great :)
>>>>>
>>>>> --------
>>>>> Ed Kranz
>>>>> RV10
>>>>> Finishing
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442593#442593
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Attachments:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/aerosport_render_146.jpg
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/hdr_panel_cropped_172.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> -List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> FORUMS -
>>>>> _blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>>> ==========
>>>>> b Site -
>>>>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>>>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>> ==========
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>>> tp://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>>>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> tp://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>> *
>>
>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> tp://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>> *
>>
>>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "DLM" <dlm34077(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | symmetrical panel and backup |
If you are seriously interested in backup for IFR in IMC, you need two
different EFIS systems and an autopilot with internal solid state gyros and
backup batteries. My solution is Chelton primary with FAA level A software;
GRT Sport/software (mini is now available) for backup and a Trutrak AP that
will also fly the aircraft albeit not extremely precisely. I have three 680s
on board although the last was added on the firewall more for weight and
balance purposes. In essence I have three systems all capable of keeping the
shiny side up. The AP can accept LNAV/VNAV commands from the Chelton, LNAV
commands from the GRT and fly the aircraft independently depending on a
source selection switch for the AP.
My two cents
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: symmetrical panel and backup |
| From: | Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> |
There are several "mini-EFIS" available today that were not on the market
7-8 yrs ago. Even if you select the same brand as the main EFIS, the
operating software is different. You have to decide whether you want same
logic or being able to know the ins and outs of two different brand
philosophies, and whether you want more Tees in your pitot static system to
leak, or a GPS derived attitude, altitude and airspeed as backup.
It appears the autopilot market has evolved to where the leading EFIS have
integrated autopilots, and backup batteries for each screen. Having a
separate autopilot generally adds several grand in cost. However, most
autopilots, whether separate or integrated will fail if they don't have
electrons to power them, as most use electric servos. One does have to
decide whether to wear 2 belts and 1 or two suspenders to have enough
backup.
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 5:51 AM, DLM wrote:
>
> If you are seriously interested in backup for IFR in IMC, you need two
> different EFIS systems and an autopilot with internal solid state gyros and
> backup batteries. My solution is Chelton primary with FAA level A software;
> GRT Sport/software (mini is now available) for backup and a Trutrak AP that
> will also fly the aircraft albeit not extremely precisely. I have three
> 680s
> on board although the last was added on the firewall more for weight and
> balance purposes. In essence I have three systems all capable of keeping
> the
> shiny side up. The AP can accept LNAV/VNAV commands from the Chelton, LNAV
> commands from the GRT and fly the aircraft independently depending on a
> source selection switch for the AP.
>
> My two cents
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: New Aerosport Symmetrical Panel |
| From: | "fdombroski" <f.dombroski(at)yahoo.com> |
For Back UP EFIS:
On an IFR platform I always utilize a separate manufacture for the secondary EFIS.
The GRT Mini x is a great package in a small footprint.
--------
Frank Dombroski
RV-10 2.0 N46VT soon to be flying
KSMQ Somerset Airport NJ
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442746#442746
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Greenley" <wgreenley(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | symmetrical panel and backup |
Trying to figure out how to keep backups in perspective. While building
my 10 I am still flying my =9956 Cessna 172. Flew home yesterday
IFR. One engine, one alternator, one main ships battery. Two radios, one
powering a VOR/ILS/LOC head, and one a VOR. Had a tablet GPS on the
yoke, and a backup tablet in the bag, no auto pilot. I know pilots that
have been flying like this for years, even before the portable
GPS=99s. Does it seem that we get a little carried away with
backups? I am still trying to decide on a panel, but leaning towards two
G3X=99s, and a mini-B each with batteries, autopilot controlled by
the G3X=99s. No round dials. This seems like so much more backup
than I have now, even still with one ships battery and alternator.
Bill Greenley
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly
McMullen
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: symmetrical panel and backup
There are several "mini-EFIS" available today that were not on the
market 7-8 yrs ago. Even if you select the same brand as the main EFIS,
the operating software is different. You have to decide whether you want
same logic or being able to know the ins and outs of two different brand
philosophies, and whether you want more Tees in your pitot static system
to leak, or a GPS derived attitude, altitude and airspeed as backup.
It appears the autopilot market has evolved to where the leading EFIS
have integrated autopilots, and backup batteries for each screen. Having
a separate autopilot generally adds several grand in cost. However, most
autopilots, whether separate or integrated will fail if they don't have
electrons to power them, as most use electric servos. One does have to
decide whether to wear 2 belts and 1 or two suspenders to have enough
backup.
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 5:51 AM, DLM wrote:
If you are seriously interested in backup for IFR in IMC, you need two
different EFIS systems and an autopilot with internal solid state gyros
and
backup batteries. My solution is Chelton primary with FAA level A
software;
GRT Sport/software (mini is now available) for backup and a Trutrak AP
that
will also fly the aircraft albeit not extremely precisely. I have three
680s
on board although the last was added on the firewall more for weight and
balance purposes. In essence I have three systems all capable of keeping
the
shiny side up. The AP can accept LNAV/VNAV commands from the Chelton,
LNAV
commands from the GRT and fly the aircraft independently depending on a
source selection switch for the AP.
My two cents
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
FORUMS -
_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: symmetrical panel and backup |
| From: | Ed Kranz <ed.kranz(at)gmail.com> |
I do have a TCW IBBS backup battery that will power the MFD (which will
drop into reversionary mode), engine monitor, one of the adahrs (along with
the mag and temp probe), and the autopilot panel. The AP servos are NOT
powered by the backup battery, but the autopilot panel will give me a
flight director, so I will become the "meat servo". The MFD is also an XM
enabled unit, so I'll even still have weather and some good tunes incase I
get bored during the emergency! The backup battery will only be needed
after the primary alternator, secondary 30 amp alternator, and the main
ships battery fail.
Additionally, if there is a CANBUS failure, the adahrs are both connected
with a secondary RS232 connection to the PFD and MFD, helping me to keep
the shiny side up.
I have thought a LOT about systems redundancy. As an IT Systems Admin, it's
part of my day job. I've designed as many of the systems to have
redundancy, sometimes even dual and triple redundancy, as practical. The
last big piece is going to be having a completely different brand backup
PFD. Like I said before, I'm leaning towards a battery operated, GPS
derived, self contained unit like a Dynon D1, as it isn't dependent on ANY
of the other systems in the plane, like power or pitot/static.
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
> There are several "mini-EFIS" available today that were not on the market
> 7-8 yrs ago. Even if you select the same brand as the main EFIS, the
> operating software is different. You have to decide whether you want same
> logic or being able to know the ins and outs of two different brand
> philosophies, and whether you want more Tees in your pitot static system to
> leak, or a GPS derived attitude, altitude and airspeed as backup.
> It appears the autopilot market has evolved to where the leading EFIS have
> integrated autopilots, and backup batteries for each screen. Having a
> separate autopilot generally adds several grand in cost. However, most
> autopilots, whether separate or integrated will fail if they don't have
> electrons to power them, as most use electric servos. One does have to
> decide whether to wear 2 belts and 1 or two suspenders to have enough
> backup.
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 5:51 AM, DLM wrote:
>
>>
>> If you are seriously interested in backup for IFR in IMC, you need two
>> different EFIS systems and an autopilot with internal solid state gyros
>> and
>> backup batteries. My solution is Chelton primary with FAA level A
>> software;
>> GRT Sport/software (mini is now available) for backup and a Trutrak AP
>> that
>> will also fly the aircraft albeit not extremely precisely. I have three
>> 680s
>> on board although the last was added on the firewall more for weight and
>> balance purposes. In essence I have three systems all capable of keeping
>> the
>> shiny side up. The AP can accept LNAV/VNAV commands from the Chelton, LNAV
>> commands from the GRT and fly the aircraft independently depending on a
>> source selection switch for the AP.
>>
>> My two cents
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> http://www.avast.com
>>
>>
>> ==========
>> -List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> ==========
>> FORUMS -
>> _blank">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> b Site -
>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rene" <rene(at)felker.com> |
| Subject: | symmetrical panel and backup |
I agree that the landscape has changed since I made my panel decision 8
years ago. Then my backup was a Blue Mountain.when it crapped
out I went to a third GRT screen.then replaced that
with a GRT sport. Different enough to solve the same technology
problem, but yet runs just like my other GRT system and thus no learning
curve or retraining time caused by two unique systems.
I also have three 2.5=9D steam gauges. With that I should be able
to get out of the soup even if everything else goes tango uniform.
I have two batteries, but that was more to move the CG forward than the
actual need for a second battery.
Rene'
801-721-6080
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly
McMullen
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 8:27 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: symmetrical panel and backup
There are several "mini-EFIS" available today that were not on the
market 7-8 yrs ago. Even if you select the same brand as the main EFIS,
the operating software is different. You have to decide whether you want
same logic or being able to know the ins and outs of two different brand
philosophies, and whether you want more Tees in your pitot static system
to leak, or a GPS derived attitude, altitude and airspeed as backup.
It appears the autopilot market has evolved to where the leading EFIS
have integrated autopilots, and backup batteries for each screen. Having
a separate autopilot generally adds several grand in cost. However, most
autopilots, whether separate or integrated will fail if they don't have
electrons to power them, as most use electric servos. One does have to
decide whether to wear 2 belts and 1 or two suspenders to have enough
backup.
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 5:51 AM, DLM wrote:
If you are seriously interested in backup for IFR in IMC, you need two
different EFIS systems and an autopilot with internal solid state gyros
and
backup batteries. My solution is Chelton primary with FAA level A
software;
GRT Sport/software (mini is now available) for backup and a Trutrak AP
that
will also fly the aircraft albeit not extremely precisely. I have three
680s
on board although the last was added on the firewall more for weight and
balance purposes. In essence I have three systems all capable of keeping
the
shiny side up. The AP can accept LNAV/VNAV commands from the Chelton,
LNAV
commands from the GRT and fly the aircraft independently depending on a
source selection switch for the AP.
My two cents
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
FORUMS -
_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
b Site -
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: symmetrical panel and backup |
| From: | "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com> |
Tim
Very well said.
I also agree that the "hard" IFR thing is misused. You really need to be proficient
in any IFR situation. Also, your BEST friend in IFR is ATC. You should
NEVER be afraid or embarrassed to use them.
Listening to everyone's opinion on what you HAVE to have to safely fly IFR really
makes me chuckle. Have you guys looked at the ancient panels and systems in
the airliners that carry you across the country and all over the world?
They just updated the database in my work jet...using a single sided floppy disk...it
took almost a half an hour...
A plumber friend once told me something. He said, "The more complicated the plumbing
is, the easier it is to stop it up." I think at some point, that statement
applies here...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442761#442761
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: symmetrical panel and backup |
| From: | "Berck E. Nash" <flyboy(at)gmail.com> |
Those old airliners may be ancient, but they're also very redundant. All
the transport category aircraft I've ever flown have at least three fully
independent sources of attitude information, at least two completely
separate pitot-static systems with two air data computers, three
altimeters, three air speed indicators... Sure, they may have no glass
screens, and I flew plenty of turboprops across the country full of
passengers using nothing but VOR/DME for navigation (often without an
operable autopilot), but they were all designed so no single system failure
on any of those planes would prove to be a major event.
I don't think I need the same level of redundancy in my RV-10, but I really
do want something like the GRT mini (or even 3 round dials) in case the
primary systems glitch. And I've seen enough bugs in the software and
electronics of airliners (which are built and tested to much higher
standards than whatever I'll be putting in my RV-10) to make me want
options.
I know people do it all the time, but I'm just not comfortable flying IMC
where the failure of a single vacuum pump can leave me shooting an approach
with a turn coordinator and a whiskey compass. Sure, I trained for it; I
would probably survive, but part of the reason for building my own plane is
so that I can affordably have a little more redundancy than that.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: symmetrical panel and backup |
The one thing I'd note is that when planning an EFIS system, yes,
there are times when it may be nice to have more than one
manufacturer in the panel for those primary gauges.
But, don't fall victim to going too far with that.
I would spend as much as you need to get your primary system
fully up to par and integrated. Then just add the 2nd system
as a more stand-alone device. The issue you will run into
sometimes is panel space. Don't sacrifice too much of your
panel space of what you want for the primary just to give it
to backups. And don't do something like pick one EFIS brand
for one side and one for the other side. You'll never be
as happy with how it all integrates. This isn't saying you
SHOULDN'T have backups or varied vendors, but just saying
not to short your primary for the purpose of having a bigger
backup. You can have all the backup you need without
all that much space taken up.
Tim
On 5/29/2015 11:59 AM, Berck E. Nash wrote:
> Those old airliners may be ancient, but they're also very redundant.
> All the transport category aircraft I've ever flown have at least three
> fully independent sources of attitude information, at least two
> completely separate pitot-static systems with two air data computers,
> three altimeters, three air speed indicators... Sure, they may have no
> glass screens, and I flew plenty of turboprops across the country full
> of passengers using nothing but VOR/DME for navigation (often without an
> operable autopilot), but they were all designed so no single system
> failure on any of those planes would prove to be a major event.
>
> I don't think I need the same level of redundancy in my RV-10, but I
> really do want something like the GRT mini (or even 3 round dials) in
> case the primary systems glitch. And I've seen enough bugs in the
> software and electronics of airliners (which are built and tested to
> much higher standards than whatever I'll be putting in my RV-10) to make
> me want options.
>
> I know people do it all the time, but I'm just not comfortable flying
> IMC where the failure of a single vacuum pump can leave me shooting an
> approach with a turn coordinator and a whiskey compass. Sure, I trained
> for it; I would probably survive, but part of the reason for building my
> own plane is so that I can affordably have a little more redundancy than
> that.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: symmetrical panel and backup |
| From: | "Berck E. Nash" <flyboy(at)gmail.com> |
Tim: All good points, and no way I would split primary EFIS displays across
vendors. The 3-screen 10" G3X touch system really does, I think, start to
push the issue of it being possible to have the backup you want and the
primary displays that you want. The 3 screen G3X just isn't going to leave
enough room for something like the GRT-mini as a backup, which leaves me
struggling a bit with the tradeoffs. I think the 3 screens are probably
worth it for the primary use case, as a GRT-mini just takes up space
without providing anything useful as long as the primary works. A 3rd G3X
is going to be enormously useful every day, but I'm just not sure what to
do as a backup in that case, short of deciding that 3 G3X's are probably
good enough. And they probably are, but I keep going back to what happened
to the F-22 when I envision software failures:
http://www.dailytech.com/Lockheeds+F22+Raptor+Gets+Zapped+by+International+Date+Line/article6225.htm
Looking around at modern spam cans (Cessna 350, Mooney Acclaim, SR-22) ,
they all seem to be going with the 3 round gauges as backups...
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Tim Olson wrote:
>
> The one thing I'd note is that when planning an EFIS system, yes,
> there are times when it may be nice to have more than one
> manufacturer in the panel for those primary gauges.
> But, don't fall victim to going too far with that.
> I would spend as much as you need to get your primary system
> fully up to par and integrated. Then just add the 2nd system
> as a more stand-alone device. The issue you will run into
> sometimes is panel space. Don't sacrifice too much of your
> panel space of what you want for the primary just to give it
> to backups. And don't do something like pick one EFIS brand
> for one side and one for the other side. You'll never be
> as happy with how it all integrates. This isn't saying you
> SHOULDN'T have backups or varied vendors, but just saying
> not to short your primary for the purpose of having a bigger
> backup. You can have all the backup you need without
> all that much space taken up.
> Tim
>
>
> On 5/29/2015 11:59 AM, Berck E. Nash wrote:
>
>> Those old airliners may be ancient, but they're also very redundant.
>> All the transport category aircraft I've ever flown have at least three
>> fully independent sources of attitude information, at least two
>> completely separate pitot-static systems with two air data computers,
>> three altimeters, three air speed indicators... Sure, they may have no
>> glass screens, and I flew plenty of turboprops across the country full
>> of passengers using nothing but VOR/DME for navigation (often without an
>> operable autopilot), but they were all designed so no single system
>> failure on any of those planes would prove to be a major event.
>>
>> I don't think I need the same level of redundancy in my RV-10, but I
>> really do want something like the GRT mini (or even 3 round dials) in
>> case the primary systems glitch. And I've seen enough bugs in the
>> software and electronics of airliners (which are built and tested to
>> much higher standards than whatever I'll be putting in my RV-10) to make
>> me want options.
>>
>> I know people do it all the time, but I'm just not comfortable flying
>> IMC where the failure of a single vacuum pump can leave me shooting an
>> approach with a turn coordinator and a whiskey compass. Sure, I trained
>> for it; I would probably survive, but part of the reason for building my
>> own plane is so that I can affordably have a little more redundancy than
>> that.
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: symmetrical panel and backup |
Looking over this thread it seems to me that it might be worthwhile defining
the objectives before looking at solution sets.
For a flat screen approach I want:
- Devices that integrate for capability
- Devices that do not rely on any single input
- Two displays in the event that one dies, each from an independent power
feed
- Each display can perform any function
- Two independent ADAHRS modules (or similar capability)
- Enough redundancy in power to the panel that a single failure will not
turn everything dark (e.g. no Avionics Master switch, no single master relay
to the battery or multiple batteries feeding a common buss, etc.)
There are a boatload of ways to achieve the above objectives, some more
complex (and costly) than others. To Tim's point however, start off with
what you want for normal operations then see what it can/can't do for any
single failure mode that you can think of for the whole system. For the
things you find unacceptable design in a back up. The rest are managed.
I have two 10" displays, an analog airspeed and altimeter, two ADAHRS
modules, a second radio and two selectable ways to power each device. A
loss of any single component will support continued, but perhaps reduced
capability IFR flight. Example of a managed risk is if the Garmin 650 craps
out (as it already has) then I lose my certified IFR WAAS GPS and NAV. I'd
be relying on the EFIS standalone GPS system so not legal for IFR but
perfectly fine for getting me on the ground - after I do the required report
to ATC.
Carl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 2:45 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: symmetrical panel and backup
The one thing I'd note is that when planning an EFIS system, yes, there are
times when it may be nice to have more than one manufacturer in the panel
for those primary gauges.
But, don't fall victim to going too far with that.
I would spend as much as you need to get your primary system fully up to par
and integrated. Then just add the 2nd system as a more stand-alone device.
The issue you will run into sometimes is panel space. Don't sacrifice too
much of your panel space of what you want for the primary just to give it to
backups. And don't do something like pick one EFIS brand for one side and
one for the other side. You'll never be as happy with how it all
integrates. This isn't saying you SHOULDN'T have backups or varied vendors,
but just saying not to short your primary for the purpose of having a bigger
backup. You can have all the backup you need without all that much space
taken up.
Tim
On 5/29/2015 11:59 AM, Berck E. Nash wrote:
> Those old airliners may be ancient, but they're also very redundant.
> All the transport category aircraft I've ever flown have at least
> three fully independent sources of attitude information, at least two
> completely separate pitot-static systems with two air data computers,
> three altimeters, three air speed indicators... Sure, they may have
> no glass screens, and I flew plenty of turboprops across the country
> full of passengers using nothing but VOR/DME for navigation (often
> without an operable autopilot), but they were all designed so no
> single system failure on any of those planes would prove to be a major
event.
>
> I don't think I need the same level of redundancy in my RV-10, but I
> really do want something like the GRT mini (or even 3 round dials) in
> case the primary systems glitch. And I've seen enough bugs in the
> software and electronics of airliners (which are built and tested to
> much higher standards than whatever I'll be putting in my RV-10) to
> make me want options.
>
> I know people do it all the time, but I'm just not comfortable flying
> IMC where the failure of a single vacuum pump can leave me shooting an
> approach with a turn coordinator and a whiskey compass. Sure, I
> trained for it; I would probably survive, but part of the reason for
> building my own plane is so that I can affordably have a little more
> redundancy than that.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: symmetrical panel and backup |
Yeah, you added some good info. I'll expound on a couple more points.
First, and this may seem like an attack but it's not, and it may
seem like I'm biased because I'm a "don't have" guy, but I'm not.
But... I'm just not in the camp that thinks bigger glass is better.
At a certain point it just takes up more space. I have 3 screens
and they give PLENTY of visibility, for the pilot, to all 3
of them, and they are maybe what, 1/3 the size of the big 10" ones?
Much easier to fit in the panel that way and much easier to have
*effective* backups. And by that I mean not where you have to
have a backup instrument down by your fuel valve to be able to
fit one in. I think Garmin had it right with the original
G3X screens, personally. Those would be easy to fit into any
RV10 panel and have 3 screens.
But one very important addition I think is that if you are going for
a real complete backup solution, don't forget some of the details.
On my flight this last week, I had to do VTF for the ILS, and I
not only had my NAV1 used by my EFIS for displaying the ILS on the
EFIS, but I set NAV2 up as well, since it had been a while that
I did a real ILS (not for practice) and especially in low conditions.
I wanted that cross check with my Nav2. But what made it even
POSSIBLE is that I had a CDI in my panel. I know almost nobody
that seems to install a CDI anymore. But, it was a welcome
instrument on that approach. If you want to have a Nav2 and have
it be useable, you need at least a device that can display that
info. In my RV-14 panel I just didn't have the room, so I
won't have a CDI. That's Ok, I also won't have a NAV2. But that
really changes my abilities in some situations. When I was picking
through my approaches I could do, looking between 2 airports I
was going to be near, there was only one ILS, and I don't
remember for sure this detail but I don't think that there were
ANY other approaches at either airport that could bring you
lower than 300 or 400'. Ceilings were just below 300. GPS is
great, but at many airports you may not get the low approach
capability that you'd have with an ILS. So equip as appropriate.
Now in a backup situation, in my RV-14, if I lost my NAV,
I'd have been stuck and had to go somewhere else...and with 300'
ceilings there isn't much available. Time to hike it to another
airport maybe 30-45 minutes away.
Anyway, EFIS's are great, but don't overlook the other devices is
my main point. A Dynon/GRT/Blue Mountain/Whatever may be a good
backup to a point. But it may not give you everything. Or, if you
have 2 NAV radios, it may be that you want a mini-efis that can
display the CDI on it too. Just so many things to think about.
I was personally *considering* using a ipad with the Levil AHRS
as a backup instrument in the RV-14...but the caveat is that if
I depart on any flight where I may need it, I would have it
ready and running the whole flight. I'm not sure sure it's
a great backup for a whole panel, but it's all I had real good
space for other than what round gauges supply. And for that
matter, it's probably all I'd need. The comment about most
production planes using round gauges is a good one. They
go with those because they are a backup...and don't need to
be full featured. But your flight style will change if you
should be using them.
Tim
On 5/29/2015 2:32 PM, Carl Froehlich wrote:
>
> Looking over this thread it seems to me that it might be worthwhile defining
> the objectives before looking at solution sets.
>
> For a flat screen approach I want:
> - Devices that integrate for capability
> - Devices that do not rely on any single input
> - Two displays in the event that one dies, each from an independent power
> feed
> - Each display can perform any function
> - Two independent ADAHRS modules (or similar capability)
> - Enough redundancy in power to the panel that a single failure will not
> turn everything dark (e.g. no Avionics Master switch, no single master relay
> to the battery or multiple batteries feeding a common buss, etc.)
>
> There are a boatload of ways to achieve the above objectives, some more
> complex (and costly) than others. To Tim's point however, start off with
> what you want for normal operations then see what it can/can't do for any
> single failure mode that you can think of for the whole system. For the
> things you find unacceptable design in a back up. The rest are managed.
>
> I have two 10" displays, an analog airspeed and altimeter, two ADAHRS
> modules, a second radio and two selectable ways to power each device. A
> loss of any single component will support continued, but perhaps reduced
> capability IFR flight. Example of a managed risk is if the Garmin 650 craps
> out (as it already has) then I lose my certified IFR WAAS GPS and NAV. I'd
> be relying on the EFIS standalone GPS system so not legal for IFR but
> perfectly fine for getting me on the ground - after I do the required report
> to ATC.
>
> Carl
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: symmetrical panel and backup |
| From: | "Berck E. Nash" <flyboy(at)gmail.com> |
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Tim Olson wrote:
>
> First, and this may seem like an attack but it's not, and it may
> seem like I'm biased because I'm a "don't have" guy, but I'm not.
> But... I'm just not in the camp that thinks bigger glass is better.
Interesting point. I'd just assumed from looking at them at OSH, that
flying behind giant screens would be a much more pleasant experience. But
I've zero personal experience flying with large screens, so I don't know.
Have you flown anything with big screens? The small garmins have always
looked way too cluttered to me, and some bigger screens seems to make that
better. Personally, the only glass I've spent any time behind is the
collins pro line 4 in the CRJ, which has laughably small CRT displays by
today's standards. I never thought they seemed small, but there were 6 of
them (you can really only see the 2 in front of you and the 2 in the
center), and collins doesn't have the same cluttered look that Garmin does.
If I'd been forced to have the engine instruments share with the MFD, I do
think the screens would be way too small.
I want a plane that's comfortable to fly from either seat, as I'm likely to
spend a lot of time with two pilots up front. (I'm also going to be doing
instrument instruction with my build partner, and I'm somewhat greedy about
wanting my own display over in the right seat.) I'd been thinking that a
single 10" display in front of each pilot would be plenty, but the part
that bothers me about that is a screen in front of the seat you're not
sitting in is just too far away if one goes dark. Which means, do you
switch seats, or crane your neck? A center screen would solve that problem.
The G3X Touch is also available with 7" screens, and 3 of those would
certainly be good enough, and leave plenty of room for backups..... but 3
bigger screens seems even better.
I've still got well over a year before I have to start filling a panel
(just starting on the fuel tanks now), but in the meantime I'm anxiously
looking at what's out there.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: symmetrical panel and backup |
| From: | "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu> |
My setup has a GRT 6.5" screen centered on tbe left seat, then the avionics, then
a second 6.5" screen, so this last one is offset to the left for someone in
the right seat. Easy for the left seat to use. I did it this way so the engine
instruments, normally on screen 2, are in the same place as on the 182 I flew
for many years, so it seems natural to me.
I have given instrument instruction, in actual, in someone else's -10, who had
a similar set up. I had no problem looking across to the pilot's PFD; everything
was quite readable.
re Tim and CDIs: I quite agree. I routinely do not use the GRT's primary PFD page.
Instead, I split it with an electronic HSI. On an ILS the main CDI is showing
localizer deviation, while an RMI needle shows the SL30's multiplexed VOR,
for cross fixes, missed approach, whatever you need on a no-gps approach. If
everything goes bad and I'm reduced to my battery powered D-6 and a hand held
Sporty's VOR (so old that it just shows digital to/from bearings) I've found (under
the hood) that this works quite well. The trick is to almost close your
eyes and imagine the bearing as a needle on an ADF, and fly the approach as if
it were an NDB. Of course, that presumes that you can fly NDB approaches!
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442781#442781
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: symmetrical panel and backup |
| From: | "Rocketman1988" <Rocketman(at)etczone.com> |
"... don't think I need the same level of redundancy in my RV-10, but I really
do want something like the GRT mini..."
Exactly. I am current;y looking at an AFS EFIS with the GRT Mini backup. Seems
like a good compromise. If the weather is so bad that I need triple redundant
systems, then I will probably just delay a bit...or go on the airlines...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442808#442808
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "rvdave" <rv610dave(at)gmail.com> |
The quick build kit I have, the previous builder installed two Archer NAV antennae
one in each wingtip I'm assuming I can combine these signals using a combiner
or reverse splitter . Will I be fighting a ghosting/corrupting signal
using two signal sources?
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 for sale
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442813#442813
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: NAV splitter |
| From: | "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu> |
This absolutely does not work.
You will make a directional antenna which works very well in some directions and
very poorly in others. Which direction depends on the exact lengths of the coax.
One Archer works just fine, with some reduction in sensitivity when looking thru
the airframe direction.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442814#442814
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Carl Froehlich <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: NAV splitter |
Nope - will not work. The impedance match will be all wrong.
Use one antenna for NAV, keep the other antenna as a backup comm - say for a handheld.
It would work a boat load better than the handheld's rubber ducky antenna.
I made this antenna out of same scrap aluminum and small pieces of fiberglass.
I used an antenna tester to tune (most of these antennas are so far out that
just slapping one in tends to produce disappointing results). 100nmi plus VOR
range at altitude.
Carl
> On May 30, 2015, at 2:45 PM, Bob Turner wrote:
>
>
> This absolutely does not work.
> You will make a directional antenna which works very well in some directions
and very poorly in others. Which direction depends on the exact lengths of the
coax.
> One Archer works just fine, with some reduction in sensitivity when looking thru
the airframe direction.
>
> --------
> Bob Turner
> RV-10 QB
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442814#442814
>
>
>
The quick build kit I have, the previous builder installed two Archer NAV antennae
one in each wingtip I'm assuming I can combine these signals using a combiner
or reverse splitter . Will I be fighting a ghosting/corrupting signal
using two signal sources?
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 for sale
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> |
| Subject: | Re: NAV splitter |
You can use one to Fe achieve Nav radio if you have two, but you don't want to
try to combine them.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
352-427-0285
jesse(at)saintaviation.com
Sent from my iPad
> On May 30, 2015, at 1:31 PM, rvdave wrote:
>
>
> The quick build kit I have, the previous builder installed two Archer NAV antennae
one in each wingtip I'm assuming I can combine these signals using a
combiner or reverse splitter . Will I be fighting a ghosting/corrupting signal
using two signal sources?
>
> --------
> Dave Ford
> RV6 for sale
> RV10 building
> Cadillac, MI
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442813#442813
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: NAV splitter |
| From: | "rvdave" <rv610dave(at)gmail.com> |
Exactly what I need to know, thanks.
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 for sale
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442818#442818
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carl.froehlich(at)verizon.net> |
The RV-10 is down for inspection, right wing replacement and to fix an
annoying nose gear shimmy. Reading the achieves it was clear that wheel
balancing is a major step to solving nose gear shimmy. I already have
the
solid nose gear axle mod.
Finding a wheel balancer proved hard outside of dropping $400 for one
from
Aircraft Tool Supply. Tom Doran made this one with some very nice
bearings
he had laying around and milled Delrin spacers (he is magic with a mill
machine). It is amazingly sensitive. I tried balancing the nose wheel
in
the past with just a horizontal rod to find the heavy spot. Using this
rig
I found my previous attempt to be way off. I ended up using six =BC oz
stick
on weights to get the nose wheel to balance. The mains used about three
weights each.
Carl
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
| Subject: | Re: symmetrical panel and backup |
What you choose for backup may be dependent on whether your pitot/static
lines run to ADAHRS in rear of plane (dynon Skyview) or if it is at the
instrument panel. The GRT mini requires hook up to those lines, and you
get benefit of actual airspeed and altitude. Dynon D1/D2 needs no
hookup, but only gives you GPS derived ground speed and GPS track and
GPS altitude.
All better than nothing, but not quite as good as barometric and pitot
derived numbers.
Huge change in redundancy from when I was flying in non-radar areas with
venturi powered gyros and electric turn coordinator, with single
nav/com/ils and single ADF.
That gave some blood pressure rise when the venturis iced up. Key word
is when, not if. Fortunately the old AN gyros would operate down to less
than 1" of vacuum, so you got warning when the vacuum started trending
below 4"
All with one alternator and one battery for electrons.
On 5/30/2015 8:39 AM, Rocketman1988 wrote:
>
> "... don't think I need the same level of redundancy in my RV-10, but I really
do want something like the GRT mini..."
>
> Exactly. I am current;y looking at an AFS EFIS with the GRT Mini backup. Seems
like a good compromise. If the weather is so bad that I need triple redundant
systems, then I will probably just delay a bit...or go on the airlines...
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442808#442808
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com> |
| Subject: | Re: NAV splitter |
I have installed two, because I have two nav/coms. If you only have one,
perhaps with an ILS, you could use the second one for the GS. As others
have said, you can't combine, and if you split for GS or second nav you
lose about 50% of the signal strength.
On 5/30/2015 12:53 PM, rvdave wrote:
>
> Exactly what I need to know, thanks.
>
> --------
> Dave Ford
> RV6 for sale
> RV10 building
> Cadillac, MI
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442818#442818
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: NAV splitter |
| From: | "Bob Turner" <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu> |
If your nav radio has separate inputs for vor and GS you can hook up one antenna
to each and save tbe cost of a splitter.
If you want to use it for a com radio you'll want to bend it up as much as possible,
and trim about 10% of the length off the end. It won't be great but as Carl
said it's better than the rubber duckie.
For techies: the impedance match is fine, the issue is that depending on the direction
of the signal, there will be phase mis-matches. When the phase difference
is 180 degrees you'll get no signal.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442822#442822
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wheel balancer |
| From: | "bruceflys" <bruceflys(at)comcast.net> |
This works well for me: http://www.marcparnes.com/Honda_Motorcycle_Wheel_Balancer.htm
I made a vertical "U" of 2X6 wood to support the ends.
--------
RV-10 UC
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442831#442831
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Clifford <davidsoutpost(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel balancer |
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel balancer |
I have that same one. It works very well. I'm really surprised how friction free
their bearings are. It's real hard to get the balance perfect almost because
if you're a perfectionist you can spend a lot of time getting it real precise.
But once you get it real close its easy to know you did a good job. The
price is right too. Highly recommended. Been using mine now for almost 9 years
I think. Glad they're still making them because it looks like it's a one man
business.
Tim
> On May 31, 2015, at 7:12 AM, bruceflys wrote:
>
>
> This works well for me: http://www.marcparnes.com/Honda_Motorcycle_Wheel_Balancer.htm
>
> I made a vertical "U" of 2X6 wood to support the ends.
>
> --------
> RV-10 UC
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442831#442831
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wheel balancer |
| From: | Les Kearney <kearney(at)shaw.ca> |
Hi Bruce
Which kit did you get? Was it the UNIV kit?
Cheers
Les
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 31, 2015, at 8:12 AM, bruceflys wrote:
>
>
> This works well for me: http://www.marcparnes.com/Honda_Motorcycle_Wheel_Balancer.htm
>
> I made a vertical "U" of 2X6 wood to support the ends.
>
> --------
> RV-10 UC
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442831#442831
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris Hukill" <cjhukill(at)cox.net> |
If you have dual AHDRS with auto monitoring, and dual screens, the need
for a tie breaker is debatable . My dual Skyview provides this
capability as do other EFIS systems. You may not realize this, but you
already have a tie breaker, as they call them in jets, if you have an
IPhone 5 or newer. Use the compass ap that came with the phone, and go
to the second page of the ap, and therein is a very accurate pitch and
roll display, and it won=99t tumble. I have played around with it
, maneuvering in my RV8 and have no problem returning to strait and
level and maintaining that, using that as a sole reference, (under a
hood with a safety pilot). You don=99t get airspeed or altitude
info, but target pitch and power is all you need to fly anyway while you
sort things out. Turn the IPhone's auto lock feature to
=9Cnever=9D and velcro the phone to the panel. If you fly
lots of hard IFR, then go ahead and get the real deal in your panel. If
all you fly is light IFR, like getting above a marine overcast on
departure or down thru one with an approach, then dual AHDRS with auto
monitoring, and the IPhone tie breaker may be all you need. There are
probably better aviation aps that use the ADRS chip in the IPhone or
IPad or whatever devise you have with you , but you may already have all
the tie breaker that you need. Just saying....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bruce Breckenridge <bbreckenridge(at)gmail.com> |
I just grabbed my wife's iPhone 6 Plus - amazing! Can't wait to put it in
the plane and try it out. Thanks!
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Chris Hukill wrote:
> If you have dual AHDRS with auto monitoring, and dual screens, the need
> for a tie breaker is debatable . My dual Skyview provides this capability
> as do other EFIS systems. You may not realize this, but you already have
a
> tie breaker, as they call them in jets, if you have an IPhone 5 or newer.
> Use the compass ap that came with the phone, and go to the second page of
> the ap, and therein is a very accurate pitch and roll display, and it won
=99t
> tumble. I have played around with it , maneuvering in my RV8 and have no
> problem returning to strait and level and maintaining that, using that as
a
> sole reference, (under a hood with a safety pilot). You don=99t get
airspeed
> or altitude info, but target pitch and power is all you need to fly anywa
y
> while you sort things out. Turn the IPhone's auto lock feature to
=9Cnever=9D
> and velcro the phone to the panel. If you fly lots of hard IFR, then go
> ahead and get the real deal in your panel. If all you fly is light IFR,
> like getting above a marine overcast on departure or down thru one with a
n
> approach, then dual AHDRS with auto monitoring, and the IPhone tie breake
r
> may be all you need. There are probably better aviation aps that use the
> ADRS chip in the IPhone or IPad or whatever devise you have with you , bu
t
> you may already have all the tie breaker that you need. Just saying....
>
> *
>
===========
onics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
===========
===========
om/contribution>
===========
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ed Kranz <ed.kranz(at)gmail.com> |
That is cool.
One thing to be careful of in that app. After 45 degrees in either roll
direction, it "flips" to think you're holding the phone in portrait vs
landscape. My guess is that the aviation based apps like this would be much
better.
On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Bruce Breckenridge <
bbreckenridge(at)gmail.com> wrote:
> I just grabbed my wife's iPhone 6 Plus - amazing! Can't wait to put it i
n
> the plane and try it out. Thanks!
>
>
> On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Chris Hukill wrote:
>
>> If you have dual AHDRS with auto monitoring, and dual screens, the need
>> for a tie breaker is debatable . My dual Skyview provides this capabilit
y
>> as do other EFIS systems. You may not realize this, but you already have
a
>> tie breaker, as they call them in jets, if you have an IPhone 5 or newer
.
>> Use the compass ap that came with the phone, and go to the second page o
f
>> the ap, and therein is a very accurate pitch and roll display, and it wo
n=99t
>> tumble. I have played around with it , maneuvering in my RV8 and have no
>> problem returning to strait and level and maintaining that, using that a
s a
>> sole reference, (under a hood with a safety pilot). You don=99t ge
t airspeed
>> or altitude info, but target pitch and power is all you need to fly anyw
ay
>> while you sort things out. Turn the IPhone's auto lock feature to
=9Cnever=9D
>> and velcro the phone to the panel. If you fly lots of hard IFR, then go
>> ahead and get the real deal in your panel. If all you fly is light IFR,
>> like getting above a marine overcast on departure or down thru one with
an
>> approach, then dual AHDRS with auto monitoring, and the IPhone tie break
er
>> may be all you need. There are probably better aviation aps that use the
>> ADRS chip in the IPhone or IPad or whatever devise you have with you , b
ut
>> you may already have all the tie breaker that you need. Just saying....
>>
>> *
>>
>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> tp://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>> *
>>
>>
> *
>
===========
onics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
===========
===========
om/contribution>
===========
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com> |
I just tried this. That's where his key words of setting your phone to rota
tion lock is important. I always keep my phone rotate locked and it worked p
roperly that way, but yes, if you turn that off it could be very problematic
.
I have a gyro app that is much prettier than the compass version, so I doubt
I'll use compass, but it is nice to know its there.
Tim
> On May 31, 2015, at 11:36 AM, Ed Kranz wrote:
>
> That is cool.
>
> One thing to be careful of in that app. After 45 degrees in either roll di
rection, it "flips" to think you're holding the phone in portrait vs landsca
pe. My guess is that the aviation based apps like this would be much better.
>
>> On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Bruce Breckenridge wrote:
>> I just grabbed my wife's iPhone 6 Plus - amazing! Can't wait to put it i
n the plane and try it out. Thanks!
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Chris Hukill wrote:
>>> If you have dual AHDRS with auto monitoring, and dual screens, the need f
or a tie breaker is debatable . My dual Skyview provides this capability as d
o other EFIS systems. You may not realize this, but you already have a tie b
reaker, as they call them in jets, if you have an IPhone 5 or newer. Use th
e compass ap that came with the phone, and go to the second page of the ap, a
nd therein is a very accurate pitch and roll display, and it won=99t t
umble. I have played around with it , maneuvering in my RV8 and have no prob
lem returning to strait and level and maintaining that, using that as a sole
reference, (under a hood with a safety pilot). You don=99t get airspe
ed or altitude info, but target pitch and power is all you need to fly anywa
y while you sort things out. Turn the IPhone's auto lock feature to =9C
never=9D and velcro the phone to the panel. If you fly lots of hard IFR
, then go ahead and get the real deal in your panel. If all you fly is light
IFR, like getting above a marine overcast on departure or down thru one wit
h an approach, then dual AHDRS with auto monitoring, and the IPhone tie brea
ker may be all you need. There are probably better aviation aps that use the
ADRS chip in the IPhone or IPad or whatever devise you have with you , but y
ou may already have all the tie breaker that you need. Just saying....
>>>
>>>
>>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> tp://forums.matronics.com
>>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> tp://forums.matronics.com
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>
>
>
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jae Chang <jc-matronics_rv10(at)jline.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wheel balancer |
http://www.harborfreight.com/motorcycle-wheel-balancing-stand-98488.html
Here is what ive used in the past. The axle sizes are slightly
different. I remember it taking me a while to finally get the nose wheel
balanced correctly. If the plane sits for too long, i will notice it
bounce now and then.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wheel balancer |
| From: | "bruceflys" <bruceflys(at)comcast.net> |
Sorry, Les, but I can't answer. When I bought mine a few years ago, it was offered
specifically as an aircraft wheel balancer on a different website. I am
unable to relocate it.
--------
RV-10 UC
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442871#442871
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lenny Iszak" <lenard(at)rapiddecision.com> |
I would not rely on that as a tiebreaker. Once you get into a turn the centripetal
forces start messing with the attitude solution much like your own senses,
which we all know better not to rely on. The steeper the turn the bigger the
error.
To correct for the centripetal error you need to factor in speed, and I don't think
the compass app does that, but I could be wrong, I never tried the app in
flight.
Lenny
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=442915#442915
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris Hukill" <cjhukill(at)cox.net> |
Lenny
The purpose of a "tie breaker" is to verify which of your attitude
indications are correct when two systems are in disagreement. It is mostly
redundant information in modern EFIS systems as the EFIS will compare it's
attitude information with pitot- static and GPS data and figure out which
one is in error from that. It then alerts the pilot with it's determination
of which attitude system is in fault. The pilot only has to verify that
recommendation and the EFIS will run both screens on the good AHDRS . This
all happens in a few seconds. The pilot should have a means of verifying the
attitude information during those few seconds, hence a tie breaker. Any
precession error or centripetal forces aren't a factor as your only
interested in the displayed attitude of the tie breaker during the short
period of time that your verifying the EFIS's solution to the displayed
error. In VMC you could just look out the window, or in the bad old days you
could try to fly with needle ball and airspeed. Heck we had to be able to
fly an approach using only an airspeed indicator, altimeter, and an electric
turn and bank even with all of it's precession errors. A modern standby
suite should be able to give you all the info a needle, ball and airspeed
gives you, but the panel real estate dedicated to those old dials would be
better spent on a second screen with it's second, monitored AHDRS. Your
IPhone velcroed to the panel with it's attitude info displayed could then be
your tiebreaker.
Chris
Subject: RV10-List: Re: tie breaker
From: "Lenny Iszak" <lenard(at)rapiddecision.com>
I would not rely on that as a tiebreaker. Once you get into a turn the
centripetal
forces start messing with the attitude solution much like your own senses,
which we all know better not to rely on. The steeper the turn the bigger the
error.
To correct for the centripetal error you need to factor in speed, and I
don't think
the compass app does that, but I could be wrong, I never tried the app in
flight.
Lenny
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David" <dlm34077(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | throttle quadrant cable length |
The current CT Q-49.5 is 49.5 inches long. I seem to recall that another
slightly longer length has been used on the IO540 installation on the
quadrant 10s. Any comments?
David McNeill
N46007 900+
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Saylor <saylor.dave(at)gmail.com> |
I'm sad to hear that Jeremy Monnett, CEO of Sonex, died in a crash at
Oshkosh along with another Sonex employee, Mike Clark.
I worked with Jeremy on the FAA 51% rule committee a few years ago. He was
a great guy and very dedicated to experimental aviation.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/aircraft-manufacturers-ceo-mechanic-killed-plane-crash-31498294
--Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: throttle quadrant cable length |
A slightly longer length for all three cables is better than what is
supplied.
I originally installed the standard cables on a standard IO-540
installation with the quadrant. I'm not sure there is a 'standard'
quadrant installation but my quadrant seemed to end up where everyone
elses has. It worked but at year 2 all three cables had frayed in spots
and there was some melting of the plastic covering in spots on 1 or two.
Per advice gleaned from the boards, I replaced all three with custom
cables from California Push-Pull. Same spec as Vans supplied except the
plastic coating was higher temp I believe. The cables I ordered,
installed and am flying with are 176-VTT-2-47, -51, and -72.
In retrospect, I wish I had gone with those in the original build.
On 6/3/2015 11:23 AM, David wrote:
>
> The current CT Q-49.5 is 49.5 inches long. I seem to recall that
> another slightly longer length has been used on the IO540 installation
> on the quadrant 10s. Any comments?
>
> David McNeill
>
> N46007 900+
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Avast logo
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phillip Perry <philperry9(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Missing step? 18-5 Fuel Tanks |
Just curious. I'm trimming up my wing root fairings and am running into a problem.
Going back, I think I've found it.
Attached is a photo of 18-5. They call for a dimple in the T-1005B (upper) shim.
But the plans don't call for dimples in the T-1005C (lower) shim.
The skin is dimpled (as called for under in the wing attach section), but this
substructure isn't.
Am I missing something in assuming these bottom shims need to be dimpled too?
Or is there something I don't know/understand.
Phil
Sent from my iPhone
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Phillip Perry <philperry9(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Missing step? 18-5 Fuel Tanks |
With photo this time.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 3, 2015, at 8:41 PM, Phillip Perry wrote:
>
> Just curious. I'm trimming up my wing root fairings and am running into a
problem. Going back, I think I've found it.
>
> Attached is a photo of 18-5. They call for a dimple in the T-1005B (upper
) shim. But the plans don't call for dimples in the T-1005C (lower) shim.
>
> The skin is dimpled (as called for under in the wing attach section), but t
his substructure isn't.
>
> Am I missing something in assuming these bottom shims need to be dimpled t
oo? Or is there something I don't know/understand.
>
> Phil
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone