Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:05 AM - Re: Rear Heat Vent Tube (Mark Ritter)
2. 04:13 AM - Trueflight 190The Perfect Panel (Russell Daves)
3. 05:22 AM - Re: Trueflight 190 (Jesse Saint)
4. 06:02 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Tim Olson)
5. 06:02 AM - Traffic ()
6. 06:19 AM - Page 29-14 (Fred Williams, M.D.)
7. 06:38 AM - Re: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy (Don Fanning)
8. 07:04 AM - Re: Traffic (Jesse Saint)
9. 07:10 AM - Re: Page 29-14 (PJ Seipel)
10. 07:39 AM - Re: Traffic (Tim Olson)
11. 07:39 AM - Re: Traffic (Mark Ritter)
12. 07:58 AM - Re: Page 29-14 (Vern W. Smith)
13. 08:00 AM - Re: Traffic (Phillips, Jack)
14. 08:01 AM - Re: Traffic (Jesse Saint)
15. 08:15 AM - Re: Traffic (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
16. 08:20 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (MauleDriver)
17. 08:22 AM - Re: Traffic (GRANSCOTT@aol.com)
18. 08:32 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane (William Curtis)
19. 08:42 AM - Re: Traffic (Doerr, Ray R [NTK])
20. 08:46 AM - Re: Traffic (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
21. 08:57 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (GRANSCOTT@aol.com)
22. 09:15 AM - Re: Traffic (Scott Schmidt)
23. 09:24 AM - Re: FS: MT Prop Gov (William Curtis)
24. 09:24 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (John Jessen)
25. 09:40 AM - Re: Traffic (rtitsworth)
26. 09:42 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane (Jesse Saint)
27. 09:52 AM - Page 29-14 (Fred Williams, M.D.)
28. 09:54 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Vern W. Smith)
29. 09:56 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (MauleDriver)
30. 09:57 AM - Re: FS: MT Prop Gov (Jesse Saint)
31. 10:00 AM - Re: Trueflight 190The Perfect Panel (John W. Cox)
32. 10:11 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (John W. Cox)
33. 10:11 AM - Re: FS: MT Prop Gov (John W. Cox)
34. 10:33 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (MauleDriver)
35. 10:35 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane (Tim Olson)
36. 10:35 AM - Re: Trueflight 190The Perfect Panel (KiloPapa)
37. 10:48 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane (Tim Olson)
38. 11:39 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane (Deems Davis)
39. 11:39 AM - Re: Traffic (Darton Steve)
40. 11:40 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Vern W. Smith)
41. 11:49 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Tim Olson)
42. 11:59 AM - Re: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane (William Curtis)
43. 12:06 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane (Tim Olson)
44. 12:09 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (John W. Cox)
45. 12:13 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane (John W. Cox)
46. 12:21 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (William Curtis)
47. 12:22 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (John W. Cox)
48. 12:39 PM - [Fw: Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W] (MauleDriver)
49. 12:43 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (John W. Cox)
50. 12:51 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane (Randy)
51. 01:03 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (MauleDriver)
52. 01:03 PM - Re: FS: MT Prop Gov (John Dunne)
53. 01:03 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Rene Felker)
54. 01:05 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (MauleDriver)
55. 01:06 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Sean Stephens)
56. 01:11 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane (William Curtis)
57. 01:25 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Bobby J. Hughes)
58. 01:26 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Tim Olson)
59. 01:27 PM - Re: how to decide - was GNS-430W (John W. Cox)
60. 01:29 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (William Curtis)
61. 01:32 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (John Jessen)
62. 01:34 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane (Tim Lewis)
63. 01:47 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane (Tim Olson)
64. 01:57 PM - Pneumatic Rivet Squeezer (Steve Stella)
65. 02:03 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Sean Stephens)
66. 02:18 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane (John Jessen)
67. 02:26 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (John W. Cox)
68. 02:43 PM - Re: Pneumatic Rivet Squeezer (Jesse Saint)
69. 02:53 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Rene Felker)
70. 03:09 PM - Re: Trueflight 190The Perfect Panel (GRANSCOTT@aol.com)
71. 03:18 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane (John W. Cox)
72. 04:24 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (orchidman)
73. 04:32 PM - Re: FS: MT Prop Gov (Neal George)
74. 04:57 PM - GPS News Alert (Tim C)
75. 05:00 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Bob Leffler)
76. 05:06 PM - Re: Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Mark Ritter)
77. 05:26 PM - Re: Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (bob.kaufmann)
78. 06:03 PM - Re: Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (linn Walters)
79. 06:37 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Bill Schlatterer)
80. 06:46 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Bill Schlatterer)
81. 07:06 PM - Re: Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Bill Schlatterer)
82. 07:11 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Deems Davis)
83. 07:20 PM - Re: Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Rene)
84. 07:51 PM - Magneto to sparkplug routing (Deems Davis)
85. 08:01 PM - Re: Magneto to sparkplug routing (Deems Davis)
86. 08:09 PM - Re: Magneto to sparkplug routing (Tim Olson)
87. 08:22 PM - Re: Pneumatic Rivet Squeezer (Dave Leikam)
88. 08:31 PM - Re: Magneto to sparkplug routing (Tim Olson)
89. 08:46 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (KiloPapa)
90. 09:19 PM - Re: FS: MT Prop Gov (LessDragProd@aol.com)
91. 10:00 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (orchidman)
92. 10:10 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (John W. Cox)
93. 10:38 PM - Re: Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Tim Olson)
94. 10:43 PM - Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W (Tim Olson)
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: | Rear Heat Vent Tube |
Scott,
Vans told me you needed air going thru the heat muff. I used the "Y"
adapter at the back of the right baffle and ran one scat tube to the heat
muff and one to the cabin for cool air. The scat tube off the rear of the
heat muff is run out the bottom of the cowling.
Mark
N410MR
>From: Scott Schmidt <scottmschmidt@yahoo.com>
>To: RV-10 List <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RV10-List: Rear Heat Vent Tube
>Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 21:07:42 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Does anyone know if I can cover or partially cover the hole in the right
>rear baffle that feeds the rear heat during these summer months or does it
>need air going through the heat muff to keep it cool?
>I would like to cover at least half of it to increase the pressure and
>cooling.
>
>Scott Schmidt
>scottmschmidt@yahoo.com
_________________________________________________________________
PC Magazines 2007 editors choice for best Web mailaward-winning Windows
Live Hotmail.
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: | Trueflight 190The Perfect Panel |
I installed the GRT WX Weather module and wired it to feed all three of
my GRT screens (displayed over the moving map). I love it. On a recent
trip it really helped fly around some really bad weather. I could have
flown around such weather as I was VFR but I would have gone a long way
around instead of picking and choosing my route. ATC (flight following)
asked if I had onboard radar and my response was "Yes that is why I am
now heading due West instead of Northwest" ATC said that a pilot
reported ice at 14000 feet. I feel real sorry for anybody who flew
through the middle of that system on an IFR flight plan.
You can see screen shots of the route I flew through the weather cells
at:
http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sjtabiweather2go5.jpg
http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sjtabiweather1yr4.jpg
http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sjtlbbweather1og4.jpg
The screen shots cover the last part of the flight around the weather.
I wished I had shot a picture when the weather system was directly ahead
of me before I turned west to fly around it. My route was KERV direct
to KLBB but southeast of KSJT I turned west as the weather system was
painted from just west of KSJT TO at least 50 miles east of KDYS. After
turning west and going around KSJT I then fly back Northeast between
KSJT and KBPG and then headed North between KBPG and KSWW. Had I not
had onboard radar I would have flown west probably west of KMAF before
turning back north and then coming into KLBB from the west side (headed
East).
I cannot say enough about how great the customer service is at GRT as
well.
Russ Daves
N710RV - First flight 7/28/06 - 110 hours and counting
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: Trueflight 190 |
We have had the Flight Cheetah in N256H for about 250 hours. It is not as
intuitive as the 396 or 496, but the information it gives you is great. I
have not seen another display of weather that is as useful as
TrueFlight's. The fastest and cheapest flight level page is also very
helpful, so you don't have to try to figure which winds will help the best
or hurt the least. When you load an approach, one button switches back
and forth between the moving map with the overlaid approach and the
approach plate so you can become familiar with the procedure and minimums,
etc. I would not have recommended it a year ago, but since we got the
solid state hard drive it has been very stable. It has a few little
quirks, but for $200 a year for updates on everything (navaids,
approaches, plates, software), it's hard to beat. I haven't looked into
their new stuff recently, but this instrument is great for situational
awareness. Scott, I don't think you'll be disappointed.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
352-427-0285
Scott Schmidt wrote:
> I am actually in the process of purchasing that system. After reading
> about and talking with them I am very impressed with it and I recently
> received a free Samsung Q1 and thought I might as well give it a try. It
> has all the weather that the 496 has plus more, and you can get all the
> approach charts, taxi diagrams, and low IFR charts on it. Your plane can
> overlay on all the charts I just mentioned as well. The also have all the
> IFR approaches loaded into the system so you can fly the approach on the
> moving map. They said within the next couple of week they will have
> forward 3D synthetic vision with HITS. Later this year they will have
> outputs for digital autopilots. For around $2500 for a total system they
> seem pretty cool. www.aviationsafety.com
>
> Weather for my plane is something I have really struggled with over the
> past year. My options have been a Garmin 396 or 496, WSI for the Chelton,
> Grand Rapids XM weather, Anywhere map, True Flight, or just WX WORX.
> They all have their positives and negatives.
>
> Garmin 396 or 496 - Nice package, good support, simple to use, nice
> screen, but is a Garmin and they are expensive to keep current relative to
> the others. From what I hear they shut down guidance when on an approach
> so you don't use it as a primary source (not a big deal). I also like the
> fact that I could take this from the plane, throw it in the car or my
> motorcycle and have dual purposes for it.
>
> WSI for Chelton - By far the most expensive to purchase and monthly
> subscription is a little more. The huge advantage is the fact that I
> don't have to have another piece of equipment in the plane and I can see
> my current flight plan on the screen. But the system is around $5,000 to
> purchase.
>
> Grand Rapids XM Weather - Looks pretty cool and for $1500 it is hard to
> beat. The screen resolution isn't the best but for practical purposes it
> seems like it would do the job. Doesn't have all the screen options that
> the Garmin or others have.
>
> Anywhere map - This is a do-all system with weather, approach charts and
> maps. I have played with this system alot at Oshkosh but I think True
> Flight has a few more features.
>
> WX Worx - Great system if you just need weather, lacks approach charts,
> IFR airways, maps
>
> True Flight - Has just about everything the other systems plus more.
> There are things I don't like about the screen setup, but overall it looks
> pretty complete.
>
> In talking with the them, I had concerns about the hard drive crashing on
> the Samsung like I have heard with the Motion Computing. Apparently, the
> Motion Computing suffers from an overheating issue, not a hard drive
> crashing issue. At the higher altitudes the CPU doesn't have the air
> required to keep the chip cool. They have tested the Samsung to 19,000
> and not had any issues. I don't see flying above that much. I was at
> 15,500 the other day at gross, and it didn't look like I had much climb
> performance left.
>
> This selection is as frustrating as planning the perfect panel. Once I
> get it I will let you know how I like it.
>
> Scott Schmidt
> scottmschmidt@yahoo.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: "GRANSCOTT@aol.com" <GRANSCOTT@aol.com>
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 5:48:34 PM
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
>
>
> has anyone flown the handheld Cheeta system...FL 190 or something like
> that?
>
> P
>
>
> See what's free at AOL.com.
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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Just got this info from another forum. Was a nice thing to
see this a.m. anyway. It's making more sense how it
came about...so now I can see that there's hope for most
of the systems.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
--------------------
Got more details from a CPA forum discussion.
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afs/afs400/afs410/policy_guidance/
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afs/afs400/afs410/policy_guidance/media/AC90-100compliance.xls
http://www8.garmin.com/aviation/type2_loa.jsp
The Excel spreadsheet has the reason for the 480 non-compliance. It
hasn't been applied for, but when it is, it should meet the requirements.
The AOPA letter to the FAA says part 91 is not required to comply with
the AIM and AC.
--------------------------
Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
> Your perfect panel just got less perfect, as FAA moves to establish
> Garmin monopoly:
> FAA policy change restricts many IFR GPS receivers
> GPS receiver
>
> Those older IFR-certified GPS receivers (and some brand-new ones) that
> you've been relying on for years may now be unapproved for flying many
> instrument procedures, thanks to some recent FAA policy changes.
>
> "This doesn't make any sense. In most cases, this is not a safety of
> flight issue," said Randy Kenagy, AOPA senior director of strategic
> planning. "Pilots affected will lose access to approaches and
> published routes unnecessarily."
>
> AOPA has brought the matter to the FAA's attention.
>
> The issue came about in March when the FAA updated avionics compliance
> tables in Advisory Circular 90-100A and made changes to the
> Aeronautical Information Manual. It means that up to 26,000 GPS users
> no longer comply with a 1996 FAA policy that allows GPS to be used in
> lieu of ADF or DME.
>
> Only three GPS models the Garmin 400-, 500-, and G1000-series are
> legal, according to the FAA documents. Other models made by Garmin,
> including the new GNS 480 WAAS receiver, as well as receivers
> manufactured by Chelton, Honeywell, Northstar, and Trimble are listed
> as "noncompliant." See the avionics chart.
>
> Many members have removed ADF and DME navigation equipment from their
> aircraft because of the 1996 policy, and they will no longer have
> access to conventional and precision approaches where the equipment is
> a required element. Complicating matters further, the older GPS boxes
> are prohibited from flying RNAV routes and terminal RNAV procedures.
>
> AOPA told the FAA that all IFR-certified systems should still be
> approved for use in lieu of ADF and DME and for flying T routes and
> certain departure procedures where pilots manually enter the
> waypoints. Except for major metropolitan airports, the use of older
> boxes should not be restricted.
>
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 |
|
To go with your fancy panel, don't forget to get an active traffic
system, so you don't get whacked by somebody while you're both
heads-down looking at the pretty HITS displays.
Avidyne TAS system will display on Garmin, Avidyne, and Chelton
displays, amongst others.
Jeez, and I don't even work there anymore!
P.S. Your life will be easier if you consider this before you install a
headliner, since the top antenna needs a foil ground plane installed . .
.
Cheers,
TDT
Tim Dawson-Townsend
Aurora Flight Sciences
tdt@aurora.aero
617-401-2522
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 |
|
Question:
29-14 step 4: "match drill #30 holes in the lower flange of the
F-1040-L and R Upper Fuse Channels into the WD-1002 L and R upper
Firewall brackets"
Problem: easy to do up until you get to the most forward hole. It is
blocked by the flange of the F-1001 M left side angle and the F-1001D rt
side angle. Same problem goes for the upper most forward hole of the
F-1041 lower fuse channels.
The only way that I can see to be able to drill (and then rivet) is to
a)trim the flange on the F-1001 M and F-1001D 's. _or_ b) Not
drill or put a rivet in that hole.
I'm sure someone else has had to cross this bridge.
Thanks.
Fred Williams
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: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy |
I live in Lynchburg, VA and teach at Liberty University.
Right now, I am at Mountain Air, near Burnsville, NC. through Monday.
Don
On 5/23/07, Randy DeBauw <Randy@abros.com> wrote:
>
> Don, Where are you located? Randy 40006
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Don Fanning
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 23, 2007 1:52 PM
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>
>
> I would like a full set. We can install it this summer when I come down
> for the annual and the ADI install (if it comes out).
>
>
> Don
>
>
> On 5/22/07, *Jesse Saint* <jesse@saintaviation.com> wrote:
>
> I have you on my list for the Rosen Visors. Please reply to this e-mail
> and let me know if you want a full set for $317.97 plus shipping or a half
> set for $168.99. Please include on your e-mail the desired shipping address
> and phone number. I will e-mail an invoice that you can send in with a
> check after I figure out the shipping charges. I should be able to do a
> flat-rate USPS box or something like that. I do accept paypal, but they
> charge a fee, so I would need the fee added to the amount you send.
>
>
> GOD BLESS!
>
>
> Jesse Saint
>
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
>
> jesse@saintaviation.com
>
> www.saintaviation.com
>
> Cell: 352-427-0285
>
> Fax: 815-377-3694
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com]
> *On Behalf Of *Bobby J. Hughes
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 12, 2007 6:50 PM
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* RE: RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>
>
> Jessie,
>
>
> At $200 count me in.
>
>
> Enjoyed our visit at Lockhart.
>
>
> Bobby Hughes
>
> 40116
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Jesse Saint
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 12, 2007 3:08 PM
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* RV10-List: Rosen Sun Visor Group Buy
>
> Sorry for the quality, but I have attached some pictures of our Rosen Sun
> Visor installation. I am getting a quote on our custom mount from a local
> machine shop and am getting a quote from Rosen on a group buy for the
> visors. We tried to find a place on the sides to install a visor, but there
> just isn't a good place to put it that won't block the pilot's vision when
> he isn't using the visor. This is a 3-axis visor, so it can be used to
> block sun from the pilot or copilot's front anywhere in the windshield and
> can also block the pilot's right or copilot's left. Unfortunately we
> couldn't find any way to block the sun from the pilot's left or copilot's
> right except a suction cup or static cling piece. The visor base would
> mount on the cabin top using two of the 4 screws that hold the front bar to
> the cabin top.
>
>
> Please let me know off the list if you are interested and I will put a
> list together and let you know when I know how much it would cost. I am
> hoping to keep it under $200 including the visor (big or small lense) and
> the custom black-anodized base.
>
>
> Jesse Saint
>
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
>
> jesse@saintaviation.com
>
> www.saintaviation.com
>
> Cell: 352-427-0285
>
> Fax: 815-377-3694
>
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
>
> * <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>*
>
> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List*
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> *http://forums.matronics.com*
>
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List*
>
> *http://forums.matronics.com*
>
> * *
>
>
> --
> Don
> Liberty University
> Of: 434-592-4127
> Cel: 434-944-5347
> email: drdonfa@gmail.com
> Skype: drdonfanning
> MSN Messenger: dfanning@liberty.edu
> Web: www.luglobal.com
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> * *
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
--
Don
Liberty University
Of: 434-592-4127
Cel: 434-944-5347
email: drdonfa@gmail.com
Skype: drdonfanning
MSN Messenger: dfanning@liberty.edu
Web: www.luglobal.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 |
|
I understand that it would be nice having traffic in the panel, but isn't
that what ATC is there for? They can give you weather info, but not nearly
as well as seeing it in color on your moving map, but is it distracting
seeing all of the planes that are around you? I have talked to a number of
pilots who don't want to know about traffic. ATC will tell you about the
ones that matter, but the others, well, don't matter.
This may prompt a nice discussion about what traffic options are available
and how helpful they are.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
tdawson-townsend@aurora.aero
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 9:02 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Traffic
To go with your fancy panel, don't forget to get an active traffic system,
so you don't get whacked by somebody while you're both heads-down looking at
the pretty HITS displays.
Avidyne TAS system will display on Garmin, Avidyne, and Chelton displays,
amongst others.
Jeez, and I don't even work there anymore!
P.S. Your life will be easier if you consider this before you install a
headliner, since the top antenna needs a foil ground plane installed . . .
Cheers,
TDT
Tim Dawson-Townsend
Aurora Flight Sciences
tdt@aurora.aero
617-401-2522
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 |
|
After looking at the pictures on a lot of other people's web pages, I
trimmed the flange just enough to get to the hole.
PJ
RV-10 #40032
Fred Williams wrote:
> <drfred@suddenlinkmail.com>
>
> Question:
>
> 29-14 step 4: "match drill #30 holes in the lower flange of the
> F-1040-L and R Upper Fuse Channels into the WD-1002 L and R upper
> Firewall brackets"
>
> Problem: easy to do up until you get to the most forward hole. It is
> blocked by the flange of the F-1001 M left side angle and the F-1001D
> rt side angle. Same problem goes for the upper most forward hole of
> the F-1041 lower fuse channels.
> The only way that I can see to be able to drill (and then rivet) is to
> a)trim the flange on the F-1001 M and F-1001D 's. _or_ b) Not
> drill or put a rivet in that hole.
> I'm sure someone else has had to cross this bridge.
> Thanks.
>
> Fred Williams
>
>
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 |
|
Please don't take this personally Jesse, it's not meant that way.
That is one of the most laughable things I've heard for a while.
Truly amazingly laughable....especially in the days where the FAA
is contemplating user fees for services. You would be surprised
at how many planes there are cruising around underneath class B
airspace and how close the come to eachother...and often haven't
a clue. I have traffic on the PFD and MFD, which is about
as cool as it gets for display, but it's already been a potential
bacon saver a few times. Sure, the chance of an actual collission
isn't necessarily that great under the "big sky" theory, but
near misses can be pretty spooky as well.
The thing that TIS/TCAS and that sort of thing gives you is the
ability to give you a bearing, distance, altitude, and whether
or not the traffic is climbing or descending, so you know where
you need to be looking. Even with TIS, you sometimes have a hard
time picking out traffic at your altitude or slightly lower
because of visual ground clutter. In just that one respect that
you mention, TIS can add the distraction because if you see it
on the scope you may tend to get excited trying to spot it
visually....so it gives you a little adrenaline at times. But
saying that they'd rather not have it because of that would be like
saying you'd rather not have the MRI if you've been having
neurological issues, because it might tell you that you have
a brain tumor.
The most laughable part about the entire thing though was that
somehow ATC will tell you about the ones that matter. The problem
is, that's only true for IFR flight. Even on Flight Following
they don't always have time to provide those services. But,
I spend a ton of time on some flights where I'm VFR only, and
TIS is very valuable around the areas by me like MSP, MSN, ORD,
and so on. Had a callout last week where a chopper was heading
head-on towards me as I was on downwind and it called that one
out. Having it on screen was a nice tip off to look for it.
Whether you put it on the 496, 430, 530, 480, Chelton, or
whoever supports it, it's a pretty cheap option if you
go with a GTX-330. But as TDT mentioned, it would be
better yet with something more active than TIS. That said,
not only is it a shame that TIS may be life-limited, but I'm
sure glad I bought it because I have many many years to enjoy
it yet before it's gone...and it's already saved me. One of
the more memorable saves was in evening haze as I was nearing
Dunnellon, FL for fuel, BTW.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Jesse Saint wrote:
> I understand that it would be nice having traffic in the panel, but
> isnt that what ATC is there for? They can give you weather info, but
> not nearly as well as seeing it in color on your moving map, but is it
> distracting seeing all of the planes that are around you? I have talked
> to a number of pilots who dont want to know about traffic. ATC will
> tell you about the ones that matter, but the others, well, dont matter.
>
>
>
> This may prompt a nice discussion about what traffic options are
> available and how helpful they are.
>
>
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 |
|
Jesse,
I couldn't disagree more. Having traffic on the CMX 200 and 430 is a huge
help in the "see and avoid" environment of uncontrolled airports and VFR
local flights without flight following. The value of knowing which way to
look for traffic should not be underestimated - especially on hazy low
visibility days.
Mark
N410MR
>From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@saintaviation.com>
>To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RE: RV10-List: Traffic
>Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 10:02:57 -0400
>
>I understand that it would be nice having traffic in the panel, but isn't
>that what ATC is there for? They can give you weather info, but not nearly
>as well as seeing it in color on your moving map, but is it distracting
>seeing all of the planes that are around you? I have talked to a number of
>pilots who don't want to know about traffic. ATC will tell you about the
>ones that matter, but the others, well, don't matter.
>
>
>This may prompt a nice discussion about what traffic options are available
>and how helpful they are.
>
>
>Jesse Saint
>
>Saint Aviation, Inc.
>
>jesse@saintaviation.com
>
>www.saintaviation.com
>
>Cell: 352-427-0285
>
>Fax: 815-377-3694
>
> _____
>
>From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>tdawson-townsend@aurora.aero
>Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 9:02 AM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RV10-List: Traffic
>
>
>To go with your fancy panel, don't forget to get an active traffic system,
>so you don't get whacked by somebody while you're both heads-down looking
>at
>the pretty HITS displays.
>
>
>Avidyne TAS system will display on Garmin, Avidyne, and Chelton displays,
>amongst others.
>
>
>Jeez, and I don't even work there anymore!
>
>
>P.S. Your life will be easier if you consider this before you install a
>headliner, since the top antenna needs a foil ground plane installed . . .
>
>
>Cheers,
>
>
>TDT
>
>
>Tim Dawson-Townsend
>
>Aurora Flight Sciences
>
>tdt@aurora.aero
>
>617-401-2522
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Catch suspicious messages before you open themwith Windows Live Hotmail.
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 |
|
Trimming of the flange is what was done on a quick build fuselage I saw
at Van's factory. Also remember you need enough clearance to get a rivet
set or squeezers in to set the rivet.
Vern (#324 fuselage)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of PJ Seipel
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 7:11 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Page 29-14
After looking at the pictures on a lot of other people's web pages, I
trimmed the flange just enough to get to the hole.
PJ
RV-10 #40032
Fred Williams wrote:
> <drfred@suddenlinkmail.com>
>
> Question:
>
> 29-14 step 4: "match drill #30 holes in the lower flange of the
> F-1040-L and R Upper Fuse Channels into the WD-1002 L and R upper
> Firewall brackets"
>
> Problem: easy to do up until you get to the most forward hole. It is
> blocked by the flange of the F-1001 M left side angle and the F-1001D
> rt side angle. Same problem goes for the upper most forward hole of
> the F-1041 lower fuse channels.
> The only way that I can see to be able to drill (and then rivet) is to
> a)trim the flange on the F-1001 M and F-1001D 's. _or_ b) Not
> drill or put a rivet in that hole.
> I'm sure someone else has had to cross this bridge.
> Thanks.
>
> Fred Williams
>
>
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 |
|
I agree with you Mark. I'll never forget the time I was on an IFR
flight plan (in VMC) and had a Bonanza whiz below me, on an almost
reciprocal heading about 100' below me. He was close enough I could
tell what color hair he had (actually, he was balding). No warning
whatever from ATC. I called and told Washington Center that a Bonanza
had narrowly missed me and the controller said "...uh, traffic no
factor." No fooling. He was already past me when I told ATC about him.
Don't rely on ATC to tell you about traffic. Just because they say
"radar contact" does not mean you are off the hook for looking for
traffic. Remember the old saying "If the pilot screws up, the pilot
dies. If ATC screws up, the pilot dies."
Jack Phillips
Planning to avoid building and put some time on the RV-4 this weekend
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Ritter
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 10:39 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Traffic
Jesse,
I couldn't disagree more. Having traffic on the CMX 200 and 430 is a
huge help in the "see and avoid" environment of uncontrolled airports
and VFR local flights without flight following. The value of knowing
which way to look for traffic should not be underestimated - especially
on hazy low visibility days.
Mark
N410MR
>From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@saintaviation.com>
>To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RE: RV10-List: Traffic
>Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 10:02:57 -0400
>
>I understand that it would be nice having traffic in the panel, but
>isn't that what ATC is there for? They can give you weather info, but
>not nearly as well as seeing it in color on your moving map, but is it
>distracting seeing all of the planes that are around you? I have
>talked to a number of pilots who don't want to know about traffic. ATC
>will tell you about the ones that matter, but the others, well, don't
matter.
>
>
>This may prompt a nice discussion about what traffic options are
>available and how helpful they are.
>
>
>Jesse Saint
>
>Saint Aviation, Inc.
>
>jesse@saintaviation.com
>
>www.saintaviation.com
>
>Cell: 352-427-0285
>
>Fax: 815-377-3694
>
> _____
>
>From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>tdawson-townsend@aurora.aero
>Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 9:02 AM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RV10-List: Traffic
>
>
>To go with your fancy panel, don't forget to get an active traffic
>system, so you don't get whacked by somebody while you're both
>heads-down looking at the pretty HITS displays.
>
>
>Avidyne TAS system will display on Garmin, Avidyne, and Chelton
>displays, amongst others.
>
>
>Jeez, and I don't even work there anymore!
>
>
>P.S. Your life will be easier if you consider this before you install
>a headliner, since the top antenna needs a foil ground plane installed
. . .
>
>
>Cheers,
>
>
>TDT
>
>
>Tim Dawson-Townsend
>
>Aurora Flight Sciences
>
>tdt@aurora.aero
>
>617-401-2522
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Catch suspicious messages before you open them-with Windows Live
Hotmail.
_________________________________________________
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 |
|
Both responses so far are exactly what I was looking for. Thanks.
Do not archive
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Traffic
Please don't take this personally Jesse, it's not meant that way.
That is one of the most laughable things I've heard for a while.
Truly amazingly laughable....especially in the days where the FAA
is contemplating user fees for services. You would be surprised
at how many planes there are cruising around underneath class B
airspace and how close the come to eachother...and often haven't
a clue. I have traffic on the PFD and MFD, which is about
as cool as it gets for display, but it's already been a potential
bacon saver a few times. Sure, the chance of an actual collission
isn't necessarily that great under the "big sky" theory, but
near misses can be pretty spooky as well.
The thing that TIS/TCAS and that sort of thing gives you is the
ability to give you a bearing, distance, altitude, and whether
or not the traffic is climbing or descending, so you know where
you need to be looking. Even with TIS, you sometimes have a hard
time picking out traffic at your altitude or slightly lower
because of visual ground clutter. In just that one respect that
you mention, TIS can add the distraction because if you see it
on the scope you may tend to get excited trying to spot it
visually....so it gives you a little adrenaline at times. But
saying that they'd rather not have it because of that would be like
saying you'd rather not have the MRI if you've been having
neurological issues, because it might tell you that you have
a brain tumor.
The most laughable part about the entire thing though was that
somehow ATC will tell you about the ones that matter. The problem
is, that's only true for IFR flight. Even on Flight Following
they don't always have time to provide those services. But,
I spend a ton of time on some flights where I'm VFR only, and
TIS is very valuable around the areas by me like MSP, MSN, ORD,
and so on. Had a callout last week where a chopper was heading
head-on towards me as I was on downwind and it called that one
out. Having it on screen was a nice tip off to look for it.
Whether you put it on the 496, 430, 530, 480, Chelton, or
whoever supports it, it's a pretty cheap option if you
go with a GTX-330. But as TDT mentioned, it would be
better yet with something more active than TIS. That said,
not only is it a shame that TIS may be life-limited, but I'm
sure glad I bought it because I have many many years to enjoy
it yet before it's gone...and it's already saved me. One of
the more memorable saves was in evening haze as I was nearing
Dunnellon, FL for fuel, BTW.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Jesse Saint wrote:
> I understand that it would be nice having traffic in the panel, but
> isn't that what ATC is there for? They can give you weather info, but
> not nearly as well as seeing it in color on your moving map, but is it
> distracting seeing all of the planes that are around you? I have talked
> to a number of pilots who don't want to know about traffic. ATC will
> tell you about the ones that matter, but the others, well, don't matter.
>
>
>
> This may prompt a nice discussion about what traffic options are
> available and how helpful they are.
>
>
--
4:01 PM
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 |
|
Jesse, I would suggest you acquire a better understanding on what exactly
ATC is required to provide under different conditions and flight rules. M
ight I suggest a pilot's license as a starting point. Bottom line is don't
EVER trust that ATC is 100% keeping you out of harm's way. The PIC has ul
timate responsibility for safety of flight, including rejecting vectors if
ATC decides to drive you into another aircraft and your MARK1 eyeballs or o
nboard equipment tell you it's a bad idea.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Limbo
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 9:03 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Traffic
I understand that it would be nice having traffic in the panel, but isn't t
hat what ATC is there for? They can give you weather info, but not nearly
as well as seeing it in color on your moving map, but is it distracting see
ing all of the planes that are around you? I have talked to a number of pi
lots who don't want to know about traffic. ATC will tell you about the one
s that matter, but the others, well, don't matter.
This may prompt a nice discussion about what traffic options are available
and how helpful they are.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com<mailto:jesse@saintaviation.com>
www.saintaviation.com<http://www.saintaviation.com>
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of tdawson-townsend@aurora.aero
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 9:02 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Traffic
To go with your fancy panel, don't forget to get an active traffic system,
so you don't get whacked by somebody while you're both heads-down looking a
t the pretty HITS displays.
Avidyne TAS system will display on Garmin, Avidyne, and Chelton displays, a
mongst others.
Jeez, and I don't even work there anymore!
P.S. Your life will be easier if you consider this before you install a he
adliner, since the top antenna needs a foil ground plane installed . . .
Cheers,
TDT
Tim Dawson-Townsend
Aurora Flight Sciences
tdt@aurora.aero
617-401-2522
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
http://forums.matronics.com
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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
This has all made me try to think around this issue a different way.
Give a realistic assessment of a future the owner's capabilities,
missions and desires, perhaps a less considered sweet spot is the VFR
cruiser.
Assume for a minute that the owner is not instrument rated (but plans to
be sometime in the future), or is not able/willing to always remain
current per the regs (me). Assume that the '10 will be a serious cross
country machine (weekender bag, cooler, mate, extra shoes for mate), and
you live in the eastern US (just can't comment on fly-styles west of the
Mississip). I've been thinking of a guy I've been listening to on
Rec.aviation.pilot for a few years. He's been flying a VFR Pathfinder
quite happily for some years - Jay Honeck:
http://www.alexisparkinn.com/welcome_to_the_inn.htm
Many times Jay has been asked to defend his VFR-only flying, as in "Jay,
you need an IFR rating - it will make your travels so much easier". But
he argues that VFR is right for him and his family and frankly he makes
a lot of sense. Following his flying exploits, I wonder if many/most of
us will end up doing what he does. And if we do, we'll die very happy.
What is out there weather-wise is a lot of very flyable VFR weather and
destinations. A simple steam guage VFR '10 like Van's is a super
machine. But as homebuilders, we are sorely tempted to juice it up. So
how would you juice up a VFR '10?
Weather is still the issue. A 396 or better is practically mandatory
from a cost-benefit standpoint. It turns many marginal VFR sky gropes
out over the horizon, into more safer, fully informed journeys into
calm waters.
What is also needed are tools to fly in the near-IFR conditions we all
fly in every summer. I'm not talking clouds or fog, or flying into
deteriorating conditions but just plain summer haze. Make it westbound
in the evening with smoke from a few distant fires and you really can
benefit from use of the gyro panel... or a low end glass EFIS. Add an
autopilot - anywhere from a wing leveler to a sorcerer - and you can
truly remain VFR because you are actually looking out the window.
Remember, anyone can trim a cruiser to maintain altitude, it's the wing
leveling that you really need. And if it's driven by your GPS, wow!
So a low end glass EFIS, GPS, autopilot, and a backup GPS with Satellite
weather and 101 music channels makes this a very comfortable and capable
VFR cruiser.
To complete the safety package, add traffic awareness.
It looks state of the art, it flys state of the art, it is state of the
art. And it may realistically reflect the true capabilities, mission,
and desires of many of us owner/pilots to be.
You've skipped heated pitots, some Nav equipment, extensive backups,
certification(?), and the costs of getting and staying instrument
proficient.
So how many $$ are needed to realize this dream? I don't know but it's
maybe it's worth a run.
Below is one of Jay's latest postings to rec.aviation.piloting:
We were flying back from Springfield last Sunday, arcing into a
setting sun the size of a pie tin. It was one of those flights where
you keep catching yourself turning off course, just to get the sun
behind the windshield post and out of your eyes...
We'd been silent most of the way, just enjoying the ride and the
afterglow of a day well-spent visiting old friends, when my daughter,
age 13, asked me to play the theme song from "One Six Right" on the CD
player.
Mary and I both looked at each other, shocked that Becca even knew the
name of the album, much less the song itself -- but I quickly slid the
disk into the player, and listened as the fabulous opening bars began
to play...
(For those who don't know the music, listen to it here, for free:
http://www.onesixright.com/ )
There was a scattered layer of clouds below, and a few above, and the
sun played behind them, scattering the light into a million separate
beams, lighting the verdant farmland far below with a burning,
heavenly glow. The view was simply breath-taking.
My daughter, usually oblivious to the flying she has done so often
since birth, suddenly asked me to "Do the soaring thing to the music,
Dad, like you did before..."
Hesitant to deviate from straight and level while talking to Chicago
Center, I started a little dipping and rolling to the music. I
glanced over to see that her eyes were closed, the sunshine was
lighting her face like an angel, and she was simply *feeling* the
flight with all of her senses. She was grinning from ear to ear.
Inspired, I let my inhibitions go, and began giant swoops and gentle
push-overs, all in time to the orchestral crescendos of "One Six
Right". Soon, I found myself closing *my* eyes, and feeling the
weightlessness at the top of the arc, and the one-G steep turns, back
and forth, all to the beat of the music. It was magical.
Throat tightening, chest bursting, I wanted to cry with joy. If there
is a heaven, it must feel very much like this.
And my daughter was "getting it"!
When we landed, Becca -- vocally against the very notion of learning
to fly for so many years -- said "Dad, maybe I *will* learn to fly
some day..."
:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
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 |
|
In a message dated 5/25/2007 10:06:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
jesse@saintaviation.com writes:
ATC will tell you about the ones that matter, but the others, well, don
=99t
matter.
Jesse, as far as I know traffic is advisory only unless you are in positive
control zones...class A and Class B airspaces...all the other air space is j
ust
advisory and not control...time permitting, only.
Patrick
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com
.
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: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane |
Richard,
> Just one example that took a awhile to understand was the significant
> differences between the DigiFlight and Sorcerer autopilots. One has it's
> own brain (Sorcerer) and can fly most any scenario on it's own while the
> DigiFlight requires some other component to do the heavy thinking.
Just a minor correction. Both the DigiFlight and the Sorcerer "have a brain."
Each can fly the airplane on its own using the built in heading gyro and altitude
sensor. What the Sorcerer adds is VHF/NAV capability. That is, it can fly
a coupled VOR/LOC/ILS approach from any plain old VHF/NAV radio. The DigiFlight
can do this only if you are flying an overlay approach on your IFR GPS and
it is controlling the autopilot. Since most IFR GPS will provide a lateral
overlay, and now the "W" GPS will also provide vertical guidance, the benefits
of the Sorcerer over a DigiFlight II VSGV are not worth the extra $5K IMHO.
Also if you truly want the DigiFlight to fly a VOR/LOC/ILS, not just the overlay,
you could drive if from any HSI/EFIS with an ARINC 429 interface and GPSS-V.
The TruTrak RV-10 Autopilot is the Sorcerer with the VHF/NAV capability removed
and a yaw dampener added.
> The costs envolved in a modern safe IFR EFIS panel are probably the biggest
> single expense catagory in the project, but if well planned and executed
> should provide and equally valuable sense of acomplishment.
I've seen many use this term -- What exactly is an "IFR EFIS"? I know what an
IFR GPS is as there are many TSOs and documents relating to it but for those that
use this term, can you explain what makes one EFIS IFR and one not?
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
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 |
|
I love the TIS traffic on my 430 as well, but everyone just needs to remember
it only works in the vicinity (approximately 50 nm radius) of some Class B and
C airspace. As the FAA upgrades some of these ASR-9 radar sites to ASR-11, TIS
will no longer be available. This upsets me greatly because in any other business
you would not do an upgrade if you were going to loose an important feature
like TIS.
Also you can never trust TIS for the whole picture in the sky because planes like
Champs with no transponder (Mode A or C) will not show up on your TIS screen.
This is why I like to fly at 10,500 or 11,500 in hopes that not many non
transponder airplanes are flying at these heights.
Thank You
Ray Doerr
40250
N519RV
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 9:39 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Traffic
Please don't take this personally Jesse, it's not meant that way.
That is one of the most laughable things I've heard for a while.
Truly amazingly laughable....especially in the days where the FAA
is contemplating user fees for services. You would be surprised
at how many planes there are cruising around underneath class B
airspace and how close the come to eachother...and often haven't
a clue. I have traffic on the PFD and MFD, which is about
as cool as it gets for display, but it's already been a potential
bacon saver a few times. Sure, the chance of an actual collission
isn't necessarily that great under the "big sky" theory, but
near misses can be pretty spooky as well.
The thing that TIS/TCAS and that sort of thing gives you is the
ability to give you a bearing, distance, altitude, and whether
or not the traffic is climbing or descending, so you know where
you need to be looking. Even with TIS, you sometimes have a hard
time picking out traffic at your altitude or slightly lower
because of visual ground clutter. In just that one respect that
you mention, TIS can add the distraction because if you see it
on the scope you may tend to get excited trying to spot it
visually....so it gives you a little adrenaline at times. But
saying that they'd rather not have it because of that would be like
saying you'd rather not have the MRI if you've been having
neurological issues, because it might tell you that you have
a brain tumor.
The most laughable part about the entire thing though was that
somehow ATC will tell you about the ones that matter. The problem
is, that's only true for IFR flight. Even on Flight Following
they don't always have time to provide those services. But,
I spend a ton of time on some flights where I'm VFR only, and
TIS is very valuable around the areas by me like MSP, MSN, ORD,
and so on. Had a callout last week where a chopper was heading
head-on towards me as I was on downwind and it called that one
out. Having it on screen was a nice tip off to look for it.
Whether you put it on the 496, 430, 530, 480, Chelton, or
whoever supports it, it's a pretty cheap option if you
go with a GTX-330. But as TDT mentioned, it would be
better yet with something more active than TIS. That said,
not only is it a shame that TIS may be life-limited, but I'm
sure glad I bought it because I have many many years to enjoy
it yet before it's gone...and it's already saved me. One of
the more memorable saves was in evening haze as I was nearing
Dunnellon, FL for fuel, BTW.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Jesse Saint wrote:
> I understand that it would be nice having traffic in the panel, but
> isn't that what ATC is there for? They can give you weather info, but
> not nearly as well as seeing it in color on your moving map, but is it
> distracting seeing all of the planes that are around you? I have talked
> to a number of pilots who don't want to know about traffic. ATC will
> tell you about the ones that matter, but the others, well, don't matter.
>
>
>
> This may prompt a nice discussion about what traffic options are
> available and how helpful they are.
>
>
Message 20
| 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 |
|
ATC is not there for traffic avoidance for VFR pilots, only as work load
permits, or basically when they feel like it. Even when flying on an IFR
flight plan in VFR conditions, it is still primarily the PIC's
responsibility to visually scan and act on collision avoidance. In other
words ATC is there to help, but as PIC you are still ultimately
responsible. There has been many times that traffic could not be seen
until to late, think high wing versus low wing in the traffic pattern.
It is a reality, and especially for the North East coast people the
traffic corridor is highly congested and any tool that can aid in the
detection and avoidance of traffic would be a great add to the
situational awareness, I just wish I could afford the Avidyne solution
or others for that matter.
Dan
N289DT RV10E
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 10:03 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Traffic
I understand that it would be nice having traffic in the panel, but
isn't that what ATC is there for? They can give you weather info, but
not nearly as well as seeing it in color on your moving map, but is it
distracting seeing all of the planes that are around you? I have talked
to a number of pilots who don't want to know about traffic. ATC will
tell you about the ones that matter, but the others, well, don't matter.
This may prompt a nice discussion about what traffic options are
available and how helpful they are.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
tdawson-townsend@aurora.aero
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 9:02 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Traffic
To go with your fancy panel, don't forget to get an active traffic
system, so you don't get whacked by somebody while you're both
heads-down looking at the pretty HITS displays.
Avidyne TAS system will display on Garmin, Avidyne, and Chelton
displays, amongst others.
Jeez, and I don't even work there anymore!
P.S. Your life will be easier if you consider this before you install a
headliner, since the top antenna needs a foil ground plane installed . .
.
Cheers,
TDT
Tim Dawson-Townsend
Aurora Flight Sciences
tdt@aurora.aero
617-401-2522
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
http://forums.matronics.com
Message 21
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
In a message dated 5/25/2007 11:21:56 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
MauleDriver@nc.rr.com writes:
What is also needed are tools to fly in the near-IFR conditions we all
fly in every summer. I'm not talking clouds or fog, or flying into
deteriorating conditions but just plain summer haze.
I'm sure you're serious about this statement but if you want to over fly your
visibility you might want to consider getting IFR and filing...flying a
Cherokee at 120kts is one thing, flying an RV 10 into the same haze at 160kts is
another...a hand held is wonder as opposted to nothing but having better
situational awareness equipment is better and I'd think a requirement if you want
to
bust through haze and smoke often.
In the past year, I've had ultralight flying through controlled airspace
untagged, been cut off on final by a skyjocky flying a King Air at over 200 kts
shooting a GPS approach to a non-towered airport and he was not on the local
freq until he was over the fence--he claimed he was protected because PHL
approach had cleared him for the approach--big problem PHL does not own the airspace
at non-towered airports...yet he flew by me with in a couple of hundred yards
in the haze and muck...the G1000 tagged him so I was able to see him at the
last minute and avoid some noise pollution. While the pilot was an ATP he did
not know or remember the rules of flying a non-towered GPS approach.
There are lots of crazy's out their flying, our job is to avoid them at all
costs and having a good setup is part of the equation IMHO if you can afford it
do it but don't fool yourselves with stuff that's designed for situation
awareness into thinking it's certified for operations. Using portable devices and
thinking of them as IFR stuff is a formula for disaster...knowing and
understanding the difference between active radar and return info or TIS for TCAS
etc., may lead one down the path to a chain of events. It's interesting that many
people who invest in TIS equipment don't understand that most of the
information they are looking for is only available in limited area coverage and
that
will probably go away in the next decade.
I was flying a while back and a guy in a Cherokee 140 calls back to the tower
when given an advisory for traffic that he had the target on the "T-CAS"...a
TCAS system would cost more than his plane was worth...and he did not have a
radar pod on his wing either. Probably had a portable TIS reader and while
better than nothing it certainly is not TCAS.
Who was it a while back who could not believe that he could not file "G"
because he had a 396 or 496...ever wonder why Garmin does not have all the IFR
stuff in these little boxes..they have a lot of good quality awareness
information but they are not IFR equipment.
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Message 22
| 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 |
|
Not much I can add. I am always too late on these responses. I need to pl
ug my brain into this forum like others have. =0A =0ASeriously, TIS is tot
ally awesome, even around Salt Lake where I don't get alot of coverage. Bu
t you get coverage typically when you need it. It is so nice to come home
from a trip and look down at the screen and before Salt Lake Approach even
tells me anything, I can see how many planes are in the pattern at my home
airport which is right next to Class B airspace. Because of the Garmin 330
, lately I don't call approach because I can see all the planes as good as
he can which was the only reason why I called in when I was getting close a
nd half the time when I do call in they only give you traffic warnings when
they are within 500 feet of yourself it seems. Of course the best way to
go is to be IFR or talking to approach control or flight following while us
ing the traffic system. I have both the 330 and the TrafficScope VRX syste
m which I also like. I'd like to upgrade to the Zaon XRX. When my TIS isn
't working I watch that close and when it tells me about traffic
that is close I can normally find them. It all helps and is not distracti
ng. One thing really nice about today's EFIS systems is the ability look ou
t the window more. You would think you be looking inside more with all tha
t equipment but on the ground you input your flight plan so that as you are
flying you actually look outside more because you are not having to worry
about airspace violations and you really don't have to monitor the engine b
ecause it will talk to you if anything gets in the yellow or red depending
on how you have it set up. =0A =0AScott Schmidt=0Ascottmschmidt@yahoo.com
=0A=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom: RV Builder (Michael Sausen)
<rvbuilder@sausen.net>=0ATo: "rv10-list@matronics.com" <rv10-list@matronic
s.com>=0ASent: Friday, May 25, 2007 8:14:36 AM=0ASubject: RE: RV10-List: Tr
affic=0A=0A=0A Jesse, I would suggest you acquire a better understanding o
n what exactly ATC is required to provide under different conditions and fl
ight rules. Might I suggest a pilot=A2s license as a starting point. Bott
om line is don=A2t EVER trust that ATC is 100% keeping you out of harm=A2s
way. The PIC has ultimate responsibility for safety of flight, including r
ejecting vectors if ATC decides to drive you into another aircraft and your
MARK1 eyeballs or onboard equipment tell you it=A2s a bad idea.=0A =0AMich
ael Sausen=0A-10 #352 Limbo=0A =0AFrom: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.co
m [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint=0A
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 9:03 AM=0ATo: rv10-list@matronics.com=0ASubject:
RE: RV10-List: Traffic=0A =0AI understand that it would be nice having tra
ffic in the panel, but isn=A2t that what ATC is there for? They can give y
ou weather info, but not nearly as well as seeing it in color on your movin
g map, but is it distracting seeing all of the planes that are around you?
I have talked to a number of pilots who don=A2t want to know about traffic
. ATC will tell you about the ones that matter, but the others, well, don
=A2t matter.=0A =0AThis may prompt a nice discussion about what traffic opt
ions are available and how helpful they are.=0A =0AJesse Saint=0ASaint Avia
tion, Inc.=0Ajesse@saintaviation.com=0Awww.saintaviation.com=0ACell: 352-42
7-0285=0AFax: 815-377-3694=0A=0A=0A=0AFrom: owner-rv10-list-server@matronic
s.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of tdawson-to
wnsend@aurora.aero=0ASent: Friday, May 25, 2007 9:02 AM=0ATo: rv10-list@mat
ronics.com=0ASubject: RV10-List: Traffic=0A =0A =0ATo go with your fancy pa
nel, don=A2t forget to get an active traffic system, so you don=A2t get wha
cked by somebody while you=A2re both heads-down looking at the pretty HITS
displays.=0A =0AAvidyne TAS system will display on Garmin, Avidyne, and Che
lton displays, amongst others.=0A =0AJeez, and I don=A2t even work there an
ymore!=0A =0AP.S. Your life will be easier if you consider this before you
install a headliner, since the top antenna needs a foil ground plane insta
lled . . .=0A =0ACheers,=0A =0ATDT=0A =0A =0ATim Dawson-Townsend=0AAurora F
light Sciences=0Atdt@aurora.aero=0A617-401-2522=0A =0A =0A =0A =0Ahttp://
www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List=0Ahttp://forums.matronics.com=0A =0A
=0A =0Ay List utilities such as the Subscriptions page,=0A http://www.ma
tronics.bsp; - NEW MATRONICS WEB FO; http://forums.matronics.com</
===============
Message 23
| 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 |
|
Some folks are opting for the PCU5000/X (http://pcu5000.com). It supposedly governs better than the MT provided in the FF kit. Someone on Vansairforce is doing a group buy of the PCU5000. Since the PCU5000X ($1350) is more expensive than the MT ($Van's $1100), this may be another case of a solution looking for a problem. Has anyone flying had issues with the MT P-860-3?
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=17279&page=1&pp=10&highlight=pcu
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
> X-Rcpt-To: <wcurtis@nerv10.com>
>
> Why would you sell? What are you going to run with?
>
> John
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Neal George
> Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 7:40 PM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com; RV7A@yahoogroups.com; rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: FS: MT Prop Gov
>
>
>
> Listers -
>
>
>
> I have a new MT prop governor for sale.
>
> $1075, shipped.
>
>
>
> Neal E. George
> 2023 Everglades Drive
> Navarre, FL 32566
> Home - 850-515-0640
> Cell - 850-218-4838
Message 24
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Yes!
I think that the point is well presented and well taken. I've said to more
than one person that "I don't get it" in terms of all the higher end panels.
Tim, Deems and others have explained their rationale to me and I'm slowly
getting it, but Bill finally put into words what I haven't been able to. I
love flying for the sake of flying, and to me this means VFR most of the
time. This is what has been in the back of my mind and I couldn't explain
it. Thanks, Bill !!
I will get my IFR rating, because I honestly do believe it will make me a
better pilot (and insurance companies might like me better) just as a tail
wheel endorsement will also. I have a float plane rating and that certainly
has made me better (landing floats on glassy waters requires some precision
that I wasn't used to before). However, I love the ability to just fly.
Get in and go. Sure you want to have a flight plan and file it, and sure
you'd like flight following, but there's something about keeping it simple
that appeals to me.
So, my big challenge has been what to put in that works well in the assumed
IFR future that I know I'll be involved in, but also doesn't bust the bank,
and doesn't just sit there while I have fun looking out the window and down
at my maps occasionally. And will I keep current enough in real IMC that I
could, honestly, safely, take advantage of the IFR system? This is a big,
big question. I think for those who are already IFR trained and that's what
they normally fly, it isn't such an issue to think in terms of the more
advanced systems. If they can afford it, it probably is a no brainer.
But there's the rub. A high end system can make IFR simpler during the high
workload, high risk scenarios that one will, if they fly IFR/IMC, eventually
find. That's when a current, but not super current, IFR pilot needs that
electronic horsepower. So, getting a glass panel 6-pack substitute, such as
the AFS EFIS, coupled with a (for example) G430W and some type of MFD, may
not be the safest thing for someone who spends most of his/her time flying
VFR, with only the occasional IFR/IMC usage. This is why I'm so interested
in the combination of equipment that can bridge that gap between basic IFR
and the high end systems. You want minimal button pushing and mental
gyrations in those situations that are the highest stress/workload
situations. It's easy to do enroute with almost any system. It gets
progressively more difficult for take offs, holdings, approaches, but all of
these have been done for decades on steam gauges, so it's not impossible.
It's just that with all the goodies out there, one wants to put together
something that works well, doesn't bust the bank (for me and I bet many who
are not commenting on the list), but can be effective. This is why I've
been begging for situational descriptions about how systems work well or
not. Tim is correct, this is so hard to discuss because everyone is working
for such minimal examples, both in terms of situations and in terms of
equipment. However, the situations do exist, whether you've experienced
them or read about them, and you know your system, so you can give at least
some type of evaluation how it should work given the situation. To some it
might also be embarrassing to discuss what has happened and how their system
responded, but we need to discuss these things in order for all of us to
gain. I want all of us to benefit, and really the only way is to get the
stories out and discuss them.
Money will be the limiting factor for many of us. Someone is going to have
to give me oxygen when I plunk down my bucks for the panel. And that's
after I've been let out of the intensive care unit for the engine payment.
However, when all is said and done, I'll be happy with whatever I have and
practice with it as much as possible. True enough. But until then lots of
decisions have to be made. Bill has helped me understand what it was that I
couldn't get put into words, that I couldn't get past a generalized feeling
about. That's the beauty of this list and of sharing thoughts. Please!
Those silent ones out there. Jump in! The water is fine.
John Jessen
#328
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of MauleDriver
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 8:20 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
This has all made me try to think around this issue a different way.
Give a realistic assessment of a future the owner's capabilities, missions
and desires, perhaps a less considered sweet spot is the VFR cruiser.
Assume for a minute that the owner is not instrument rated (but plans to be
sometime in the future), or is not able/willing to always remain current per
the regs (me). Assume that the '10 will be a serious cross country machine
(weekender bag, cooler, mate, extra shoes for mate), and you live in the
eastern US (just can't comment on fly-styles west of the Mississip). I've
been thinking of a guy I've been listening to on Rec.aviation.pilot for a
few years. He's been flying a VFR Pathfinder quite happily for some years -
Jay Honeck:
http://www.alexisparkinn.com/welcome_to_the_inn.htm
Many times Jay has been asked to defend his VFR-only flying, as in "Jay, you
need an IFR rating - it will make your travels so much easier". But he
argues that VFR is right for him and his family and frankly he makes a lot
of sense. Following his flying exploits, I wonder if many/most of us will
end up doing what he does. And if we do, we'll die very happy.
What is out there weather-wise is a lot of very flyable VFR weather and
destinations. A simple steam guage VFR '10 like Van's is a super machine.
But as homebuilders, we are sorely tempted to juice it up. So how would you
juice up a VFR '10?
Weather is still the issue. A 396 or better is practically mandatory from a
cost-benefit standpoint. It turns many marginal VFR sky gropes
out over the horizon, into more safer, fully informed journeys into
calm waters.
What is also needed are tools to fly in the near-IFR conditions we all fly
in every summer. I'm not talking clouds or fog, or flying into
deteriorating conditions but just plain summer haze. Make it westbound in
the evening with smoke from a few distant fires and you really can benefit
from use of the gyro panel... or a low end glass EFIS. Add an autopilot -
anywhere from a wing leveler to a sorcerer - and you can truly remain VFR
because you are actually looking out the window.
Remember, anyone can trim a cruiser to maintain altitude, it's the wing
leveling that you really need. And if it's driven by your GPS, wow!
So a low end glass EFIS, GPS, autopilot, and a backup GPS with Satellite
weather and 101 music channels makes this a very comfortable and capable VFR
cruiser.
To complete the safety package, add traffic awareness.
It looks state of the art, it flys state of the art, it is state of the art.
And it may realistically reflect the true capabilities, mission, and desires
of many of us owner/pilots to be.
You've skipped heated pitots, some Nav equipment, extensive backups,
certification(?), and the costs of getting and staying instrument
proficient.
So how many $$ are needed to realize this dream? I don't know but it's
maybe it's worth a run.
Below is one of Jay's latest postings to rec.aviation.piloting:
We were flying back from Springfield last Sunday, arcing into a setting sun
the size of a pie tin. It was one of those flights where you keep catching
yourself turning off course, just to get the sun behind the windshield post
and out of your eyes...
We'd been silent most of the way, just enjoying the ride and the afterglow
of a day well-spent visiting old friends, when my daughter, age 13, asked me
to play the theme song from "One Six Right" on the CD player.
Mary and I both looked at each other, shocked that Becca even knew the name
of the album, much less the song itself -- but I quickly slid the disk into
the player, and listened as the fabulous opening bars began to play...
(For those who don't know the music, listen to it here, for free:
http://www.onesixright.com/ )
There was a scattered layer of clouds below, and a few above, and the sun
played behind them, scattering the light into a million separate beams,
lighting the verdant farmland far below with a burning, heavenly glow. The
view was simply breath-taking.
My daughter, usually oblivious to the flying she has done so often since
birth, suddenly asked me to "Do the soaring thing to the music, Dad, like
you did before..."
Hesitant to deviate from straight and level while talking to Chicago Center,
I started a little dipping and rolling to the music. I glanced over to see
that her eyes were closed, the sunshine was lighting her face like an angel,
and she was simply *feeling* the flight with all of her senses. She was
grinning from ear to ear.
Inspired, I let my inhibitions go, and began giant swoops and gentle
push-overs, all in time to the orchestral crescendos of "One Six
Right". Soon, I found myself closing *my* eyes, and feeling the
weightlessness at the top of the arc, and the one-G steep turns, back
and forth, all to the beat of the music. It was magical.
Throat tightening, chest bursting, I wanted to cry with joy. If there is a
heaven, it must feel very much like this.
And my daughter was "getting it"!
When we landed, Becca -- vocally against the very notion of learning to fly
for so many years -- said "Dad, maybe I *will* learn to fly some day..."
:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
Message 25
| 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 |
|
I have an XRX interfaced to a 496 (paints graphical traffic on the 496
screen). The 496 accepts data from the XRX as if the XRX was a TIS GTX330
(same data/message format?). The XRX isn't perfect (passive device), but It
does identify traffic (direction, altitude, and inferred distance) and
interface with the 496.
I'd be interested if anyone has experimented hooking the rs232 output from
an XRX to a panel mounted MFD (in place of a GTX330) and if/how it works.
It seems like it would be a poor man's (passive) Ryan.
Rick
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott Schmidt
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 12:15 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Traffic
Not much I can add. I am always too late on these responses. I need to
plug my brain into this forum like others have.
Seriously, TIS is totally awesome, even around Salt Lake where I don't get
alot of coverage. But you get coverage typically when you need it. It is
so nice to come home from a trip and look down at the screen and before Salt
Lake Approach even tells me anything, I can see how many planes are in the
pattern at my home airport which is right next to Class B airspace. Because
of the Garmin 330, lately I don't call approach because I can see all the
planes as good as he can which was the only reason why I called in when I
was getting close and half the time when I do call in they only give you
traffic warnings when they are within 500 feet of yourself it seems. Of
course the best way to go is to be IFR or talking to approach control or
flight following while using the traffic system. I have both the 330 and
the TrafficScope VRX system which I also like. I'd like to upgrade to the
Zaon XRX. When my TIS isn't working I watch that close and when it tells me
about traffic that is close I can normally find them. It all helps and is
not distracting. One thing really nice about today's EFIS systems is the
ability look out the window more. You would think you be looking inside
more with all that equipment but on the ground you input your flight plan so
that as you are flying you actually look outside more because you are not
having to worry about airspace violations and you really don't have to
monitor the engine because it will talk to you if anything gets in the
yellow or red depending on how you have it set up.
Scott Schmidt
scottmschmidt@yahoo.com
----- Original Message ----
From: RV Builder (Michael Sausen) <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 8:14:36 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Traffic
Jesse, I would suggest you acquire a better understanding on what exactly
ATC is required to provide under different conditions and flight rules.
Might I suggest a pilot?s license as a starting point. Bottom line is don?t
EVER trust that ATC is 100% keeping you out of harm?s way. The PIC has
ultimate responsibility for safety of flight, including rejecting vectors if
ATC decides to drive you into another aircraft and your MARK1 eyeballs or
onboard equipment tell you it?s a bad idea.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Limbo
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 9:03 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Traffic
I understand that it would be nice having traffic in the panel, but isn?t
that what ATC is there for? They can give you weather info, but not nearly
as well as seeing it in color on your moving map, but is it distracting
seeing all of the planes that are around you? I have talked to a number of
pilots who don?t want to know about traffic. ATC will tell you about the
ones that matter, but the others, well, don?t matter.
This may prompt a nice discussion about what traffic options are available
and how helpful they are.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com <http://www.saintaviation.com/>
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
tdawson-townsend@aurora.aero
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 9:02 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Traffic
To go with your fancy panel, don?t forget to get an active traffic system,
so you don?t get whacked by somebody while you?re both heads-down looking at
the pretty HITS displays.
Avidyne TAS system will display on Garmin, Avidyne, and Chelton displays,
amongst others.
Jeez, and I don?t even work there anymore!
P.S. Your life will be easier if you consider this before you install a
headliner, since the top antenna needs a foil ground plane installed . . .
Cheers,
TDT
Tim Dawson-Townsend
Aurora Flight Sciences
tdt@aurora.aero
617-401-2522
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
http://forums.matronics.com
y List utilities such as the Subscriptions page,
http://www.matronics.bsp; - NEW MATRONICS WEB FO;
http://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com/> </
=================
" target=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Li===
Message 26
| 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: | The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane |
You are right for the most part. The Sorcerer, I believe, doesn't have an
internal heading source, while the Digiflight II does (which isn't worth
anything on the ones that I have flown). If you lose heading info from the
external GPS, the Sorcerer will let you decide a bank angle, whereas the DII
will let you select a Heading ("HDG" will display instead of "TRK" when it
gets the info from a GPS). The Sorcerer will let you select a target
altitude for climb or descent, and how you want to get there, indicated
airspeed for climb and distance for descent, or vertical speed for either.
This comes in very handy when being vectored by ATC and they say to maintain
at or above a certain altitude, you just punch it in and tell it a distance
and you are done (3 seconds). Vector change is just a rotation of the knob
on either. The Sorcerer will fly the NAV radio, whether VOR's or ILS. Do
all ILS approach airports have a precision GPS approach also? Does anything
except the GRT offer "artificial GPS approaches" on an ILS? This may not
matter to some, but there are a lot of pilots who still want to be able to
fly an actual ILS, although this is probably changing with the WAAS
approaches. When going missed approach, a toggle of the UP/DOWN switch will
automatically take you into a 500fpm climb while you figure out what to do
next. With separate buttons for everything, it is much easier to navigate
and get just what you want, when you want it.
The RV-10 AP is just the Sorcerer without the analog NAV functions, and both
the Sorcerer and the RV-10 AP have the Yaw Dampener as an option, although I
don't believe it is standard with the RV-10 AP, although they mentioned it
as such in the beginning. The AP-100 is the Sorcerer without the Altitude
Select or VNAV functions, but it includes the analog NAV functions.
The extra $4K for the Sorcerer is a chunk of change, but for many I think
the peace of mind of having almost all controls right on the unit instead of
having to tell it what to do through the GPS or EFIS is worth it. If you
don't want the altitude select but do want the analog NAV, go with the
AP-100 for $6,900. If you don't want the analog NAV and do want the
altitude select, go with the RV-10 AP. If you want both, go with the
Sorcerer. If you don't want either, then the DII VSG or VSGV are for you,
at $4,725 and $5,225 respectively.
Of course, they are all fantastic auto pilots. Monitor your trim, though,
unless you want to get into aerobatics. :-)
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Curtis
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 11:37 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane
Richard,
> Just one example that took a awhile to understand was the significant
> differences between the DigiFlight and Sorcerer autopilots. One has it's
> own brain (Sorcerer) and can fly most any scenario on it's own while the
> DigiFlight requires some other component to do the heavy thinking.
Just a minor correction. Both the DigiFlight and the Sorcerer "have a
brain." Each can fly the airplane on its own using the built in heading
gyro and altitude sensor. What the Sorcerer adds is VHF/NAV capability.
That is, it can fly a coupled VOR/LOC/ILS approach from any plain old
VHF/NAV radio. The DigiFlight can do this only if you are flying an overlay
approach on your IFR GPS and it is controlling the autopilot. Since most
IFR GPS will provide a lateral overlay, and now the "W" GPS will also
provide vertical guidance, the benefits of the Sorcerer over a DigiFlight II
VSGV are not worth the extra $5K IMHO. Also if you truly want the
DigiFlight to fly a VOR/LOC/ILS, not just the overlay, you could drive if
from any HSI/EFIS with an ARINC 429 interface and GPSS-V.
The TruTrak RV-10 Autopilot is the Sorcerer with the VHF/NAV capability
removed and a yaw dampener added.
> The costs envolved in a modern safe IFR EFIS panel are probably the
biggest
> single expense catagory in the project, but if well planned and executed
> should provide and equally valuable sense of acomplishment.
I've seen many use this term -- What exactly is an "IFR EFIS"? I know what
an IFR GPS is as there are many TSOs and documents relating to it but for
those that use this term, can you explain what makes one EFIS IFR and one
not?
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
--
4:01 PM
Message 27
| 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 |
|
Thanks for the replies. I talked with Joe at Van's this am and we
decided on the same approach. Will trim the flanges on the F 1001 M and
D angles. Enough to get rivet set and drill the holes.
Fred Williams.
Message 28
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Thanks for reminding me why I started flying in the first place. I've
spent way too much time in the shop and lost sight of what is important
to me.
Vern (#324)
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of MauleDriver
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 8:20 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
Below is one of Jay's latest postings to rec.aviation.piloting:
We were flying back from Springfield last Sunday, arcing into a
setting sun the size of a pie tin. It was one of those flights where
you keep catching yourself turning off course, just to get the sun
behind the windshield post and out of your eyes...
We'd been silent most of the way, just enjoying the ride and the
afterglow of a day well-spent visiting old friends, when my daughter,
age 13, asked me to play the theme song from "One Six Right" on the CD
player.
Mary and I both looked at each other, shocked that Becca even knew the
name of the album, much less the song itself -- but I quickly slid the
disk into the player, and listened as the fabulous opening bars began
to play...
(For those who don't know the music, listen to it here, for free:
http://www.onesixright.com/ )
There was a scattered layer of clouds below, and a few above, and the
sun played behind them, scattering the light into a million separate
beams, lighting the verdant farmland far below with a burning,
heavenly glow. The view was simply breath-taking.
My daughter, usually oblivious to the flying she has done so often
since birth, suddenly asked me to "Do the soaring thing to the music,
Dad, like you did before..."
Hesitant to deviate from straight and level while talking to Chicago
Center, I started a little dipping and rolling to the music. I
glanced over to see that her eyes were closed, the sunshine was
lighting her face like an angel, and she was simply *feeling* the
flight with all of her senses. She was grinning from ear to ear.
Inspired, I let my inhibitions go, and began giant swoops and gentle
push-overs, all in time to the orchestral crescendos of "One Six
Right". Soon, I found myself closing *my* eyes, and feeling the
weightlessness at the top of the arc, and the one-G steep turns, back
and forth, all to the beat of the music. It was magical.
Throat tightening, chest bursting, I wanted to cry with joy. If there
is a heaven, it must feel very much like this.
And my daughter was "getting it"!
When we landed, Becca -- vocally against the very notion of learning
to fly for so many years -- said "Dad, maybe I *will* learn to fly
some day..."
:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
Message 29
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
I understand your concern but I am serious. Unfortunately, 3 miles in
haze at 6,000 is legal VFR and near-IFR at the same time (so is 1 mile
isn't it?) I recall it being very common to have *all* the enroute
airports reporting 3 miles or better while struggling to find a good
horizon, let alone see traffic.
I guess the technical definition of VFR at cruising altitude is
something like "observed flight visibility" or something. Not sure how
to determine that however. It's a bit less straightforward than
observing 1/2 mile when measured RVR is 1/4.
I don't think flying in these conditions is akin to "continuing VFR into
IMC" and it's attendant accident rate. People generally don't spiral in
doing day VFR in these quite legal VFR conditions. They don't spiral in
at night either because of pervasive ground lighting. Kennedy over the
ocean being the obvious trap. But people do struggle, it is
uncomfortable, and the horizon is occassionally and momentarily lost.
So, is a glass EFIS a useful tool for augmenting real world VFR cruising?
BTW, when current, I always fly IFR to at least make flying at IFR
altitudes a rational tactic for avoiding some traffic. And if that
darn '10 in my hangar would leave me alone, I'd go out and do some
traveling and get current again!
GRANSCOTT@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 5/25/2007 11:21:56 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> MauleDriver@nc.rr.com writes:
>
> What is also needed are tools to fly in the near-IFR conditions we
> all
> fly in every summer. I'm not talking clouds or fog, or flying into
> deteriorating conditions but just plain summer haze.
>
> I'm sure you're serious about this statement but if you want to over
> fly your visibility you might want to consider getting IFR and
> filing...flying a Cherokee at 120kts is one thing, flying an RV 10
> into the same haze at 160kts is another...a hand held is wonder as
> opposted to nothing but having better situational awareness equipment
> is better and I'd think a requirement if you want to bust through haze
> and smoke often.
>
Message 30
| 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 |
|
We had problems with an RPM surge at a certain RPM setting with the MT, but
it was fixed with a stronger spring. I think the new units should all have
the stronger spring now, but am not sure.
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Curtis
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 12:29 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: FS: MT Prop Gov
Some folks are opting for the PCU5000/X (http://pcu5000.com). It supposedly
governs better than the MT provided in the FF kit. Someone on Vansairforce
is doing a group buy of the PCU5000. Since the PCU5000X ($1350) is more
expensive than the MT ($Van's $1100), this may be another case of a
solution looking for a problem. Has anyone flying had issues with the MT
P-860-3?
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=17279&page=1&pp=10&hi
ghlight=pcu
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
> X-Rcpt-To: <wcurtis@nerv10.com>
>
> Why would you sell? What are you going to run with?
>
> John
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Neal George
> Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 7:40 PM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com; RV7A@yahoogroups.com; rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: FS: MT Prop Gov
>
>
>
> Listers -
>
>
>
> I have a new MT prop governor for sale.
>
> $1075, shipped.
>
>
>
> Neal E. George
> 2023 Everglades Drive
> Navarre, FL 32566
> Home - 850-515-0640
> Cell - 850-218-4838
--
4:01 PM
Message 31
| 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: | Trueflight 190The Perfect Panel |
Russ your explanation and examples helps many in the choice of GRT as a
lower cost and robust alternative to the plunge into the deep end
(financially) with Chelton. However one of your sentences led me to
believe that you also have Onboard Radar - which brand?
I was under the impression that the data painted (in the examples was
from something like WSI) was delayed and sent by RF signal over a
receiver, then overlaid into the GRT screen to create the impression of
having onboard radar when one was not present onboard. How do you
designate the equipped RV-10 for IFR flight plans?
John
________________________________
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Russell Daves
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 4:12 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Trueflight 190The Perfect Panel
I installed the GRT WX Weather module and wired it to feed all three of
my GRT screens (displayed over the moving map). I love it. On a recent
trip it really helped fly around some really bad weather. I could have
flown around such weather as I was VFR but I would have gone a long way
around instead of picking and choosing my route. ATC (flight following)
asked if I had onboard radar and my response was "Yes that is why I am
now heading due West instead of Northwest" ATC said that a pilot
reported ice at 14000 feet. I feel real sorry for anybody who flew
through the middle of that system on an IFR flight plan.
You can see screen shots of the route I flew through the weather cells
at:
http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sjtabiweather2go5.jpg
http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sjtabiweather1yr4.jpg
http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sjtlbbweather1og4.jpg
<http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sjtlbbweather1og4.jpg>
The screen shots cover the last part of the flight around the weather.
I wished I had shot a picture when the weather system was directly ahead
of me before I turned west to fly around it. My route was KERV direct
to KLBB but southeast of KSJT I turned west as the weather system was
painted from just west of KSJT TO at least 50 miles east of KDYS. After
turning west and going around KSJT I then fly back Northeast between
KSJT and KBPG and then headed North between KBPG and KSWW. Had I not
had onboard radar I would have flown west probably west of KMAF before
turning back north and then coming into KLBB from the west side (headed
East).
I cannot say enough about how great the customer service is at GRT as
well.
Russ Daves
N710RV - First flight 7/28/06 - 110 hours and counting
Message 32
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Let me make a plug at this point for the efforts of your continued
membership with AOPA and the knowledge of Randy Kenagy and his group.
He was instrumental in trying to educate the bone-headed Oregon
bureaucrats on ADS-B a while back.
Your membership pays dividends which might not be felt if the Airlines
rewrite FAA user fees (regardless of politic) prevails.
If you are not a member, you might reconsider during this contentious
lobby effort.
John Cox -
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 9:57 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
Kelly, when you used the word "Monopoly" you struck a chord with
me there. I just happened to catch that article a couple hours
ago too. To me, it reeks of 2 possibilities...
1) A Microsoft-like action by Garmin to get people to pay for another
upgrade to a new system.
or
2) A stupid inadvertent mistake by the fumbling policy writers at
the FAA. I could just have been a mistake.
Either way, my gut feeling is that it'll either be rectified by
new documents that change some wording or references, or it'll be
rectified by some sort of software update. It made me happy to see
that my AOPA dues were being used for something else useful at
least. They've been really earning that money the past few years.
Clearly though, from a functional standpoint there is really nothing
that has changed. A positive note is that part 91 operators are not
legally bound by regulations to comply.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
> Your perfect panel just got less perfect, as FAA moves to establish
> Garmin monopoly:
> FAA policy change restricts many IFR GPS receivers
> GPS receiver
>
> Those older IFR-certified GPS receivers (and some brand-new ones) that
> you've been relying on for years may now be unapproved for flying many
> instrument procedures, thanks to some recent FAA policy changes.
>
> "This doesn't make any sense. In most cases, this is not a safety of
> flight issue," said Randy Kenagy, AOPA senior director of strategic
> planning. "Pilots affected will lose access to approaches and
> published routes unnecessarily."
>
> AOPA has brought the matter to the FAA's attention.
>
> The issue came about in March when the FAA updated avionics compliance
> tables in Advisory Circular 90-100A and made changes to the
> Aeronautical Information Manual. It means that up to 26,000 GPS users
> no longer comply with a 1996 FAA policy that allows GPS to be used in
> lieu of ADF or DME.
>
> Only three GPS models - the Garmin 400-, 500-, and G1000-series - are
> legal, according to the FAA documents. Other models made by Garmin,
> including the new GNS 480 WAAS receiver, as well as receivers
> manufactured by Chelton, Honeywell, Northstar, and Trimble are listed
> as "noncompliant." See the avionics chart.
>
> Many members have removed ADF and DME navigation equipment from their
> aircraft because of the 1996 policy, and they will no longer have
> access to conventional and precision approaches where the equipment is
> a required element. Complicating matters further, the older GPS boxes
> are prohibited from flying RNAV routes and terminal RNAV procedures.
>
> AOPA told the FAA that all IFR-certified systems should still be
> approved for use in lieu of ADF and DME and for flying T routes and
> certain departure procedures where pilots manually enter the
> waypoints. Except for major metropolitan airports, the use of older
> boxes should not be restricted.
>
Message 33
| 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 |
|
Neal has not answered why he is selling or the solution. Thanks for a
possible perspective.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William
Curtis
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 9:29 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: FS: MT Prop Gov
Some folks are opting for the PCU5000/X (http://pcu5000.com). It
supposedly governs better than the MT provided in the FF kit. Someone
on Vansairforce is doing a group buy of the PCU5000. Since the PCU5000X
($1350) is more expensive than the MT ($Van's $1100), this may be
another case of a solution looking for a problem. Has anyone flying had
issues with the MT P-860-3?
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=17279&page=1&pp=1
0&highlight=pcu
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
> X-Rcpt-To: <wcurtis@nerv10.com>
>
> Why would you sell? What are you going to run with?
>
> John
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Neal George
> Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 7:40 PM
> To: rv-list@matronics.com; RV7A@yahoogroups.com;
rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: FS: MT Prop Gov
>
>
>
> Listers -
>
>
>
> I have a new MT prop governor for sale.
>
> $1075, shipped.
>
>
>
> Neal E. George
> 2023 Everglades Drive
> Navarre, FL 32566
> Home - 850-515-0640
> Cell - 850-218-4838
Message 34
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
It's starting to make sense to me too! Taking it a step further, does
it make sense to even try to do a basic IFR setup in one's '10 before
one has the rating and has had a chance to use it for awhile?
You raised the point of button pushing versus proficiency and currency.
That's a big question for me. One one hand, I've seen our local package
express/check cashing pilots train. These folks can fly a failed engine
twin with the standard 6 pack thru an approach, miss, and hold and
still talk about "I like keeping it a half needle to the right so my
landing light will be on the centerline when I break out". I just try
to fly straight enough to avoid embarassing myself on the controllers radar.
On the other hand, I found use of my 2nd generation IFR cert'd Garmin
300XL a total challenge. Flying a standard GPS T approach with it is a
piece of cake. Flying an ADF or VOR overlay is more challenging.
Trying to use it to aid in a typical vector-to-ILS situation can also be
challenging. With proficiency, I can use it to great advantage in these
situations. When a bit rusty, rust being a very real challenge to us
non-pros, it was best to just fly vectors and use it exactly as an ADF
or DME might be used. But forget the moving map, programming interim
points, or even trying to use it as a second VOR in those situations. I
learned that often less was more. It's pretty crude technology compared
to the modern systems.
Tim and others are convincing me that the *some* of the current stuff is
actually easy to use even when mixed with a bit of rust. I need some
hands-on to confirm that for me. I'm sure some of the current stuff is
more challenging. We are certainly on the verge of having these systems
actually make *all* aspects of IFR flight easier and safer for the non-pro.
But the point I'm getting to is this - properly equipping a used GA
plane for IFR required IFR experience in the old 6 pack days. Figuring
out how you would combine existing equipment with a major upgrade, and
coming out the back end with what you wanted took some experience.
Perhaps properly equipping a homebuilt for IFR requires IFR experience
too. There are many choices, many alternatives, and many approaches in
a constantly changing environment. Would that make the prudent course
to equip for VFR, get experience with plane, mission, and self., then
upgrade as desired? Inefficient? maybe. Some dollars may be wasted.
But the bottom line may in fact benefit. Just a thought.
I feel like I have some experience but frankly, I stand here lost in the
face of all the choices. My dream is an IFR cruiser that will put my
'ol Maule to shame. So I will try to take advantage of those that have
gone before and end up with a Cheltonesque panel and as few unused
redundancies as possible. We'll see.
Bill "heading to the hangar for a long weekend of progress" Watson
John Jessen wrote:
>
> Yes!
>
> I think that the point is well presented and well taken. I've said to more
> than one person that "I don't get it" in terms of all the higher end panels.
> Tim, Deems and others have explained their rationale to me and I'm slowly
> getting it, but Bill finally put into words what I haven't been able to. I
> love flying for the sake of flying, and to me this means VFR most of the
> time. This is what has been in the back of my mind and I couldn't explain
> it. Thanks, Bill !!
>
> I will get my IFR rating, because I honestly do believe it will make me a
> better pilot (and insurance companies might like me better) just as a tail
> wheel endorsement will also. I have a float plane rating and that certainly
> has made me better (landing floats on glassy waters requires some precision
> that I wasn't used to before). However, I love the ability to just fly.
> Get in and go. Sure you want to have a flight plan and file it, and sure
> you'd like flight following, but there's something about keeping it simple
> that appeals to me.
>
> So, my big challenge has been what to put in that works well in the assumed
> IFR future that I know I'll be involved in, but also doesn't bust the bank,
> and doesn't just sit there while I have fun looking out the window and down
> at my maps occasionally. And will I keep current enough in real IMC that I
> could, honestly, safely, take advantage of the IFR system? This is a big,
> big question. I think for those who are already IFR trained and that's what
> they normally fly, it isn't such an issue to think in terms of the more
> advanced systems. If they can afford it, it probably is a no brainer.
>
> But there's the rub. A high end system can make IFR simpler during the high
> workload, high risk scenarios that one will, if they fly IFR/IMC, eventually
> find. That's when a current, but not super current, IFR pilot needs that
> electronic horsepower. So, getting a glass panel 6-pack substitute, such as
> the AFS EFIS, coupled with a (for example) G430W and some type of MFD, may
> not be the safest thing for someone who spends most of his/her time flying
> VFR, with only the occasional IFR/IMC usage. This is why I'm so interested
> in the combination of equipment that can bridge that gap between basic IFR
> and the high end systems. You want minimal button pushing and mental
> gyrations in those situations that are the highest stress/workload
> situations. It's easy to do enroute with almost any system. It gets
> progressively more difficult for take offs, holdings, approaches, but all of
> these have been done for decades on steam gauges, so it's not impossible.
> It's just that with all the goodies out there, one wants to put together
> something that works well, doesn't bust the bank (for me and I bet many who
> are not commenting on the list), but can be effective. This is why I've
> been begging for situational descriptions about how systems work well or
> not. Tim is correct, this is so hard to discuss because everyone is working
> for such minimal examples, both in terms of situations and in terms of
> equipment. However, the situations do exist, whether you've experienced
> them or read about them, and you know your system, so you can give at least
> some type of evaluation how it should work given the situation. To some it
> might also be embarrassing to discuss what has happened and how their system
> responded, but we need to discuss these things in order for all of us to
> gain. I want all of us to benefit, and really the only way is to get the
> stories out and discuss them.
>
> Money will be the limiting factor for many of us. Someone is going to have
> to give me oxygen when I plunk down my bucks for the panel. And that's
> after I've been let out of the intensive care unit for the engine payment.
> However, when all is said and done, I'll be happy with whatever I have and
> practice with it as much as possible. True enough. But until then lots of
> decisions have to be made. Bill has helped me understand what it was that I
> couldn't get put into words, that I couldn't get past a generalized feeling
> about. That's the beauty of this list and of sharing thoughts. Please!
> Those silent ones out there. Jump in! The water is fine.
>
> John Jessen
> #328
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of MauleDriver
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 8:20 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
>
>
> This has all made me try to think around this issue a different way.
> Give a realistic assessment of a future the owner's capabilities, missions
> and desires, perhaps a less considered sweet spot is the VFR cruiser.
>
> Assume for a minute that the owner is not instrument rated (but plans to be
> sometime in the future), or is not able/willing to always remain current per
> the regs (me). Assume that the '10 will be a serious cross country machine
> (weekender bag, cooler, mate, extra shoes for mate), and you live in the
> eastern US (just can't comment on fly-styles west of the Mississip). I've
> been thinking of a guy I've been listening to on Rec.aviation.pilot for a
> few years. He's been flying a VFR Pathfinder quite happily for some years -
> Jay Honeck:
> http://www.alexisparkinn.com/welcome_to_the_inn.htm
> Many times Jay has been asked to defend his VFR-only flying, as in "Jay, you
> need an IFR rating - it will make your travels so much easier". But he
> argues that VFR is right for him and his family and frankly he makes a lot
> of sense. Following his flying exploits, I wonder if many/most of us will
> end up doing what he does. And if we do, we'll die very happy.
>
> What is out there weather-wise is a lot of very flyable VFR weather and
> destinations. A simple steam guage VFR '10 like Van's is a super machine.
> But as homebuilders, we are sorely tempted to juice it up. So how would you
> juice up a VFR '10?
>
> Weather is still the issue. A 396 or better is practically mandatory from a
> cost-benefit standpoint. It turns many marginal VFR sky gropes
> out over the horizon, into more safer, fully informed journeys into
> calm waters.
>
> What is also needed are tools to fly in the near-IFR conditions we all fly
> in every summer. I'm not talking clouds or fog, or flying into
> deteriorating conditions but just plain summer haze. Make it westbound in
> the evening with smoke from a few distant fires and you really can benefit
> from use of the gyro panel... or a low end glass EFIS. Add an autopilot -
> anywhere from a wing leveler to a sorcerer - and you can truly remain VFR
> because you are actually looking out the window.
> Remember, anyone can trim a cruiser to maintain altitude, it's the wing
> leveling that you really need. And if it's driven by your GPS, wow!
> So a low end glass EFIS, GPS, autopilot, and a backup GPS with Satellite
> weather and 101 music channels makes this a very comfortable and capable VFR
> cruiser.
>
> To complete the safety package, add traffic awareness.
>
> It looks state of the art, it flys state of the art, it is state of the art.
> And it may realistically reflect the true capabilities, mission, and desires
> of many of us owner/pilots to be.
>
> You've skipped heated pitots, some Nav equipment, extensive backups,
> certification(?), and the costs of getting and staying instrument
> proficient.
>
> So how many $$ are needed to realize this dream? I don't know but it's
> maybe it's worth a run.
>
> Below is one of Jay's latest postings to rec.aviation.piloting:
>
> We were flying back from Springfield last Sunday, arcing into a setting sun
> the size of a pie tin. It was one of those flights where you keep catching
> yourself turning off course, just to get the sun behind the windshield post
> and out of your eyes...
>
> We'd been silent most of the way, just enjoying the ride and the afterglow
> of a day well-spent visiting old friends, when my daughter, age 13, asked me
> to play the theme song from "One Six Right" on the CD player.
>
> Mary and I both looked at each other, shocked that Becca even knew the name
> of the album, much less the song itself -- but I quickly slid the disk into
> the player, and listened as the fabulous opening bars began to play...
>
> (For those who don't know the music, listen to it here, for free:
> http://www.onesixright.com/ )
>
> There was a scattered layer of clouds below, and a few above, and the sun
> played behind them, scattering the light into a million separate beams,
> lighting the verdant farmland far below with a burning, heavenly glow. The
> view was simply breath-taking.
>
> My daughter, usually oblivious to the flying she has done so often since
> birth, suddenly asked me to "Do the soaring thing to the music, Dad, like
> you did before..."
>
> Hesitant to deviate from straight and level while talking to Chicago Center,
> I started a little dipping and rolling to the music. I glanced over to see
> that her eyes were closed, the sunshine was lighting her face like an angel,
> and she was simply *feeling* the flight with all of her senses. She was
> grinning from ear to ear.
>
> Inspired, I let my inhibitions go, and began giant swoops and gentle
> push-overs, all in time to the orchestral crescendos of "One Six
> Right". Soon, I found myself closing *my* eyes, and feeling the
> weightlessness at the top of the arc, and the one-G steep turns, back
> and forth, all to the beat of the music. It was magical.
>
> Throat tightening, chest bursting, I wanted to cry with joy. If there is a
> heaven, it must feel very much like this.
>
> And my daughter was "getting it"!
>
> When we landed, Becca -- vocally against the very notion of learning to fly
> for so many years -- said "Dad, maybe I *will* learn to fly some day..."
>
> :-)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
>
Message 35
| 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: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane |
Great post William, and pretty much right on. The DFIIVSGV if you
couple it to many EFIS's is a very powerful autopilot. By itself
it's a very nice autopilot that will make your job easier. The
Sorcerer does include a bunch of great features that make it
good as a stand-alone AP, or an AP that would work with many
IFR GPS systems. Jesse's post just covered a bunch of that
stuff too.
I do have an answer for this question though:
"What exactly is an "IFR EFIS"? "
Indeed, EFIS is an acronym that leaves the definition pretty open,
but I can tell you exactly what makes an IFR EFIS. Look at
the Dynon, GRT, and many others...then compare it to the G900
and Chelton and I'm assuming the OP Tech. The Chelton system
uses an actual Jeppesen IFR database with all SIDs and STARs
and everything else in it, and I would think the G900 does too.
And, you can purchase a Jepp Subscription to it. Additionally,
Jepp is the only *certified* electronic database available for
IFR systems. So the fact that these EFIS contain all of the flight
planning features of most radios like the 430W/530W/480, and they
have all the necessary certified IFR databases, that would distinguish
them from the other. In fact, even if another system uses the FAA
data's database, it just isn't the same as it's not a certified
electronic database. A regular subscription update is a key too.
That's one question that's been gnawing at me about OP Tech too...and
perhaps Deems or someone can answer. For Chelton, right now you
buy a Jepp database from Chelton, but that's changing and soon
we'll be buying from Jepp. For OP Tech, I can't seem to find any
info on the database updates on Jepps site, or OP Tech's site,
and the same with the Chart functions for those systems. One
thing you can be assured is that there is a cost if it's Jepp.
But, not seeing a Jepp database gave me questions on what how
useful the system would be without a 430/530/480 if you can't
get Jepp data on a subscription. So yeah, there are IFR
EFIS systems, and there are non-IFR EFIS systems. That's
not at all to say you can't fly IFR with a non-IFR EFIS, but
to say you then need to ensure you have the other part
91.205 for IFR flight "navigation equipment appropriate to the
ground facilities to be used".
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
William Curtis wrote:
> <wcurtis@nerv10.com>
>
> Richard,
>
>> Just one example that took a awhile to understand was the
>> significant differences between the DigiFlight and Sorcerer
>> autopilots. One has it's own brain (Sorcerer) and can fly most any
>> scenario on it's own while the DigiFlight requires some other
>> component to do the heavy thinking.
>
> Just a minor correction. Both the DigiFlight and the Sorcerer "have
> a brain." Each can fly the airplane on its own using the built in
> heading gyro and altitude sensor. What the Sorcerer adds is VHF/NAV
> capability. That is, it can fly a coupled VOR/LOC/ILS approach from
> any plain old VHF/NAV radio. The DigiFlight can do this only if you
> are flying an overlay approach on your IFR GPS and it is controlling
> the autopilot. Since most IFR GPS will provide a lateral overlay,
> and now the "W" GPS will also provide vertical guidance, the benefits
> of the Sorcerer over a DigiFlight II VSGV are not worth the extra $5K
> IMHO. Also if you truly want the DigiFlight to fly a VOR/LOC/ILS,
> not just the overlay, you could drive if from any HSI/EFIS with an
> ARINC 429 interface and GPSS-V.
>
> The TruTrak RV-10 Autopilot is the Sorcerer with the VHF/NAV
> capability removed and a yaw dampener added.
>
>> The costs envolved in a modern safe IFR EFIS panel are probably the
>> biggest single expense catagory in the project, but if well planned
>> and executed should provide and equally valuable sense of
>> acomplishment.
>
> I've seen many use this term -- What exactly is an "IFR EFIS"? I
> know what an IFR GPS is as there are many TSOs and documents relating
> to it but for those that use this term, can you explain what makes
> one EFIS IFR and one not?
>
> William http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>
>
>
Message 36
| 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: Trueflight 190The Perfect Panel |
Thanks for the pics as it greatly enhances the text.
Kevin
40494
tail/empennage
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Russell Daves
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 4:12 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Trueflight 190The Perfect Panel
I installed the GRT WX Weather module and wired it to feed all three
of my GRT screens (displayed over the moving map). I love it. On a
recent trip it really helped fly around some really bad weather. I
could have flown around such weather as I was VFR but I would have gone
a long way around instead of picking and choosing my route. ATC (flight
following) asked if I had onboard radar and my response was "Yes that is
why I am now heading due West instead of Northwest" ATC said that a
pilot reported ice at 14000 feet. I feel real sorry for anybody who
flew through the middle of that system on an IFR flight plan.
You can see screen shots of the route I flew through the weather cells
at:
http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sjtabiweather2go5.jpg
http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sjtabiweather1yr4.jpg
http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sjtlbbweather1og4.jpg
The screen shots cover the last part of the flight around the weather.
I wished I had shot a picture when the weather system was directly
ahead of me before I turned west to fly around it. My route was KERV
direct to KLBB but southeast of KSJT I turned west as the weather system
was painted from just west of KSJT TO at least 50 miles east of KDYS.
After turning west and going around KSJT I then fly back Northeast
between KSJT and KBPG and then headed North between KBPG and KSWW. Had
I not had onboard radar I would have flown west probably west of KMAF
before turning back north and then coming into KLBB from the west side
(headed East).
I cannot say enough about how great the customer service is at GRT as
well.
Russ Daves
N710RV - First flight 7/28/06 - 110 hours and counting
Message 37
| 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: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane |
2 comments on this post...
Jesse Saint wrote:
> Do
> all ILS approach airports have a precision GPS approach also? Does anything
> except the GRT offer "artificial GPS approaches" on an ILS? This may not
> matter to some, but there are a lot of pilots who still want to be able to
> fly an actual ILS, although this is probably changing with the WAAS
> approaches.
Well, there are GPS approaches that fly similar to an ILS (like WAAS
approaches), and there are GPS Overlays that EFIS's provide. They
are different yet similar. I can give an example of my system anyway:
The Chelton will fly an actual ILS approach, but the main guidance
without external inputs would come from a GPS overlay which they have
for every approach basically. So when you load the approach, you
have a HITS that appears and will bring you right down the boxes
for the approach. But, this is NOT driven by an ILS radio signal
coming from some ground antenna. What IS being driven by that
radio signal is your NAV receiver which will display a localizer
and glideslope on the EFIS that is displaying this data. Then,
your job is to verify that not only are you in the HITS boxes, but
also look RIGHT NEXT to your HITS on the screen and verify you're
actually on the glideslope and localizer. The funny thing is, if
they don't agree, you're supposed to follow the localizer/GS, not
the HITS, because the loc/GS is the official data on an ILS approach.
(Never seen them not match though as of yet) You would think the
GPS overlay would be the reliable one...but if you're flying an ILS
you need to follow ILS display indicators. Now, if you're flying
a GPS approach, then those 2 things should be identical and the
glideslope you're flying will be GPS based and it will always
match up with the HITS. So, indeed I can fly the overlays
and an actual ILS....and be doing it at the same time.
>
> The extra $4K for the Sorcerer is a chunk of change, but for many I think
> the peace of mind of having almost all controls right on the unit instead of
> having to tell it what to do through the GPS or EFIS is worth it. If you
> don't want the altitude select but do want the analog NAV, go with the
> AP-100 for $6,900. If you don't want the analog NAV and do want the
> altitude select, go with the RV-10 AP. If you want both, go with the
> Sorcerer. If you don't want either, then the DII VSG or VSGV are for you,
> at $4,725 and $5,225 respectively.
Regarding the value of the Sorcerer.... I can't knock it because it's
excellent. But, it really depends on exactly what other hardware you
have as to how much that extra almost doubling of price is worth. For
my system the added benefits are very very minimal. If your main
radio is a 430W/530W/480 but you lack the other equipment, you will
probably find that the $5,000 is well spent. It just depends.
In your example you mentioned things like putting in a target altitude
and climb rate and things like that. With the stuff I'm using I
can set a VSI bug for 800fpm climb and a target altitude of 10,000'
and it'll just do exactly that. In fact, departing IFR my practice
would be to punch in the targets and as soon as I lift off the runway
just engage GPSS/GSPV and from there on I just manage trim and power.
So I get all the function of the sorcerer with roughly 1/2 the
cash outlay. The only time it's a shortcoming is if I were completely
EFIS-less...then I could not have an autopilot flown ILS. I can
still fly a WAAS Lnav/Vnav or LPV approach on the 480, but I'd
have to hand-fly an ILS.
Also, for sorcerer users remember that you should set your altimeter
on that unit as well as any other altimeters before takeoff if you're
going to use it for altitude assignments.
Tim
do not archive
Message 38
| 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: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane |
Re. Op Tech and Jepps
Yes they do use Jepps database, you have 2 options:
a. an annual subscription, or
b. 'pay as you go'
I'm not sure what the current pricing is, but from memory the annual
subscription was aprox $700 and the 'pay as you go' was $90 per update.
You download the updates from their website and place them on an SD card
and update the EFIS.
They just published a new website, and I can't find the current pricing,
perhaps they moved it to the download section which requires a password
and user id. (I haven't activated mine yet to preserve the '1 year'
trigger.)
Deems Davis # 406
Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! )
http://deemsrv10.com/
Tim Olson wrote:
> --> A regular subscription update is a key too.
> That's one question that's been gnawing at me about OP Tech too...and
> perhaps Deems or someone can answer. ............
Message 39
| 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 |
|
I am a retired SLC approach controller and currently
flying for a corporation. Do NOT count on traffic from
any controller anywhere whether you are IFR or
VFR!(IMHO) It is not required. Safety alerts are
required to be issued by controllers but the
parameters for what constitutes a safety alert are not
specified. Also the controller has to see the conflict
before traffic can be issued, controllers are human
and don't see or even understand every conflict.
As for TCAS or equivalent type displays, they are a
very valuable tool in the cockpit! you just need to
understand the limitations of you system.
Steve 40212
--- Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com> wrote:
> I understand that it would be nice having traffic in
> the panel, but isn't
> that what ATC is there for?
Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate
in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367
Message 40
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
John,
Are you inferring the ADS-B project is dead here in Oregon? I thought it
was alive and well, behind schedule but still had a heart beat.
Vern Smith (#324)
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 10:09 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
Let me make a plug at this point for the efforts of your continued
membership with AOPA and the knowledge of Randy Kenagy and his group.
He was instrumental in trying to educate the bone-headed Oregon
bureaucrats on ADS-B a while back.
Your membership pays dividends which might not be felt if the Airlines
rewrite FAA user fees (regardless of politic) prevails.
If you are not a member, you might reconsider during this contentious
lobby effort.
John Cox -
Message 41
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Bill, while it's definitely an option to outfit minimally, as
Gary S. mentioned before, and flying for a while until you
know your mission or goals, I'm not sure if it would help.
Doing that would prevent you from getting hands-on experience
that would help you form your goals.
You're right that it can be very hard to know what all works well
together when upgrading or building, and to know what the end
result would be. I don't think it's impossible though.
I basically couldn't be happier but it was bought with lots
of time and effort. But I keep recommending over and over
that people actually just go FLY with some systems. The technical
details as to what talks to what aren't that hard to find out,
once you narrow the field on equipment. So the goal would
be to fly a few various layouts of brands you may be interested
in, see what you can learn, and then keep asking questions
until you pick a winner. Then ask all the questions to ensure
it will work with everything else, and then, after all is said
and done, buy it. I can guarantee that you'd have a clear
picture of all of my misc. ramblings if I took you for
a 1-2 hour flight.
There are hundreds of GRT's out there and loads of Cheltons
both certified and non-certified. The G1000 makes a great
test-flight for a G900 buyer. So getting time won't be
impossible, and it could be the most worthy $500 round-trip
airline ticket you could buy to go determine your choice.
I spent the money to fly the RV-10 at the factory for the
same reasons....to know I was buying the right kit...even
though I waited until on the wings.
For those who aren't instrument rated though, my recommendation
backs up a step....I really think you'd benefit from the rating
before you build the panel. No insult intended, but you really
don't have a clue about IFR flight until you've been through
it with training and even some experience...where it's YOU
at the controls with the sweat on your brow. Then, at that
point, you'll have enough of a concept to begin flying some
systems and seeing how well you can do, and if they do everything
you would hope for.
Tim
> But the point I'm getting to is this - properly equipping a used GA
> plane for IFR required IFR experience in the old 6 pack days. Figuring
> out how you would combine existing equipment with a major upgrade, and
> coming out the back end with what you wanted took some experience.
> Perhaps properly equipping a homebuilt for IFR requires IFR experience
> too. There are many choices, many alternatives, and many approaches in
> a constantly changing environment. Would that make the prudent course
> to equip for VFR, get experience with plane, mission, and self., then
> upgrade as desired? Inefficient? maybe. Some dollars may be wasted.
> But the bottom line may in fact benefit. Just a thought.
>
Message 42
| 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: | The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane |
Jesse, Yup, clear -clear as mud:-)
> You are right for the most part. The Sorcerer, I believe, doesn't have an
> internal heading source, while the Digiflight II does (which isn't worth
> anything on the ones that I have flown). If you lose heading info from the
> external GPS, the Sorcerer will let you decide a bank angle, whereas the DII
> will let you select a Heading ("HDG" will display instead of "TRK" when it
> gets the info from a GPS).
Well according to their web page, the Sorcerer has a " GPS-Slaved solid-state Directional
Gyro" and the DigiFlights have "Built-in Digital Slaved Directional
Gyro." I think these are worth a LOT as if all else in your panel fails, you
still have the independent autopilot to keep the plane right side up. Why would
you spend all that money for an autopilot that could not fly the plane without
any external data source? In addition to course tracking, the GPS data for
both provides precession correction to automatically keep the DG aligned with
the compass heading--or more accurately the ground track. You do know the
difference between Track and Heading don't you? Compass/DG reports heading, GPS
reports track.
As far as the vertical speed selector, if you have a Garmin 400/500, the VNAV function
works very well in providing vertical guidance (to the pilot or autopilot)
so that you can "navigate" to a particular fix at a specified crossing altitude.
If you have a navigator with VNAV function, then it is much better to
do the function on it rather than on the autopilot. The vertical speed and VHF/NAV
function of the Sorcerer are nice but if you have a Garmin 400/500 navigator,
you already have those capabilities.
> The extra $4K for the Sorcerer is a chunk of change, but for many I think
> the peace of mind of having almost all controls right on the unit instead of
> having to tell it what to do through the GPS or EFIS is worth it.
Some pilots are EFIS centric while others are GPS navigator centric. For the EFIS
centric, they would much prefer to do all the button pushing on the EFIS (flight
plan, autopilot control, etc). For the GPS navigator centric, they prefer
to do all their button pushing on the GPS navigator and only rely on the EFIS
to display the various information. I haven't met any yet that are autopilot
centric but if there are any out there, I guess they may benefit from what
the Sorcerer offers. Since you have all these functions in most EFIS and GPS
navigators, I still don't see the value.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
> Jesse Saint
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
> jesse@saintaviation.com
> www.saintaviation.com
> Cell: 352-427-0285
> Fax: 815-377-3694
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Curtis
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 11:37 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com; rsipp@earthlink.net
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane
>
>
> Richard,
>
> > Just one example that took a awhile to understand was the significant
> > differences between the DigiFlight and Sorcerer autopilots. One has it's
> > own brain (Sorcerer) and can fly most any scenario on it's own while the
> > DigiFlight requires some other component to do the heavy thinking.
>
> Just a minor correction. Both the DigiFlight and the Sorcerer "have a
> brain." Each can fly the airplane on its own using the built in heading
> gyro and altitude sensor. What the Sorcerer adds is VHF/NAV capability.
> That is, it can fly a coupled VOR/LOC/ILS approach from any plain old
> VHF/NAV radio. The DigiFlight can do this only if you are flying an overlay
> approach on your IFR GPS and it is controlling the autopilot. Since most
> IFR GPS will provide a lateral overlay, and now the "W" GPS will also
> provide vertical guidance, the benefits of the Sorcerer over a DigiFlight II
> VSGV are not worth the extra $5K IMHO. Also if you truly want the
> DigiFlight to fly a VOR/LOC/ILS, not just the overlay, you could drive if
> from any HSI/EFIS with an ARINC 429 interface and GPSS-V.
>
> The TruTrak RV-10 Autopilot is the Sorcerer with the VHF/NAV capability
> removed and a yaw dampener added.
>
> > The costs envolved in a modern safe IFR EFIS panel are probably the
> biggest
> > single expense catagory in the project, but if well planned and executed
> > should provide and equally valuable sense of acomplishment.
>
> I've seen many use this term -- What exactly is an "IFR EFIS"? I know what
> an IFR GPS is as there are many TSOs and documents relating to it but for
> those that use this term, can you explain what makes one EFIS IFR and one
> not?
>
> William
> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 4:01 PM
>
>
>
Message 43
| 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: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane |
Thanks, that's great news. So then we can add the OP officially
as an "IFR EFIS" per the email to William. I do think that
this feature (Jepp Database) really sets them apart in that
you really need that unless you're for sure installing another
device that has them already.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Deems Davis wrote:
>
> Re. Op Tech and Jepps
>
> Yes they do use Jepps database, you have 2 options:
>
> a. an annual subscription, or
> b. 'pay as you go'
>
> I'm not sure what the current pricing is, but from memory the annual
> subscription was aprox $700 and the 'pay as you go' was $90 per update.
> You download the updates from their website and place them on an SD card
> and update the EFIS.
>
> They just published a new website, and I can't find the current pricing,
> perhaps they moved it to the download section which requires a password
> and user id. (I haven't activated mine yet to preserve the '1 year'
> trigger.)
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! )
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>
> Tim Olson wrote:
>> --> A regular subscription update is a key too.
>> That's one question that's been gnawing at me about OP Tech too...and
>> perhaps Deems or someone can answer. ............
>
Message 44
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
The lengthy responses raise this question. Could there be a minimalist
panel to get RV-10 builders to completion and a logical retrofit to the
final and ultimate goal of IFR capability? Scott suggests even his
morphed Dual Chelton/Dual GRT could have benefits from additional
upgrades.
Disregarding the vast sea of wire changes between sensors and
Chelton/GRT are there any clear migration paths that you veterans see?
Should potential buyers have options at OSH '07 Shopping for a two step
build process or is it just "Jump in the Water is Deep"?
I conclude that the use of VANS steam gauges are now a journey down a
terminating road to minimalism - VFR Only.
You went Horizontal Scan, Scott went Vertical.... Tomato/Tomoto.
John C.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
Bill, while it's definitely an option to outfit minimally, as
Gary S. mentioned before, and flying for a while until you
know your mission or goals, I'm not sure if it would help.
Doing that would prevent you from getting hands-on experience
that would help you form your goals.
You're right that it can be very hard to know what all works well
together when upgrading or building, and to know what the end
result would be. I don't think it's impossible though.
I basically couldn't be happier but it was bought with lots
of time and effort. But I keep recommending over and over
that people actually just go FLY with some systems. The technical
details as to what talks to what aren't that hard to find out,
once you narrow the field on equipment. So the goal would
be to fly a few various layouts of brands you may be interested
in, see what you can learn, and then keep asking questions
until you pick a winner. Then ask all the questions to ensure
it will work with everything else, and then, after all is said
and done, buy it. I can guarantee that you'd have a clear
picture of all of my misc. ramblings if I took you for
a 1-2 hour flight.
There are hundreds of GRT's out there and loads of Cheltons
both certified and non-certified. The G1000 makes a great
test-flight for a G900 buyer. So getting time won't be
impossible, and it could be the most worthy $500 round-trip
airline ticket you could buy to go determine your choice.
I spent the money to fly the RV-10 at the factory for the
same reasons....to know I was buying the right kit...even
though I waited until on the wings.
For those who aren't instrument rated though, my recommendation
backs up a step....I really think you'd benefit from the rating
before you build the panel. No insult intended, but you really
don't have a clue about IFR flight until you've been through
it with training and even some experience...where it's YOU
at the controls with the sweat on your brow. Then, at that
point, you'll have enough of a concept to begin flying some
systems and seeing how well you can do, and if they do everything
you would hope for.
Tim
Message 45
| 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: | The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane |
Can you guys identify if you are IFR rated, VFR rated or Simulator
Wannabe Pilot's cause the danger level of the divergent advise has my
mind swimming.
For many reading of these divergent threads, it will take John Jessen
and a computer matrix to sort it all out into meaningful directions.
John C.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane
2 comments on this post...
Jesse Saint wrote:
<jesse@saintaviation.com>
> Do
> all ILS approach airports have a precision GPS approach also? Does
anything
> except the GRT offer "artificial GPS approaches" on an ILS? This may
not
> matter to some, but there are a lot of pilots who still want to be
able to
> fly an actual ILS, although this is probably changing with the WAAS
> approaches.
Well, there are GPS approaches that fly similar to an ILS (like WAAS
approaches), and there are GPS Overlays that EFIS's provide. They
are different yet similar. I can give an example of my system anyway:
The Chelton will fly an actual ILS approach, but the main guidance
without external inputs would come from a GPS overlay which they have
for every approach basically. So when you load the approach, you
have a HITS that appears and will bring you right down the boxes
for the approach. But, this is NOT driven by an ILS radio signal
coming from some ground antenna. What IS being driven by that
radio signal is your NAV receiver which will display a localizer
and glideslope on the EFIS that is displaying this data. Then,
your job is to verify that not only are you in the HITS boxes, but
also look RIGHT NEXT to your HITS on the screen and verify you're
actually on the glideslope and localizer. The funny thing is, if
they don't agree, you're supposed to follow the localizer/GS, not
the HITS, because the loc/GS is the official data on an ILS approach.
(Never seen them not match though as of yet) You would think the
GPS overlay would be the reliable one...but if you're flying an ILS
you need to follow ILS display indicators. Now, if you're flying
a GPS approach, then those 2 things should be identical and the
glideslope you're flying will be GPS based and it will always
match up with the HITS. So, indeed I can fly the overlays
and an actual ILS....and be doing it at the same time.
>
> The extra $4K for the Sorcerer is a chunk of change, but for many I
think
> the peace of mind of having almost all controls right on the unit
instead of
> having to tell it what to do through the GPS or EFIS is worth it. If
you
> don't want the altitude select but do want the analog NAV, go with the
> AP-100 for $6,900. If you don't want the analog NAV and do want the
> altitude select, go with the RV-10 AP. If you want both, go with the
> Sorcerer. If you don't want either, then the DII VSG or VSGV are for
you,
> at $4,725 and $5,225 respectively.
Regarding the value of the Sorcerer.... I can't knock it because it's
excellent. But, it really depends on exactly what other hardware you
have as to how much that extra almost doubling of price is worth. For
my system the added benefits are very very minimal. If your main
radio is a 430W/530W/480 but you lack the other equipment, you will
probably find that the $5,000 is well spent. It just depends.
In your example you mentioned things like putting in a target altitude
and climb rate and things like that. With the stuff I'm using I
can set a VSI bug for 800fpm climb and a target altitude of 10,000'
and it'll just do exactly that. In fact, departing IFR my practice
would be to punch in the targets and as soon as I lift off the runway
just engage GPSS/GSPV and from there on I just manage trim and power.
So I get all the function of the sorcerer with roughly 1/2 the
cash outlay. The only time it's a shortcoming is if I were completely
EFIS-less...then I could not have an autopilot flown ILS. I can
still fly a WAAS Lnav/Vnav or LPV approach on the 480, but I'd
have to hand-fly an ILS.
Also, for sorcerer users remember that you should set your altimeter
on that unit as well as any other altimeters before takeoff if you're
going to use it for altitude assignments.
Tim
do not archive
Message 46
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
> For those who aren't instrument rated though, my recommendation
> backs up a step....I really think you'd benefit from the rating
> before you build the panel. No insult intended, but you really
> don't have a clue about IFR flight until you've been through
> it with training and even some experience...where it's YOU
> at the controls with the sweat on your brow. Then, at that
> point, you'll have enough of a concept to begin flying some
> systems and seeing how well you can do, and if they do everything
> you would hope for.
Totally agree with this!
Just as "Friends don't let friends drive drunk", I'd also suggest that "Friends
should not let VFR friends build IFR panels." Even after you have the rating,
you really need time "in the system" to determine what is really important.
You see some panels supposedly built for IFR and you know the person who designed
it dose not actually fly IFR.
I also agree with Scott's earlier comment that a glass panel ironically allows
you more time looking out the window. For the CIA, you spend much less time on
the C and the I, leaving more time for the A and looking out the window.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
Message 47
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Oregon had the shot at being the #2 state for full -widespread
implementation. It is now way back in the pack for implementation due
to a bone-headed Board of Directors at the Aviation level.
Urgency and validity were two words they did not possess when Randy made
a person presentation on the system at the state capital. Thank
goodness Phil Boyer is also an Oregon pilot. The system is whimpering
through the development process at being behind schedule and over
budget. Much of the state which needed it worst is not under
consideration at this time.
You should all be pressing your state's for their spot on the pecking
order.
John Cox - Legislative Affairs / Oregon Pilots Assoc.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Vern W. Smith
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 11:40 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
John,
Are you inferring the ADS-B project is dead here in Oregon? I thought it
was alive and well, behind schedule but still had a heart beat.
Vern Smith (#324)
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 10:09 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
Let me make a plug at this point for the efforts of your continued
membership with AOPA and the knowledge of Randy Kenagy and his group.
He was instrumental in trying to educate the bone-headed Oregon
bureaucrats on ADS-B a while back.
Your membership pays dividends which might not be felt if the Airlines
rewrite FAA user fees (regardless of politic) prevails.
If you are not a member, you might reconsider during this contentious
lobby effort.
John Cox -
Message 48
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W] |
Sorry if sending this a second time but I never rec'd it back
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
From: MauleDriver <MauleDriver@nc.rr.com>
References: <004801c79ee9$1ed65500$0200a8c0@harris.harrisinteractive.com>
It's starting to make sense to me too! Taking it a step further, does
it make sense to even try to do a basic IFR setup in one's '10 before
one has the rating and has had a chance to use it for awhile?
You raised the point of button pushing versus proficiency and currency.
That's a big question for me. One one hand, I've seen our local package
express/check cashing pilots train. These folks can fly a failed engine
twin with the standard 6 pack thru an approach, miss, and hold and
still talk about "I like keeping it a half needle to the right so my
landing light will be on the centerline when I break out". I just try
to fly straight enough to avoid embarassing myself on the controllers radar.
On the other hand, I found use of my 2nd generation IFR cert'd Garmin
300XL a total challenge. Flying a standard GPS T approach with it is a
piece of cake. Flying an ADF or VOR overlay is more challenging.
Trying to use it to aid in a typical vector-to-ILS situation can also be
challenging. With proficiency, I can use it to great advantage in these
situations. When a bit rusty, rust being a very real challenge to us
non-pros, it was best to just fly vectors and use it exactly as an ADF
or DME might be used. But forget the moving map, programming interim
points, or even trying to use it as a second VOR in those situations. I
learned that often less was more. It's pretty crude technology compared
to the modern systems.
Tim and others are convincing me that the *some* of the current stuff is
actually easy to use even when mixed with a bit of rust. I need some
hands-on to confirm that for me. I'm sure some of the current stuff is
more challenging. We are certainly on the verge of having these systems
actually make *all* aspects of IFR flight easier and safer for the non-pro.
But the point I'm getting to is this - properly equipping a used GA
plane for IFR required IFR experience in the old 6 pack days. Figuring
out how you would combine existing equipment with a major upgrade, and
coming out the back end with what you wanted took some experience.
Perhaps properly equipping a homebuilt for IFR requires IFR experience
too. There are many choices, many alternatives, and many approaches in
a constantly changing environment. Would that make the prudent course
to equip for VFR, get experience with plane, mission, and self., then
upgrade as desired? Inefficient? maybe. Some dollars may be wasted.
But the bottom line may in fact benefit. Just a thought.
I feel like I have some experience but frankly, I stand here lost in the
face of all the choices. My dream is an IFR cruiser that will put my
'ol Maule to shame. So I will try to take advantage of those that have
gone before and end up with a Cheltonesque panel and as few unused
redundancies as possible. We'll see.
Bill "heading to the hangar for a long weekend of progress" Watson
John Jessen wrote:
>
> Yes!
>
> I think that the point is well presented and well taken. I've said to more
> than one person that "I don't get it" in terms of all the higher end panels.
> Tim, Deems and others have explained their rationale to me and I'm slowly
> getting it, but Bill finally put into words what I haven't been able to. I
> love flying for the sake of flying, and to me this means VFR most of the
> time. This is what has been in the back of my mind and I couldn't explain
> it. Thanks, Bill !!
>
> I will get my IFR rating, because I honestly do believe it will make me a
> better pilot (and insurance companies might like me better) just as a tail
> wheel endorsement will also. I have a float plane rating and that certainly
> has made me better (landing floats on glassy waters requires some precision
> that I wasn't used to before). However, I love the ability to just fly.
> Get in and go. Sure you want to have a flight plan and file it, and sure
> you'd like flight following, but there's something about keeping it simple
> that appeals to me.
>
> So, my big challenge has been what to put in that works well in the assumed
> IFR future that I know I'll be involved in, but also doesn't bust the bank,
> and doesn't just sit there while I have fun looking out the window and down
> at my maps occasionally. And will I keep current enough in real IMC that I
> could, honestly, safely, take advantage of the IFR system? This is a big,
> big question. I think for those who are already IFR trained and that's what
> they normally fly, it isn't such an issue to think in terms of the more
> advanced systems. If they can afford it, it probably is a no brainer.
>
> But there's the rub. A high end system can make IFR simpler during the high
> workload, high risk scenarios that one will, if they fly IFR/IMC, eventually
> find. That's when a current, but not super current, IFR pilot needs that
> electronic horsepower. So, getting a glass panel 6-pack substitute, such as
> the AFS EFIS, coupled with a (for example) G430W and some type of MFD, may
> not be the safest thing for someone who spends most of his/her time flying
> VFR, with only the occasional IFR/IMC usage. This is why I'm so interested
> in the combination of equipment that can bridge that gap between basic IFR
> and the high end systems. You want minimal button pushing and mental
> gyrations in those situations that are the highest stress/workload
> situations. It's easy to do enroute with almost any system. It gets
> progressively more difficult for take offs, holdings, approaches, but all of
> these have been done for decades on steam gauges, so it's not impossible.
> It's just that with all the goodies out there, one wants to put together
> something that works well, doesn't bust the bank (for me and I bet many who
> are not commenting on the list), but can be effective. This is why I've
> been begging for situational descriptions about how systems work well or
> not. Tim is correct, this is so hard to discuss because everyone is working
> for such minimal examples, both in terms of situations and in terms of
> equipment. However, the situations do exist, whether you've experienced
> them or read about them, and you know your system, so you can give at least
> some type of evaluation how it should work given the situation. To some it
> might also be embarrassing to discuss what has happened and how their system
> responded, but we need to discuss these things in order for all of us to
> gain. I want all of us to benefit, and really the only way is to get the
> stories out and discuss them.
>
> Money will be the limiting factor for many of us. Someone is going to have
> to give me oxygen when I plunk down my bucks for the panel. And that's
> after I've been let out of the intensive care unit for the engine payment.
> However, when all is said and done, I'll be happy with whatever I have and
> practice with it as much as possible. True enough. But until then lots of
> decisions have to be made. Bill has helped me understand what it was that I
> couldn't get put into words, that I couldn't get past a generalized feeling
> about. That's the beauty of this list and of sharing thoughts. Please!
> Those silent ones out there. Jump in! The water is fine.
>
> John Jessen
> #328
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of MauleDriver
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 8:20 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
>
>
> This has all made me try to think around this issue a different way.
> Give a realistic assessment of a future the owner's capabilities, missions
> and desires, perhaps a less considered sweet spot is the VFR cruiser.
>
> Assume for a minute that the owner is not instrument rated (but plans to be
> sometime in the future), or is not able/willing to always remain current per
> the regs (me). Assume that the '10 will be a serious cross country machine
> (weekender bag, cooler, mate, extra shoes for mate), and you live in the
> eastern US (just can't comment on fly-styles west of the Mississip). I've
> been thinking of a guy I've been listening to on Rec.aviation.pilot for a
> few years. He's been flying a VFR Pathfinder quite happily for some years -
> Jay Honeck:
> http://www.alexisparkinn.com/welcome_to_the_inn.htm
> Many times Jay has been asked to defend his VFR-only flying, as in "Jay, you
> need an IFR rating - it will make your travels so much easier". But he
> argues that VFR is right for him and his family and frankly he makes a lot
> of sense. Following his flying exploits, I wonder if many/most of us will
> end up doing what he does. And if we do, we'll die very happy.
>
> What is out there weather-wise is a lot of very flyable VFR weather and
> destinations. A simple steam guage VFR '10 like Van's is a super machine.
> But as homebuilders, we are sorely tempted to juice it up. So how would you
> juice up a VFR '10?
>
> Weather is still the issue. A 396 or better is practically mandatory from a
> cost-benefit standpoint. It turns many marginal VFR sky gropes
> out over the horizon, into more safer, fully informed journeys into
> calm waters.
>
> What is also needed are tools to fly in the near-IFR conditions we all fly
> in every summer. I'm not talking clouds or fog, or flying into
> deteriorating conditions but just plain summer haze. Make it westbound in
> the evening with smoke from a few distant fires and you really can benefit
> from use of the gyro panel... or a low end glass EFIS. Add an autopilot -
> anywhere from a wing leveler to a sorcerer - and you can truly remain VFR
> because you are actually looking out the window.
> Remember, anyone can trim a cruiser to maintain altitude, it's the wing
> leveling that you really need. And if it's driven by your GPS, wow!
> So a low end glass EFIS, GPS, autopilot, and a backup GPS with Satellite
> weather and 101 music channels makes this a very comfortable and capable VFR
> cruiser.
>
> To complete the safety package, add traffic awareness.
>
> It looks state of the art, it flys state of the art, it is state of the art.
> And it may realistically reflect the true capabilities, mission, and desires
> of many of us owner/pilots to be.
>
> You've skipped heated pitots, some Nav equipment, extensive backups,
> certification(?), and the costs of getting and staying instrument
> proficient.
>
> So how many $$ are needed to realize this dream? I don't know but it's
> maybe it's worth a run.
>
> Below is one of Jay's latest postings to rec.aviation.piloting:
>
> We were flying back from Springfield last Sunday, arcing into a setting sun
> the size of a pie tin. It was one of those flights where you keep catching
> yourself turning off course, just to get the sun behind the windshield post
> and out of your eyes...
>
> We'd been silent most of the way, just enjoying the ride and the afterglow
> of a day well-spent visiting old friends, when my daughter, age 13, asked me
> to play the theme song from "One Six Right" on the CD player.
>
> Mary and I both looked at each other, shocked that Becca even knew the name
> of the album, much less the song itself -- but I quickly slid the disk into
> the player, and listened as the fabulous opening bars began to play...
>
> (For those who don't know the music, listen to it here, for free:
> http://www.onesixright.com/ )
>
> There was a scattered layer of clouds below, and a few above, and the sun
> played behind them, scattering the light into a million separate beams,
> lighting the verdant farmland far below with a burning, heavenly glow. The
> view was simply breath-taking.
>
> My daughter, usually oblivious to the flying she has done so often since
> birth, suddenly asked me to "Do the soaring thing to the music, Dad, like
> you did before..."
>
> Hesitant to deviate from straight and level while talking to Chicago Center,
> I started a little dipping and rolling to the music. I glanced over to see
> that her eyes were closed, the sunshine was lighting her face like an angel,
> and she was simply *feeling* the flight with all of her senses. She was
> grinning from ear to ear.
>
> Inspired, I let my inhibitions go, and began giant swoops and gentle
> push-overs, all in time to the orchestral crescendos of "One Six
> Right". Soon, I found myself closing *my* eyes, and feeling the
> weightlessness at the top of the arc, and the one-G steep turns, back
> and forth, all to the beat of the music. It was magical.
>
> Throat tightening, chest bursting, I wanted to cry with joy. If there is a
> heaven, it must feel very much like this.
>
> And my daughter was "getting it"!
>
> When we landed, Becca -- vocally against the very notion of learning to fly
> for so many years -- said "Dad, maybe I *will* learn to fly some day..."
>
> :-)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
>
Message 49
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Inexperienced or non-IFR pilots should not be giving advise to the
masses in how to build panels or selection of avionics components. I
whole-heartedly concur with your advise.
The masses need to know the quality of the source before giving it
consideration on something so vitally important. Learn to clear out the
clutter quickly.
I will let the experienced IFR pilots chime in on Vertical Stacking
versus Horizontal Stacking and its importance being placed as high on
the panel as practical. Not withholding the importance of a Back Seat
WSO with the armament screen between his/her legs.
Some panel layouts aid in resale, others lend themselves to being
scrapped and rebuilt for resale. The eye is in the beholder
(purchaser). Till then rejoice in your choice and fly often/ fly safe.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William
Curtis
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 12:26 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
> For those who aren't instrument rated though, my recommendation
> backs up a step....I really think you'd benefit from the rating
> before you build the panel. No insult intended, but you really
> don't have a clue about IFR flight until you've been through
> it with training and even some experience...where it's YOU
> at the controls with the sweat on your brow. Then, at that
> point, you'll have enough of a concept to begin flying some
> systems and seeing how well you can do, and if they do everything
> you would hope for.
Totally agree with this!
Just as "Friends don't let friends drive drunk", I'd also suggest that
"Friends should not let VFR friends build IFR panels." Even after you
have the rating, you really need time "in the system" to determine what
is really important. You see some panels supposedly built for IFR and
you know the person who designed it dose not actually fly IFR.
I also agree with Scott's earlier comment that a glass panel ironically
allows you more time looking out the window. For the CIA, you spend
much less time on the C and the I, leaving more time for the A and
looking out the window.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
Message 50
| 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: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane |
I was under the impression that GRT EFIS, since they have a good
relationship with Trutrak and have rewritten some of the control laws, would
drive the DII VSGV from an SL30 either VOR or ILS and could set ALT off of
the EFIS also. Of course pilot controls climb or decent rate. Also I
believe the GRT will fly a silulated ILS at a non ILS airport. I hope I've
understood correctly since that is what I bought but have'nt put to use yet.
Randy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@saintaviation.com>
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 11:41 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane
>
> You are right for the most part. The Sorcerer, I believe, doesn't have an
> internal heading source, while the Digiflight II does (which isn't worth
> anything on the ones that I have flown). If you lose heading info from
> the
> external GPS, the Sorcerer will let you decide a bank angle, whereas the
> DII
> will let you select a Heading ("HDG" will display instead of "TRK" when it
> gets the info from a GPS). The Sorcerer will let you select a target
> altitude for climb or descent, and how you want to get there, indicated
> airspeed for climb and distance for descent, or vertical speed for either.
> This comes in very handy when being vectored by ATC and they say to
> maintain
> at or above a certain altitude, you just punch it in and tell it a
> distance
> and you are done (3 seconds). Vector change is just a rotation of the
> knob
> on either. The Sorcerer will fly the NAV radio, whether VOR's or ILS. Do
> all ILS approach airports have a precision GPS approach also? Does
> anything
> except the GRT offer "artificial GPS approaches" on an ILS? This may not
> matter to some, but there are a lot of pilots who still want to be able to
> fly an actual ILS, although this is probably changing with the WAAS
> approaches. When going missed approach, a toggle of the UP/DOWN switch
> will
> automatically take you into a 500fpm climb while you figure out what to do
> next. With separate buttons for everything, it is much easier to navigate
> and get just what you want, when you want it.
>
> The RV-10 AP is just the Sorcerer without the analog NAV functions, and
> both
> the Sorcerer and the RV-10 AP have the Yaw Dampener as an option, although
> I
> don't believe it is standard with the RV-10 AP, although they mentioned it
> as such in the beginning. The AP-100 is the Sorcerer without the Altitude
> Select or VNAV functions, but it includes the analog NAV functions.
>
> The extra $4K for the Sorcerer is a chunk of change, but for many I think
> the peace of mind of having almost all controls right on the unit instead
> of
> having to tell it what to do through the GPS or EFIS is worth it. If you
> don't want the altitude select but do want the analog NAV, go with the
> AP-100 for $6,900. If you don't want the analog NAV and do want the
> altitude select, go with the RV-10 AP. If you want both, go with the
> Sorcerer. If you don't want either, then the DII VSG or VSGV are for you,
> at $4,725 and $5,225 respectively.
>
> Of course, they are all fantastic auto pilots. Monitor your trim, though,
> unless you want to get into aerobatics. :-)
>
> Jesse Saint
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
> jesse@saintaviation.com
> www.saintaviation.com
> Cell: 352-427-0285
> Fax: 815-377-3694
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Curtis
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 11:37 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com; rsipp@earthlink.net
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane
>
>
> Richard,
>
>> Just one example that took a awhile to understand was the significant
>> differences between the DigiFlight and Sorcerer autopilots. One has it's
>> own brain (Sorcerer) and can fly most any scenario on it's own while the
>> DigiFlight requires some other component to do the heavy thinking.
>
> Just a minor correction. Both the DigiFlight and the Sorcerer "have a
> brain." Each can fly the airplane on its own using the built in heading
> gyro and altitude sensor. What the Sorcerer adds is VHF/NAV capability.
> That is, it can fly a coupled VOR/LOC/ILS approach from any plain old
> VHF/NAV radio. The DigiFlight can do this only if you are flying an
> overlay
> approach on your IFR GPS and it is controlling the autopilot. Since most
> IFR GPS will provide a lateral overlay, and now the "W" GPS will also
> provide vertical guidance, the benefits of the Sorcerer over a DigiFlight
> II
> VSGV are not worth the extra $5K IMHO. Also if you truly want the
> DigiFlight to fly a VOR/LOC/ILS, not just the overlay, you could drive if
> from any HSI/EFIS with an ARINC 429 interface and GPSS-V.
>
> The TruTrak RV-10 Autopilot is the Sorcerer with the VHF/NAV capability
> removed and a yaw dampener added.
>
>> The costs envolved in a modern safe IFR EFIS panel are probably the
> biggest
>> single expense catagory in the project, but if well planned and executed
>> should provide and equally valuable sense of acomplishment.
>
> I've seen many use this term -- What exactly is an "IFR EFIS"? I know
> what
> an IFR GPS is as there are many TSOs and documents relating to it but for
> those that use this term, can you explain what makes one EFIS IFR and one
> not?
>
> William
> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
>
>
> --
> 4:01 PM
>
>
>
Message 51
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Well said William. I think I'd totally agree even though I haven't seen
any of those panels.
What's CIA?
William Curtis wrote:
> Just as "Friends don't let friends drive drunk", I'd also suggest that "Friends
should not let VFR friends build IFR panels." Even after you have the rating,
you really need time "in the system" to determine what is really important.
You see some panels supposedly built for IFR and you know the person who designed
it dose not actually fly IFR.
>
> I also agree with Scott's earlier comment that a glass panel ironically allows
you more time looking out the window. For the CIA, you spend much less time
on the C and the I, leaving more time for the A and looking out the window.
>
>
> William
> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
>
>
>
> Totally agree with this!
Message 52
| 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: FS: MT Prop Gov |
Jesse, or anyone. Is this a common governor model supplied with other Vans
kits with constant speed props?
John 40315
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse@saintaviation.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2007 2:57 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: FS: MT Prop Gov
>
> We had problems with an RPM surge at a certain RPM setting with the MT,
> but
> it was fixed with a stronger spring. I think the new units should all
> have
> the stronger spring now, but am not sure.
>
> Jesse Saint
> Saint Aviation, Inc.
> jesse@saintaviation.com
> www.saintaviation.com
> Cell: 352-427-0285
> Fax: 815-377-3694
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Curtis
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 12:29 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: FS: MT Prop Gov
>
>
> Some folks are opting for the PCU5000/X (http://pcu5000.com). It
> supposedly
> governs better than the MT provided in the FF kit. Someone on
> Vansairforce
> is doing a group buy of the PCU5000. Since the PCU5000X ($1350) is more
> expensive than the MT ($Van's $1100), this may be another case of a
> solution looking for a problem. Has anyone flying had issues with the MT
> P-860-3?
>
> http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=17279&page=1&pp=10&hi
> ghlight=pcu
>
> William
> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
>
> -------- Original Message --------
>> X-Rcpt-To: <wcurtis@nerv10.com>
>>
>> Why would you sell? What are you going to run with?
>>
>> John
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Neal George
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 7:40 PM
>> To: rv-list@matronics.com; RV7A@yahoogroups.com; rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: RV10-List: FS: MT Prop Gov
>>
>>
>>
>> Listers -
>>
>>
>>
>> I have a new MT prop governor for sale.
>>
>> $1075, shipped.
>>
>>
>>
>> Neal E. George
>> 2023 Everglades Drive
>> Navarre, FL 32566
>> Home - 850-515-0640
>> Cell - 850-218-4838
>
>
> --
> 4:01 PM
>
>
>
Message 53
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
So, do we have to take a test before we comment, or do we just submit a bio
with every comment?
Rene' Felker
N423CF
40322
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 1:43 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
Inexperienced or non-IFR pilots should not be giving advise to the
masses in how to build panels or selection of avionics components. I
whole-heartedly concur with your advise.
The masses need to know the quality of the source before giving it
consideration on something so vitally important. Learn to clear out the
clutter quickly.
I will let the experienced IFR pilots chime in on Vertical Stacking
versus Horizontal Stacking and its importance being placed as high on
the panel as practical. Not withholding the importance of a Back Seat
WSO with the armament screen between his/her legs.
Some panel layouts aid in resale, others lend themselves to being
scrapped and rebuilt for resale. The eye is in the beholder
(purchaser). Till then rejoice in your choice and fly often/ fly safe.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William
Curtis
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 12:26 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
> For those who aren't instrument rated though, my recommendation
> backs up a step....I really think you'd benefit from the rating
> before you build the panel. No insult intended, but you really
> don't have a clue about IFR flight until you've been through
> it with training and even some experience...where it's YOU
> at the controls with the sweat on your brow. Then, at that
> point, you'll have enough of a concept to begin flying some
> systems and seeing how well you can do, and if they do everything
> you would hope for.
Totally agree with this!
Just as "Friends don't let friends drive drunk", I'd also suggest that
"Friends should not let VFR friends build IFR panels." Even after you
have the rating, you really need time "in the system" to determine what
is really important. You see some panels supposedly built for IFR and
you know the person who designed it dose not actually fly IFR.
I also agree with Scott's earlier comment that a glass panel ironically
allows you more time looking out the window. For the CIA, you spend
much less time on the C and the I, leaving more time for the A and
looking out the window.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
Message 54
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Yes Tim, I think we are on the same page and basically agree....
-- Hands on experience is extremely valuable and is the key to making
informed decisions
-- You can put together the right panel if you take advantage of some
hands-on and all the other info sources
-- Putting an IFR panel together screams for first having a rating, some
experience using it, plus some hands-on with current equipment
I feel like I have the IFR experience and so with some study and some
hands-on with the current equipment, I'll be able to design the panel of
my dreams and pocketbook.
At the same time, I'm suggesting that if I didn't have the previous IFR
time, it might make sense to either get it, or put together a good VFR
machine. Fly it, confirm that I want IFR capability to expand my
mission, then somehow get the rating, some experience, and then retrofit
my panel. And if VFR in the '10 completely floats my boat which is
highly likely in this super ship - I have what I want along with quite a
few saved $$$ for fuel.
WANTED, any RV10 pilot (including Tim) who is passing thru the
Carolinas. Please stop by 8NC8 and say Hi! I've got hangar space and a
fuel tank... I top you off for a ride!
That's 8NC8, exactly 10nm mag north of RDU. AKA, Lake Ridge Aero Park
in Durham NC.
Bill "in the hangar building but still able to post" Watson
Tim Olson wrote:
>
> Bill, while it's definitely an option to outfit minimally, as
> Gary S. mentioned before, and flying for a while until you
> know your mission or goals, I'm not sure if it would help.
> Doing that would prevent you from getting hands-on experience
> that would help you form your goals.
>
> <snippety snip>
>
> For those who aren't instrument rated though, my recommendation
> backs up a step....I really think you'd benefit from the rating
> before you build the panel. No insult intended, but you really
> don't have a clue about IFR flight until you've been through
> it with training and even some experience...where it's YOU
> at the controls with the sweat on your brow. Then, at that
> point, you'll have enough of a concept to begin flying some
> systems and seeing how well you can do, and if they do everything
> you would hope for.
>
> Tim
>
>
>> But the point I'm getting to is this - properly equipping a used GA
>> plane for IFR required IFR experience in the old 6 pack days.
>> Figuring out how you would combine existing equipment with a major
>> upgrade, and coming out the back end with what you wanted took some
>> experience. Perhaps properly equipping a homebuilt for IFR requires
>> IFR experience too. There are many choices, many alternatives, and
>> many approaches in a constantly changing environment. Would that
>> make the prudent course to equip for VFR, get experience with plane,
>> mission, and self., then upgrade as desired? Inefficient? maybe.
>> Some dollars may be wasted. But the bottom line may in fact
>> benefit. Just a thought.
>>
>
>
Message 55
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
On May 25, 2007, at 2:26 PM, William Curtis wrote:
> Just as "Friends don't let friends drive drunk", I'd also suggest
> that "Friends should not let VFR friends build IFR panels." Even
> after you have the rating, you really need time "in the system" to
> determine what is really important. You see some panels supposedly
> built for IFR and you know the person who designed it dose not
> actually fly IFR.
What? You're telling me that just because I don't have my ticket
*yet* that I shouldn't build a panel for when I *do* get it?
My currently VFR skills will have an IFR panel including Chelton/Op +
associated *stuff*. The EFIS can be used for VFR too and I don't
have to spend a lot of $$time$$ adding *stuff* when my IFR ticket is
mailed.
Confused and maybe missing the point.
-Sean #40303
Message 56
| 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: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane |
OK, so in this case you have defined an IFR EFIS as an EFIS with a Jepp database.
I'm not sure I would agree with this definition. While it is clear what make
one GPS VFR and another IFR, I submit that there is no clear definition for
what makes an EFIS VFR or IFR. Certainly there is no FAA definition of an IFR
EFIS which is why I started this discussion. VFR GPS and most handhelds also
have internal Jepp databases and yet still they are not "IFR". Maybe "EFIS
with IFR navigation" would be more appropriate, but still not totally correct
if there was not at least a TSO 129a GPS included.
By your definition, the G900X/1000 would be considered an IFR EFIS since it includes
an integral TSO 146a GPS with Jepp data. So would the certified Chelton
FlightLogic EFIS.
But what about the G600 which does not? Should this NOT be considered an IFR EFIS
since it does NOT have a built in Jepp database? And while it's does NOT
meet your definition of an "IFR EFIS", why would Garmin get a blanket STC to
install it in certified aircraft replacing the standard 6 pack and CDIs?
So either the G900X/1000 and the certified Chelton FlightLogic EFIS are the ONLY
IFR EFIS or there is no such thing as an IFR EFIS.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
>
>
> Thanks, that's great news. So then we can add the OP officially
> as an "IFR EFIS" per the email to William. I do think that
> this feature (Jepp Database) really sets them apart in that
> you really need that unless you're for sure installing another
> device that has them already.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
Message 57
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
The great thing is we get to rebuild our panels as often as we like.
Going home to work on my instrument rating using ASA IP PC based
software :)
Bobby
40116
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rene Felker
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 2:03 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
So, do we have to take a test before we comment, or do we just submit a
bio with every comment?
Rene' Felker
N423CF
40322
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 1:43 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
Inexperienced or non-IFR pilots should not be giving advise to the
masses in how to build panels or selection of avionics components. I
whole-heartedly concur with your advise.
The masses need to know the quality of the source before giving it
consideration on something so vitally important. Learn to clear out the
clutter quickly.
I will let the experienced IFR pilots chime in on Vertical Stacking
versus Horizontal Stacking and its importance being placed as high on
the panel as practical. Not withholding the importance of a Back Seat
WSO with the armament screen between his/her legs.
Some panel layouts aid in resale, others lend themselves to being
scrapped and rebuilt for resale. The eye is in the beholder
(purchaser). Till then rejoice in your choice and fly often/ fly safe.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William
Curtis
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 12:26 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
> For those who aren't instrument rated though, my recommendation backs
> up a step....I really think you'd benefit from the rating before you
> build the panel. No insult intended, but you really don't have a clue
> about IFR flight until you've been through it with training and even
> some experience...where it's YOU at the controls with the sweat on
> your brow. Then, at that point, you'll have enough of a concept to
> begin flying some systems and seeing how well you can do, and if they
> do everything you would hope for.
Totally agree with this!
Just as "Friends don't let friends drive drunk", I'd also suggest that
"Friends should not let VFR friends build IFR panels." Even after you
have the rating, you really need time "in the system" to determine what
is really important. You see some panels supposedly built for IFR and
you know the person who designed it dose not actually fly IFR.
I also agree with Scott's earlier comment that a glass panel ironically
allows you more time looking out the window. For the CIA, you spend
much less time on the C and the I, leaving more time for the A and
looking out the window.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
Message 58
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Sean,
Don't Panic...you'll be fine. Considering you're already looking
at the higher end stuff, your biggest concern will be to try to
get some stick time behind them so you can analyze the layout you'd
want. Also, tap into as much knowledge from guys like Stein as you
can....he's really got some good ideas if you let HIM sway you
into panel layouts as opposed to coming up with some screwy
layout and trying to make him build it. He's a great resource.
That's not to say you wouldn't benefit from the rating...but
you've already got your sights set high.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Sean Stephens wrote:
>
>
> On May 25, 2007, at 2:26 PM, William Curtis wrote:
>> Just as "Friends don't let friends drive drunk", I'd also suggest
>> that "Friends should not let VFR friends build IFR panels." Even
>> after you have the rating, you really need time "in the system" to
>> determine what is really important. You see some panels supposedly
>> built for IFR and you know the person who designed it dose not
>> actually fly IFR.
>
> What? You're telling me that just because I don't have my ticket *yet*
> that I shouldn't build a panel for when I *do* get it?
>
> My currently VFR skills will have an IFR panel including Chelton/Op +
> associated *stuff*. The EFIS can be used for VFR too and I don't have
> to spend a lot of $$time$$ adding *stuff* when my IFR ticket is mailed.
>
> Confused and maybe missing the point.
>
> -Sean #40303
>
Message 59
| 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: | how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Comments are always great and encouraged. Advise should come with an
acronym behind the name Like - "IHNFIWIATA but think the rest of you
should purchase based on my advise and lack of first hand IFR
experience."
John - former DPE
Do not Archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rene Felker
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 1:03 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
So, do we have to take a test before we comment, or do we just submit a
bio
with every comment?
Rene' Felker
N423CF
40322
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 1:43 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
Inexperienced or non-IFR pilots should not be giving advise to the
masses in how to build panels or selection of avionics components. I
whole-heartedly concur with your advise.
The masses need to know the quality of the source before giving it
consideration on something so vitally important. Learn to clear out the
clutter quickly.
I will let the experienced IFR pilots chime in on Vertical Stacking
versus Horizontal Stacking and its importance being placed as high on
the panel as practical. Not withholding the importance of a Back Seat
WSO with the armament screen between his/her legs.
Some panel layouts aid in resale, others lend themselves to being
scrapped and rebuilt for resale. The eye is in the beholder
(purchaser). Till then rejoice in your choice and fly often/ fly safe.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William
Curtis
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 12:26 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
> For those who aren't instrument rated though, my recommendation
> backs up a step....I really think you'd benefit from the rating
> before you build the panel. No insult intended, but you really
> don't have a clue about IFR flight until you've been through
> it with training and even some experience...where it's YOU
> at the controls with the sweat on your brow. Then, at that
> point, you'll have enough of a concept to begin flying some
> systems and seeing how well you can do, and if they do everything
> you would hope for.
Totally agree with this!
Just as "Friends don't let friends drive drunk", I'd also suggest that
"Friends should not let VFR friends build IFR panels." Even after you
have the rating, you really need time "in the system" to determine what
is really important. You see some panels supposedly built for IFR and
you know the person who designed it dose not actually fly IFR.
I also agree with Scott's earlier comment that a glass panel ironically
allows you more time looking out the window. For the CIA, you spend
much less time on the C and the I, leaving more time for the A and
looking out the window.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
Message 60
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
This should be part of the test:-)
The basic tenant of IFR flying: Cross-check, Instrument interpretation and Aircraft
control.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
-------- Original Message --------
>
>
> Well said William. I think I'd totally agree even though I haven't seen
> any of those panels.
>
> What's CIA?
>
> William Curtis wrote:
> > Just as "Friends don't let friends drive drunk", I'd also suggest that "Friends
should not let VFR friends build IFR panels." Even after you have the rating,
you really need time "in the system" to determine what is really important.
You see some panels supposedly built for IFR and you know the person who
designed it dose not actually fly IFR.
> >
> > I also agree with Scott's earlier comment that a glass panel ironically allows
you more time looking out the window. For the CIA, you spend much less time
on the C and the I, leaving more time for the A and looking out the window.
> >
> >
> > William
> > http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Totally agree with this!
>
>
Message 61
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
LOL
I don't really want to do a 2-phased panel. I want to put in what I'm going
to be flying, VFR and IFR, for the foreseeable future. I've been looking at
well equipped panels of Bonanzas and Mooney's of not too long ago, and
almost anything we come up with today can blow most of those away for better
situational awareness and ease of use. It would be simple for me to do
something like this: AFS 3500 with engine monitoring, G430W, SL30, GMA340
or comparable, GTX330, GMX200 with weather and traffic, TT Sourcer, some
back up gauges...not too shabby given what was available even a few years
ago. However, is it the best bang for the buck; does it give me the most
utility for the money? And, how does one define utility?
I'm VFR rated with some IFR training under my belt, but not the ticket. I
have no advice to give, other than if you have experience about what works
out there because you've used it, please help us learn.
John J
328
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rene Felker
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 1:03 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
So, do we have to take a test before we comment, or do we just submit a bio
with every comment?
Rene' Felker
N423CF
40322
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 1:43 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
Inexperienced or non-IFR pilots should not be giving advise to the masses in
how to build panels or selection of avionics components. I whole-heartedly
concur with your advise.
The masses need to know the quality of the source before giving it
consideration on something so vitally important. Learn to clear out the
clutter quickly.
I will let the experienced IFR pilots chime in on Vertical Stacking versus
Horizontal Stacking and its importance being placed as high on the panel as
practical. Not withholding the importance of a Back Seat WSO with the
armament screen between his/her legs.
Some panel layouts aid in resale, others lend themselves to being scrapped
and rebuilt for resale. The eye is in the beholder (purchaser). Till then
rejoice in your choice and fly often/ fly safe.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of William Curtis
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 12:26 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
> For those who aren't instrument rated though, my recommendation backs
> up a step....I really think you'd benefit from the rating before you
> build the panel. No insult intended, but you really don't have a clue
> about IFR flight until you've been through it with training and even
> some experience...where it's YOU at the controls with the sweat on
> your brow. Then, at that point, you'll have enough of a concept to
> begin flying some systems and seeing how well you can do, and if they
> do everything you would hope for.
Totally agree with this!
Just as "Friends don't let friends drive drunk", I'd also suggest that
"Friends should not let VFR friends build IFR panels." Even after you have
the rating, you really need time "in the system" to determine what is really
important. You see some panels supposedly built for IFR and you know the
person who designed it dose not actually fly IFR.
I also agree with Scott's earlier comment that a glass panel ironically
allows you more time looking out the window. For the CIA, you spend much
less time on the C and the I, leaving more time for the A and looking out
the window.
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
Message 62
| 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: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane |
As best I can tell, the RV-10 AP doesn't include the yaw damper in the
base price. According to
<http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/autopilot2_2.htm> the RV-10 AP
($7250) has the yaw damper as an option (another $2500).
A weather/traffic/terrain/airspace display option for the
lower-cost-than-perfect panel: Garmin 496 (handheld - around $2800)
will display WxWorx from XM and also TIS info from the appropriate mode
S Garmin transponder (GTX 330). To integrate the 496 with the
Nav/Com/IFR GPS one can run a serial line from the IFR-certified
GNS-430(W) or GNS-530(W) to the 496. This will automatically transfer
the active flight plan and waypoint from the 430/530 to the 496.
The 496 is also a pretty good street navigator for use at your
destination (includes audible turn guidance in automobile mode).
Tim
--
Tim Lewis -- HEF (Manassas, VA)
RV-6A N47TD -- 900 hrs
RV-10 #40059 under construction
William Curtis wrote:
>
> Richard,
>
>
>> Just one example that took a awhile to understand was the significant
>> differences between the DigiFlight and Sorcerer autopilots. One has it's
>> own brain (Sorcerer) and can fly most any scenario on it's own while the
>> DigiFlight requires some other component to do the heavy thinking.
>>
>
> Just a minor correction. Both the DigiFlight and the Sorcerer "have a brain."
Each can fly the airplane on its own using the built in heading gyro and altitude
sensor. What the Sorcerer adds is VHF/NAV capability. That is, it can
fly a coupled VOR/LOC/ILS approach from any plain old VHF/NAV radio. The DigiFlight
can do this only if you are flying an overlay approach on your IFR GPS
and it is controlling the autopilot. Since most IFR GPS will provide a lateral
overlay, and now the "W" GPS will also provide vertical guidance, the benefits
of the Sorcerer over a DigiFlight II VSGV are not worth the extra $5K IMHO.
Also if you truly want the DigiFlight to fly a VOR/LOC/ILS, not just the overlay,
you could drive if from any HSI/EFIS with an ARINC 429 interface and GPSS-V.
>
> The TruTrak RV-10 Autopilot is the Sorcerer with the VHF/NAV capability removed
and a yaw dampener added.
>
>
>> The costs envolved in a modern safe IFR EFIS panel are probably the biggest
>> single expense catagory in the project, but if well planned and executed
>> should provide and equally valuable sense of acomplishment.
>>
>
> I've seen many use this term -- What exactly is an "IFR EFIS"? I know what an
IFR GPS is as there are many TSOs and documents relating to it but for those
that use this term, can you explain what makes one EFIS IFR and one not?
>
> William
> http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
>
>
>
Message 63
| 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: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane |
William Curtis wrote:
> <wcurtis@nerv10.com>
>
> OK, so in this case you have defined an IFR EFIS as an EFIS with a
> Jepp database. I'm not sure I would agree with this definition.
> While it is clear what make one GPS VFR and another IFR, I submit
> that there is no clear definition for what makes an EFIS VFR or IFR.
> Certainly there is no FAA definition of an IFR EFIS which is why I
> started this discussion. VFR GPS and most handhelds also have
> internal Jepp databases and yet still they are not "IFR". Maybe
> "EFIS with IFR navigation" would be more appropriate, but still not
> totally correct if there was not at least a TSO 129a GPS included.
>
I don't think the FAA defines even a 430/480/530 as "IFR". They
define standards that the units must perform to. The EFIS's
have the same functionality in some cases (providing the
attached hardware is there and correct). So then they can
be made to meet the standard. Also, re: the databases, those
handhelds have Jepp databases, but not Jepp approach databases,
and they don't conform to the specs by not being built in. So
that further separates them and makes the distinction. "EFIS
with IFR navigation" is close, but some of those boxes are
fully capable with the exception of the fact that their actual
receivers are external boxes....like a FreeFlight GPS.
The only difference is when you buy a 430/480/530 you're getting
the receiver in the same box as the database....but then again,
it "EFisn't" since it lacks the display of the rest of the stuff.
In the end, I really think trying to go further with the
definition would be futile.....given the above, it's probably
a good enough definition of "IFR EFIS" for practical value....and
it really isn't a slam on any other box...because it indeed
has an IFR Jepp Approach and Enroute database that sets it apart.
The other PANELS using other EFIS's can be plenty "IFR", but
they get there by having the right attached equipment.
> By your definition, the G900X/1000 would be considered an IFR EFIS
> since it includes an integral TSO 146a GPS with Jepp data. So would
> the certified Chelton FlightLogic EFIS. But what about the G600 which
> does not? Should this NOT be considered an IFR EFIS since it does
> NOT have a built in Jepp database?
Yeah, it gets grey....acknowledged....but you're right, I would
not call that an IFR EFIS. It's an EFIS display capable of IFR
flight when connected to an IFR database source. It would require
additional hardware that includes the database for IFR flight.
And while it's does NOT meet your
> definition of an "IFR EFIS", why would Garmin get a blanket STC to
> install it in certified aircraft replacing the standard 6 pack and
> CDIs?
Because it's an a certifiable "6-pack replacement" (on steroids)...
just like most of the other EFIS systems would be considered...because
you still need that IFR database equipped other box to do the heavy
work of flying the approach. Again, it's NOT saying that it's a
system you can't fly IFR with...it just can't do it with it's own
"brain".
>
> So either the G900X/1000 and the certified Chelton FlightLogic EFIS
> are the ONLY IFR EFIS or there is no such thing as an IFR EFIS.
No, according to Deems, with the database internal, it's also an
"IFR EFIS" by that definition. That does not mean anything other
than it has the capability within itself. And you're right, as
far as that goes, that makes the Avidyne system the same thing
if it requires a 430/530 to give it the database.
Being an "IFR EFIS" isn't some sort of status symbol that allows you
to slam others....it's just indicative of where you place the
navigation and flight planning brains of the system....as far as
I'm concerned.
Tim
> William http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
>
> -------- Original Message --------
>>
>> Thanks, that's great news. So then we can add the OP officially as
>> an "IFR EFIS" per the email to William. I do think that this
>> feature (Jepp Database) really sets them apart in that you really
>> need that unless you're for sure installing another device that has
>> them already.
>>
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying do not archive
>
>
Message 64
| 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: | Pneumatic Rivet Squeezer |
Is there anyone selling a Pneumatic Rivet Squeezer?
Steve
Empenage #40654
Do not archive
Message 65
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
I'll see you this fall Tim for that stick time. :)
Plan on getting the rating, but plan on being flying first. Was
hoping that I didn't have to pass a test first before I could stick
two Cheltons in there in place of a six-pack. :)
-Sean #40303
On May 25, 2007, at 3:25 PM, Tim Olson wrote:
>
> Sean,
>
> Don't Panic...you'll be fine. Considering you're already looking
> at the higher end stuff, your biggest concern will be to try to
> get some stick time behind them so you can analyze the layout you'd
> want. Also, tap into as much knowledge from guys like Stein as you
> can....he's really got some good ideas if you let HIM sway you
> into panel layouts as opposed to coming up with some screwy
> layout and trying to make him build it. He's a great resource.
>
> That's not to say you wouldn't benefit from the rating...but
> you've already got your sights set high.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
> do not archive
>
>
> Sean Stephens wrote:
>> <sean@stephensville.com>
>> On May 25, 2007, at 2:26 PM, William Curtis wrote:
>>> Just as "Friends don't let friends drive drunk", I'd also
>>> suggest that "Friends should not let VFR friends build IFR
>>> panels." Even after you have the rating, you really need time
>>> "in the system" to determine what is really important. You see
>>> some panels supposedly built for IFR and you know the person who
>>> designed it dose not actually fly IFR.
>> What? You're telling me that just because I don't have my ticket
>> *yet* that I shouldn't build a panel for when I *do* get it?
>> My currently VFR skills will have an IFR panel including Chelton/
>> Op + associated *stuff*. The EFIS can be used for VFR too and I
>> don't have to spend a lot of $$time$$ adding *stuff* when my IFR
>> ticket is mailed.
>> Confused and maybe missing the point.
>> -Sean #40303
Message 66
| 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: | The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane |
Is Avidyne selling it's system to experimental types, now? I thought I saw
something about this.
John J
328
do not archive
= = =
No, according to Deems, with the database internal, it's also an "IFR EFIS"
by that definition. That does not mean anything other than it has the
capability within itself. And you're right, as far as that goes, that makes
the Avidyne system the same thing if it requires a 430/530 to give it the
database.
Being an "IFR EFIS" isn't some sort of status symbol that allows you to slam
others....it's just indicative of where you place the navigation and flight
planning brains of the system....as far as I'm concerned.
Tim
Message 67
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Great statement Bobby. Now here is a new question that goes to the
heart of Amateur Built (current rules).
Does a total change-out of engine type, prop type or major alteration to
an airframe (Down the Road) require a revisit by a DAR or PAI? Or does
the repairman have the latitude to alter the engine/prop/panel from
basic VFR to EFIS/IFR without a trail of paperwork and new set of eyes?
What latitude for modification is legal and appropriate for a kit
designed and tested VAN's RV-10?
"Round Two" - No bio required "Do you feel Lucky?"
John Cox A&P with IA
40600
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bobby J.
Hughes
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 2:26 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
The great thing is we get to rebuild our panels as often as we like.
Going home to work on my instrument rating using ASA IP PC based
software :)
Bobby
40116
Message 68
| 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: | Pneumatic Rivet Squeezer |
Once we got 'em, we don't want to let 'em go. They're one of the best tools
you'll buy. If you can't find one used, you'll be glad you bought it new.
I prefer using them on the AN470-4's.
Do not archive
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
jesse@saintaviation.com
www.saintaviation.com
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve Stella
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 4:56 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Pneumatic Rivet Squeezer
Is there anyone selling a Pneumatic Rivet Squeezer?
Steve
Empenage #40654
Do not archive
Message 69
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
One of the local DAR's visited our last EAA chapter meetings and if I
remember correctly, engine and props were on the list of major mods. You
would have to reenter your "phase 1". But I was a little unclear about how
to do that. It did not sound like you would be visited again, but would
need a new program letter.....but I really wasn't paying to much attention
at that time since I never plan to changing the engine or prop......
Rene' Felker
N423CF
40322
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John W. Cox
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 3:24 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
Great statement Bobby. Now here is a new question that goes to the
heart of Amateur Built (current rules).
Does a total change-out of engine type, prop type or major alteration to
an airframe (Down the Road) require a revisit by a DAR or PAI? Or does
the repairman have the latitude to alter the engine/prop/panel from
basic VFR to EFIS/IFR without a trail of paperwork and new set of eyes?
What latitude for modification is legal and appropriate for a kit
designed and tested VAN's RV-10?
"Round Two" - No bio required "Do you feel Lucky?"
John Cox A&P with IA
40600
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bobby J.
Hughes
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 2:26 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
The great thing is we get to rebuild our panels as often as we like.
Going home to work on my instrument rating using ASA IP PC based
software :)
Bobby
40116
Message 70
| 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: Trueflight 190The Perfect Panel |
Kevin...please keep in mind that 2 minute old "radar" is not radar but good
recent history information...if you say I have radar to the ATC they are going
to believe you and may not give you a pop up advisory assuming that you have
active radar on board...telling ATC you have equipment that you do not have I
think is a bit misleading and over playing your hand. But hat's just my
opinion...having this information is valuable and certainly much better than flying
blind...but it ain't radar...
P
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Message 71
| 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: | The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane |
There is strong value in all builders knowing the closest flying RV-10
and getting hands on time by buying their owner's fuel and tagging along
when possible.
Each builder has invested a big part of their effort into panel design
and function. Know the reasons why, weigh them carefully, apply how it
you will fly your aircraft, then ask for the opinion of respected
individuals. Tim's post of Stein is not a bad way to start (a few of
his panels have been quite Hot a few not - he builds to owner's
specifications). Tim's website should be read repeatedly until you can
discount or adopt every hard thought-out feature. If you can't
understand it you are not ready to make the final decision. Bring your
decision to OSH '07 and put it to the Vendor Acid Test.
I would hope that scores of builders are patiently waiting for Deems OP
Technologies to fly and wish that Dexter would pipe in on this important
issue.
Short of graphic schemes and paint color(s) the panel is far more
builder specific (and Important) than an IO-540D4A5 rebuilder or
Hartzell/MT blade choice.
John C
600
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Jessen
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 2:16 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel - The Perfect airplane
Is Avidyne selling it's system to experimental types, now? I thought I
saw
something about this.
John J
328
do not archive
= = =
No, according to Deems, with the database internal, it's also an "IFR
EFIS"
by that definition. That does not mean anything other than it has the
capability within itself. And you're right, as far as that goes, that
makes
the Avidyne system the same thing if it requires a 430/530 to give it
the
database.
Being an "IFR EFIS" isn't some sort of status symbol that allows you to
slam
others....it's just indicative of where you place the navigation and
flight
planning brains of the system....as far as I'm concerned.
Tim
Message 72
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
AV8ORJWC wrote:
> I will let the experienced IFR pilots chime in on Vertical Stacking
> versus Horizontal Stacking and its importance being placed as high on
> the panel as practical. Not withholding the importance of a Back Seat
> WSO with the armament screen between his/her legs.
> John
> --
I would appreciate comments about this phase of layout also.
Past experience is KC-135's and E-3's. No glass.
I am thinking about 2 GRT's on the left side. I have not measured things yet but
I believe that due to their size, I can situate them either H or V.
Only focusing on position and not considering other items that need to fit into
the panel, what do those flying with 2 panels think?
--------
Gary Blankenbiller
RV10 - # 40674
(N410GB reserved)
do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114829#114829
Message 73
| 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 |
|
Oops - I thought I had answered, maybe it didn't go thru.
I bought the governor (P-860-4) before I made the final decision on the
prop.
Greg Anderson says the MT and the 200RV will be perfectly happy together.
But he sells a different unit, which IMPLIES a recommendation.
Thanks for the reminder, John :)
Do not archive
Neal E. George
2023 Everglades Drive
Navarre, FL 32566
Home - 850-515-0640
Cell - 850-218-4838
Neal has not answered why he is selling or the solution. Thanks for a
possible perspective.
John
Some folks are opting for the PCU5000/X (http://pcu5000.com). It supposedly
governs better than the MT provided in the FF kit. Someone on Vansairforce
is doing a group buy of the PCU5000. Since the PCU5000X
($1350) is more expensive than the MT ($Van's $1100), this may be another
case of a solution looking for a problem. Has anyone flying had issues with
the MT P-860-3?
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=17279&page=1&pp=1
0&highlight=pcu
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
Message 74
| 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 |
|
AVweb News Alert: May 24, 2007
Having trouble viewing this AVwebAlert newsletter? Go online
for the latest coverage.
To ensure that you continue to receive this newsletter,
please add avweb@e.avflash.com to your address book.
May 24, 2007
AVweb | Register | Forward This E-Mail | Advertise | Help |
Contact | Privacy Policy
FAA POLICY CHANGE VOIDS MANY IFR GPS UNITS
Many previously IFR-certified GPS receivers might now be
unapproved for flying many instrument procedures due to recent FAA
policy changes, according to AOPA. On Thursday, the association said the
FAA's Advisory Circular 90-100A, issued in March, indicates that only
three GPS models -- the Garmin 400, 500 and G1000 series -- are now
legal. Other models made by Garmin, including the new GNS 480 WAAS
receiver, as well as receivers manufactured by Chelton, Honeywell,
Northstar, and Trimble are listed as "noncompliant," AOPA said. The
action means up to 26,000 GPS users no longer comply with a 1996 FAA
policy that allows GPS to be used in lieu of ADF or DME. More...
You are subscribed to AVweb Breaking News Alerts at
tlc2@telus.net.
Unsubscribe from AVweb Alerts here.
Subscribe, change your password, or edit your newsletter
preferences here.
Questions concerning delivery of this newsletter?
Please contact our customer service department at:
http://www.avweb.com/help_desk
AVweb | Register | Forward This E-Mail | Advertise | Help |
Contact | Privacy Policy
copyright =A9 2007 Belvoir Media Group, LLC / Aviation
Publishing Group
All rights reserved.
Belvoir Media Group | 800 Connecticut Avenue | Norwalk, CT
06854
Message 75
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
I've got almost identical plans as John's plans at the moment. I'm just
waiting for Osh to get some hands on experience with the booth demos.
I'm also keeping an eye on MGL and their new 10" Odyssey due at OSH and
WTD's offering. Although WTD is a little more pricey at the moment.
I am IFR rated and really like both Chelton and OP Technologies.
Unfortunately, my budget won't allow it at the moment. Something about the
wife wanting to remodel the house and two kids in college.
Sounds like we got the makings of a large RV-10 consortium to make the
rounds at Osh. It would be humorous for a group of us to visit the vendors
as a horde. Even better, develop a common script for an IFR demo to give to
the vendors beforehand and tell them we expect to see the demo script in
their booth.
Bob
684
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Jessen
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 4:32 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
I don't really want to do a 2-phased panel. I want to put in what I'm going
to be flying, VFR and IFR, for the foreseeable future. I've been looking at
well equipped panels of Bonanzas and Mooney's of not too long ago, and
almost anything we come up with today can blow most of those away for better
situational awareness and ease of use. It would be simple for me to do
something like this: AFS 3500 with engine monitoring, G430W, SL30, GMA340
or comparable, GTX330, GMX200 with weather and traffic, TT Sourcer, some
back up gauges...not too shabby given what was available even a few years
ago. However, is it the best bang for the buck; does it give me the most
utility for the money? And, how does one define utility?
John J
328
Message 76
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
I have two GRT screens and a CMX 200 (picture attached with MX 20 before
trade in). The top screen is a GRT (PFD) and the left bottom screen is a
GRT screen. Under the top GRT screen is the MX 20. The lower screens (GRT
screen and CMX 200) are not all that easy to see. I'm 6' and find myself
looking down at the lower screens at an angle that seems to wash out the
screens (not all that bad but when I lower the viewing angle the screens
look much better. Laying out the panel my thought was to keep the screens
in front of the left seat as much as possible. May not have been such a
good idea. When I redo the panel with the new GRT hi res screens I'm
thinking I may go with a horizontal layout that gets the screens higher.
Mark
N410MR
>From: "orchidman" <gary@wingscc.com>
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RV10-List: Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
>Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 16:23:29 -0700
>
>
>
>AV8ORJWC wrote:
> > I will let the experienced IFR pilots chime in on Vertical Stacking
> > versus Horizontal Stacking and its importance being placed as high on
> > the panel as practical. Not withholding the importance of a Back Seat
> > WSO with the armament screen between his/her legs.
> > John
> > --
>
>I would appreciate comments about this phase of layout also.
>Past experience is KC-135's and E-3's. No glass.
>I am thinking about 2 GRT's on the left side. I have not measured things
>yet but I believe that due to their size, I can situate them either H or V.
>
>Only focusing on position and not considering other items that need to fit
>into the panel, what do those flying with 2 panels think?
>
>--------
>Gary Blankenbiller
>RV10 - # 40674
>(N410GB reserved)
>do not archive
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114829#114829
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
PC Magazines 2007 editors choice for best Web mailaward-winning Windows
Live Hotmail.
Message 77
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
I actually think that using akzo as a primer is the best way, what do you
think?
Bob K
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Ritter
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 4:06 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
I have two GRT screens and a CMX 200 (picture attached with MX 20 before
trade in). The top screen is a GRT (PFD) and the left bottom screen is a
GRT screen. Under the top GRT screen is the MX 20. The lower screens (GRT
screen and CMX 200) are not all that easy to see. I'm 6' and find myself
looking down at the lower screens at an angle that seems to wash out the
screens (not all that bad but when I lower the viewing angle the screens
look much better. Laying out the panel my thought was to keep the screens
in front of the left seat as much as possible. May not have been such a
good idea. When I redo the panel with the new GRT hi res screens I'm
thinking I may go with a horizontal layout that gets the screens higher.
Mark
N410MR
>From: "orchidman" <gary@wingscc.com>
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RV10-List: Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
>Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 16:23:29 -0700
>
>
>
>AV8ORJWC wrote:
> > I will let the experienced IFR pilots chime in on Vertical Stacking
> > versus Horizontal Stacking and its importance being placed as high on
> > the panel as practical. Not withholding the importance of a Back Seat
> > WSO with the armament screen between his/her legs.
> > John
> > --
>
>I would appreciate comments about this phase of layout also.
>Past experience is KC-135's and E-3's. No glass.
>I am thinking about 2 GRT's on the left side. I have not measured things
>yet but I believe that due to their size, I can situate them either H or V.
>
>Only focusing on position and not considering other items that need to fit
>into the panel, what do those flying with 2 panels think?
>
>--------
>Gary Blankenbiller
>RV10 - # 40674
>(N410GB reserved)
>do not archive
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114829#114829
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
PC Magazine's 2007 editors' choice for best Web mail-award-winning Windows
Live Hotmail.
Message 78
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
bob.kaufmann wrote:
>
>I actually think that using akzo as a primer is the best way, what do you
>think?
>
I tried it and got too many misfires. Went back to red ball. :-P
Linn
do not archive
>
>Bob K
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark Ritter
>Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 4:06 PM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
>
>I have two GRT screens and a CMX 200 (picture attached with MX 20 before
>trade in). The top screen is a GRT (PFD) and the left bottom screen is a
>GRT screen. Under the top GRT screen is the MX 20. The lower screens (GRT
>screen and CMX 200) are not all that easy to see. I'm 6' and find myself
>looking down at the lower screens at an angle that seems to wash out the
>screens (not all that bad but when I lower the viewing angle the screens
>look much better. Laying out the panel my thought was to keep the screens
>in front of the left seat as much as possible. May not have been such a
>good idea. When I redo the panel with the new GRT hi res screens I'm
>thinking I may go with a horizontal layout that gets the screens higher.
>
>Mark
>N410MR
>
>
>
>
>>From: "orchidman" <gary@wingscc.com>
>>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>>Subject: RV10-List: Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
>>Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 16:23:29 -0700
>>
>>
>>
>>AV8ORJWC wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I will let the experienced IFR pilots chime in on Vertical Stacking
>>>versus Horizontal Stacking and its importance being placed as high on
>>>the panel as practical. Not withholding the importance of a Back Seat
>>>WSO with the armament screen between his/her legs.
>>>John
>>>--
>>>
>>>
>>I would appreciate comments about this phase of layout also.
>>Past experience is KC-135's and E-3's. No glass.
>>I am thinking about 2 GRT's on the left side. I have not measured things
>>yet but I believe that due to their size, I can situate them either H or V.
>>
>>Only focusing on position and not considering other items that need to fit
>>into the panel, what do those flying with 2 panels think?
>>
>>--------
>>Gary Blankenbiller
>>RV10 - # 40674
>>(N410GB reserved)
>>do not archive
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Read this topic online here:
>>
>>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114829#114829
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>PC Magazine's 2007 editors' choice for best Web mail-award-winning Windows
>Live Hotmail.
>
>
>
>
Message 79
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
OK, well here are a couple of thoughts on the "should I or shouldn't I build
IFR" decision. It's all a chain of connected decisions. A) If you are
routinely traveling any distance or into a heavy traffic area, you want the
option to be able to file IFR for traffic and ease of fitting into the
traffic flow. Don't have to but you will like it if you do! B) Lots of
eyes on you. C) Also there are MANY VFR days that are crummy flying days
because of haze and cloud but if you want to go somewhere, to be able to
file IFR /G and go is wonderful. AND D) you will be a lot better pilot
after you get your IFR ticket. I thought that was a joke until I did it and
it's just true. Few folks really learn anything until they NEED to know and
getting the ticket requires you to upgrade your weather management skills,
ATC system skills, risk assessment, AND your appreciation of how good you
really are when it hits the fan. Understanding how easy it is to die in the
soup had made me a lot better pilot and much more critical of my decision
making process.
>> So how about equipment? Here was my thought process after a lot of IFR
hours in a nice spam can. I like flying VFR/IFR which means flying on an
IFR plan but looking outside instead of inside to see the sights. I love to
be able to dial in an altitude and have the plane climb or descend and
capture it. I love to drive the plane with the heading bug. I wanted to be
able to fly a coupled approach from the final approach course( don't care
about a full approach, hold, etc cause it almost never happens that way).
The funny part is that I wanted the plane to do all that so that I could
look outside for the view and other traffic.
>> That lead me to the EFIS and Autopilot decisions: a) GRT because they
are airplane folks writing code and not computer guys learning to fly B) GRT
systems are tightly integrated to Tru-Trak Auto pilots and Jim Younts is
here in Arkansas :-) AND builds a fabulous AP c) the GRT system is less
expensive than a 6 pack with an HIS and heading bug d) the GRT and TT VSVG
allow you to fly the way I like to fly with altitude preselect and capture.
HIS/OBS indicators built-in. D) Customer support and knowledge about
systems is 10+++
>> That lead me to the NAV/Comm Decision : A) Gotta have a Garmin 430
because it is IFR certified and you need that to fly an approach at the end
of the trip b) it is reasonably priced and can be kept current on a
reasonable price basis C) WAAS is gravy and I like gravy. D) Great NAV and
Great COMM and you need at least one great one of each e) 430 does a great
job of driving the TT AP
>> That leads to the On-Board Wx decision: I simply can't explain how
different flying in any weather is when you have a Gods-eye view of
everything around you, full Metars at airports 360 degrees around you. Etc.
I wouldn't go VFR without it anymore. Soooo, I bought the Garmin 396 so
that I can take it to the spam can, travel with friends, play with it in the
house, whatever. I really really like NOT having it in the panel. I am
lucky to also be able to drive a Baron with on-board radar and I never turn
it on, complete waste of money. Always take the Garmin.
>> Other IFR related decisions: 1) TPX330 because I wanted to see traffic
displayed on the GRT screens, 2) P-Mag and Slick because I wanted electronic
ignition but was "skeared" of not having a mag if everything died. 3) Garmin
396 with Wx (see above) 4) full 2 1/4 analog Alt, AS, Compass, with
electronic T&B backup gauges 5) ICOM A24 radio in my flight bag in case
everything electronic dies (never used it) 6) AeroElectric Nuckell-Head
Z13/8 electric system with Heavy duty everything
This allows me to fly the way I like 99% of the time and fits my Worst worst
worst case IFR scenario: Flying along at night in the soup, everything
electronic craps out despite all the redundant systems, what to do? I fly
the plane on analog for a minute, (it's trimmed so nothing should change),
switch the Garmin to the artificial panel as a back up, turn 180 and head
home or to VFR, pull out my ICOM and shout for help! That's my most basic
TU "back-up/out" plan but even that is not a low risk exit, but at least I
have found my own balance between risk, mission, dollars, and safety.
My opinion and it's only that on the most basic IFR ride is this. GRT
system (or one that has and HIS and heading bug NAV to AP), basic AP of your
choice that will track NAV, GNS430 not WAAS or at least the SL40(?) NAV/COM,
basic analog backups, other usual stuff of choice. I think if you price it
out, you will be within about 5K of a nice VFR ride and that's not much
compared to the total cost of the airplane. This gets you enough to be
safe, get your ticket, fly great VFR/IFR and be very safe as long as you
make good decisions. BUT the first thing I would add is a Garmin 496 with
Wx.
Funny, this just moved from the Perfect IFR Panel to the Minimal IFR Panel ?
How'd dat happen"
Hope this helps!
Bill S
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of MauleDriver
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
It's starting to make sense to me too! Taking it a step further, does it
make sense to even try to do a basic IFR setup in one's '10 before one has
the rating and has had a chance to use it for awhile?
You raised the point of button pushing versus proficiency and currency.
That's a big question for me. One one hand, I've seen our local package
express/check cashing pilots train. These folks can fly a failed engine
twin with the standard 6 pack thru an approach, miss, and hold and still
talk about "I like keeping it a half needle to the right so my landing light
will be on the centerline when I break out". I just try to fly straight
enough to avoid embarassing myself on the controllers radar.
On the other hand, I found use of my 2nd generation IFR cert'd Garmin 300XL
a total challenge. Flying a standard GPS T approach with it is a piece of
cake. Flying an ADF or VOR overlay is more challenging.
Trying to use it to aid in a typical vector-to-ILS situation can also be
challenging. With proficiency, I can use it to great advantage in these
situations. When a bit rusty, rust being a very real challenge to us
non-pros, it was best to just fly vectors and use it exactly as an ADF or
DME might be used. But forget the moving map, programming interim points,
or even trying to use it as a second VOR in those situations. I learned
that often less was more. It's pretty crude technology compared to the
modern systems.
Tim and others are convincing me that the *some* of the current stuff is
actually easy to use even when mixed with a bit of rust. I need some
hands-on to confirm that for me. I'm sure some of the current stuff is more
challenging. We are certainly on the verge of having these systems actually
make *all* aspects of IFR flight easier and safer for the non-pro.
But the point I'm getting to is this - properly equipping a used GA plane
for IFR required IFR experience in the old 6 pack days. Figuring out how
you would combine existing equipment with a major upgrade, and coming out
the back end with what you wanted took some experience.
Perhaps properly equipping a homebuilt for IFR requires IFR experience too.
There are many choices, many alternatives, and many approaches in a
constantly changing environment. Would that make the prudent course to
equip for VFR, get experience with plane, mission, and self., then upgrade
as desired? Inefficient? maybe. Some dollars may be wasted.
But the bottom line may in fact benefit. Just a thought.
I feel like I have some experience but frankly, I stand here lost in the
face of all the choices. My dream is an IFR cruiser that will put my 'ol
Maule to shame. So I will try to take advantage of those that have gone
before and end up with a Cheltonesque panel and as few unused redundancies
as possible. We'll see.
Bill "heading to the hangar for a long weekend of progress" Watson
John Jessen wrote:
>
> Yes!
>
> I think that the point is well presented and well taken. I've said to
> more than one person that "I don't get it" in terms of all the higher end
panels.
> Tim, Deems and others have explained their rationale to me and I'm
> slowly getting it, but Bill finally put into words what I haven't been
> able to. I love flying for the sake of flying, and to me this means
> VFR most of the time. This is what has been in the back of my mind
> and I couldn't explain it. Thanks, Bill !!
>
> I will get my IFR rating, because I honestly do believe it will make
> me a better pilot (and insurance companies might like me better) just
> as a tail wheel endorsement will also. I have a float plane rating
> and that certainly has made me better (landing floats on glassy waters
> requires some precision that I wasn't used to before). However, I love
the ability to just fly.
> Get in and go. Sure you want to have a flight plan and file it, and
> sure you'd like flight following, but there's something about keeping
> it simple that appeals to me.
>
> So, my big challenge has been what to put in that works well in the
> assumed IFR future that I know I'll be involved in, but also doesn't
> bust the bank, and doesn't just sit there while I have fun looking out
> the window and down at my maps occasionally. And will I keep current
> enough in real IMC that I could, honestly, safely, take advantage of
> the IFR system? This is a big, big question. I think for those who
> are already IFR trained and that's what they normally fly, it isn't
> such an issue to think in terms of the more advanced systems. If they can
afford it, it probably is a no brainer.
>
> But there's the rub. A high end system can make IFR simpler during
> the high workload, high risk scenarios that one will, if they fly
> IFR/IMC, eventually find. That's when a current, but not super
> current, IFR pilot needs that electronic horsepower. So, getting a
> glass panel 6-pack substitute, such as the AFS EFIS, coupled with a
> (for example) G430W and some type of MFD, may not be the safest thing
> for someone who spends most of his/her time flying VFR, with only the
> occasional IFR/IMC usage. This is why I'm so interested in the
> combination of equipment that can bridge that gap between basic IFR
> and the high end systems. You want minimal button pushing and mental
> gyrations in those situations that are the highest stress/workload
> situations. It's easy to do enroute with almost any system. It gets
> progressively more difficult for take offs, holdings, approaches, but all
of these have been done for decades on steam gauges, so it's not impossible.
> It's just that with all the goodies out there, one wants to put
> together something that works well, doesn't bust the bank (for me and
> I bet many who are not commenting on the list), but can be effective.
> This is why I've been begging for situational descriptions about how
> systems work well or not. Tim is correct, this is so hard to discuss
> because everyone is working for such minimal examples, both in terms
> of situations and in terms of equipment. However, the situations do
> exist, whether you've experienced them or read about them, and you
> know your system, so you can give at least some type of evaluation how
> it should work given the situation. To some it might also be
> embarrassing to discuss what has happened and how their system
> responded, but we need to discuss these things in order for all of us
> to gain. I want all of us to benefit, and really the only way is to get
the stories out and discuss them.
>
> Money will be the limiting factor for many of us. Someone is going to
> have to give me oxygen when I plunk down my bucks for the panel. And
> that's after I've been let out of the intensive care unit for the engine
payment.
> However, when all is said and done, I'll be happy with whatever I have
> and practice with it as much as possible. True enough. But until
> then lots of decisions have to be made. Bill has helped me understand
> what it was that I couldn't get put into words, that I couldn't get
> past a generalized feeling about. That's the beauty of this list and of
sharing thoughts. Please!
> Those silent ones out there. Jump in! The water is fine.
>
> John Jessen
> #328
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of MauleDriver
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 8:20 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was
> GNS-430W
>
>
> This has all made me try to think around this issue a different way.
> Give a realistic assessment of a future the owner's capabilities,
> missions and desires, perhaps a less considered sweet spot is the VFR
cruiser.
>
> Assume for a minute that the owner is not instrument rated (but plans
> to be sometime in the future), or is not able/willing to always remain
> current per the regs (me). Assume that the '10 will be a serious
> cross country machine (weekender bag, cooler, mate, extra shoes for
> mate), and you live in the eastern US (just can't comment on
> fly-styles west of the Mississip). I've been thinking of a guy I've
> been listening to on Rec.aviation.pilot for a few years. He's been
> flying a VFR Pathfinder quite happily for some years - Jay Honeck:
> http://www.alexisparkinn.com/welcome_to_the_inn.htm
> Many times Jay has been asked to defend his VFR-only flying, as in
> "Jay, you need an IFR rating - it will make your travels so much
> easier". But he argues that VFR is right for him and his family and
> frankly he makes a lot of sense. Following his flying exploits, I
> wonder if many/most of us will end up doing what he does. And if we do,
we'll die very happy.
>
> What is out there weather-wise is a lot of very flyable VFR weather
> and destinations. A simple steam guage VFR '10 like Van's is a super
machine.
> But as homebuilders, we are sorely tempted to juice it up. So how
> would you juice up a VFR '10?
>
> Weather is still the issue. A 396 or better is practically mandatory
> from a cost-benefit standpoint. It turns many marginal VFR sky gropes
> out over the horizon, into more safer, fully informed journeys into
> calm waters.
>
> What is also needed are tools to fly in the near-IFR conditions we all
> fly in every summer. I'm not talking clouds or fog, or flying into
> deteriorating conditions but just plain summer haze. Make it
> westbound in the evening with smoke from a few distant fires and you
> really can benefit from use of the gyro panel... or a low end glass
> EFIS. Add an autopilot - anywhere from a wing leveler to a sorcerer
> - and you can truly remain VFR because you are actually looking out the
window.
> Remember, anyone can trim a cruiser to maintain altitude, it's the wing
> leveling that you really need. And if it's driven by your GPS, wow!
> So a low end glass EFIS, GPS, autopilot, and a backup GPS with
> Satellite weather and 101 music channels makes this a very comfortable
> and capable VFR cruiser.
>
> To complete the safety package, add traffic awareness.
>
> It looks state of the art, it flys state of the art, it is state of the
art.
> And it may realistically reflect the true capabilities, mission, and
> desires of many of us owner/pilots to be.
>
> You've skipped heated pitots, some Nav equipment, extensive backups,
> certification(?), and the costs of getting and staying instrument
> proficient.
>
> So how many $$ are needed to realize this dream? I don't know but
> it's maybe it's worth a run.
>
> Below is one of Jay's latest postings to rec.aviation.piloting:
>
> We were flying back from Springfield last Sunday, arcing into a
> setting sun the size of a pie tin. It was one of those flights where
> you keep catching yourself turning off course, just to get the sun
> behind the windshield post and out of your eyes...
>
> We'd been silent most of the way, just enjoying the ride and the
> afterglow of a day well-spent visiting old friends, when my daughter,
> age 13, asked me to play the theme song from "One Six Right" on the CD
player.
>
> Mary and I both looked at each other, shocked that Becca even knew the
> name of the album, much less the song itself -- but I quickly slid the
> disk into the player, and listened as the fabulous opening bars began to
play...
>
> (For those who don't know the music, listen to it here, for free:
> http://www.onesixright.com/ )
>
> There was a scattered layer of clouds below, and a few above, and the
> sun played behind them, scattering the light into a million separate
> beams, lighting the verdant farmland far below with a burning,
> heavenly glow. The view was simply breath-taking.
>
> My daughter, usually oblivious to the flying she has done so often
> since birth, suddenly asked me to "Do the soaring thing to the music,
> Dad, like you did before..."
>
> Hesitant to deviate from straight and level while talking to Chicago
> Center, I started a little dipping and rolling to the music. I
> glanced over to see that her eyes were closed, the sunshine was
> lighting her face like an angel, and she was simply *feeling* the
> flight with all of her senses. She was grinning from ear to ear.
>
> Inspired, I let my inhibitions go, and began giant swoops and gentle
> push-overs, all in time to the orchestral crescendos of "One Six
> Right". Soon, I found myself closing *my* eyes, and feeling the
> weightlessness at the top of the arc, and the one-G steep turns, back
> and forth, all to the beat of the music. It was magical.
>
> Throat tightening, chest bursting, I wanted to cry with joy. If there
> is a heaven, it must feel very much like this.
>
> And my daughter was "getting it"!
>
> When we landed, Becca -- vocally against the very notion of learning
> to fly for so many years -- said "Dad, maybe I *will* learn to fly some
day..."
>
> :-)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
>
Message 80
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Second the comment on Stein, he sells it all, flown it all, and gives a
straight answer. I bought a lot of stuff from him and he sent it to me
before I sent him the check,... Says it all for me. He is a great source
for technical data on the various systems.
Bill S
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tim Olson
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
Sean,
Don't Panic...you'll be fine. Considering you're already looking at the
higher end stuff, your biggest concern will be to try to get some stick time
behind them so you can analyze the layout you'd want. Also, tap into as
much knowledge from guys like Stein as you can....he's really got some good
ideas if you let HIM sway you into panel layouts as opposed to coming up
with some screwy layout and trying to make him build it. He's a great
resource.
That's not to say you wouldn't benefit from the rating...but you've already
got your sights set high.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Sean Stephens wrote:
> --> <sean@stephensville.com>
>
>
> On May 25, 2007, at 2:26 PM, William Curtis wrote:
>> Just as "Friends don't let friends drive drunk", I'd also suggest
>> that "Friends should not let VFR friends build IFR panels." Even
>> after you have the rating, you really need time "in the system" to
>> determine what is really important. You see some panels supposedly
>> built for IFR and you know the person who designed it dose not
>> actually fly IFR.
>
> What? You're telling me that just because I don't have my ticket
> *yet* that I shouldn't build a panel for when I *do* get it?
>
> My currently VFR skills will have an IFR panel including Chelton/Op +
> associated *stuff*. The EFIS can be used for VFR too and I don't have
> to spend a lot of $$time$$ adding *stuff* when my IFR ticket is mailed.
>
> Confused and maybe missing the point.
>
> -Sean #40303
>
Message 81
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Gary, mine is a 7 panel so it is smaller than the 10 but you can see how
they fit in this picture. If I had a third panel, I would dump the EIS
display and put it on a hidden sub panel. This is an Affordable Modular
Panel. I "might" put one of the Garmin docking panels in the right side but
am thinking of just putting one of the bigger panel GPS units (AVMAP EKP-4)
on the right to entertain the passenger ;-)
I like the radio stack high and easy to get to so because that is typically
what pulls the eye from the EFIS unless you have the higher end units where
you do it all from the EFIS itself. Not sure vert or hor makes me a lot of
difference. How does it flow to the hand and eye would be my consideration.
Hope this helps
Bill S
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of orchidman
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 6:23 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
AV8ORJWC wrote:
> I will let the experienced IFR pilots chime in on Vertical Stacking
> versus Horizontal Stacking and its importance being placed as high on
> the panel as practical. Not withholding the importance of a Back Seat
> WSO with the armament screen between his/her legs.
> John
> --
I would appreciate comments about this phase of layout also.
Past experience is KC-135's and E-3's. No glass.
I am thinking about 2 GRT's on the left side. I have not measured things
yet but I believe that due to their size, I can situate them either H or V.
Only focusing on position and not considering other items that need to fit
into the panel, what do those flying with 2 panels think?
--------
Gary Blankenbiller
RV10 - # 40674
(N410GB reserved)
do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114829#114829
Message 82
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Bill Schlatterer wrote:
> -........ Few folks really learn anything until they NEED to know and
> getting the ticket requires you to upgrade your weather management skills,
> ATC system skills, risk assessment, AND your appreciation of how good you
> really are when it hits the fan. Understanding how easy it is to die in the
> soup had made me a lot better pilot and much more critical of my decision
> making process.
>
>
AMEN !!!!!!!!
Deems Davis # 406
Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! )
http://deemsrv10.com/
IFR, but NOT current
Message 83
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Here is my panel and thoughts.....how I got here.
500+ hours
Commercial/instrument
Very little actual IMC, mostly penetrations, letdowns and a hand full of
real full approaches.
Of all my choices, I have only flown behind the 430.
1. Dual GRT, wanted it for the interface with the 430 and TT.
2. TT AP, great reviews and will fly profiles from the GRT....
3. Backup instruments, AS, TT ADI, and Altimeter...in a pinch that will
do
(I lost a vacuum pump over Seattle once, that was all I had left in the
spam
can, no gyro vectors till I punched out of the bottom)
4. Blue Mountain, CDI function for the 430, but really will be used by
my
wife so she has her own set of buttons. Not really planning on it being
the
backup.....wrong side of panel. But, could be used if necessary.
5. DVD player/screen......wife, two more for the kids.
6. 430 IFR GPS, used in current spam can, know and like interface.
7. SL30, wanted two radios, don't want to deal with hand held. Had to
after an alternator failure while VFR out of Palm Springs.....my
assessment
was it just was not very effective and in a pinch I would want it to be
the
very last resort. I still carry the handheld with me.
8. 327 for transponder, decided to wait for ADS-B, might have made the
wrong choice.
9. GRT EIS, good reviews and integrates with EFIS.......
I started serious work (thinking and purchasing) on my panel in Dec 05.
Due
to my choice of hardware by the time I got around to ordering it was mid
2006. Worked almost final layout with Stein and then awaited
parts.......panel completed and in my garage last week, minus the TT
ADI,
not making the smaller ones yet.
Stein has been great, but he is in demand........
Rene'
801-721-6080
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of orchidman
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 5:23 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
AV8ORJWC wrote:
> I will let the experienced IFR pilots chime in on Vertical Stacking
> versus Horizontal Stacking and its importance being placed as high on
> the panel as practical. Not withholding the importance of a Back Seat
> WSO with the armament screen between his/her legs.
> John
> --
I would appreciate comments about this phase of layout also.
Past experience is KC-135's and E-3's. No glass.
I am thinking about 2 GRT's on the left side. I have not measured
things
yet but I believe that due to their size, I can situate them either H or
V.
Only focusing on position and not considering other items that need to
fit
into the panel, what do those flying with 2 panels think?
--------
Gary Blankenbiller
RV10 - # 40674
(N410GB reserved)
do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114829#114829
Message 84
| 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: | Magneto to sparkplug routing |
Anybody up for a temporary break from panel discussions? (which I'm
enjoying thoroughly!)
I'm into the engine install, and working on baffling and plenum, and I'm
trying to think ahead so I know I've got clearance for spark plug leads,
how to attach, baffling penetration etc.. I've got dual Slick mags
6350/6351 (I may be willing to be an early adopter on some things, but I
couldn't get comfortable (yet) with conflicting info I was hearing on EI ).
My engine shipped with the mag harnesses uncoupled from the plugs, And
I'm at a loss on how to reconnect the leads. I've searched the Internet
for information about how to connect them and I've come up empty. I know
I can get the info from Allen @ BPE on Monday AM, but am hoping someone
might have the answer over the weekend.
(My Lycoming manual depicts 2 different methods for dual mags.)
Thanks
Deems Davis # 406
Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! )
http://deemsrv10.com/
Message 85
| 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: Magneto to sparkplug routing |
Boy, do I feel stupid :-[
I'm assuming that the answer must have something to do with the B3
(bottom cyl # 3 ?), T5 top Cyl #5?) , B6 ........etc stamped on the end
of the leads that connects to the plug....
Too long in a 100 degree garage!
Deems
Deems Davis wrote:
>
> Anybody up for a temporary break from panel discussions? (which I'm
> enjoying thoroughly!)
>
> I'm into the engine install, and working on baffling and plenum, and
> I'm trying to think ahead so I know I've got clearance for spark plug
> leads, how to attach, baffling penetration etc.. I've got dual Slick
> mags 6350/6351 (I may be willing to be an early adopter on some
> things, but I couldn't get comfortable (yet) with conflicting info I
> was hearing on EI ).
>
> My engine shipped with the mag harnesses uncoupled from the plugs, And
> I'm at a loss on how to reconnect the leads. I've searched the
> Internet for information about how to connect them and I've come up
> empty. I know I can get the info from Allen @ BPE on Monday AM, but am
> hoping someone might have the answer over the weekend.
>
> (My Lycoming manual depicts 2 different methods for dual mags.)
>
> Thanks
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! )
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>
>
Message 86
| 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: Magneto to sparkplug routing |
What seems to be the problem with attaching the harnesses. They
did come with the wires all into a cap right? ... and that cap
just gets screwed to the mag. The cap actually only fits perfectly
in 1 orientation...but you have to be really careful because it
looks very close in one other orientation. As far as mag vs.
firing order....I'd have to dig in to read on that myself. It
was easy with a Lightspeed...just hook the top plugs to that
and the bottom to the mags. I can't remember the wire arrangement
for a pair of mags though...it's been toooooo long.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Deems Davis wrote:
>
> Anybody up for a temporary break from panel discussions? (which I'm
> enjoying thoroughly!)
>
> I'm into the engine install, and working on baffling and plenum, and I'm
> trying to think ahead so I know I've got clearance for spark plug leads,
> how to attach, baffling penetration etc.. I've got dual Slick mags
> 6350/6351 (I may be willing to be an early adopter on some things, but I
> couldn't get comfortable (yet) with conflicting info I was hearing on EI ).
>
> My engine shipped with the mag harnesses uncoupled from the plugs, And
> I'm at a loss on how to reconnect the leads. I've searched the Internet
> for information about how to connect them and I've come up empty. I know
> I can get the info from Allen @ BPE on Monday AM, but am hoping someone
> might have the answer over the weekend.
>
> (My Lycoming manual depicts 2 different methods for dual mags.)
>
> Thanks
>
> Deems Davis # 406
> Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! )
> http://deemsrv10.com/
>
>
Message 87
| 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: Pneumatic Rivet Squeezer |
Take the plunge and buy a new one. It will be some of the best money
you spend on your project.
Dave Leikam
40496
QB wings
----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Stella
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 2:55 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Pneumatic Rivet Squeezer
Is there anyone selling a Pneumatic Rivet Squeezer?
Steve
Empenage #40654
Do not archive
Message 88
| 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: Magneto to sparkplug routing |
Don't feel too bad...you remembered it first. As soon as I
saw this post I had the head slapping moment myself. Now
I remember that it's printed right on the wires. ;)
Well, at least you have the means to progress now!
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
Deems Davis wrote:
>
> Boy, do I feel stupid :-[
>
> I'm assuming that the answer must have something to do with the B3
> (bottom cyl # 3 ?), T5 top Cyl #5?) , B6 ........etc stamped on the end
> of the leads that connects to the plug....
>
> Too long in a 100 degree garage!
>
>
> Deems
>
> Deems Davis wrote:
>>
>> Anybody up for a temporary break from panel discussions? (which I'm
>> enjoying thoroughly!)
>>
>> I'm into the engine install, and working on baffling and plenum, and
>> I'm trying to think ahead so I know I've got clearance for spark plug
>> leads, how to attach, baffling penetration etc.. I've got dual Slick
>> mags 6350/6351 (I may be willing to be an early adopter on some
>> things, but I couldn't get comfortable (yet) with conflicting info I
>> was hearing on EI ).
>>
>> My engine shipped with the mag harnesses uncoupled from the plugs, And
>> I'm at a loss on how to reconnect the leads. I've searched the
>> Internet for information about how to connect them and I've come up
>> empty. I know I can get the info from Allen @ BPE on Monday AM, but am
>> hoping someone might have the answer over the weekend.
>>
>> (My Lycoming manual depicts 2 different methods for dual mags.)
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Deems Davis # 406
>> Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! )
>> http://deemsrv10.com/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 89
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
>
> Inexperienced or non-IFR pilots should not be giving advise to the
> masses in how to build panels or selection of avionics components. I
> whole-heartedly concur with your advise.
> (snipped)
>
> John
Let's not get carried away with this "who knows best" business. Opinions
abound and builders have their favorites. I am capable of sorting out the
wheat from the chaff and I'll bet most on the list are. This lengthy
discussion has brought up alot of good points and much info has been
revealed just in the course of the exchange. Just because a person has a
Contractor's license does not make them a good builder any more than an
Instrument rating makes a one qualified to advise on what I need to put in
my panel.
>
>So, do we have to take a test before we comment, or do we just submit a bio
>with every comment?
>
>Rene' Felker
>N423CF
>40322
Apparently so. Only those truly qualified and approved by the King need
give advice or comment.
Kevin
40494
tail/empennage
do not archive
Message 90
| 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: FS: MT Prop Gov |
Just for the sake of clarification, the Lyc. IO-540-C4B5 engine has two
different governor gear ratios.
The NARROW deck has a 0.895:1 gear ratio and uses the MT governor P-860-3 or
P-420-17.
The WIDE deck has a 0.947:1 gear ratio and uses the MT governor P-860-5 or
P-420-5.
The cylinders on the NARROW deck engine are mounted with round nuts having
an internal Allen wrench drive.
The cylinders on the WIDE deck engine are mounted with standard hex nuts.
I have not seen the WIDE deck MT governors being offered for sale by Van's
Aircraft. I have only seen them offer the MT governors designed for the
NARROW deck Lyc. 540 engine.
Regards,
Jim Ayers
In a message dated 05/25/2007 9:26:16 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
wcurtis@nerv10.com writes:
--> RV10-List message posted by: "William Curtis" <wcurtis@nerv10.com>
Some folks are opting for the PCU5000/X (http://pcu5000.com). It supposedly
governs better than the MT provided in the FF kit. Someone on Vansairforce
is doing a group buy of the PCU5000. Since the PCU5000X ($1350) is more
expensive than the MT ($Van's $1100), this may be another case of a solution
looking for a problem. Has anyone flying had issues with the MT P-860-3?
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=17279&page=1&pp=10&high
light=pcu
William
http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Message 91
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Here is a little more background to my question.
It has been many years since I professionally flew but my 2k hours of instrument
time was behind what I call steam ADI and HSIs gages because of their age.
The ADI was on top and is where you centered your vision or cross-check. It was
right in front of you and as you rolled, it was centered in your vision. The
ideal would be thought of as the heads up displays you see in current fighters.
Then your check for your horizontal awareness would be by looking down. Airspeed
and altitude would be by looking left and right.
Now we come to the current age of glass instruments where I have no current experience.
mritter509(at)msn.com wrote:
> I have two GRT screens and a CMX 200. The top screen is a GRT (PFD) and the
left bottom screen is a
> GRT screen. Under the top GRT screen is the MX 20. The lower screens (GRT
> screen and CMX 200) are not all that easy to see. I'm 6' and find myself
> looking down at the lower screens at an angle that seems to wash out the
> screens (not all that bad but when I lower the viewing angle the screens
> look much better. Laying out the panel my thought was to keep the screens
> in front of the left seat as much as possible. May not have been such a
> good idea. When I redo the panel with the new GRT hi res screens I'm
> thinking I may go with a horizontal layout that gets the screens higher.
> Mark
> N410MR
>
Mark, these are exactly the concerns that I have. With all the flexibility we
now have with these new EFIS systems you can do split screens and combos with
many of them. But when you start flying what is the best layout for your panel
cross-check. Glare and viewing angles could be potential problems and that
is why I am asking.
Bill Schlatterer wrote:
> Gary, mine is a 7 panel so it is smaller than the 10 but you can see how
> they fit in this picture. If I had a third panel, I would dump the EIS
> display and put it on a hidden sub panel. This is an Affordable Modular
> Panel. I "might" put one of the Garmin docking panels in the right side but
> am thinking of just putting one of the bigger panel GPS units (AVMAP EKP-4)
> on the right to entertain the passenger ;-)
>
> I like the radio stack high and easy to get to so because that is typically
> what pulls the eye from the EFIS unless you have the higher end units where
> you do it all from the EFIS itself. Not sure vert or hor makes me a lot of
> difference. How does it flow to the hand and eye would be my consideration.
> Hope this helps
> Bill S
> --
Bill, are you flying yet? In the real world cross-checking, is the side by side
cross-check as fast as the up down cross-check? If there is someone with experience
in both, I think their input would be very valuable to many of us still
in the layout mode.
rene(at)felker.com wrote:
> Here is my panel and thoughts.....how I got here.
>
> 500+ hours
> Commercial/instrument
> Very little actual IMC, mostly penetrations, letdowns and a hand full of
> real full approaches.
> .
> .
> .
> I started serious work (thinking and purchasing) on my panel in Dec 05. Due
> to my choice of hardware by the time I got around to ordering it was mid
> 2006. Worked almost final layout with Stein and then awaited
> parts.......panel completed and in my garage last week, minus the TT ADI,
> not making the smaller ones yet.
>
> Stein has been great, but he is in demand........
>
> Rene'
> --
Rene, it is spooky how close the left 2/3's of your panel is to what I have visualized
in my mind at this point in time. After finalizing the vertical or horizontal
visually, the next concern is the button pressing and knob twirling.
Is vertical or horizontal better? Are your hands distracting and interfering
with your vision of the displays as you enter/update the systems?
--------
Gary Blankenbiller
RV10 - # 40674
(N410GB reserved)
do not archive
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114878#114878
Message 92
| 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: | The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Bob your concept of a meaningful IFR demo script for equipment in the
RV-10 would be of value. Common denominator, basic features, same
target audience and reinforcement of the principals mentioned here. Only
80 flying aircraft, 639 yet to be completed with 35% IFR rated pilots.
That is over 200 viable customers walking the same walk and asking to
talk the same talk from captive salespeople.
Great idea. One month, Three weeks and six days.
John
600
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Leffler
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 5:00 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
I've got almost identical plans as John's plans at the moment. I'm just
waiting for Osh to get some hands on experience with the booth demos.
I'm also keeping an eye on MGL and their new 10" Odyssey due at OSH and
WTD's offering. Although WTD is a little more pricey at the moment.
I am IFR rated and really like both Chelton and OP Technologies.
Unfortunately, my budget won't allow it at the moment. Something about
the
wife wanting to remodel the house and two kids in college.
Sounds like we got the makings of a large RV-10 consortium to make the
rounds at Osh. It would be humorous for a group of us to visit the
vendors
as a horde. Even better, develop a common script for an IFR demo to give
to
the vendors beforehand and tell them we expect to see the demo script in
their booth.
Bob
684
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Jessen
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 4:32 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
I don't really want to do a 2-phased panel. I want to put in what I'm
going
to be flying, VFR and IFR, for the foreseeable future. I've been
looking at
well equipped panels of Bonanzas and Mooney's of not too long ago, and
almost anything we come up with today can blow most of those away for
better
situational awareness and ease of use. It would be simple for me to do
something like this: AFS 3500 with engine monitoring, G430W, SL30,
GMA340
or comparable, GTX330, GMX200 with weather and traffic, TT Sourcer, some
back up gauges...not too shabby given what was available even a few
years
ago. However, is it the best bang for the buck; does it give me the
most
utility for the money? And, how does one define utility?
John J
328
Message 93
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
On layout, I will just give a couple of observations.
My initial thoughts before I did the panel were that looking at
some planes, even airliners, the over/under arrangement would be
more normal like a standard "T" 6-pack arrangement. I was worried
about putting my 3 screens horizontally across the panel.
In practice, I found that without stretching the panel lower, it
was very hard to put 3 screens in a panel without going horizontally,
and I personally prefer a flat aluminum panel because some of the funky
curves and trimmings that make the fiberglass ones very sweet looking
also take up some of the space that you can use to mount things...or
the ledges hide buttons or labels or make switches harder to place.
Not in every case, but that was just my thought.
So I spent a lot of time arranging mine on a mock-up and studying it
closely. Every single item had thought put into where it would be,
in relation to my scan, my hands, my co-pilot, and so on. When I
was done, I ended up being very very happy and was now convinced that
horizontal was at least do-able.
Then, I got the opportunity to fly a panel with the same brand of
gear, but laid out over/under. That actually served to drive home
that I felt I had it "right" according to my best wishes. The lower
screen on the extended lower panel was much further from a comfortable
scan. It kept you looking down, which is precisely where you will
find it the most likely to set off your mental unbalance...remember
where they have you look before putting you into IFR training
unusual attitudes? Also, that lower screen was much less shielded
by the glareshield, and hence it wasn't as easy to see in the sun
as the one above it. That little glareshield ledge does indeed help
block *glare*. ;) I'm now dead sold personally on the horizontal
arrangement.
From a radio stack perspective, I found that just Right of the
center rib was plenty accessible, and totally visible for both
people in front. Also, my center screen is very usable for the
co-pilot and they could fly off any of the 3 screens pretty easily
if needed.
The horizontal layout allowed me to pack it all into the panel, keep
every major piece of equipment as high as possible along the
horizontal scan, and keep your eyes as minimally directed downward
as possible.
I hesitated to even reply to the thread on positioning because although
I am now very set in my ways as to how I like the layout, I'm also not
a "my way or the highway" (in the sky... ;)) kind of guy. I believe
that if you have a reason why some arrangement fits your needs better,
that's your decision and who am I to argue. People have different
needs. That said, very few people would realistically want to do
anything that would damage an effective scan, so I'd advise taking
the time to plan out as efficient an arrangement as possible. Mock
it up, and, one thing I did a lot of was asking others more
knowledgeable than myself for their opinion. I'm very happy with
the layout now, and about the only thing I'd change if I were cutting
aluminum again is to not have put an elevator trim switch on the panel
at all, because the sticks are good enough for me.
You're doing a great thing by asking, and thinking about critically, but
at the same time, don't expect anyone to be able to tell you exactly
what to do...in the end, you're the builder. Feel free to send the
list a panel layout as you get ones you want to bounce off people, and
I'm sure you'll get critiques that will help.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
do not archive
orchidman wrote:
>
>
> AV8ORJWC wrote:
>> I will let the experienced IFR pilots chime in on Vertical Stacking
>> versus Horizontal Stacking and its importance being placed as high
>> on the panel as practical. Not withholding the importance of a
>> Back Seat WSO with the armament screen between his/her legs. John
>> --
>
> I would appreciate comments about this phase of layout also. Past
> experience is KC-135's and E-3's. No glass. I am thinking about 2
> GRT's on the left side. I have not measured things yet but I believe
> that due to their size, I can situate them either H or V.
>
> Only focusing on position and not considering other items that need
> to fit into the panel, what do those flying with 2 panels think?
>
> -------- Gary Blankenbiller RV10 - # 40674 (N410GB reserved) do not
> archive
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=114829#114829
>
>
Message 94
| 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: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W |
Don't get too frustrated and walk away from the conversation.
Personally, I think one amazing thing about this thread has been the
absolutely great participation and lack of flames with a couple
of exceptions...we've actually been able to cover quite a bit of
good info with minimal body slams...it's an impressive group of
people we have here, because in many other forums we'd be way
off in the weeds by now.
Tim
KiloPapa wrote:
>
> Apparently so. Only those truly qualified and approved by the King need
> give advice or comment.
>
> Kevin
> 40494
> tail/empennage
>
> do not archive
>
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! --
|