Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:30 AM - Re: Full Panel (David Joyce)
2. 02:55 AM - Re: Full Panel (Frans Veldman)
3. 03:47 AM - Re: Full Panel (Frans Veldman)
4. 03:49 AM - AW: Full Panel (uvtreith)
5. 05:20 AM - Re: AW: Full Panel (rampil)
6. 05:27 AM - Re: Full Panel (craig bastin)
7. 06:04 AM - Re: Full Panel (Frans Veldman)
8. 08:49 AM - Re: Re: Altimeter settings /configuration UK derogation (Raimo Toivio)
9. 10:56 AM - Re: Full Panel (Paul McAllister)
10. 11:58 AM - Re: Altimeter settings /configuration UK derogation (rampil)
11. 01:05 PM - Re: Re: Altimeter settings /configuration UK derogation (Raimo Toivio)
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 |
|
Tony, The thought occurs to me to wonder why anyone would want a full width
panel these days? The only possible reason I can think of is to house a
1960s array of steam aged instruments with a separate dial for everything,
both navigational and engine monitoring. But with such great EFIS & engine
management systems available now which save space & weight and allow you to
spend much less time with your head in the cockpit while still having enough
capacity to safely fly IMC, why not keep the undoubted benefits of a parcel
shelf?
Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Renshaw" <tonyrenshaw268@optusnet.com.au>
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 10:53 PM
Subject: Europa-List: Full Panel
> <tonyrenshaw268@optusnet.com.au>
>
> Gidday,
> I am all over the shop, to coin a phrase, but in the mean time I am trying
> to gather thoughts on a panel. Now I have seen Bob Borger's full width
> panel on EuropaOwners, and others, but am unsure if these have all been
> individually made, or whether Europa now sells them. There is a Tri Gear
> Instrument which I reckon still has the parcel shelf, and then there is a
> Blank Panel Full Depth Avionics Panel. I reckon neither of these are
> probably full "width" panels, so what I really want is some pictures
> somewhere of how guys have done this mod, or in fact whether someone sells
> a completed full "width" panel?
> Reg
> Tony Renshaw
> Sydney Aussie
>
>
>
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 |
|
On 03/23/2010 11:53 PM, Tony Renshaw wrote:
> Gidday, I am all over the shop, to coin a phrase, but in the mean
> time I am trying to gather thoughts on a panel. Now I have seen Bob
> Borger's full width panel on EuropaOwners, and others, but am unsure
> if these have all been individually made, or whether Europa now sells
> them. There is a Tri Gear Instrument which I reckon still has the
> parcel shelf, and then there is a Blank Panel Full Depth Avionics
> Panel. I reckon neither of these are probably full "width" panels, so
> what I really want is some pictures somewhere of how guys have done
> this mod, or in fact whether someone sells a completed full "width"
> panel?
You might want to take a look at our build page,
www.privatepilots.nl/europa/building.htm
We have a full width panel, and made this ourselves.
It is just a matter of modelling. We built a frame from wood, and then
some layer of clay on top of it to model the glade shield. A few layers
of bid over it, digg out all the stuff once it is cured, and presto, you
have an instrument panel.
Frans
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 |
|
On 03/24/2010 08:14 AM, David Joyce wrote:
> Tony, The thought occurs to me to wonder why anyone would want a full
> width panel these days?
I would actually reverse the question: Why would anyone trade panel
space for a silly picknick tray? ;-)
I can give you a few reasons:
1) Versatility. There are very few (if any?) "we can do it all"-EFIS &
engine management systems which are very good in *everything* they are
supposed to do. With separate instruments, you can simply pick the
instruments that best suit you. For instance, I have a dual electrical
system, is there any glass panel thing that can cope with that and
display two battery monitors? With separate instruments, you don't have
to worry about these things.
If I want to replace an instrument later on, because there is a new and
better system, I can just do so, and am not bound to the EFIS I'm using
(which manufacturer might have gone out of business by then).
2) Reliability. Most solid state gyro systems are simply lying. They
don't display the real attitude, but compute that from a number of
sources and play a nice game of averaging, which seems to work well as
long as you fly VFR. But fly uncoordinated for 15 minutes or so, with
one wing lower than the other, and most of these systems quickly adapt
to it and start to tell that you are actually flying straight and level.
3) Redundancy. Apart from the obvious facts that with these systems you
put all your eggs in one basket, again the attitude indicator is the
main danger. Instead of being an independant instrument, it computes the
attitude from a number of sources, like static pressure for instance.
(Gravity sensors have too much drift, so the instrument calibrates
itself with other sources: "If static pressure increases, we are
descending, so let's display a nose down attitude.") Now, if you loose
your static port in IMC conditions, with conventional instruments you
loose a few instruments, but the attitude indicator (horizon) can help
you out. Not so with a glass panel, because if the static port is gone,
the horizon is gone too. Same with the pitot.
And of course, if you hit the display in turbulence, you don't loose a
single instrument, but everything you have. I wouldn't dare to fly in
IMC with such a thing.
4) Readability. Steam instruments are easy to read. You get used to a
certain needle position, and even the smallest deviation, or vibration
will attract your attention. With a digital representation the
resolution is often to course. A numerical output is then better, but
numerical outputs are horrible for the brain, consuming much more
resources to interpret, compared to just reading the angle of a needle.
Then of course we all know how easily computers lie to us. If the
display shows some parameter climbing in the red line, it is always a
question whether it is real, or just a sensor or data cable problem,
interference, or whatever.
Here in the Netherlands (and probably a lot of other countries as well)
we are required to have a TSO'd altimeter, airspeed indicator, and a
compass. So, we already need three separate instruments of the standard
six pack, besides the EFIS. Now add a separate gyro instrument to the
stack to partly solve the redundancy problem. Now also add an autopilot
to it, which comes with a turn indicator built in. What are we actually
saving with our EFIS? Just the vertical speed indicator!
I did the math while I was designing my panel, and discovered that with
any EFIS, I would actually add weight (considering my desire for
redundancy), add costs, loose some flexibility, and decided that it is
not worth it.
I also decided that I don't need a picknick tray. My lunch can wait
until I'm done flying. Packages can be put in the bagage bay. The
picknick tray is not the best place to keep loose stuff, and put
anything white or shiny in it and it affects the vision. And then I also
just disliked it. I'm building an airplane, and it should look like an
airplane. ;-)
Keeping the picknick tray would simply mean, even with an EFIS, that I
would have to scramble for panel space and probably trade off a few
desirable features.
Frans
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 |
|
Hi Tony,
Europa Aircraft is selling some different pre-cut panels, also for EFIS
installation.
Please see the attached drawings.
All the Best from Germany
Bruno Reith
-----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
Von: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] Im Auftrag von Tony
Renshaw
Gesendet: Dienstag, 23. M=E4rz 2010 23:53
An: europa-list@matronics.com
Betreff: Europa-List: Full Panel
<tonyrenshaw268@optusnet.com.au>
Gidday,
I am all over the shop, to coin a phrase, but in the mean time I am
trying
to gather thoughts on a panel. Now I have seen Bob Borger's full width
panel
on EuropaOwners, and others, but am unsure if these have all been
individually made, or whether Europa now sells them. There is a Tri Gear
Instrument which I reckon still has the parcel shelf, and then there is
a
Blank Panel Full Depth Avionics Panel. I reckon neither of these are
probably full "width" panels, so what I really want is some pictures
somewhere of how guys have done this mod, or in fact whether someone
sells a
completed full "width" panel?
Reg
Tony Renshaw
Sydney Aussie
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: AW: Full Panel |
The full width panels, like the one I use, were made for
FlightCrafters in Zephyrhills, FL. Try calling Russ Lepre
to see if he can still have them made, or you can try one
your self. It basically just requires a big foam plug for the
laminating over on the right side.
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=291537#291537
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 |
|
Frans, I can understand your concerns with regard to EFIS panels, and what
you have
said no doubt was true at the start of efis development, these day most efis
panels
continually cross check solid state gyro information with both GPS and
pressure infomation
to assess the accuracy of the data being received, and the gyros themselves
are now capable
of detecting and correcting drift automatically, and yes most panels can
handle multiple inputs
for almost anything in or on your A/C. FWIW, I did a work out on weights
about a year ago
and the efis panel with two comm radios, Nav radio, Transponder, came in
about 15KG lighter
than a gyro steam gauge setup and a small GPS unit (giving the same basic
functionality on both
panels)
craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Frans
Veldman
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 8:33 PM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Full Panel
On 03/24/2010 08:14 AM, David Joyce wrote:
> Tony, The thought occurs to me to wonder why anyone would want a full
> width panel these days?
I would actually reverse the question: Why would anyone trade panel
space for a silly picknick tray? ;-)
I can give you a few reasons:
1) Versatility. There are very few (if any?) "we can do it all"-EFIS &
engine management systems which are very good in *everything* they are
supposed to do. With separate instruments, you can simply pick the
instruments that best suit you. For instance, I have a dual electrical
system, is there any glass panel thing that can cope with that and
display two battery monitors? With separate instruments, you don't have
to worry about these things.
If I want to replace an instrument later on, because there is a new and
better system, I can just do so, and am not bound to the EFIS I'm using
(which manufacturer might have gone out of business by then).
2) Reliability. Most solid state gyro systems are simply lying. They
don't display the real attitude, but compute that from a number of
sources and play a nice game of averaging, which seems to work well as
long as you fly VFR. But fly uncoordinated for 15 minutes or so, with
one wing lower than the other, and most of these systems quickly adapt
to it and start to tell that you are actually flying straight and level.
3) Redundancy. Apart from the obvious facts that with these systems you
put all your eggs in one basket, again the attitude indicator is the
main danger. Instead of being an independant instrument, it computes the
attitude from a number of sources, like static pressure for instance.
(Gravity sensors have too much drift, so the instrument calibrates
itself with other sources: "If static pressure increases, we are
descending, so let's display a nose down attitude.") Now, if you loose
your static port in IMC conditions, with conventional instruments you
loose a few instruments, but the attitude indicator (horizon) can help
you out. Not so with a glass panel, because if the static port is gone,
the horizon is gone too. Same with the pitot.
And of course, if you hit the display in turbulence, you don't loose a
single instrument, but everything you have. I wouldn't dare to fly in
IMC with such a thing.
4) Readability. Steam instruments are easy to read. You get used to a
certain needle position, and even the smallest deviation, or vibration
will attract your attention. With a digital representation the
resolution is often to course. A numerical output is then better, but
numerical outputs are horrible for the brain, consuming much more
resources to interpret, compared to just reading the angle of a needle.
Then of course we all know how easily computers lie to us. If the
display shows some parameter climbing in the red line, it is always a
question whether it is real, or just a sensor or data cable problem,
interference, or whatever.
Here in the Netherlands (and probably a lot of other countries as well)
we are required to have a TSO'd altimeter, airspeed indicator, and a
compass. So, we already need three separate instruments of the standard
six pack, besides the EFIS. Now add a separate gyro instrument to the
stack to partly solve the redundancy problem. Now also add an autopilot
to it, which comes with a turn indicator built in. What are we actually
saving with our EFIS? Just the vertical speed indicator!
I did the math while I was designing my panel, and discovered that with
any EFIS, I would actually add weight (considering my desire for
redundancy), add costs, loose some flexibility, and decided that it is
not worth it.
I also decided that I don't need a picknick tray. My lunch can wait
until I'm done flying. Packages can be put in the bagage bay. The
picknick tray is not the best place to keep loose stuff, and put
anything white or shiny in it and it affects the vision. And then I also
just disliked it. I'm building an airplane, and it should look like an
airplane. ;-)
Keeping the picknick tray would simply mean, even with an EFIS, that I
would have to scramble for panel space and probably trade off a few
desirable features.
Frans
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
19:44:00
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 |
|
On 03/24/2010 01:25 PM, craig bastin wrote:
> Frans, I can understand your concerns with regard to EFIS panels, and what
> you have
> said no doubt was true at the start of efis development, these day most efis
> panels
> continually cross check solid state gyro information with both GPS and
> pressure infomation
> to assess the accuracy of the data being received, and the gyros themselves
> are now capable
> of detecting and correcting drift automatically,
This is what I was saying. Take the GPS and pressure information away
from these EFIS panels, and the solid state gyro will go south very soon!
So, just when you need the horizon most (with a clogged pressure system)
it will fail to help you out.
> FWIW, I did a work out on weights
> about a year ago
> and the efis panel with two comm radios, Nav radio, Transponder, came in
> about 15KG lighter
> than a gyro steam gauge setup and a small GPS unit (giving the same basic
> functionality on both
> panels)
Hmm, all the instruments in my full size panel together weigh less than
15 Kg's. To get to a weight difference of 15Kg you must really do your
best to find the heaviest instruments you can find. For a standard
sixpack, each of the instruments must weigh more than 2,5Kg's! I have
some difficulty to believe that these figures are accurate.
Anyway, I was just clearing up why someone would prefer more panel space
over a picknick tray. It is not my intention to start a EFIS versus
steam war. ;-) Everything is somehow a compromise.
Frans
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: Altimeter settings /configuration UK derogation |
>
> Ah!
>
> A perfect example of how a common language divides the UK and the
> US!!!
>
> If even Englishmen in the UK can't understand it, what are those Brussellonians
> up to?
There are many Finnish people...
Raimo
do not archive
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 |
|
Hi all,
I would like to add my experience. I find the parcel tray is very little
value, at least for the type of flying I have been doing. The challenge I
have with the factory panel is more around internal volume, in particular
its depth rather than the external area.
I had a tough time getting the Apollo GX60 comm/gps and SL70 transponder to
fit without hitting the firewall. Garmin 430's can be tough to fit in as
well.
To Frans point, fabricating your own isn't a big task. I recall Bob
Jacobson (no longer a Europa owner) reporting that is "home fabricated"
panel weighed 2 lbs less than the factory panel and he didn't use carbon
fiber. He also included internal cooling ducts and a couple of other neat
features.
As to weight savings. When I removed my "6 pack", pump, hoses and regulator
I weighted them and they came in at 14 pounds. My EFIS and backup
instruments came in at 6 pounds so I had a net saving of 8 pounds.
My primary instruments are a pair of GRT EFIS with a single AHRS. These
display my engine parameters as well.
My back up's are 2.25" instruments:
- Trutrack single axis auto pilot
- Trutrack ADI
- Winter ASI
- Mechanical Altimeter
- Dual / alternative buss electrical buss
I have about 300 hours on this new panel configuration including quite a bit
of IFR time in actual conditions. I have not had a problem with the EFIS
display getting its self confused, however I do keep my back up instruments
in my scan, and my auto pilot does not rely on any external system to keep
straight and level.
If I was to do this over again. I would only have a separate autopilot and
my primary + back up instruments would be a pair of EFIS with dual AHRS and
dual pitot / static systems. Although it is a bunch of work to make the two
separate systems agree, this setup offers a high level of redundancy.
So, I guess this is a long winded way of saying that I would build my own
panel, try not to stuff it too full of goodies and that I am fine with "All
glass" if sufficient thought is applied to failure & effects analysis.
Cheers, Paul
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: Altimeter settings /configuration UK derogation |
Hi Raimo,
Are you saying that Finnish people understand this legal gibberish??
I have a number of friends in Helsinki and while they usually understand
me, I don't believe they would handle BrusX any better than I.
Ira
--------
Ira N224XS
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=291579#291579
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: Altimeter settings /configuration UK derogation |
Hi Ira
>
> Are you saying that Finnish people understand this legal gibberish??
no, I was trying to say "this legal gibberish" must have been produced by some
Finnish bureaucrat in Bryssel...
They are very talent doing that, they can even produce Finnish text that nobody
understands here. Ask your friends in Helsinki...
Raimo from Finland
OH-XRT #417
please archive!
----- Original Message -----
From: "rampil" <ira.rampil@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 8:57 PM
Subject: Europa-List: Re: Altimeter settings /configuration UK derogation
>
> Hi Raimo,
>
> Are you saying that Finnish people understand this legal gibberish??
>
> I have a number of friends in Helsinki and while they usually understand
> me, I don't believe they would handle BrusX any better than I.
>
> Ira
>
> --------
> Ira N224XS
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=291579#291579
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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! --
|