Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:28 AM - Re: Primary and B/U Alt Fields on Master Bus (Bud K)
2. 06:58 AM - opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin 430 (Charlie England)
3. 07:25 AM - Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin 430 (Kelly McMullen)
4. 07:44 AM - Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin 430 (Art Zemon)
5. 08:20 AM - Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin 430 (Charlie England)
6. 08:29 AM - Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin 430 (don van santen)
7. 08:45 AM - Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin 430 (rd2)
8. 10:16 AM - Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin 430 (Sebastien)
9. 10:21 AM - Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin 430 (James Quinn)
10. 11:13 AM - Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin 430 (Charlie England)
11. 11:23 AM - Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin 430 (Charlie England)
12. 11:30 AM - Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin 430 (Charlie England)
13. 12:11 PM - Contactor Questions (A Lumley)
14. 02:45 PM - Re: Re: Primary and B/U Alt Fields on Master Bus (Art Zemon)
15. 04:58 PM - Re: Contactor Questions (user9253)
16. 08:26 PM - Re: Re: Primary and B/U Alt Fields on Master Bus (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
17. 08:31 PM - Re: Contactor Questions (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
18. 08:36 PM - Re: Primary and B/U Alt Fields on Master Bus (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
19. 08:43 PM - Re: Contactor Questions (A Lumley)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Primary and B/U Alt Fields on Master Bus |
Art,
Yes I could upgrade to a larger, pad mounted alternator but would rather use what
I have. I recognize the added expense and complexity of going the e-bus route.
And yes, that pitot heat power is over half of my e-bus load. I don't see
myself continuing to fly in IMC with a primary system failure and would head
to VMC ASAP.
Since your B/U alternator has the capacity, did you implement the e-bus architecture
or put everything on a main bus?
--------
Bud
RV-4
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=501892#501892
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin 430 |
Have any of you IFR flyers flown both the 430 & 480, and can give a
comparison of the two? I'm toying with the idea of adding an approach
certified GPS to the RV, but I'm 'not yet rated', so I truly don't know
what I don't know. I do know that the 430 is far more common, and the 480
seems to sell for less money in the used market. I've heard only two
opinions comparing the two; diametrically opposed. Each said their choice
was far easier to use in an IFR environment. Not an adequate sample size,
so I'd like to get a bit more of a consensus.
Thanks,
Charlie
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin |
430
Given the install costs, whether in time/effort, or in paying someone to
install, seems to me a bad idea to consider the 480 that is no longer
supported, the 430 if not upgraded to WAAS, which is barely supported,
and even the WAAS unit that is likely to go unsupported within the next
5 years. I made the choice to go to a 650 about 7-8 years ago for that
reason, and they are ever closer to becoming boat anchors.
So, to me the discussion about ease of use between the Apollo designed
units and the Garmin is greatly overshadowed by their expected useful
life. Both original units are over 20 yrs old, using computer chips not
made for 20 yrs, and even the upgraded WAAS units are already 13 yrs
old. It seems like very few avionics with chips and displays that wear
out are supported much past 20 yrs and some much less.
On 5/13/2021 6:54 AM, Charlie England wrote:
> Have any of you IFR flyers flown both the 430 & 480, and can give a
> comparison of the two? I'm toying with the idea of adding an approach
> certified GPS to the RV, but I'm 'not yet rated', so I truly don't know
> what I don't know. I do know that the 430 is far more common,and the
> 480 seems to sell for less money in the used market. I've heard only two
> opinions comparing the two; diametrically opposed. Each said their
> choice was far easier to use in an IFR environment. Not an adequate
> sample size, so I'd like to get a bit more of a consensus.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
>
>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin |
430
Charlie,
I put a Garmin GPS175 into my plane to get the IFR GPS. Check out that unit.
-- Art Z.
Sent from my phone. Please excuse brevity and bizarre typos.
On Thu, May 13, 2021, 9:11 AM Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com> wrote:
> Have any of you IFR flyers flown both the 430 & 480, and can give a
> comparison of the two? I'm toying with the idea of adding an approach
> certified GPS to the RV, but I'm 'not yet rated', so I truly don't know
> what I don't know. I do know that the 430 is far more common, and the 480
> seems to sell for less money in the used market. I've heard only two
> opinions comparing the two; diametrically opposed. Each said their choice
> was far easier to use in an IFR environment. Not an adequate sample size,
> so I'd like to get a bit more of a consensus.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
> <#m_6093873194344501072_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin |
430
Hi Art,
Thanks; I'm aware of the 175. I'm sure it's a fine unit, but it ain't
cheap, considering that it only has one function. Both the 430 & 480
include a comm radio and an alternate (backup) means of nav/approach.
GPS outages here in the South are, if not frequent, common enough that I
wouldn't want to be dependent solely on GPS in IFR conditions.
Charlie
On 5/13/2021 9:42 AM, Art Zemon wrote:
> Charlie,
>
> I put a Garmin GPS175 into my plane to get the IFR GPS. Check out that
> unit.
>
> -- Art Z.
>
> Sent from my phone. Please excuse brevity and bizarre typos.
>
> On Thu, May 13, 2021, 9:11 AM Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com
> <mailto:ceengland7@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Have any of you IFR flyers flown both the 430 & 480, and can give
> a comparison of the two? I'm toying with the idea of adding an
> approach certified GPS to the RV, but I'm 'not yet rated', so I
> truly don't know what I don't know. I do know that the 430 is far
> more common,and the 480 seems to sell for less money in the used
> market. I've heard only two opinions comparing the two;
> diametrically opposed. Each said their choice was far easier to
> use in an IFR environment. Not an adequate sample size, so I'd
> like to get a bit more of a consensus.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
>
>
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin |
430
I flew the 480 for six years in my RV7 and the 430 inmany spam cans. Am now
flying a Avidyne 540 in the RV. I rank the three as follows 540 best, 480
close second, 430 very distant third. YMMV.
On Thu, May 13, 2021, 07:02 Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com> wrote:
> Have any of you IFR flyers flown both the 430 & 480, and can give a
> comparison of the two? I'm toying with the idea of adding an approach
> certified GPS to the RV, but I'm 'not yet rated', so I truly don't know
> what I don't know. I do know that the 430 is far more common, and the 480
> seems to sell for less money in the used market. I've heard only two
> opinions comparing the two; diametrically opposed. Each said their choice
> was far easier to use in an IFR environment. Not an adequate sample size,
> so I'd like to get a bit more of a consensus.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
> <#m_-8396110847717575666_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin |
430
Or its bigger brother GNX375, which adds an ADS-B (Out and In) x-ponder to the
GPS175. Of course with GNX375 you get 2 equipment pieces out, if one fails and
needs to go to the shop.
I have found the GPS175/GNX375 leaning curve not steep and the touchscreen fine,
even for aging eyes, despite the small dimensions.Rumen----- Original Message
-----
From: Art Zemon <art@zemon.name>
Sent: Thu, 13 May 2021 10:42:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin
430
Charlie,
I put a Garmin GPS175 into my plane to get the IFR GPS. Check out that unit.
-- Art Z.
Sent from my phone. Please excuse brevity and bizarre typos.
On Thu, May 13, 2021, 9:11 AM Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com> wrote:
Have any of you IFR flyers flown both the 430 & 480, and can give a comparison
of the two? I'm toying with the idea of adding an approach certified GPS to the
RV, but
I'm 'not yet rated', so I truly don't know what I don't know. I do know that the
430 is far more common, and the 480 seems to sell for less money in the used
market. I've heard only two opinions comparing the two; diametrically opposed.
Each said their choice was far easier to use in an IFR environment. Not an adequate
sample size, so I'd like to get a bit more of a consensus.
Thanks,
Charlie
Virus-free. www.avast.com
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin |
430
Charlie,
Your diametrically opposed opinions are both correct. The 480 has more
functionality and is more complex but once you learn how to use it, it is
easier for complex IFR. The 430 is much more simple and intuitive so much
easier to pick up and use for simple flights and IFR procedures.
The common problem with both is lack of support. The 430W is still
supported by Garmin ... today. It might not be tomorrow.
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 7:47 AM Art Zemon <art@zemon.name> wrote:
> Charlie,
>
> I put a Garmin GPS175 into my plane to get the IFR GPS. Check out that
> unit.
>
> -- Art Z.
>
> Sent from my phone. Please excuse brevity and bizarre typos.
>
> On Thu, May 13, 2021, 9:11 AM Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Have any of you IFR flyers flown both the 430 & 480, and can give a
>> comparison of the two? I'm toying with the idea of adding an approach
>> certified GPS to the RV, but I'm 'not yet rated', so I truly don't know
>> what I don't know. I do know that the 430 is far more common, and the 480
>> seems to sell for less money in the used market. I've heard only two
>> opinions comparing the two; diametrically opposed. Each said their choice
>> was far easier to use in an IFR environment. Not an adequate sample size,
>> so I'd like to get a bit more of a consensus.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>>
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free.
>> www.avast.com
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
>> <#m_5489770090366040310_m_-7514915172799506573_m_6093873194344501072_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin |
430
Don,
Garmin dropped all maint/repair support for the 480 last year. May explain
why costs are lower.
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 10:48 AM rd2 <rd2@dejazzd.com> wrote:
> Or its bigger brother GNX375, which adds an ADS-B (Out and In) x-ponder to
> the GPS175. Of course with GNX375 you get 2 equipment pieces out, if one
> fails and needs to go to the shop.
> I have found the GPS175/GNX375 leaning curve not steep and the touchscreen
> fine, even for aging eyes, despite the small dimensions.
> Rumen
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Art Zemon <art@zemon.name>
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Thu, 13 May 2021 10:42:40 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs
> Garmin 430
>
> Charlie,
>
> I put a Garmin GPS175 into my plane to get the IFR GPS. Check out that
> unit.
>
> -- Art Z.
>
> Sent from my phone. Please excuse brevity and bizarre typos.
>
> On Thu, May 13, 2021, 9:11 AM Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Have any of you IFR flyers flown both the 430 & 480, and can give a
>> comparison of the two? I'm toying with the idea of adding an approach
>> certified GPS to the RV, but
>>
>> I'm 'not yet rated', so I truly don't know what I don't know. I do know
>> that the 430 is far more common, and the 480 seems to sell for less money
>> in the used market. I've heard only two opinions comparing the two;
>> diametrically opposed. Each said their choice was far easier to use in an
>> IFR environment. Not an adequate sample size, so I'd like to get a bit more
>> of a consensus.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>>
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
>> Virus-free. www.avast.com
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
>>
>> <#m_-226767829949529104_m_6093873194344501072_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin |
430
Again, serious money vs features/abilities. I already have a Garmin 327
in my flying -6, and in my -7 project. I just added ADSB out/in to the
-6 via the uAvionics EchoUAT *with an approved position source* for
~$1400. I can't make sense of paying 2 or 3 times that for the 'gubmnt'
to track non-stop my every move.
I'm not yet instrument rated; may never be. I don't fly enough to
justify the rather extreme expense of the new tech. I'm looking for an
affordable option that would enable training, if I decide to pursue the
rating.
Charlie
On 5/13/2021 10:44 AM, rd2 wrote:
> Or its bigger brother GNX375, which adds an ADS-B (Out and In)
> x-ponder to the GPS175. Of course with GNX375 you get 2 equipment
> pieces out, if one fails and needs to go to the shop.
> I have found the GPS175/GNX375 leaning curve not steep and the
> touchscreen fine, even for aging eyes, despite the small dimensions.
> Rumen
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Art Zemon <art@zemon.name>
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Thu, 13 May 2021 10:42:40 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480
> vs Garmin 430
>
> Charlie,
>
> I put a Garmin GPS175 into my plane to get the IFR GPS. Check out that
> unit.
>
> -- Art Z.
>
> Sent from my phone. Please excuse brevity and bizarre typos.
>
> On Thu, May 13, 2021, 9:11 AM Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com
> <mailto:ceengland7@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Have any of you IFR flyers flown both the 430 & 480, and can give
> a comparison of the two? I'm toying with the idea of adding an
> approach certified GPS to the RV, but
>
> I'm 'not yet rated', so I truly don't know what I don't know. I do
> know that the 430 is far more common,and the 480 seems to sell
> for less money in the used market. I've heard only two opinions
> comparing the two; diametrically opposed. Each said their choice
> was far easier to use in an IFR environment. Not an adequate
> sample size, so I'd like to get a bit more of a consensus.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
>
>
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin |
430
*That* is a useful data point. I've been expecting for some time that
support to disappear for the 430, but I suppose that there are just too
many in service for Garmin to take the heat over dropping support.
Of course, at the rates they are charging, they've just about stopped
supporting *anything* they make.
It's time for the FAA to correct their rules for IFR GPS, and align them
with the rules for VHF nav & ILS (at least in homebuilts). If it works,
it's legal. That would open the door for us to use open-sourced
georeferenced plates in GRT, etc EFIS, just like is already legal with
non-TSO nav/ILS radios feeding the EFIS display. If a $500 GPS puck is
good enough for ADSB position, why isn't it good enough for IFR nav &
approaches (with current plates, of course)?
Charlie
On 5/13/2021 12:20 PM, James Quinn wrote:
> Don,
> Garmin dropped all maint/repair support for the 480 last year. May
> explain why costs are lower.
>
> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 10:48 AM rd2 <rd2@dejazzd.com
> <mailto:rd2@dejazzd.com>> wrote:
>
> Or its bigger brother GNX375, which adds an ADS-B (Out and In)
> x-ponder to the GPS175. Of course with GNX375 you get 2 equipment
> pieces out, if one fails and needs to go to the shop.
> I have found the GPS175/GNX375 leaning curve not steep and the
> touchscreen fine, even for aging eyes, despite the small dimensions.
> Rumen
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Art Zemon <art@zemon.name <mailto:art@zemon.name>>
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> <mailto:aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thu, 13 May 2021 10:42:40 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin
> GNS480 vs Garmin 430
>
> Charlie,
>
> I put a Garmin GPS175 into my plane to get the IFR GPS. Check out
> that unit.
>
> -- Art Z.
>
> Sent from my phone. Please excuse brevity and bizarre typos.
>
> On Thu, May 13, 2021, 9:11 AM Charlie England
> <ceengland7@gmail.com <mailto:ceengland7@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Have any of you IFR flyers flown both the 430 & 480, and can
> give a comparison of the two? I'm toying with the idea of
> adding an approach certified GPS to the RV, but
>
> I'm 'not yet rated', so I truly don't know what I don't know.
> I do know that the 430 is far more common,and the 480 seems
> to sell for less money in the used market. I've heard only two
> opinions comparing the two; diametrically opposed. Each said
> their choice was far easier to use in an IFR environment. Not
> an adequate sample size, so I'd like to get a bit more of a
> consensus.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
>
>
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: opinions needed: Apollo/Garmin GNS480 vs Garmin |
430
That would likely explain the disparity of opinion. Also sounds like I'd
be better off with the 430, since I'll never (if ever) be a contributor
to controllers' heavy IFR work load. :-)
On 5/13/2021 12:15 PM, Sebastien wrote:
> Charlie,
>
> Your diametrically opposed opinions are both correct. The 480 has more
> functionality and is more complex but once you learn how to use it, it
> is easier for complex IFR. The 430 is much more simple and intuitive
> so much easier to pick up and use for simple flights and IFR procedures.
>
> The common problem with both is lack of support. The 430W is still
> supported by Garmin ... today. It might not be tomorrow.
>
>
> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 7:47 AM Art Zemon <art@zemon.name
> <mailto:art@zemon.name>> wrote:
>
> Charlie,
>
> I put a Garmin GPS175 into my plane to get the IFR GPS. Check out
> that unit.
>
> -- Art Z.
>
> Sent from my phone. Please excuse brevity and bizarre typos.
>
> On Thu, May 13, 2021, 9:11 AM Charlie England
> <ceengland7@gmail.com <mailto:ceengland7@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Have any of you IFR flyers flown both the 430 & 480, and can
> give a comparison of the two? I'm toying with the idea of
> adding an approach certified GPS to the RV, but I'm 'not yet
> rated', so I truly don't know what I don't know. I do know
> that the 430 is far more common,and the 480 seems to sell for
> less money in the used market. I've heard only two opinions
> comparing the two; diametrically opposed. Each said their
> choice was far easier to use in an IFR environment. Not an
> adequate sample size, so I'd like to get a bit more of a
> consensus.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charlie
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
>
>
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Contactor Questions |
Good afternoon,
I'm working on a schematic for my RV-10 based on the Z-101 architecture and have
come up with a couple questions about contactors...
First, about the starter contactor. The Z-101 shows a single conductor connecting
the contactor to the starter with a jumper at the starter. I found another
discussion from 2015 with an alternative arrangement (attached) for permanent
magnet starters. I'm planning to use a B&C starter. Should I be using the extra
wire & diode?
Second, I'm adding an external power outlet per Z-31A. I've made sense of most
of this drawing but I'm unsure why there is no diode shown across the coil in
the Z-31A diagram? The B&C continuous contactor includes an external diode already.
Should it be removed?
Thanks for taking the time to read my perhaps basic questions!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=501905#501905
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/facdd36_721_432.jpg
http://forums.matronics.com//files/z101_697.png
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Primary and B/U Alt Fields on Master Bus |
Bud,
I put everything on one bus except a couple of tiny loads which are
attached to a small always-on bus. Here are all of my wiring diagrams
<https://drive.google.com/file/d/12DhiCdTSuUNvlsmBK027yQ1mDDy5eRUl/view?usp=sharing>.
The file
engine.pdf
<https://drive.google.com/file/d/12DhiCdTSuUNvlsmBK027yQ1mDDy5eRUl/view?usp=drive_web>
is the one that has the bus architecture and the alternators.
Cheers,
-- Art Z.
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 7:40 AM Bud K <budkeil@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Art,
> Yes I could upgrade to a larger, pad mounted alternator but would rather
> use what I have. I recognize the added expense and complexity of going the
> e-bus route. And yes, that pitot heat power is over half of my e-bus
> load. I don't see myself continuing to fly in IMC with a primary system
> failure and would head to VMC ASAP.
>
> Since your B/U alternator has the capacity, did you implement the e-bus
> architecture or put everything on a main bus?
>
--
https://CheerfulCurmudgeon.com/
*Friendship is like a stone. A stone has no value, but when you rub two
stones together properly, sparks of fire emerge. *
Rabbi Mordechai of Lechovitz
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Contactor Questions |
Z-31A does not require a diode because the over-voltage module provides arc suppression.
No, do not remove the B&C installed diode. It does not hurt anything.
--------
Joe Gores
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=501909#501909
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Primary and B/U Alt Fields on Master Bus |
At 04:43 PM 5/13/2021, you wrote:
>Bud,
>
>I put everything on one bus except a couple of
>tiny loads which are attached to a small
>always-on bus. Here are
><https://drive.google.com/file/d/12DhiCdTSuUNvlsmBK027yQ1mDDy5eRUl/view?usp
=sharing>all
>of my wiring diagrams. The file=C2
>
><https://drive.google.com/file/d/12DhiCdTSuUNvlsmBK027yQ1mDDy5eRUl/view?usp
=drive_web>
>[]
><https://drive.google.com/file/d/12DhiCdTSuUNvlsmBK027yQ1mDDy5eRUl/view?usp
=drive_web>=C2
>engine.pdf
>=C2 is the one that has the bus architecture and the alternators.
Figure Z-13 shows the optimal application of
the diminutive SD-8 into a two alternator
system. On of the design goals was to
eliminate the battery contactor load of
approx 0.6 to 0.8 amps when flying on
battery only. Eliminating that load was
also useful for maximizing available
energy from the SD-8.
If you're not going to have an e-bus,
the tie both alternators to the main bus
as depicted in Z-12.
Have you done a load analysis of the
easily anticipated failure conditions
for formulate your plan-b
flight configuration?
Bob . . .
Un impeachable logic: George Carlin asked, "If black boxes
survive crashes, why don't they make the whole airplane
out of that stuff?"
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Contactor Questions |
At 02:10 PM 5/13/2021, you wrote:
><andrew.lumley@sympatico.ca>
>
>Good afternoon,
>
>I'm working on a schematic for my RV-10 based on the Z-101
>architecture and have come up with a couple questions about contactors...
>
>First, about the starter contactor. The Z-101 shows a single
>conductor connecting the contactor to the starter with a jumper at
>the starter. I found another discussion from 2015 with an
>alternative arrangement (attached) for permanent magnet starters.
>I'm planning to use a B&C starter. Should I be using the extra wire & diode?
By 'extra wire' are you talking about the jumper from
contactor "I" terminal to the starter's "S"
terminal? Yes, wire as shown and including
the diode is a good thing. The starter contactor
from B*C will include a built in diode on its
coil.
>Second, I'm adding an external power outlet per Z-31A. I've made
>sense of most of this drawing but I'm unsure why there is no diode
>shown across the coil in the Z-31A diagram? The B&C continuous
>contactor includes an external diode already. Should it be removed?
Wouldn't hurt but not necessary assuming you
can get a B*C crowbar ov module. Are those
available? I though those were out of production.
>Thanks for taking the time to read my perhaps basic questions!
That's what this organization is here for
my friend . . . folks that already know everything
don't need us!
Bob . . .
Un impeachable logic: George Carlin asked, "If black boxes
survive crashes, why don't they make the whole airplane
out of that stuff?"
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Primary and B/U Alt Fields on Master Bus |
At 09:19 PM 5/12/2021, you wrote:
>
>I am planning an avionics upgrade on an RV-4. The airplane
>currently has and SD-8 back up dynamo as well as an internally
>regulated alternator. I plan on installing a Garmin GPS175 and
>heated pitot and a Dynon Skyview to allow me to fly IFR. I am
>planning to rearchitect the electrical system as part of the
>upgrade. I plan on implementing an Essential Bus architecture
>similar to figure Z-12, dual alternator, single battery.
>
>Question #1. Why are both the primary and B/U alternator fields
>powered by the master bus? Wouldn't it be prudent to power at least
>the B/U alternator field from the E-bus in case you have to shut
>down the Master bus, thereby disabling both alternators? I know that
>the SD-8 can be 'self exciting', however, if it is not, the B/U
>alternator would be shut down.
>
>Question #2. Shouldn't the B/U alternator B lead go the battery side
>of the Battery Contactor as opposed to master bus side? Wouldn't
>that charge the battery partially offsetting the power draw from E-bus devices.
My apologies, I got some replies mistaken
for queries. Scratch my recent post to the
thread.
If you're running an SD-8 aux alternator,
you need to be looking at Z-13.
Bob . . .
Un impeachable logic: George Carlin asked, "If black boxes
survive crashes, why don't they make the whole airplane
out of that stuff?"
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Contactor Questions |
Thanks to you both for the quick feedback. I'll include the jumper from the contactor
"I" terminal to the starter with the extra diode.
You are correct that B&C no longer sells the crowbar module so I was going to build
my own from your crowbar schematics.
Thanks again, I'm sure I'll have lots more questions...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=501914#501914
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|