Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:36 AM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Nikolaos Napoli)
2. 05:38 AM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Thane States)
3. 06:33 AM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Jesse Saint)
4. 07:12 AM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Tim Olson)
5. 09:48 AM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Jesse Saint)
6. 10:08 AM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Dave Saylor)
7. 10:28 AM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (DLM)
8. 11:13 AM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Carl Froehlich)
9. 11:34 AM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Robin Marks)
10. 11:40 AM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Tim Olson)
11. 11:44 AM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Bill Watson)
12. 11:48 AM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (DLM)
13. 12:07 PM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (DLM)
14. 12:36 PM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Carl Froehlich)
15. 12:41 PM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Dave Saylor)
16. 12:46 PM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Seano)
17. 12:59 PM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Jae Chang)
18. 02:04 PM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (DLM)
19. 03:13 PM - BFR - Things to try (Jim Combs)
20. 03:45 PM - Re: Bendix S1200 Mags (Jim Berry)
21. 04:21 PM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Jesse Saint)
22. 04:23 PM - Re: BFR - Things to try (Phil Perry)
23. 04:56 PM - Re: BFR - Things to try (DLM)
24. 04:58 PM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Bill Watson)
25. 05:01 PM - Re: BFR - Things to try (Jim Combs)
26. 05:07 PM - Re: BFR - Things to try (Jim Combs)
27. 05:19 PM - Re: BFR - Things to try (Phillip Perry)
28. 05:34 PM - Re: BFR - Things to try (Phillip Perry)
29. 05:36 PM - Re: BFR - Things to try (Jim Combs)
30. 05:45 PM - Re: BFR - Things to try (Robin Marks)
31. 05:56 PM - Re: BFR - Things to try (Dick & Vicki Sipp)
32. 06:28 PM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Tim Olson)
33. 08:38 PM - Re: BFR - Things to try (Bob Turner)
34. 08:49 PM - Re: Re: GRT Panel Layout (Bill Watson)
35. 09:43 PM - Re: GRT Panel Layout (Bob Turner)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GRT Panel Layout |
Thats pretty close to my thinking on the panel layout. I have also been flying
approaches with the Ipad and its great.
Those are the large 10.4inch HXr screens with one of them right of the center rib
so I don't think a passenger will have any problem flying from that screen.
Notice also that its also similar to the G1000 configuration in the small Cessnas.
They don't have a center stack but they do have a separate control panel
in the middle and relatively wide botton areas in each screen. The screen
viewing area ends up close to the same location.
Now if GRT comes out with a touch sensitive daylight readable screen I might go
to the three large screen configuration with a remote stack which would be ideal
in my mind. We are probably not too far off from such a configuration.
On May 24, 2012, at 11:38 PM, Jesse Saint wrote:
>
> I have read a lot of threads over the years about panel layouts. If you are expecting
to fly a lot with a copilot, or expect to do a lot of flying from the
right seat, a screen over there can make sense. Other than that it's a waste
of money IMHO. I do quite a bit of right seat flying and look over in front of
the pilot for instruments when needed. In reality, the autopilot does the flying
and I just navigate and monitor the systems, whether right or left seat. When
landing, whether vmc or imc, I take over the autopilot to land only after
breaking out, and then fly by feel and glance at the airspeed & altimeter to verify.
>
> When laying out a panel, I put the stuff closest that I need to touch the most
and look at the most. That puts EFIS w moving map close and GPS/NAV/COM close
at hand. I almost always put radio stack left of center rib, EFIS/PFD left of
that, pilot center. Backup attitude near PFD. Engine monitor on PFD or just
to right of radio stack. I find that I never like flying without my engine info
displayed on the panel. Even though in cruise there are very few changes, I
just feel better having it available without touching/pushing anything. Oh, and
autopilot close at hand is a good idea unless its a hands off unit (controlled
via the EFIS through GPSS/V). When shooting an approach it's the most touched
thing with vectors then coupling.
>
> A plug for the iPad, whether Foreflight or other App, a RAM mount right of center
panel & facing pilot is awesome. I'm amazed how much I use it in flight,
vmc or imc. When in a plane without aRAM mount, I have the copilot hold it facing
me when nearing and flying an approach. I can't get over how nice it is to
have georeferenced plates. The flight cheetah or 696 or any other plate display
I've seen doesn't hold a candle to the iPad. The easy zoom/pan is incredible.
>
> Jesse Saint
> I-TEC, Inc.
> jesse@itecusa.org
> www.itecusa.org
> www.mavericklsa.com
> C: 352-427-0285
> O: 352-465-4545
> F: 815-377-3694
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 24, 2012, at 11:01 PM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> It looks like you spent some time thinking about the 2 GRT displays. I assume
those are the new GRT displays (?).
>>
>> I have 3 GRT HX displays spread out across the panel with the intent of the
left and right panels being in front of the two pilot positions. The center
one is canted towards the pilot.
>>
>> I still think having a GRT HX in from of each panel made sense so the plane
can be flow from the right seat (even though it rarely is). However, I wish the
left and center panels were closer together. I find the distance between them
awkward during hood sessions in particular.
>>
>> In retrospect, putting the two displays right up against each other would have
been ideal. I typically have the PFD and Map split screened on one, the engine
on the other. I guess I didn't expect how important it was to me to have
a full engine screen up at all times. Between leaning, power management and
monitoring temps, I end up keeping a constant eye on the engine. But of course
you always want to see the PFD and often the map during ops in IMC. Minimizing
the distance between all of these is a good thing relative to one's scan.
>>
>> For the right seat, having one centered display is more than enough given the
actual use of that screen.
>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/kppg1w0g2k47h66/1%20015.jpg
>>
>> FWIW,
>> Bill Watson
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Re: GRT Panel Layout |
Just my opinion, but if you are anywhere near lightning, then you are
taking added risk that is unnecessary. Where there is lightning there
is way to much convective activity. I would never put my family in that
scenario. With all those fancy avionics you can avoid WX like that.
Just my 2 cents. Great loking panel, I love my GRT.
Thane
----- Original Message -----
From: Nikolaos Napoli
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 8:21 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
Yes I did look at the Gemini and I really like it. It looks like a
great idea. The only thing that stops mr from installing it instead is
concern for lightning strike. I have no idea how tolerant of lightning
strike all this equipment is and would hate to be in IMC and have a
lightning strike take out my entire panel. Maybe I am being too
conservative, but like most of us I will have my family in it.
The only conclusion I reached researching the literature is that in a
relatively large cockpit, i e airline, its unlikely that a direct
lightning strike will take the entire instrument panel out. If I could
convice myself that lightning is not a threat, or if I was going to only
fly In VMC, then I would go with the Gemini.
Niko
Nikolaos Napoli
On May 24, 2012, at 7:37 PM, Robin Marks <robin@PaintTheWeb.com>
wrote:
Nikolaos,
Have you considered either the new Gemini due out (Last December
:-)) instead of your 3 round gauges? The Gemini will probably save you $
and at the same time five you full 6 pack functionality in one location.
Or maybe a Dynon D60 or D100 with its own internal back up battery?
I have the D100 in my -10 as a backup and I like it a lot. I have
reserved a spot as a backup instrument in my 8A for the Gemini. Rumored
pricing under $1,300.
Robin
http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/products/Gemini_PFD.html
<image003.jpg>
http://www.dynonavionics.com/docs/EFIS_intro.html
<image005.jpg>
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Nikolaos
Napoli
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 4:12 PM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
The remote audio panel being offered is a relatively simple one with
no bluetooth and no marker beacon. I wanted both.
Since I am planning on flying IFR I wanted a backup navigator in
case the GTN650 died on me. One option would be to go to a n SL30 which
I might go for instead of the second GTN650 as I have only purchased one
of them at this time. During IFR flying I enter a change in frequency
on the radio as its being given to me, I do not write it down, and for
that I want a very simple way to enter it. I am not sure how a single
GTN650 will work for that. I believe to really get all the remote
equipment with the GRT system and make it work well you need the android
tablet. At that point the problem of where to mount it and sunlight
visibility comes in. And here is a look at the numbers, 1200 for
remote com, 4500 for remote Wass gps total 5700. GTN 650 set me back
8100 but for the extra 2300 I have a vor navigator and can do ILS
approaches and also have a touch screen. It makes the GTN650 look like
a pretty good deal to me.
Nikolaos Napoli
On May 24, 2012, at 4:44 PM, Bob Turner <bobturner@alum.rpi.edu>
wrote:
<bobturner@alum.rpi.edu>
>
> Contrarian: I'd leave the EIS box more or less out of sight, off
to the right. The HXr screens will display all the engine data. You can
have the EIS flash if there's no oil pressure after start up, but you
will have to look over there.
>
> I'm curious; looks like you're going with a remote transponder but
opted not to go with the remote audio panel or remote com?
>
> Two Garmin boxes are overkill IMHO, but it's your money.
>
> --------
> Bob Turner
> RV-10 QB
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=373800#373800
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===================
bsp; - The RV10-List Email Forum -
nd much much more:
tronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
===================
bsp; - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
eb Forums!
.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
===================
bsp; - List Contribution Web Site -
o:p>
bsp; -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
tronics.com/contribution"> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===================
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
05/24/12
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: GRT Panel Layout |
I guess that depends on how you define "anywhere near". Flying through a thu
nderstorm is not wise, but flying near one is often necessary, especially on
a typical Florida summer day.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
www.mavericklsa.com
C: 352-427-0285
O: 352-465-4545
F: 815-377-3694
Sent from my iPhone
On May 25, 2012, at 8:36 AM, "Thane States" <thane2@comporium.net> wrote:
> Just my opinion, but if you are anywhere near lightning, then you are taki
ng added risk that is unnecessary. Where there is lightning there is way to
much convective activity. I would never put my family in that scenario. W
ith all those fancy avionics you can avoid WX like that. Just my 2 cents. G
reat loking panel, I love my GRT.
> Thane
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Nikolaos Napoli
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 8:21 PM
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
>
> Yes I did look at the Gemini and I really like it. It looks like a great i
dea. The only thing that stops mr from installing it instead is concern for
lightning strike. I have no idea how tolerant of lightning strike all this
equipment is and would hate to be in IMC and have a lightning strike take o
ut my entire panel. Maybe I am being too conservative, but like most of us
I will have my family in it.
>
> The only conclusion I reached researching the literature is that in a rela
tively large cockpit, i e airline, its unlikely that a direct lightning stri
ke will take the entire instrument panel out. If I could convice myself that
lightning is not a threat, or if I was going to only fly In VMC, then I wou
ld go with the Gemini.
>
> Niko
>
>
> Nikolaos Napoli
>
> On May 24, 2012, at 7:37 PM, Robin Marks <robin@PaintTheWeb.com> wrote:
>
>> Nikolaos,
>> Have you considered either the new Gemini due out (Last December :-)) ins
tead of your 3 round gauges? The Gemini will probably save you $ and at the s
ame time five you full 6 pack functionality in one location.
>> Or maybe a Dynon D60 or D100 with its own internal back up battery?
>> I have the D100 in my -10 as a backup and I like it a lot. I have reserve
d a spot as a backup instrument in my 8A for the Gemini. Rumored pricing und
er $1,300.
>> Robin
>> http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/products/Gemini_PFD.html
>> <image003.jpg>
>> http://www.dynonavionics.com/docs/EFIS_intro.html
>> <image005.jpg>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server
@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Nikolaos Napoli
>> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 4:12 PM
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
>> The remote audio panel being offered is a relatively simple one with no b
luetooth and no marker beacon. I wanted both.
>> Since I am planning on flying IFR I wanted a backup navigator in case the
GTN650 died on me. One option would be to go to a n SL30 which I might go f
or instead of the second GTN650 as I have only purchased one of them at this
time. During IFR flying I enter a change in frequency on the radio as its b
eing given to me, I do not write it down, and for that I want a very simple w
ay to enter it. I am not sure how a single GTN650 will work for that. I be
lieve to really get all the remote equipment with the GRT system and make it
work well you need the android tablet. At that point the problem of where t
o mount it and sunlight visibility comes in. And here is a look at the numb
ers, 1200 for remote com, 4500 for remote Wass gps total 5700. GTN 650 se
t me back 8100 but for the extra 2300 I have a vor navigator and can do ILS a
pproaches and also have a touch screen. It makes the GTN650 look like a pre
tty good deal to me.
>> Nikolaos Napoli
>> On May 24, 2012, at 4:44 PM, Bob Turner <bobturner@alum.rpi.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> > Contrarian: I'd leave the EIS box more or less out of sight, off to the
right. The HXr screens will display all the engine data. You can have the E
IS flash if there's no oil pressure after start up, but you will have to loo
k over there.
>> >
>> > I'm curious; looks like you're going with a remote transponder but opte
d not to go with the remote audio panel or remote com?
>> >
>> > Two Garmin boxes are overkill IMHO, but it's your money.
>> >
>> > --------
>> > Bob Turner
>> > RV-10 QB
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Read this topic online here:
>> >
>> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=373800#373800
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> ===================
>> bsp; - The RV10-List Email Forum -
>> nd much much more:
>> tronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List"> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10
-List
>> ===================
>> bsp; - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
>> eb Forums!
>> .matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ===================
>> bsp; - List Contribution Web Site -
>> o:p>
>> bsp; -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> tronics.com/contribution"> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ===================
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.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: GRT Panel Layout |
I'd agree with that...it really depends. There are many times in the
summer that you'll get lines of stuff or many splotches scattered,
of popup cells. (Lines are usually worse) I've found that it's
usually best to stay VFR on those days....save the IFR for layers
and for wide areas of rain. So you stay VFR, but you end up
flying surprisingly nice air weaving between all of the buildups.
I am careful not to get where there are clouds overhead, because
then you have no idea what's above you that could fall (hail)
out of the cloud. But I've had many trips where I had to
weave through buildups to get places, and it didn't feel
especially dangerous at all. At the same time, I don't think
lightning would be likely to jump out to where I was either.
But, I think if you're flying IFR through rain clouds, you'd
have more worry about lightning even if it's only mildly
convective, and probably what's more of a concern than lightning
is P-static. You'll be far more likely to be affected by
P-static flying IFR than lighting, because as Thane States states
(fun to say) you probably will be avoiding the convective
stuff as much as possible anyway, and definitely you'll be
staying out of the worrysome convective stuff.
On my screens, I've found Green is usually good, yellow
is usually doable, and with WSI at least, it's been
pretty darn accurate with minimal delay, so easy
to navigate past. Red, is bad (or so I'd think), but I've
never flown through it to find out.
Tim
On 5/25/2012 8:32 AM, Jesse Saint wrote:
> I guess that depends on how you define "anywhere near". Flying through a
> thunderstorm is not wise, but flying near one is often necessary,
> especially on a typical Florida summer day.
>
> Jesse Saint
> I-TEC, Inc.
> jesse@itecusa.org <mailto:jesse@itecusa.org>
> www.itecusa.org <http://www.itecusa.org>
> www.mavericklsa.com <http://www.mavericklsa.com>
> C: 352-427-0285
> O: 352-465-4545
> F: 815-377-3694
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 25, 2012, at 8:36 AM, "Thane States" <thane2@comporium.net
> <mailto:thane2@comporium.net>> wrote:
>
>> Just my opinion, but if you are anywhere near lightning, then you are
>> taking added risk that is unnecessary. Where there is lightning there
>> is way to much convective activity. I would never put my family in
>> that scenario. With all those fancy avionics you can avoid WX like
>> that. Just my 2 cents. Great loking panel, I love my GRT.
>> Thane
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Nikolaos Napoli <mailto:napolin@me.com>
>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> *Sent:* Thursday, May 24, 2012 8:21 PM
>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
>>
>> Yes I did look at the Gemini and I really like it. It looks like a
>> great idea. The only thing that stops mr from installing it
>> instead is concern for lightning strike. I have no idea how
>> tolerant of lightning strike all this equipment is and would hate
>> to be in IMC and have a lightning strike take out my entire panel.
>> Maybe I am being too conservative, but like most of us I will have
>> my family in it.
>>
>> The only conclusion I reached researching the literature is that
>> in a relatively large cockpit, i e airline, its unlikely that a
>> direct lightning strike will take the entire instrument panel out.
>> If I could convice myself that lightning is not a threat, or if I
>> was going to only fly In VMC, then I would go with the Gemini.
>>
>> Niko
>>
>>
>> Nikolaos Napoli
>>
>> On May 24, 2012, at 7:37 PM, Robin Marks <robin@PaintTheWeb.com
>> <mailto:robin@PaintTheWeb.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> Nikolaos,
>>>
>>> Have you considered either the new Gemini due out (Last December
>>> :-)) instead of your 3 round gauges? The Gemini will probably
>>> save you $ and at the same time five you full 6 pack
>>> functionality in one location.
>>>
>>> Or maybe a Dynon D60 or D100 with its own internal back up battery?
>>>
>>> I have the D100 in my -10 as a backup and I like it a lot. I have
>>> reserved a spot as a backup instrument in my 8A for the Gemini.
>>> Rumored pricing under $1,300.
>>>
>>> Robin
>>>
>>> http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/products/Gemini_PFD.html
>>>
>>> <image003.jpg>
>>>
>>> http://www.dynonavionics.com/docs/EFIS_intro.html
>>>
>>> <image005.jpg>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>>> <mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com>
>>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>>> Nikolaos Napoli
>>> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 4:12 PM
>>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
>>>
>>> <mailto:napolin@me.com>>
>>>
>>> The remote audio panel being offered is a relatively simple one
>>> with no bluetooth and no marker beacon. I wanted both.
>>>
>>> Since I am planning on flying IFR I wanted a backup navigator in
>>> case the GTN650 died on me. One option would be to go to a n SL30
>>> which I might go for instead of the second GTN650 as I have only
>>> purchased one of them at this time. During IFR flying I enter a
>>> change in frequency on the radio as its being given to me, I do
>>> not write it down, and for that I want a very simple way to enter
>>> it. I am not sure how a single GTN650 will work for that. I
>>> believe to really get all the remote equipment with the GRT
>>> system and make it work well you need the android tablet. At that
>>> point the problem of where to mount it and sunlight visibility
>>> comes in. And here is a look at the numbers, 1200 for remote com,
>>> 4500 for remote Wass gps total 5700. GTN 650 set me back 8100 but
>>> for the extra 2300 I have a vor navigator and can do ILS
>>> approaches and also have a touch screen. It makes the GTN650 look
>>> like a pretty good deal to me.
>>>
>>> Nikolaos Napoli
>>>
>>> On May 24, 2012, at 4:44 PM, Bob Turner <bobturner@alum.rpi.edu
>>> <mailto:bobturner@alum.rpi.edu>> wrote:
>>>
>>> <bobturner@alum.rpi.edu <mailto:bobturner@alum.rpi.edu>>
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > Contrarian: I'd leave the EIS box more or less out of sight,
>>> off to the right. The HXr screens will display all the engine
>>> data. You can have the EIS flash if there's no oil pressure after
>>> start up, but you will have to look over there.
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > I'm curious; looks like you're going with a remote transponder
>>> but opted not to go with the remote audio panel or remote com?
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > Two Garmin boxes are overkill IMHO, but it's your money.
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > --------
>>>
>>> > Bob Turner
>>>
>>> > RV-10 QB
>>>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GRT Panel Layout |
My point exactly. I actually have seen lightning as much as about 5nm (estimated)
away from the CB clouds when skirting a squall line before, but if you look
at a NEXRAD and Strikes overlay, the strikes are almost exclusively in the red.
I fly through green as often as necessary, yellow to avoid huge detours, and
NEVER red. I don't mind flying through building clouds with tops up to maybe
12,000-15,000 ft or so, but avoid towering cumulous much above that. I also try
to avoid flying under that stuff for the same reasons and because it's usually
pretty bumpy, although sometimes its necessary for takeoff and landing. I
would certainly much sooner go high and pick my way between the tops before going
under to get past a line.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
www.mavericklsa.com
C: 352-427-0285
O: 352-465-4545
F: 815-377-3694
Sent from my iPhone
On May 25, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>
> I'd agree with that...it really depends. There are many times in the
> summer that you'll get lines of stuff or many splotches scattered,
> of popup cells. (Lines are usually worse) I've found that it's
> usually best to stay VFR on those days....save the IFR for layers
> and for wide areas of rain. So you stay VFR, but you end up
> flying surprisingly nice air weaving between all of the buildups.
> I am careful not to get where there are clouds overhead, because
> then you have no idea what's above you that could fall (hail)
> out of the cloud. But I've had many trips where I had to
> weave through buildups to get places, and it didn't feel
> especially dangerous at all. At the same time, I don't think
> lightning would be likely to jump out to where I was either.
>
> But, I think if you're flying IFR through rain clouds, you'd
> have more worry about lightning even if it's only mildly
> convective, and probably what's more of a concern than lightning
> is P-static. You'll be far more likely to be affected by
> P-static flying IFR than lighting, because as Thane States states
> (fun to say) you probably will be avoiding the convective
> stuff as much as possible anyway, and definitely you'll be
> staying out of the worrysome convective stuff.
>
> On my screens, I've found Green is usually good, yellow
> is usually doable, and with WSI at least, it's been
> pretty darn accurate with minimal delay, so easy
> to navigate past. Red, is bad (or so I'd think), but I've
> never flown through it to find out.
>
> Tim
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GRT Panel Layout |
This is a great discussion for me since the only weather we ever
really see at home is fog. Since I don't have much T-storm
experience, I was told to give them 20 miles. Is that too
conservative?
Along the same lines, there's a line of reasoning that says that EFIS
should be backed up with spinning gyro instruments. Gyros would
theoretically be less susceptible to a lightning strike or other major
electrical issue. I have a D-10A as my backup, and I'm starting to
wonder about it. We're designing a panel as I type and I'm
considering going with a turn coordinator, airspeed, altimeter, and
wet compass as the mechanical backups. I'm thinking that most of us
did some partial panel training with a failed attitude indicator, and
using the remaining "five-pack" works OK. Not great, but OK, and
maybe the TC will be a little more reliable than an electric attitude
indicator. I haven't had great luck with them.
I'm interested in what you all think about that scheme.
Dave Saylor
831-750-0284 CL
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com> wrote:
>
> My point exactly. I actually have seen lightning as much as about 5nm (estimated)
away from the CB clouds when skirting a squall line before, but if you look
at a NEXRAD and Strikes overlay, the strikes are almost exclusively in the
red. I fly through green as often as necessary, yellow to avoid huge detours,
and NEVER red. I don't mind flying through building clouds with tops up to maybe
12,000-15,000 ft or so, but avoid towering cumulous much above that. I also
try to avoid flying under that stuff for the same reasons and because it's usually
pretty bumpy, although sometimes its necessary for takeoff and landing.
I would certainly much sooner go high and pick my way between the tops before
going under to get past a line.
>
> Jesse Saint
> I-TEC, Inc.
> jesse@itecusa.org
> www.itecusa.org
> www.mavericklsa.com
> C: 352-427-0285
> O: 352-465-4545
> F: 815-377-3694
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 25, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I'd agree with that...it really depends. There are many times in the
>> summer that you'll get lines of stuff or many splotches scattered,
>> of popup cells. (Lines are usually worse) I've found that it's
>> usually best to stay VFR on those days....save the IFR for layers
>> and for wide areas of rain. So you stay VFR, but you end up
>> flying surprisingly nice air weaving between all of the buildups.
>> I am careful not to get where there are clouds overhead, because
>> then you have no idea what's above you that could fall (hail)
>> out of the cloud. But I've had many trips where I had to
>> weave through buildups to get places, and it didn't feel
>> especially dangerous at all. At the same time, I don't think
>> lightning would be likely to jump out to where I was either.
>>
>> But, I think if you're flying IFR through rain clouds, you'd
>> have more worry about lightning even if it's only mildly
>> convective, and probably what's more of a concern than lightning
>> is P-static. You'll be far more likely to be affected by
>> P-static flying IFR than lighting, because as Thane States states
>> (fun to say) you probably will be avoiding the convective
>> stuff as much as possible anyway, and definitely you'll be
>> staying out of the worrysome convective stuff.
>>
>> On my screens, I've found Green is usually good, yellow
>> is usually doable, and with WSI at least, it's been
>> pretty darn accurate with minimal delay, so easy
>> to navigate past. Red, is bad (or so I'd think), but I've
>> never flown through it to find out.
>>
>> Tim
>
>
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: GRT Panel Layout |
Don't know how the EFISs hold up with lightning, however, I did
inadvertently (during an O sh*t moment) short an Odyssey 680 to ground via a
Chelton IDU case with no ill effect. The Cheltons can be installed in
certified aircraft so I believe they have been tested in adverse conditions.
Tim Olsen may know more.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Saylor
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 10:07 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
--> <dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com>
This is a great discussion for me since the only weather we ever really see
at home is fog. Since I don't have much T-storm experience, I was told to
give them 20 miles. Is that too conservative?
Along the same lines, there's a line of reasoning that says that EFIS should
be backed up with spinning gyro instruments. Gyros would theoretically be
less susceptible to a lightning strike or other major electrical issue. I
have a D-10A as my backup, and I'm starting to wonder about it. We're
designing a panel as I type and I'm considering going with a turn
coordinator, airspeed, altimeter, and wet compass as the mechanical backups.
I'm thinking that most of us did some partial panel training with a failed
attitude indicator, and using the remaining "five-pack" works OK. Not
great, but OK, and maybe the TC will be a little more reliable than an
electric attitude indicator. I haven't had great luck with them.
I'm interested in what you all think about that scheme.
Dave Saylor
831-750-0284 CL
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com>
wrote:
>
> My point exactly. I actually have seen lightning as much as about 5nm
(estimated) away from the CB clouds when skirting a squall line before, but
if you look at a NEXRAD and Strikes overlay, the strikes are almost
exclusively in the red. I fly through green as often as necessary, yellow to
avoid huge detours, and NEVER red. I don't mind flying through building
clouds with tops up to maybe 12,000-15,000 ft or so, but avoid towering
cumulous much above that. I also try to avoid flying under that stuff for
the same reasons and because it's usually pretty bumpy, although sometimes
its necessary for takeoff and landing. I would certainly much sooner go high
and pick my way between the tops before going under to get past a line.
>
> Jesse Saint
> I-TEC, Inc.
> jesse@itecusa.org
> www.itecusa.org
> www.mavericklsa.com
> C: 352-427-0285
> O: 352-465-4545
> F: 815-377-3694
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 25, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I'd agree with that...it really depends. There are many times in the
>> summer that you'll get lines of stuff or many splotches scattered, of
>> popup cells. (Lines are usually worse) I've found that it's usually
>> best to stay VFR on those days....save the IFR for layers and for
>> wide areas of rain. So you stay VFR, but you end up flying
>> surprisingly nice air weaving between all of the buildups.
>> I am careful not to get where there are clouds overhead, because then
>> you have no idea what's above you that could fall (hail) out of the
>> cloud. But I've had many trips where I had to weave through buildups
>> to get places, and it didn't feel especially dangerous at all. At
>> the same time, I don't think lightning would be likely to jump out to
>> where I was either.
>>
>> But, I think if you're flying IFR through rain clouds, you'd have
>> more worry about lightning even if it's only mildly convective, and
>> probably what's more of a concern than lightning is P-static. You'll
>> be far more likely to be affected by P-static flying IFR than
>> lighting, because as Thane States states (fun to say) you probably
>> will be avoiding the convective stuff as much as possible anyway, and
>> definitely you'll be staying out of the worrysome convective stuff.
>>
>> On my screens, I've found Green is usually good, yellow is usually
>> doable, and with WSI at least, it's been pretty darn accurate with
>> minimal delay, so easy to navigate past. Red, is bad (or so I'd
>> think), but I've never flown through it to find out.
>>
>> Tim
>
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GRT Panel Layout |
I ratcheted though this thought process awhile back and ending up firmly on the
"no spinning gyro" answer.
I started with a very expensive RC Allen electric AI in my 8A. It started to go
south at 200 hours and I had to pull it shortly thereafter. I now have a Dynon
D10A in its place that been flawless for the last 500+ hours. This set the
stage for my choice of a dual SkyView EFIS install (with primary and back up
ADHRS) in the RV-10. Considering my experience and others I have engaged, the
reliability of dual EFIS and dual ADHRS far exceeds that of spinning gyros.
Note however that I have taken steps to mitigate against electrical failure from
taking down both EFIS systems. If you have a single power distribution scheme
and don't want to change it, then vacuum gyros may be the way to go.
Also of note, while the FARs state you must have a "magnetic heading reference",
this has been interpreted by the Washington FSDO office as a wet compass. They
did not wish to justify that policy, but since I wanted them to sign off my
plane I decided not to push the point (and I got the sign off last Wednesday!).
Carl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Saylor
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
--> <dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com>
This is a great discussion for me since the only weather we ever really see at
home is fog. Since I don't have much T-storm experience, I was told to give them
20 miles. Is that too conservative?
Along the same lines, there's a line of reasoning that says that EFIS should be
backed up with spinning gyro instruments. Gyros would theoretically be less
susceptible to a lightning strike or other major electrical issue. I have a D-10A
as my backup, and I'm starting to wonder about it. We're designing a panel
as I type and I'm considering going with a turn coordinator, airspeed, altimeter,
and wet compass as the mechanical backups. I'm thinking that most of us
did some partial panel training with a failed attitude indicator, and using
the remaining "five-pack" works OK. Not great, but OK, and maybe the TC will
be a little more reliable than an electric attitude indicator. I haven't had
great luck with them.
I'm interested in what you all think about that scheme.
Dave Saylor
831-750-0284 CL
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com> wrote:
>
> My point exactly. I actually have seen lightning as much as about 5nm (estimated)
away from the CB clouds when skirting a squall line before, but if you look
at a NEXRAD and Strikes overlay, the strikes are almost exclusively in the
red. I fly through green as often as necessary, yellow to avoid huge detours,
and NEVER red. I don't mind flying through building clouds with tops up to maybe
12,000-15,000 ft or so, but avoid towering cumulous much above that. I also
try to avoid flying under that stuff for the same reasons and because it's usually
pretty bumpy, although sometimes its necessary for takeoff and landing.
I would certainly much sooner go high and pick my way between the tops before
going under to get past a line.
>
> Jesse Saint
> I-TEC, Inc.
> jesse@itecusa.org
> www.itecusa.org
> www.mavericklsa.com
> C: 352-427-0285
> O: 352-465-4545
> F: 815-377-3694
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 25, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I'd agree with that...it really depends. There are many times in the
>> summer that you'll get lines of stuff or many splotches scattered, of
>> popup cells. (Lines are usually worse) I've found that it's usually
>> best to stay VFR on those days....save the IFR for layers and for
>> wide areas of rain. So you stay VFR, but you end up flying
>> surprisingly nice air weaving between all of the buildups.
>> I am careful not to get where there are clouds overhead, because then
>> you have no idea what's above you that could fall (hail) out of the
>> cloud. But I've had many trips where I had to weave through buildups
>> to get places, and it didn't feel especially dangerous at all. At
>> the same time, I don't think lightning would be likely to jump out to
>> where I was either.
>>
>> But, I think if you're flying IFR through rain clouds, you'd have
>> more worry about lightning even if it's only mildly convective, and
>> probably what's more of a concern than lightning is P-static. You'll
>> be far more likely to be affected by P-static flying IFR than
>> lighting, because as Thane States states (fun to say) you probably
>> will be avoiding the convective stuff as much as possible anyway, and
>> definitely you'll be staying out of the worrysome convective stuff.
>>
>> On my screens, I've found Green is usually good, yellow is usually
>> doable, and with WSI at least, it's been pretty darn accurate with
>> minimal delay, so easy to navigate past. Red, is bad (or so I'd
>> think), but I've never flown through it to find out.
>>
>> Tim
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GRT Panel Layout |
Carl,
Congratulations on your sign off.
Do you consider the dedicated back up battery for the Dynon to be part of what
you describe as a " single power distribution scheme"? I have a triple battery
system. Primary & backup for all electronics and then the dedicated back up battery
for my D100. Seems like enough redundancy?
Robin
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carl Froehlich
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 11:12 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
--> <carl.froehlich@verizon.net>
I ratcheted though this thought process awhile back and ending up firmly on the
"no spinning gyro" answer.
I started with a very expensive RC Allen electric AI in my 8A. It started to go
south at 200 hours and I had to pull it shortly thereafter. I now have a Dynon
D10A in its place that been flawless for the last 500+ hours. This set the
stage for my choice of a dual SkyView EFIS install (with primary and back up
ADHRS) in the RV-10. Considering my experience and others I have engaged, the
reliability of dual EFIS and dual ADHRS far exceeds that of spinning gyros.
Note however that I have taken steps to mitigate against electrical failure from
taking down both EFIS systems. If you have a single power distribution scheme
and don't want to change it, then vacuum gyros may be the way to go.
Also of note, while the FARs state you must have a "magnetic heading reference",
this has been interpreted by the Washington FSDO office as a wet compass. They
did not wish to justify that policy, but since I wanted them to sign off my
plane I decided not to push the point (and I got the sign off last Wednesday!).
Carl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Saylor
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
--> <dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com>
This is a great discussion for me since the only weather we ever really see at
home is fog. Since I don't have much T-storm experience, I was told to give them
20 miles. Is that too conservative?
Along the same lines, there's a line of reasoning that says that EFIS should be
backed up with spinning gyro instruments. Gyros would theoretically be less
susceptible to a lightning strike or other major electrical issue. I have a D-10A
as my backup, and I'm starting to wonder about it. We're designing a panel
as I type and I'm considering going with a turn coordinator, airspeed, altimeter,
and wet compass as the mechanical backups. I'm thinking that most of us
did some partial panel training with a failed attitude indicator, and using
the remaining "five-pack" works OK. Not great, but OK, and maybe the TC will
be a little more reliable than an electric attitude indicator. I haven't had
great luck with them.
I'm interested in what you all think about that scheme.
Dave Saylor
831-750-0284 CL
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com> wrote:
>
> My point exactly. I actually have seen lightning as much as about 5nm (estimated)
away from the CB clouds when skirting a squall line before, but if you look
at a NEXRAD and Strikes overlay, the strikes are almost exclusively in the
red. I fly through green as often as necessary, yellow to avoid huge detours,
and NEVER red. I don't mind flying through building clouds with tops up to maybe
12,000-15,000 ft or so, but avoid towering cumulous much above that. I also
try to avoid flying under that stuff for the same reasons and because it's usually
pretty bumpy, although sometimes its necessary for takeoff and landing.
I would certainly much sooner go high and pick my way between the tops before
going under to get past a line.
>
> Jesse Saint
> I-TEC, Inc.
> jesse@itecusa.org
> www.itecusa.org
> www.mavericklsa.com
> C: 352-427-0285
> O: 352-465-4545
> F: 815-377-3694
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 25, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I'd agree with that...it really depends. There are many times in the
>> summer that you'll get lines of stuff or many splotches scattered, of
>> popup cells. (Lines are usually worse) I've found that it's usually
>> best to stay VFR on those days....save the IFR for layers and for
>> wide areas of rain. So you stay VFR, but you end up flying
>> surprisingly nice air weaving between all of the buildups.
>> I am careful not to get where there are clouds overhead, because then
>> you have no idea what's above you that could fall (hail) out of the
>> cloud. But I've had many trips where I had to weave through buildups
>> to get places, and it didn't feel especially dangerous at all. At
>> the same time, I don't think lightning would be likely to jump out to
>> where I was either.
>>
>> But, I think if you're flying IFR through rain clouds, you'd have
>> more worry about lightning even if it's only mildly convective, and
>> probably what's more of a concern than lightning is P-static. You'll
>> be far more likely to be affected by P-static flying IFR than
>> lighting, because as Thane States states (fun to say) you probably
>> will be avoiding the convective stuff as much as possible anyway, and
>> definitely you'll be staying out of the worrysome convective stuff.
>>
>> On my screens, I've found Green is usually good, yellow is usually
>> doable, and with WSI at least, it's been pretty darn accurate with
>> minimal delay, so easy to navigate past. Red, is bad (or so I'd
>> think), but I've never flown through it to find out.
>>
>> Tim
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GRT Panel Layout |
In reading Jesse's follow up post, I think he and I approach it
basically the same. Having lightning strike data is awesome.
You then know you have a very convective and strong cell or line.
So, I avoid where the strikes are, and use that as part of
my plan as I weave around. Also, tops. If the tops are
calling 20K' or so, I know they're going to be big. I don't
want to fly through that, even if it's not red and I'm on
an IFR plan. To me, bumps are never fun. Also, even when you're
only looking at 10,000' tops, when you fly through them you
often hit a bump as you enter and get bumped around inside...but
if you stay out of the visible cloud, you get a smoother ride.
As you talk about fog, I think that is really the better IFR
conditions. The downside is that fog is often to the ground.
Where I live, we often get PERFECT IFR type conditions for fun.
500'-2000' ceilings of stratus layers, where you can get on
top. That's the kind of IFR I don't mind. I don't want
to mess with IFR if it's convective. Under it isn't fun,
but I'll go under if the tops aren't high. But if they're
higher buildups, I use my WX equipment to get me AROUND the
weather. I wouldn't file IFR if I can go VFR easily,
because then I can deviate all I want without requests.
I'd be happy to go VFR Flight Following or IFR, but only
if they're happy to give me the leeway to make course changes
every 10-20 miles so I can weave around. Convective buildups
just aren't good for flying in...and by using that as my
concept in a plan, it really helps keep you out of trouble
somewhat. The times it bites is if the widely scattered
clouds turn into broken, and you have a harder time maintaining
ground contact...when that sneaks up on you, you're better
off having been or being on an IFR plan already so you
can plug along...but plan on making deviations.
As far as 20nm being too conservative, I would not be able to
say that is true. I think the 20nm recommendation is a
healthy safety margin and think it's good to promote it
as such. The fact is though, that it can really depend.
If you're talking buildups that aren't precipitating,
you can basically just fly right by them. If they're
precipitating, then you have to pay close attention.
Are there lighting strikes? What are the tops? What
colors do you see....Red? Pink? These are indicators
of it being pretty nasty inside. Those are best to
avoid by as much as you can. 20nm though is sometimes
not workable if there are lots of small separate cells,
so you either have to land, deviate, or come up with
some other plan. For me, part of the key is what
you will be flying directly underneath. They want you
to keep 20nm away because stuff comes out of those
clouds. Lightning can reach out a little ways as Jesse
said. Hail can lift up and fall out around it too.
But, if you are able to keep perfectly blue skies above
your head, 20nm can be more than you need. This isn't
saying the recommendation isn't good. It just may be
that you can do closer without too much concern.
Check out this really awful screenshot:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/Trips/2011_East_Coast/RV20110611160341.html
Notice all the areas where there is NOTHING, but suddenly
an intense yellow area with red...some were really
strong. But, they were all over heck...and in my way.
Well, IFR, I would have probably packed it in for the
day and landed. But, since it was daylight and I was
VFR, and could see out the window fine, I got to play
ball.
Here is a picture out the window:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/Trips/2011_East_Coast/RV20110611163547.html
Notice the overhang on the cloud cell. But, I'm in clear skies.
My goal at that time was to A) keep ground contact by flying
in the valleys between anything big. B) Keep OUT from that
overhanging cloud. As long as I could keep a couple miles
out under perfect blue skies, it was a good ride. I didn't
want any hail falling on me, and I didn't see any lightning.
I was closer than 20 miles, but wasn't close enough that
we would be affected by the cloud.
Now going further along the trip, here's another screenshot near
that area.
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/Trips/2011_East_Coast/RV20110611164520.html
Here's the view out the window:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/Trips/2011_East_Coast/RV20110611164500.html
You can see that the gap between the cells may have been 20 miles
or so, but there was nothing overhanging the cell, and it was
visibly clear above me, and I was far enough from the cells that
we had no effect. This was closer than I'd have wanted, and
you know darn well I was watching very very close keeping
track of the ground, the weather on the OTHER side of the gap
(could something build up and block me from continuing?), and
what the conditions were. This wasn't a time for IFR, and I'd
have been causing ATC a pain in the butt with VFR flight following.
But as long as I was in clear skies, no overhead clouds, and
it was a smooth ride, it was easily doable. For someone
not used to flying around that stuff, might be best to ease
into it...but we get that all the time up here.
To show you a picture of a day that will make you pull your hair
out, check this one out:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/flights/20090819/RV20090814160153.html
It came from this write-up, btw:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/flights/20090819/index.html
The funny thing is, by staying VFR and knowing exactly
what you were flying in, it was doable. Again, if you're not
from an area that has these conditions, it's worth easing
into it. But, the trip actually went well.
From a different trip, this pic shows something easy to go through:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/flights/20080901/SD200809012686.html
So it all depends on a lot of factors, really. There are times
when 20nm will be a very good yardstick. Each situation is
different.
Although I don't have a spinning gyro, if you fly IFR,
I would say that would be your BEST way to go for a backup.
Would be nice to be lightning proof and p-static proof,
and everything else. So, while I don't have that in
my plane, I do think that's the best way to go. Having another
EFIS as a backup really is an inferior backup...and anyone
that believes otherwise is just being defensive and not
owning up to reality. I don't have a spinning gyro in
my plane, so yes, with that statement made, it's deficient.
That's not a slam on y'all, either. I'm just saying that
if you're flying IFR, it's BEST to have a spinning gyro backup.
There are downsides to it too, especially from a maintenance
perspective...but it would be the best choice. Something
that can't get taken out by lightning, doesn't use software,
and can keep you upright with no electricity.
Anyway, weather is a pretty interesting subject to talk about,
because opinions vary, even looking at the same cloud.
My major concern is I want smooth air, no hail, no lightning,
and to get where I'm going.
Tim
Do not archive
On 5/25/2012 12:07 PM, Dave Saylor wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Dave Saylor<dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com>
>
> This is a great discussion for me since the only weather we ever
> really see at home is fog. Since I don't have much T-storm
> experience, I was told to give them 20 miles. Is that too
> conservative?
>
> Along the same lines, there's a line of reasoning that says that EFIS
> should be backed up with spinning gyro instruments. Gyros would
> theoretically be less susceptible to a lightning strike or other major
> electrical issue. I have a D-10A as my backup, and I'm starting to
> wonder about it. We're designing a panel as I type and I'm
> considering going with a turn coordinator, airspeed, altimeter, and
> wet compass as the mechanical backups. I'm thinking that most of us
> did some partial panel training with a failed attitude indicator, and
> using the remaining "five-pack" works OK. Not great, but OK, and
> maybe the TC will be a little more reliable than an electric attitude
> indicator. I haven't had great luck with them.
>
> I'm interested in what you all think about that scheme.
>
> Dave Saylor
> 831-750-0284 CL
>
>
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Jesse Saint<jesse@saintaviation.com> wrote:
>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Jesse Saint<jesse@saintaviation.com>
>>
>> My point exactly. I actually have seen lightning as much as about 5nm (estimated)
away from the CB clouds when skirting a squall line before, but if you look
at a NEXRAD and Strikes overlay, the strikes are almost exclusively in the
red. I fly through green as often as necessary, yellow to avoid huge detours,
and NEVER red. I don't mind flying through building clouds with tops up to maybe
12,000-15,000 ft or so, but avoid towering cumulous much above that. I also
try to avoid flying under that stuff for the same reasons and because it's usually
pretty bumpy, although sometimes its necessary for takeoff and landing.
I would certainly much sooner go high and pick my way between the tops before
going under to get past a line.
>>
>> Jesse Saint
>> I-TEC, Inc.
>> jesse@itecusa.org
>> www.itecusa.org
>> www.mavericklsa.com
>> C: 352-427-0285
>> O: 352-465-4545
>> F: 815-377-3694
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On May 25, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Tim Olson<Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>>
>>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson<Tim@myrv10.com>
>>>
>>> I'd agree with that...it really depends. There are many times in the
>>> summer that you'll get lines of stuff or many splotches scattered,
>>> of popup cells. (Lines are usually worse) I've found that it's
>>> usually best to stay VFR on those days....save the IFR for layers
>>> and for wide areas of rain. So you stay VFR, but you end up
>>> flying surprisingly nice air weaving between all of the buildups.
>>> I am careful not to get where there are clouds overhead, because
>>> then you have no idea what's above you that could fall (hail)
>>> out of the cloud. But I've had many trips where I had to
>>> weave through buildups to get places, and it didn't feel
>>> especially dangerous at all. At the same time, I don't think
>>> lightning would be likely to jump out to where I was either.
>>>
>>> But, I think if you're flying IFR through rain clouds, you'd
>>> have more worry about lightning even if it's only mildly
>>> convective, and probably what's more of a concern than lightning
>>> is P-static. You'll be far more likely to be affected by
>>> P-static flying IFR than lighting, because as Thane States states
>>> (fun to say) you probably will be avoiding the convective
>>> stuff as much as possible anyway, and definitely you'll be
>>> staying out of the worrysome convective stuff.
>>>
>>> On my screens, I've found Green is usually good, yellow
>>> is usually doable, and with WSI at least, it's been
>>> pretty darn accurate with minimal delay, so easy
>>> to navigate past. Red, is bad (or so I'd think), but I've
>>> never flown through it to find out.
>>>
>>> Tim
>>
>>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GRT Panel Layout |
I'm no expert but living in the SE, convection, cumulus, and T-storms
are almost daily occurences in the summer somewhere along your trip.
Twenty miles just won't let you get anywhere in this part of the country.
Here in the SE, getting up as high as you can w/o O2 will usually allow
you to fly among the tops. Even if they aren't raining or lightening
(yet), it's best to stay out of them unless you can clearly see what's
going on the other side and if don't mind being bumped around.
Controllers issue deviations freely... especially where and when you
need them most, e.g. JAX center in FL.
For short flights, it's often equally effective to stay below cloud base
and just fly around the rain shafts. But this depends on having a clear
look at the buildups on top of the rain shafts. If it's overcast and
convective (imbedded storms), that just doesn't work whether you stay
below or fly in the clouds. Even with Nexrad, there's no reason to be
flying around or underneath imbedded convective storms in my opinion.
I would say no one purposely goes into a convective storm anymore
including the airlines. But there's a lot of very informed flying
around them these days. I guess the big guys all have radar and Nexrad
and most of us little guys have Nexrad (and before that Cheap Bastard).
It works very well... especially if you stay visual.
Coming home last week I was flying between big buildups north of
Charlotte at 11k. Staying visual forced me towards a waypoint that all
the traffic in the KCLT seemed to be crossing at 11k. Sure enough, it
was on a commonly used STAR. I listened to plane after plane ask for
deviations as they came into the waypoint, but then they'd cross it and
proceed in. I was forced to ask for the same treatment but the
controllers didn't want me crossing the arrival point along with the
airliners, especially at a 90degree angle to the other traffic. I told
them I could stay 3 miles away from it and still get thru the break in
the buildups and that seemed to work for them. Funny thing is that I
never saw another plane during the passage (and my ADS-B was only
showing some of the storm and no traffic at that moment). But I ended
up flying less than a mile away from the buildups as I squeezed thru.
There were occassional flashes and it was clearly raining below them but
they were slow builders with almost no movement and it turned out fine.
For me, the key is staying visual on convective days but I will fly
close to buildups depending on how stuff looks. Sometimes you get
surprised a bit as I did out in AZ recently. Things are bigger,
higher, and faster out there and I still need to calibrate my eyeballs a
bit better for western conditions.
Bill "a thunderstorm is just a grown up thermal having a tantrum" Watson
On 5/25/2012 1:07 PM, Dave Saylor wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Dave Saylor<dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com>
>
> This is a great discussion for me since the only weather we ever
> really see at home is fog. Since I don't have much T-storm
> experience, I was told to give them 20 miles. Is that too
> conservative?
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GRT Panel Layout |
I too have a wet compass; my IFR solution is a Chelton systen EFIS as
primary; a GRT Sport as backup which is powered by either the primary or
esential busses and a Trutrak Digiflite AP (on the primary buss) with its
own internal solid state gyros. Any of three systems can be used to keep te
dirty side down. The AP source can be selected by rotary switch so that the
Cheltons, the GRT or the AP provide flight control.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carl Froehlich
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 11:12 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
--> <carl.froehlich@verizon.net>
I ratcheted though this thought process awhile back and ending up firmly on
the "no spinning gyro" answer.
I started with a very expensive RC Allen electric AI in my 8A. It started
to go south at 200 hours and I had to pull it shortly thereafter. I now
have a Dynon D10A in its place that been flawless for the last 500+ hours.
This set the stage for my choice of a dual SkyView EFIS install (with
primary and back up ADHRS) in the RV-10. Considering my experience and
others I have engaged, the reliability of dual EFIS and dual ADHRS far
exceeds that of spinning gyros.
Note however that I have taken steps to mitigate against electrical failure
from taking down both EFIS systems. If you have a single power distribution
scheme and don't want to change it, then vacuum gyros may be the way to go.
Also of note, while the FARs state you must have a "magnetic heading
reference", this has been interpreted by the Washington FSDO office as a wet
compass. They did not wish to justify that policy, but since I wanted them
to sign off my plane I decided not to push the point (and I got the sign off
last Wednesday!).
Carl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Saylor
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
--> <dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com>
This is a great discussion for me since the only weather we ever really see
at home is fog. Since I don't have much T-storm experience, I was told to
give them 20 miles. Is that too conservative?
Along the same lines, there's a line of reasoning that says that EFIS should
be backed up with spinning gyro instruments. Gyros would theoretically be
less susceptible to a lightning strike or other major electrical issue. I
have a D-10A as my backup, and I'm starting to wonder about it. We're
designing a panel as I type and I'm considering going with a turn
coordinator, airspeed, altimeter, and wet compass as the mechanical backups.
I'm thinking that most of us did some partial panel training with a failed
attitude indicator, and using the remaining "five-pack" works OK. Not
great, but OK, and maybe the TC will be a little more reliable than an
electric attitude indicator. I haven't had great luck with them.
I'm interested in what you all think about that scheme.
Dave Saylor
831-750-0284 CL
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com>
wrote:
>
> My point exactly. I actually have seen lightning as much as about 5nm
(estimated) away from the CB clouds when skirting a squall line before, but
if you look at a NEXRAD and Strikes overlay, the strikes are almost
exclusively in the red. I fly through green as often as necessary, yellow to
avoid huge detours, and NEVER red. I don't mind flying through building
clouds with tops up to maybe 12,000-15,000 ft or so, but avoid towering
cumulous much above that. I also try to avoid flying under that stuff for
the same reasons and because it's usually pretty bumpy, although sometimes
its necessary for takeoff and landing. I would certainly much sooner go high
and pick my way between the tops before going under to get past a line.
>
> Jesse Saint
> I-TEC, Inc.
> jesse@itecusa.org
> www.itecusa.org
> www.mavericklsa.com
> C: 352-427-0285
> O: 352-465-4545
> F: 815-377-3694
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 25, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I'd agree with that...it really depends. There are many times in the
>> summer that you'll get lines of stuff or many splotches scattered, of
>> popup cells. (Lines are usually worse) I've found that it's usually
>> best to stay VFR on those days....save the IFR for layers and for
>> wide areas of rain. So you stay VFR, but you end up flying
>> surprisingly nice air weaving between all of the buildups.
>> I am careful not to get where there are clouds overhead, because then
>> you have no idea what's above you that could fall (hail) out of the
>> cloud. But I've had many trips where I had to weave through buildups
>> to get places, and it didn't feel especially dangerous at all. At
>> the same time, I don't think lightning would be likely to jump out to
>> where I was either.
>>
>> But, I think if you're flying IFR through rain clouds, you'd have
>> more worry about lightning even if it's only mildly convective, and
>> probably what's more of a concern than lightning is P-static. You'll
>> be far more likely to be affected by P-static flying IFR than
>> lighting, because as Thane States states (fun to say) you probably
>> will be avoiding the convective stuff as much as possible anyway, and
>> definitely you'll be staying out of the worrysome convective stuff.
>>
>> On my screens, I've found Green is usually good, yellow is usually
>> doable, and with WSI at least, it's been pretty darn accurate with
>> minimal delay, so easy to navigate past. Red, is bad (or so I'd
>> think), but I've never flown through it to find out.
>>
>> Tim
>
>
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GRT Panel Layout |
Back when I flew hard IFR, the thing that was most helpful was the
Strikefinder. Those were the days when some federal judge "found" that
digital and analog technologies were patent infringing. With some effort one
was installed and the aircraft was flown where the lightning strikes were
not. Smooth ride even though the rain was so heavy that water came in the
doors. The delay in the Sat WX processing seems to cause some confusion
about where not to fly. Looking forward to ADS-B install and FAA
installation completion. I will still be wary the delay. Fog is not a
problem; usually smooth ride but LIFR conditions.
-----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, 2012 11:39 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
In reading Jesse's follow up post, I think he and I approach it basically
the same. Having lightning strike data is awesome.
You then know you have a very convective and strong cell or line.
So, I avoid where the strikes are, and use that as part of my plan as I
weave around. Also, tops. If the tops are calling 20K' or so, I know
they're going to be big. I don't want to fly through that, even if it's not
red and I'm on an IFR plan. To me, bumps are never fun. Also, even when
you're only looking at 10,000' tops, when you fly through them you often hit
a bump as you enter and get bumped around inside...but if you stay out of
the visible cloud, you get a smoother ride.
As you talk about fog, I think that is really the better IFR conditions.
The downside is that fog is often to the ground.
Where I live, we often get PERFECT IFR type conditions for fun.
500'-2000' ceilings of stratus layers, where you can get on top. That's the
kind of IFR I don't mind. I don't want to mess with IFR if it's convective.
Under it isn't fun, but I'll go under if the tops aren't high. But if
they're higher buildups, I use my WX equipment to get me AROUND the weather.
I wouldn't file IFR if I can go VFR easily, because then I can deviate all I
want without requests.
I'd be happy to go VFR Flight Following or IFR, but only if they're happy to
give me the leeway to make course changes every 10-20 miles so I can weave
around. Convective buildups just aren't good for flying in...and by using
that as my concept in a plan, it really helps keep you out of trouble
somewhat. The times it bites is if the widely scattered clouds turn into
broken, and you have a harder time maintaining ground contact...when that
sneaks up on you, you're better off having been or being on an IFR plan
already so you can plug along...but plan on making deviations.
As far as 20nm being too conservative, I would not be able to say that is
true. I think the 20nm recommendation is a healthy safety margin and think
it's good to promote it as such. The fact is though, that it can really
depend.
If you're talking buildups that aren't precipitating, you can basically just
fly right by them. If they're precipitating, then you have to pay close
attention.
Are there lighting strikes? What are the tops? What colors do you
see....Red? Pink? These are indicators of it being pretty nasty inside.
Those are best to avoid by as much as you can. 20nm though is sometimes not
workable if there are lots of small separate cells, so you either have to
land, deviate, or come up with some other plan. For me, part of the key is
what you will be flying directly underneath. They want you to keep 20nm
away because stuff comes out of those clouds. Lightning can reach out a
little ways as Jesse said. Hail can lift up and fall out around it too.
But, if you are able to keep perfectly blue skies above your head, 20nm can
be more than you need. This isn't saying the recommendation isn't good. It
just may be that you can do closer without too much concern.
Check out this really awful screenshot:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/Trips/2011_East_Coast/RV20110611160341.html
Notice all the areas where there is NOTHING, but suddenly an intense yellow
area with red...some were really strong. But, they were all over heck...and
in my way.
Well, IFR, I would have probably packed it in for the day and landed. But,
since it was daylight and I was VFR, and could see out the window fine, I
got to play ball.
Here is a picture out the window:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/Trips/2011_East_Coast/RV20110611163547.html
Notice the overhang on the cloud cell. But, I'm in clear skies.
My goal at that time was to A) keep ground contact by flying in the valleys
between anything big. B) Keep OUT from that overhanging cloud. As long as
I could keep a couple miles out under perfect blue skies, it was a good
ride. I didn't want any hail falling on me, and I didn't see any lightning.
I was closer than 20 miles, but wasn't close enough that we would be
affected by the cloud.
Now going further along the trip, here's another screenshot near that area.
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/Trips/2011_East_Coast/RV20110611164520.html
Here's the view out the window:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/Trips/2011_East_Coast/RV20110611164500.html
You can see that the gap between the cells may have been 20 miles or so, but
there was nothing overhanging the cell, and it was visibly clear above me,
and I was far enough from the cells that we had no effect. This was closer
than I'd have wanted, and you know darn well I was watching very very close
keeping track of the ground, the weather on the OTHER side of the gap (could
something build up and block me from continuing?), and what the conditions
were. This wasn't a time for IFR, and I'd have been causing ATC a pain in
the butt with VFR flight following.
But as long as I was in clear skies, no overhead clouds, and it was a smooth
ride, it was easily doable. For someone not used to flying around that
stuff, might be best to ease into it...but we get that all the time up here.
To show you a picture of a day that will make you pull your hair out, check
this one out:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/flights/20090819/RV20090814160153.html
It came from this write-up, btw:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/flights/20090819/index.html
The funny thing is, by staying VFR and knowing exactly what you were flying
in, it was doable. Again, if you're not from an area that has these
conditions, it's worth easing into it. But, the trip actually went well.
From a different trip, this pic shows something easy to go through:
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/flights/20080901/SD200809012686.html
So it all depends on a lot of factors, really. There are times when 20nm
will be a very good yardstick. Each situation is different.
Although I don't have a spinning gyro, if you fly IFR, I would say that
would be your BEST way to go for a backup.
Would be nice to be lightning proof and p-static proof, and everything else.
So, while I don't have that in my plane, I do think that's the best way to
go. Having another EFIS as a backup really is an inferior backup...and
anyone that believes otherwise is just being defensive and not owning up to
reality. I don't have a spinning gyro in my plane, so yes, with that
statement made, it's deficient.
That's not a slam on y'all, either. I'm just saying that if you're flying
IFR, it's BEST to have a spinning gyro backup.
There are downsides to it too, especially from a maintenance
perspective...but it would be the best choice. Something that can't get
taken out by lightning, doesn't use software, and can keep you upright with
no electricity.
Anyway, weather is a pretty interesting subject to talk about, because
opinions vary, even looking at the same cloud.
My major concern is I want smooth air, no hail, no lightning, and to get
where I'm going.
Tim
Do not archive
On 5/25/2012 12:07 PM, Dave Saylor wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Dave
> --> Saylor<dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com>
>
> This is a great discussion for me since the only weather we ever
> really see at home is fog. Since I don't have much T-storm
> experience, I was told to give them 20 miles. Is that too
> conservative?
>
> Along the same lines, there's a line of reasoning that says that EFIS
> should be backed up with spinning gyro instruments. Gyros would
> theoretically be less susceptible to a lightning strike or other major
> electrical issue. I have a D-10A as my backup, and I'm starting to
> wonder about it. We're designing a panel as I type and I'm
> considering going with a turn coordinator, airspeed, altimeter, and
> wet compass as the mechanical backups. I'm thinking that most of us
> did some partial panel training with a failed attitude indicator, and
> using the remaining "five-pack" works OK. Not great, but OK, and
> maybe the TC will be a little more reliable than an electric attitude
> indicator. I haven't had great luck with them.
>
> I'm interested in what you all think about that scheme.
>
> Dave Saylor
> 831-750-0284 CL
>
>
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Jesse Saint<jesse@saintaviation.com>
wrote:
>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Jesse
>> --> Saint<jesse@saintaviation.com>
>>
>> My point exactly. I actually have seen lightning as much as about 5nm
(estimated) away from the CB clouds when skirting a squall line before, but
if you look at a NEXRAD and Strikes overlay, the strikes are almost
exclusively in the red. I fly through green as often as necessary, yellow to
avoid huge detours, and NEVER red. I don't mind flying through building
clouds with tops up to maybe 12,000-15,000 ft or so, but avoid towering
cumulous much above that. I also try to avoid flying under that stuff for
the same reasons and because it's usually pretty bumpy, although sometimes
its necessary for takeoff and landing. I would certainly much sooner go high
and pick my way between the tops before going under to get past a line.
>>
>> Jesse Saint
>> I-TEC, Inc.
>> jesse@itecusa.org
>> www.itecusa.org
>> www.mavericklsa.com
>> C: 352-427-0285
>> O: 352-465-4545
>> F: 815-377-3694
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On May 25, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Tim Olson<Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>>
>>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson<Tim@myrv10.com>
>>>
>>> I'd agree with that...it really depends. There are many times in
>>> the summer that you'll get lines of stuff or many splotches
>>> scattered, of popup cells. (Lines are usually worse) I've found
>>> that it's usually best to stay VFR on those days....save the IFR for
>>> layers and for wide areas of rain. So you stay VFR, but you end up
>>> flying surprisingly nice air weaving between all of the buildups.
>>> I am careful not to get where there are clouds overhead, because
>>> then you have no idea what's above you that could fall (hail) out of
>>> the cloud. But I've had many trips where I had to weave through
>>> buildups to get places, and it didn't feel especially dangerous at
>>> all. At the same time, I don't think lightning would be likely to
>>> jump out to where I was either.
>>>
>>> But, I think if you're flying IFR through rain clouds, you'd have
>>> more worry about lightning even if it's only mildly convective, and
>>> probably what's more of a concern than lightning is P-static.
>>> You'll be far more likely to be affected by P-static flying IFR than
>>> lighting, because as Thane States states (fun to say) you probably
>>> will be avoiding the convective stuff as much as possible anyway,
>>> and definitely you'll be staying out of the worrysome convective
>>> stuff.
>>>
>>> On my screens, I've found Green is usually good, yellow is usually
>>> doable, and with WSI at least, it's been pretty darn accurate with
>>> minimal delay, so easy to navigate past. Red, is bad (or so I'd
>>> think), but I've never flown through it to find out.
>>>
>>> Tim
>>
>>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GRT Panel Layout |
I have two Odyssey PC-625 batteries and one 60amp Plane Power alternator. I
am not using the Dynon back up battery as it is redundant in my install.
There are several ways to design a power distribution to guard against a
single failure taking out the whole panel. When doing this, one should
consider not just the individual component reliability, but overall system
reliability. There was a article a few years back in one of the magazines
about a twin engine plane having total electrical failure at night. This
was a standard spam can with two alternators and two batteries. The failure
was a common connection that failed (high resistance contact). A simple
example of this concept is the use of an "Avionics Master" switch. It fails
and you have no panel no matter how many batteries and alternators you have.
For those interested I can send you what I did in Power Point slides off
line.
Carl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 2:34 PM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
Carl,
Congratulations on your sign off.
Do you consider the dedicated back up battery for the Dynon to be part of
what you describe as a " single power distribution scheme"? I have a triple
battery system. Primary & backup for all electronics and then the dedicated
back up battery for my D100. Seems like enough redundancy?
Robin
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Carl Froehlich
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 11:12 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
--> <carl.froehlich@verizon.net>
I ratcheted though this thought process awhile back and ending up firmly on
the "no spinning gyro" answer.
I started with a very expensive RC Allen electric AI in my 8A. It started
to go south at 200 hours and I had to pull it shortly thereafter. I now
have a Dynon D10A in its place that been flawless for the last 500+ hours.
This set the stage for my choice of a dual SkyView EFIS install (with
primary and back up ADHRS) in the RV-10. Considering my experience and
others I have engaged, the reliability of dual EFIS and dual ADHRS far
exceeds that of spinning gyros.
Note however that I have taken steps to mitigate against electrical failure
from taking down both EFIS systems. If you have a single power distribution
scheme and don't want to change it, then vacuum gyros may be the way to go.
Also of note, while the FARs state you must have a "magnetic heading
reference", this has been interpreted by the Washington FSDO office as a wet
compass. They did not wish to justify that policy, but since I wanted them
to sign off my plane I decided not to push the point (and I got the sign off
last Wednesday!).
Carl
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Saylor
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
--> <dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com>
This is a great discussion for me since the only weather we ever really see
at home is fog. Since I don't have much T-storm experience, I was told to
give them 20 miles. Is that too conservative?
Along the same lines, there's a line of reasoning that says that EFIS should
be backed up with spinning gyro instruments. Gyros would theoretically be
less susceptible to a lightning strike or other major electrical issue. I
have a D-10A as my backup, and I'm starting to wonder about it. We're
designing a panel as I type and I'm considering going with a turn
coordinator, airspeed, altimeter, and wet compass as the mechanical backups.
I'm thinking that most of us did some partial panel training with a failed
attitude indicator, and using the remaining "five-pack" works OK. Not
great, but OK, and maybe the TC will be a little more reliable than an
electric attitude indicator. I haven't had great luck with them.
I'm interested in what you all think about that scheme.
Dave Saylor
831-750-0284 CL
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com>
wrote:
>
> My point exactly. I actually have seen lightning as much as about 5nm
(estimated) away from the CB clouds when skirting a squall line before, but
if you look at a NEXRAD and Strikes overlay, the strikes are almost
exclusively in the red. I fly through green as often as necessary, yellow to
avoid huge detours, and NEVER red. I don't mind flying through building
clouds with tops up to maybe 12,000-15,000 ft or so, but avoid towering
cumulous much above that. I also try to avoid flying under that stuff for
the same reasons and because it's usually pretty bumpy, although sometimes
its necessary for takeoff and landing. I would certainly much sooner go high
and pick my way between the tops before going under to get past a line.
>
> Jesse Saint
> I-TEC, Inc.
> jesse@itecusa.org
> www.itecusa.org
> www.mavericklsa.com
> C: 352-427-0285
> O: 352-465-4545
> F: 815-377-3694
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 25, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I'd agree with that...it really depends. There are many times in the
>> summer that you'll get lines of stuff or many splotches scattered, of
>> popup cells. (Lines are usually worse) I've found that it's usually
>> best to stay VFR on those days....save the IFR for layers and for
>> wide areas of rain. So you stay VFR, but you end up flying
>> surprisingly nice air weaving between all of the buildups.
>> I am careful not to get where there are clouds overhead, because then
>> you have no idea what's above you that could fall (hail) out of the
>> cloud. But I've had many trips where I had to weave through buildups
>> to get places, and it didn't feel especially dangerous at all. At
>> the same time, I don't think lightning would be likely to jump out to
>> where I was either.
>>
>> But, I think if you're flying IFR through rain clouds, you'd have
>> more worry about lightning even if it's only mildly convective, and
>> probably what's more of a concern than lightning is P-static. You'll
>> be far more likely to be affected by P-static flying IFR than
>> lighting, because as Thane States states (fun to say) you probably
>> will be avoiding the convective stuff as much as possible anyway, and
>> definitely you'll be staying out of the worrysome convective stuff.
>>
>> On my screens, I've found Green is usually good, yellow is usually
>> doable, and with WSI at least, it's been pretty darn accurate with
>> minimal delay, so easy to navigate past. Red, is bad (or so I'd
>> think), but I've never flown through it to find out.
>>
>> Tim
>
>
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GRT Panel Layout |
I don't think the concerns are so much running out of power as they
are having some kind of other major electrical spasm take out several
screens at once. Lightning and static come to mind, but maybe there's
something else.
In 1000 hours we've had one gyro failure of the Dynon, one internal
power supply failure that blanked the AFS EFIS, an knob failure that
hobbled the AFS, three failures of a 696 that required return to the
factory, and an intermittent failure of our 530W that needed return to
the factory. All these happened at different times and didn't affect
one another. That is, any of these failures wouldn't have been
catastrophic in IMC. But with so many different kinds of failures,
all with plenty of power on board, it just kind of seems like a matter
of time until the blank screens overlap.
What do you guys thinks about staying level with mechanical airspeed,
altitude, compass, and TC? Without an attitude indicator? I don't
recall having too hard a time with that during IFR training, and I'm
far from SuperPilot.
Dave Saylor
831-750-0284 CL
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 11:11 AM, Carl Froehlich
<carl.froehlich@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> I ratcheted though this thought process awhile back and ending up firmly on the
"no spinning gyro" answer.
>
> I started with a very expensive RC Allen electric AI in my 8A. It started to
go south at 200 hours and I had to pull it shortly thereafter. I now have a Dynon
D10A in its place that been flawless for the last 500+ hours. This set the
stage for my choice of a dual SkyView EFIS install (with primary and back up
ADHRS) in the RV-10. Considering my experience and others I have engaged, the
reliability of dual EFIS and dual ADHRS far exceeds that of spinning gyros.
>
> Note however that I have taken steps to mitigate against electrical failure from
taking down both EFIS systems. If you have a single power distribution scheme
and don't want to change it, then vacuum gyros may be the way to go.
>
> Also of note, while the FARs state you must have a "magnetic heading reference",
this has been interpreted by the Washington FSDO office as a wet compass.
They did not wish to justify that policy, but since I wanted them to sign off
my plane I decided not to push the point (and I got the sign off last Wednesday!).
>
> Carl
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Saylor
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 1:07 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
>
> --> <dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com>
>
> This is a great discussion for me since the only weather we ever really see at
home is fog. Since I don't have much T-storm experience, I was told to give
them 20 miles. Is that too conservative?
>
> Along the same lines, there's a line of reasoning that says that EFIS should
be backed up with spinning gyro instruments. Gyros would theoretically be less
susceptible to a lightning strike or other major electrical issue. I have a D-10A
as my backup, and I'm starting to wonder about it. We're designing a panel
as I type and I'm considering going with a turn coordinator, airspeed, altimeter,
and wet compass as the mechanical backups. I'm thinking that most of us
did some partial panel training with a failed attitude indicator, and using the
remaining "five-pack" works OK. Not great, but OK, and maybe the TC will be
a little more reliable than an electric attitude indicator. I haven't had great
luck with them.
>
> I'm interested in what you all think about that scheme.
>
> Dave Saylor
> 831-750-0284CL
>
>
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Jesse Saint <jesse@saintaviation.com> wrote:
>>
>> My point exactly. I actually have seen lightning as much as about 5nm (estimated)
away from the CB clouds when skirting a squall line before, but if you look
at a NEXRAD and Strikes overlay, the strikes are almost exclusively in the
red. I fly through green as often as necessary, yellow to avoid huge detours,
and NEVER red. I don't mind flying through building clouds with tops up to maybe
12,000-15,000 ft or so, but avoid towering cumulous much above that. I also
try to avoid flying under that stuff for the same reasons and because it's usually
pretty bumpy, although sometimes its necessary for takeoff and landing.
I would certainly much sooner go high and pick my way between the tops before
going under to get past a line.
>>
>> Jesse Saint
>> I-TEC, Inc.
>> jesse@itecusa.org
>> www.itecusa.org
>> www.mavericklsa.com
>> C: 352-427-0285
>> O: 352-465-4545
>> F: 815-377-3694
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On May 25, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I'd agree with that...it really depends. There are many times in the
>>> summer that you'll get lines of stuff or many splotches scattered, of
>>> popup cells. (Lines are usually worse) I've found that it's usually
>>> best to stay VFR on those days....save the IFR for layers and for
>>> wide areas of rain. So you stay VFR, but you end up flying
>>> surprisingly nice air weaving between all of the buildups.
>>> I am careful not to get where there are clouds overhead, because then
>>> you have no idea what's above you that could fall (hail) out of the
>>> cloud. But I've had many trips where I had to weave through buildups
>>> to get places, and it didn't feel especially dangerous at all. At
>>> the same time, I don't think lightning would be likely to jump out to
>>> where I was either.
>>>
>>> But, I think if you're flying IFR through rain clouds, you'd have
>>> more worry about lightning even if it's only mildly convective, and
>>> probably what's more of a concern than lightning is P-static. You'll
>>> be far more likely to be affected by P-static flying IFR than
>>> lighting, because as Thane States states (fun to say) you probably
>>> will be avoiding the convective stuff as much as possible anyway, and
>>> definitely you'll be staying out of the worrysome convective stuff.
>>>
>>> On my screens, I've found Green is usually good, yellow is usually
>>> doable, and with WSI at least, it's been pretty darn accurate with
>>> minimal delay, so easy to navigate past. Red, is bad (or so I'd
>>> think), but I've never flown through it to find out.
>>>
>>> Tim
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: GRT Panel Layout |
Well said.
Satellite weather is great for big picture and preflight planning. Picking your
way through is done with on board radar and a strike finder/stormscope,which
of course we don't have in a ten unless someone has installed one. Not many of
us in a ten should be picking our way through I guess.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 25, 2012, at 12:06, "DLM" <dlm34077@q.com> wrote:
> Back when I flew hard IFR, the thing that was most helpful was the Strikefinder.
Those were the days when some federal judge "found" that digital and analog
technologies were patent infringing. With some effort one was installed and
the aircraft was flown where the lightning strikes were not. Smooth ride even
though the rain was so heavy that water came in the doors. The delay in the Sat
WX processing seems to cause some confusion about where not to fly. Looking
forward to ADS-B install and FAA installation completion. I will still be wary
the delay. Fog is not a problem; usually smooth ride but LIFR conditions.
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: GRT Panel Layout |
Great write-up Tim with pictures and all! I can't imagine anyone
purposefully flying into those kinds of build-ups, at least not twice,
anyway.
Out here in CA, can you believe lots of people have never ever seen a
heavy thunderstorm or even seen or heard lightning before? It is such a
rare event here, it is kind of amusing.
Jae
--
#40533 RV-10
First flight 10/19/2011
Phase 1 Done 11/26/2011
do not archive
On 5/25/2012 11:39 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
>
> In reading Jesse's follow up post, I think he and I approach it
> basically the same. Having lightning strike data is awesome.
> You then know you have a very convective and strong cell or line.
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: GRT Panel Layout |
Another possible solution. If its really bad and you are going, you can
sometimes follow the airlines since they have the equipment. I was setting
in the aircraft at the Cessna factory one stormy night and contacted ICT
approach to go to KICT to spend the night instead of flying to KTUL. As I
talked with the controller I heard him vectoring a B727 toward KTUL at
6000msl. I said. Can I have one of those? Sure! Cleared as filed! I followed
the track of the Boeing to KTUL.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Watson
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: GRT Panel Layout
I'm no expert but living in the SE, convection, cumulus, and T-storms are
almost daily occurences in the summer somewhere along your trip.
Twenty miles just won't let you get anywhere in this part of the country.
Here in the SE, getting up as high as you can w/o O2 will usually allow you
to fly among the tops. Even if they aren't raining or lightening (yet),
it's best to stay out of them unless you can clearly see what's going on the
other side and if don't mind being bumped around.
Controllers issue deviations freely... especially where and when you need
them most, e.g. JAX center in FL.
For short flights, it's often equally effective to stay below cloud base and
just fly around the rain shafts. But this depends on having a clear look at
the buildups on top of the rain shafts. If it's overcast and convective
(imbedded storms), that just doesn't work whether you stay below or fly in
the clouds. Even with Nexrad, there's no reason to be flying around or
underneath imbedded convective storms in my opinion.
I would say no one purposely goes into a convective storm anymore including
the airlines. But there's a lot of very informed flying around them these
days. I guess the big guys all have radar and Nexrad and most of us little
guys have Nexrad (and before that Cheap Bastard).
It works very well... especially if you stay visual.
Coming home last week I was flying between big buildups north of Charlotte
at 11k. Staying visual forced me towards a waypoint that all the traffic in
the KCLT seemed to be crossing at 11k. Sure enough, it was on a commonly
used STAR. I listened to plane after plane ask for deviations as they came
into the waypoint, but then they'd cross it and proceed in. I was forced to
ask for the same treatment but the controllers didn't want me crossing the
arrival point along with the airliners, especially at a 90degree angle to
the other traffic. I told them I could stay 3 miles away from it and still
get thru the break in the buildups and that seemed to work for them. Funny
thing is that I never saw another plane during the passage (and my ADS-B was
only showing some of the storm and no traffic at that moment). But I ended
up flying less than a mile away from the buildups as I squeezed thru.
There were occassional flashes and it was clearly raining below them but
they were slow builders with almost no movement and it turned out fine.
For me, the key is staying visual on convective days but I will fly close to
buildups depending on how stuff looks. Sometimes you get
surprised a bit as I did out in AZ recently. Things are bigger,
higher, and faster out there and I still need to calibrate my eyeballs a bit
better for western conditions.
Bill "a thunderstorm is just a grown up thermal having a tantrum" Watson
On 5/25/2012 1:07 PM, Dave Saylor wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Dave
> --> Saylor<dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com>
>
> This is a great discussion for me since the only weather we ever
> really see at home is fog. Since I don't have much T-storm
> experience, I was told to give them 20 miles. Is that too
> conservative?
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | BFR - Things to try |
I did my third BFR in the -10 this week. After 360 hours there are still
things to be learned. During our ground training work, we discussed
runaway trim and max decent procedures.
Runaway Trim - I don't have anything that can control my trim unit other
than the DPDT switch on the panel. KISS - it's a good thing. But we did
decide to run the trim to the limits during flight to see how fast does it
happen and can the pilot override it. The -10 has a LOT of up elevator
trim authority. Unless you slow WAY down you can't override it. It takes
a while to travel to full UP but I still think it would take a pilot by
surprise if it happened without warning. We never really got to full up
trim. Just way too much pressure needed to keep the nose down. Down trim
is manageable but still will take a pilot by surprise. Having a means to
turn off power to the trim would most likely not happen fast enough. Your
first focus would be on keeping the nose of the airplane where it needs to
be, then trying to figure out what happened. By then the trim would be all
the way to the limit. It was great to try that during the BFR with an
experienced pilot / CFI. Made me really glad I don't have a trim
controller. in short, it's not pretty at all.
Maximum Decent - First, you really need to set this up with some extra AGL
altitude. The scenario was this. You have an emergency and need to get to
the ground (Anywhere, and NOW). What is the fastest decent? Power back
and slow down to max flap speed and deploy full flaps. Push the nose over
to get to top of white arc (86 Knots). VSI was pegged at 3K. I meant to
get the data from the EFIS but have not done that yet. You are coming down
fast with full control. YES the ground is in FULL view. You really have
to push the nose over to get to the 86 knots with full flaps. Get down to
your landing area and ease up on the forward stick to set up your landing.
Try this. Any passengers need to know what you are going to do before you
do it. Not uncomfortable, but you do come down FAST and with full control
for any turns or positioning to the landing area.
Jim C
N312F - 370 hours
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Bendix S1200 Mags |
Larry,
Got out to the hangar today and measured my clearance. There is 2.5" from the most
aft part of the mag (not counting the plug wires) to the firewall. I had to
change out the condenser in one mag awhile back. It was not fun, but doable
without pulling the mag.
Jim Berry
N16JB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=373943#373943
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: GRT Panel Layout |
I feel the same way about most of what Tim said except one thing. If I'm going
more than 50nm or so, I file IFR. It's probably because of where I live, with
Orlando, Tampa, Jacksonville, Atlanta, etc airspace involved in most of my flights,
as well as military airspaces everywhere. I find it easier to start IFR
and ask for deviations than to go VFR and risk getting caught in IMC. I often
hear ATC pointing out areas of moderate to extreme precipitation and giving me
10-20 degrees left or right of course long before I ask for them. When I ask
for them they almost always give them. I also sometimes have to play the card,
"I'll just cancel and go VFR" to get them to give me the needed deviation. It
seems they would much rather shuffle things a little bit with a known quantity
than to have VFR traffic that may turn any direction at any time. I will not
fly into big CB clouds, but if I know I'm going to only be in it and bumping
for 10-20 seconds, I'll stay on course. Otherwise I would be zig-zagging like
crazy on a typical summer day. 20nm from CB is nice, but is often not an option,
as Tim mentioned.
Sorry if this was a little scatterbrained, but I just woke up from a nap after
driving from Fl to Indy almost nonstop. Yes, I actually drove. The -10 is a little
tight for 8, even if 7 of them are small. Who does my cousin think he is,
getting married to a girl that isn't from Florida?!
Do not archive.
Jesse Saint
I-TEC, Inc.
jesse@itecusa.org
www.itecusa.org
www.mavericklsa.com
C: 352-427-0285
O: 352-465-4545
F: 815-377-3694
Sent from my iPhone
On May 25, 2012, at 2:39 PM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>
> In reading Jesse's follow up post, I think he and I approach it
> basically the same. Having lightning strike data is awesome.
> You then know you have a very convective and strong cell or line.
> So, I avoid where the strikes are, and use that as part of
> my plan as I weave around. Also, tops. If the tops are
> calling 20K' or so, I know they're going to be big. I don't
> want to fly through that, even if it's not red and I'm on
> an IFR plan. To me, bumps are never fun. Also, even when you're
> only looking at 10,000' tops, when you fly through them you
> often hit a bump as you enter and get bumped around inside...but
> if you stay out of the visible cloud, you get a smoother ride.
>
> As you talk about fog, I think that is really the better IFR
> conditions. The downside is that fog is often to the ground.
> Where I live, we often get PERFECT IFR type conditions for fun.
> 500'-2000' ceilings of stratus layers, where you can get on
> top. That's the kind of IFR I don't mind. I don't want
> to mess with IFR if it's convective. Under it isn't fun,
> but I'll go under if the tops aren't high. But if they're
> higher buildups, I use my WX equipment to get me AROUND the
> weather. I wouldn't file IFR if I can go VFR easily,
> because then I can deviate all I want without requests.
> I'd be happy to go VFR Flight Following or IFR, but only
> if they're happy to give me the leeway to make course changes
> every 10-20 miles so I can weave around. Convective buildups
> just aren't good for flying in...and by using that as my
> concept in a plan, it really helps keep you out of trouble
> somewhat. The times it bites is if the widely scattered
> clouds turn into broken, and you have a harder time maintaining
> ground contact...when that sneaks up on you, you're better
> off having been or being on an IFR plan already so you
> can plug along...but plan on making deviations.
>
> As far as 20nm being too conservative, I would not be able to
> say that is true. I think the 20nm recommendation is a
> healthy safety margin and think it's good to promote it
> as such. The fact is though, that it can really depend.
> If you're talking buildups that aren't precipitating,
> you can basically just fly right by them. If they're
> precipitating, then you have to pay close attention.
> Are there lighting strikes? What are the tops? What
> colors do you see....Red? Pink? These are indicators
> of it being pretty nasty inside. Those are best to
> avoid by as much as you can. 20nm though is sometimes
> not workable if there are lots of small separate cells,
> so you either have to land, deviate, or come up with
> some other plan. For me, part of the key is what
> you will be flying directly underneath. They want you
> to keep 20nm away because stuff comes out of those
> clouds. Lightning can reach out a little ways as Jesse
> said. Hail can lift up and fall out around it too.
> But, if you are able to keep perfectly blue skies above
> your head, 20nm can be more than you need. This isn't
> saying the recommendation isn't good. It just may be
> that you can do closer without too much concern.
>
> Check out this really awful screenshot:
> http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/Trips/2011_East_Coast/RV20110611160341.html
>
> Notice all the areas where there is NOTHING, but suddenly
> an intense yellow area with red...some were really
> strong. But, they were all over heck...and in my way.
> Well, IFR, I would have probably packed it in for the
> day and landed. But, since it was daylight and I was
> VFR, and could see out the window fine, I got to play
> ball.
>
> Here is a picture out the window:
> http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/Trips/2011_East_Coast/RV20110611163547.html
>
> Notice the overhang on the cloud cell. But, I'm in clear skies.
> My goal at that time was to A) keep ground contact by flying
> in the valleys between anything big. B) Keep OUT from that
> overhanging cloud. As long as I could keep a couple miles
> out under perfect blue skies, it was a good ride. I didn't
> want any hail falling on me, and I didn't see any lightning.
> I was closer than 20 miles, but wasn't close enough that
> we would be affected by the cloud.
>
> Now going further along the trip, here's another screenshot near
> that area.
>
> http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/Trips/2011_East_Coast/RV20110611164520.html
>
> Here's the view out the window:
> http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/Trips/2011_East_Coast/RV20110611164500.html
>
> You can see that the gap between the cells may have been 20 miles
> or so, but there was nothing overhanging the cell, and it was
> visibly clear above me, and I was far enough from the cells that
> we had no effect. This was closer than I'd have wanted, and
> you know darn well I was watching very very close keeping
> track of the ground, the weather on the OTHER side of the gap
> (could something build up and block me from continuing?), and
> what the conditions were. This wasn't a time for IFR, and I'd
> have been causing ATC a pain in the butt with VFR flight following.
> But as long as I was in clear skies, no overhead clouds, and
> it was a smooth ride, it was easily doable. For someone
> not used to flying around that stuff, might be best to ease
> into it...but we get that all the time up here.
>
>
> To show you a picture of a day that will make you pull your hair
> out, check this one out:
>
> http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/flights/20090819/RV20090814160153.html
>
> It came from this write-up, btw:
> http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/flights/20090819/index.html
>
> The funny thing is, by staying VFR and knowing exactly
> what you were flying in, it was doable. Again, if you're not
> from an area that has these conditions, it's worth easing
> into it. But, the trip actually went well.
>
> From a different trip, this pic shows something easy to go through:
> http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/flights/20080901/SD200809012686.html
>
> So it all depends on a lot of factors, really. There are times
> when 20nm will be a very good yardstick. Each situation is
> different.
>
> Although I don't have a spinning gyro, if you fly IFR,
> I would say that would be your BEST way to go for a backup.
> Would be nice to be lightning proof and p-static proof,
> and everything else. So, while I don't have that in
> my plane, I do think that's the best way to go. Having another
> EFIS as a backup really is an inferior backup...and anyone
> that believes otherwise is just being defensive and not
> owning up to reality. I don't have a spinning gyro in
> my plane, so yes, with that statement made, it's deficient.
> That's not a slam on y'all, either. I'm just saying that
> if you're flying IFR, it's BEST to have a spinning gyro backup.
> There are downsides to it too, especially from a maintenance
> perspective...but it would be the best choice. Something
> that can't get taken out by lightning, doesn't use software,
> and can keep you upright with no electricity.
>
> Anyway, weather is a pretty interesting subject to talk about,
> because opinions vary, even looking at the same cloud.
> My major concern is I want smooth air, no hail, no lightning,
> and to get where I'm going.
>
> Tim
> Do not archive
>
>
>
> On 5/25/2012 12:07 PM, Dave Saylor wrote:
>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Dave Saylor<dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com>
>>
>> This is a great discussion for me since the only weather we ever
>> really see at home is fog. Since I don't have much T-storm
>> experience, I was told to give them 20 miles. Is that too
>> conservative?
>>
>> Along the same lines, there's a line of reasoning that says that EFIS
>> should be backed up with spinning gyro instruments. Gyros would
>> theoretically be less susceptible to a lightning strike or other major
>> electrical issue. I have a D-10A as my backup, and I'm starting to
>> wonder about it. We're designing a panel as I type and I'm
>> considering going with a turn coordinator, airspeed, altimeter, and
>> wet compass as the mechanical backups. I'm thinking that most of us
>> did some partial panel training with a failed attitude indicator, and
>> using the remaining "five-pack" works OK. Not great, but OK, and
>> maybe the TC will be a little more reliable than an electric attitude
>> indicator. I haven't had great luck with them.
>>
>> I'm interested in what you all think about that scheme.
>>
>> Dave Saylor
>> 831-750-0284 CL
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Jesse Saint<jesse@saintaviation.com> wrote:
>>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Jesse Saint<jesse@saintaviation.com>
>>>
>>> My point exactly. I actually have seen lightning as much as about 5nm (estimated)
away from the CB clouds when skirting a squall line before, but if you
look at a NEXRAD and Strikes overlay, the strikes are almost exclusively in the
red. I fly through green as often as necessary, yellow to avoid huge detours,
and NEVER red. I don't mind flying through building clouds with tops up to maybe
12,000-15,000 ft or so, but avoid towering cumulous much above that. I also
try to avoid flying under that stuff for the same reasons and because it's
usually pretty bumpy, although sometimes its necessary for takeoff and landing.
I would certainly much sooner go high and pick my way between the tops before
going under to get past a line.
>>>
>>> Jesse Saint
>>> I-TEC, Inc.
>>> jesse@itecusa.org
>>> www.itecusa.org
>>> www.mavericklsa.com
>>> C: 352-427-0285
>>> O: 352-465-4545
>>> F: 815-377-3694
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On May 25, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Tim Olson<Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson<Tim@myrv10.com>
>>>>
>>>> I'd agree with that...it really depends. There are many times in the
>>>> summer that you'll get lines of stuff or many splotches scattered,
>>>> of popup cells. (Lines are usually worse) I've found that it's
>>>> usually best to stay VFR on those days....save the IFR for layers
>>>> and for wide areas of rain. So you stay VFR, but you end up
>>>> flying surprisingly nice air weaving between all of the buildups.
>>>> I am careful not to get where there are clouds overhead, because
>>>> then you have no idea what's above you that could fall (hail)
>>>> out of the cloud. But I've had many trips where I had to
>>>> weave through buildups to get places, and it didn't feel
>>>> especially dangerous at all. At the same time, I don't think
>>>> lightning would be likely to jump out to where I was either.
>>>>
>>>> But, I think if you're flying IFR through rain clouds, you'd
>>>> have more worry about lightning even if it's only mildly
>>>> convective, and probably what's more of a concern than lightning
>>>> is P-static. You'll be far more likely to be affected by
>>>> P-static flying IFR than lighting, because as Thane States states
>>>> (fun to say) you probably will be avoiding the convective
>>>> stuff as much as possible anyway, and definitely you'll be
>>>> staying out of the worrysome convective stuff.
>>>>
>>>> On my screens, I've found Green is usually good, yellow
>>>> is usually doable, and with WSI at least, it's been
>>>> pretty darn accurate with minimal delay, so easy
>>>> to navigate past. Red, is bad (or so I'd think), but I've
>>>> never flown through it to find out.
>>>>
>>>> Tim
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: BFR - Things to try |
On your decent, try the same setup you described and put the airplane into a
45-60 degree bank to fly a spiral to the ground. When you put it in the ba
nk, you are dropping the vertical component of lift significantly. Now you
're coming down under control and much faster than 3000 fpm.
I haven't tried it in the -10, so you might tip-toe into it. But the more v
ertical lift you can shed the faster you're going to get down.
Phil
Sent from my iPhone
On May 25, 2012, at 5:11 PM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky@gmail.com> wrote:
> I did my third BFR in the -10 this week. After 360 hours there are still t
hings to be learned. During our ground training work, we discussed runaway t
rim and max decent procedures.
>
> Runaway Trim - I don't have anything that can control my trim unit other t
han the DPDT switch on the panel. KISS - it's a good thing. But we did dec
ide to run the trim to the limits during flight to see how fast does it happ
en and can the pilot override it. The -10 has a LOT of up elevator trim aut
hority. Unless you slow WAY down you can't override it. It takes a while t
o travel to full UP but I still think it would take a pilot by surprise if i
t happened without warning. We never really got to full up trim. Just way t
oo much pressure needed to keep the nose down. Down trim is manageable but s
till will take a pilot by surprise. Having a means to turn off power to the
trim would most likely not happen fast enough. Your first focus would be o
n keeping the nose of the airplane where it needs to be, then trying to figu
re out what happened. By then the trim would be all the way to the limit. I
t was great to try that during the BFR with an experienced pilot / CFI. Mad
e me really glad I don't have a trim controller. in short, it's not pretty a
t all.
>
> Maximum Decent - First, you really need to set this up with some extra AGL
altitude. The scenario was this. You have an emergency and need to get to
the ground (Anywhere, and NOW). What is the fastest decent? Power back an
d slow down to max flap speed and deploy full flaps. Push the nose over to g
et to top of white arc (86 Knots). VSI was pegged at 3K. I meant to get th
e data from the EFIS but have not done that yet. You are coming down fast w
ith full control. YES the ground is in FULL view. You really have to push t
he nose over to get to the 86 knots with full flaps. Get down to your landi
ng area and ease up on the forward stick to set up your landing. Try this.
Any passengers need to know what you are going to do before you do it. Not
uncomfortable, but you do come down FAST and with full control for any turn
s or positioning to the landing area.
>
> Jim C
> N312F - 370 hours
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | BFR - Things to try |
IIRC; the transport aircraft use thrust levers to flight idle, gear down,
pitch down 30 and bank 30-45. I don't think the flaps are lowered to prevent
possible structural overload since the wing is weaker with the flaps
extended. IIRC this was used for medical emergencies as well as
depressurization events depending on location of course. My point is that
flaps should remain up. Power, pitch and bank should be used to control
descent. Prop should be full forward (fine pitch) to act as a big brake.
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Phil Perry
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 4:23 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: BFR - Things to try
On your decent, try the same setup you described and put the airplane into a
45-60 degree bank to fly a spiral to the ground. When you put it in the
bank, you are dropping the vertical component of lift significantly. Now
you're coming down under control and much faster than 3000 fpm.
I haven't tried it in the -10, so you might tip-toe into it. But the more
vertical lift you can shed the faster you're going to get down.
Phil
Sent from my iPhone
On May 25, 2012, at 5:11 PM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky@gmail.com> wrote:
I did my third BFR in the -10 this week. After 360 hours there are still
things to be learned. During our ground training work, we discussed runaway
trim and max decent procedures.
Runaway Trim - I don't have anything that can control my trim unit other
than the DPDT switch on the panel. KISS - it's a good thing. But we did
decide to run the trim to the limits during flight to see how fast does it
happen and can the pilot override it. The -10 has a LOT of up elevator trim
authority. Unless you slow WAY down you can't override it. It takes a
while to travel to full UP but I still think it would take a pilot by
surprise if it happened without warning. We never really got to full up
trim. Just way too much pressure needed to keep the nose down. Down trim
is manageable but still will take a pilot by surprise. Having a means to
turn off power to the trim would most likely not happen fast enough. Your
first focus would be on keeping the nose of the airplane where it needs to
be, then trying to figure out what happened. By then the trim would be all
the way to the limit. It was great to try that during the BFR with an
experienced pilot / CFI. Made me really glad I don't have a trim
controller. in short, it's not pretty at all.
Maximum Decent - First, you really need to set this up with some extra AGL
altitude. The scenario was this. You have an emergency and need to get to
the ground (Anywhere, and NOW). What is the fastest decent? Power back and
slow down to max flap speed and deploy full flaps. Push the nose over to
get to top of white arc (86 Knots). VSI was pegged at 3K. I meant to get
the data from the EFIS but have not done that yet. You are coming down fast
with full control. YES the ground is in FULL view. You really have to push
the nose over to get to the 86 knots with full flaps. Get down to your
landing area and ease up on the forward stick to set up your landing. Try
this. Any passengers need to know what you are going to do before you do
it. Not uncomfortable, but you do come down FAST and with full control for
any turns or positioning to the landing area.
Jim C
N312F - 370 hours
==================================
://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
==================================
cs.com
==================================
matronics.com/contribution
==================================
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: | Re: GRT Panel Layout |
> Satellite weather is great for big picture and preflight planning. Picking your
way through is done with on board radar and a strike finder/stormscope,which
of course we don't have in a ten unless someone has installed one. Not many
of us in a ten should be picking our way through I guess.
>
I have a different view, though it may be ill informed because I have
flown with neither radar or a strikefinder.
I've found what I'll call "nexrad" weather displays, whether from XM or
ADS-B, to be outstanding tools for picking my way thru storms. To be
clear, I'm not talking about flying in IMC and trying to pick my way
thru soft spots. I am talking about flying IFR but mainly staying
visual when near storms and using the slightly delayed Nexrad images,
along with altitude, to avoid storms and move towards my destination.
This works very well for me in typical spring/summer/fall conditions on
the east coast, particularly the in the south east. It doesn't really
work VFR because it's too difficult to get up over cloud base and too
risky getting trapped above an undercast.
As stated, Nexrad works best in getting the big picture but it also
works quite well in seeing any area of precipitation and can be used
quite effectively in tactical storm avoidance.
At times, Nexrad in the cockpit is superior to radar. I've listened
while the jets were trying to figure out where and how to penetrate a
line when I could see quite clearly on my G396 that an end-around would
work just fine. Radar just can't see around corners. Having said
that, I'm sure based on what I've been told that you can't beat radar in
most situations. I'm also under the impression that the jet crowd now
universally has Nexrad either in the newer panels or on a portable that
they never leave home without.
In FL where the daily buildups can be both big and numerous, the trick
is often just knowing whether to deviate left or right around the next
cloud so you don't get boxed in by 2 or 3 others on the other side.
When I was flying with the elegant pre-396 Cheap Bastard product
(involving an unholy alliance between a Palm pilot, an RF network, VOR
locations, and a rogue server somewhere) it was a revelation for both
the JAX controllers and I when I was able to correctly ask for the best
deviation in my little Maule, "How did you know that, do you have radar
in that thing?". 30 to 45 mins old Nexrad images were worth their
weight in gold when dealing with (Indy) controllers who often don't have
time for vector advice.
Where Nexrad-only may not work well is when closing in on a
destination. If the storms and the clouds go right down to <1000 AGL
like they often do in FL, you may not be able to stay visual while
getting to the airport. A 10 minute old Nexrad image is not the best
tool to penetrate with. Best to go somewhere else and wait it out. If
you can get under it in the clear, then you can use the Nexrad and your
eyeballs to assess the situation and hopefully get to the destination.
If you stay out of the buildups, then it seems to me only 2 things can
really ruin your day; lightning and hail. I know what hail can look
like and I try not to ever see that sight again. Lightning I don't
understand but I feel safer in the air than standing around on the airport.
After several steps forward (Cheap Bastard, XM on the 396, XM on the
GRT) I feel like I've taken a step backwards with ADS-B on the GRT.
When it's there, it's as good as the XM on the GRT. But it's not always
there (out west) and is frustratingly sporadic at the darndest times
(Asheville NC during storms).
Anyway, that's my experience so far,
Bill Watson
:
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: BFR - Things to try |
I did make some turns to align for a field that I had targeted (very close
to being right under me). You are correct, it really comes down faster.
This is NOT the best glide (Flaps Up).
Something to definitely put in the bag of tricks for flying (Not just the
-10)
Jim C - Do Not Archive
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Phil Perry <philperry9@gmail.com> wrote:
> On your decent, try the same setup you described and put the airplane into
> a 45-60 degree bank to fly a spiral to the ground. When you put it in the
> bank, you are dropping the vertical component of lift significantly. Now
> you're coming down under control and much faster than 3000 fpm.
>
> I haven't tried it in the -10, so you might tip-toe into it. But the more
> vertical lift you can shed the faster you're going to get down.
>
> Phil
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 25, 2012, at 5:11 PM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I did my third BFR in the -10 this week. After 360 hours there are still
> things to be learned. During our ground training work, we discussed
> runaway trim and max decent procedures.
>
> Runaway Trim - I don't have anything that can control my trim unit other
> than the DPDT switch on the panel. KISS - it's a good thing. But we did
> decide to run the trim to the limits during flight to see how fast does it
> happen and can the pilot override it. The -10 has a LOT of up elevator
> trim authority. Unless you slow WAY down you can't override it. It takes
> a while to travel to full UP but I still think it would take a pilot by
> surprise if it happened without warning. We never really got to full up
> trim. Just way too much pressure needed to keep the nose down. Down trim
> is manageable but still will take a pilot by surprise. Having a means to
> turn off power to the trim would most likely not happen fast enough. Your
> first focus would be on keeping the nose of the airplane where it needs to
> be, then trying to figure out what happened. By then the trim would be all
> the way to the limit. It was great to try that during the BFR with an
> experienced pilot / CFI. Made me really glad I don't have a trim
> controller. in short, it's not pretty at all.
>
> Maximum Decent - First, you really need to set this up with some extra AGL
> altitude. The scenario was this. You have an emergency and need to get to
> the ground (Anywhere, and NOW). What is the fastest decent? Power back
> and slow down to max flap speed and deploy full flaps. Push the nose over
> to get to top of white arc (86 Knots). VSI was pegged at 3K. I meant to
> get the data from the EFIS but have not done that yet. You are coming down
> fast with full control. YES the ground is in FULL view. You really have
> to push the nose over to get to the 86 knots with full flaps. Get down to
> your landing area and ease up on the forward stick to set up your landing.
> Try this. Any passengers need to know what you are going to do before you
> do it. Not uncomfortable, but you do come down FAST and with full control
> for any turns or positioning to the landing area.
>
> Jim C
> N312F - 370 hours
>
> *
>
> ==================================
> ://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> ===================================cs.com
> ===================================matronics.com/contribution
> ==================================
> *
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
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: | Re: BFR - Things to try |
We tried the prop both full forward and full out. No noticeable difference.
Without the flaps I don't think one would get the decent rate needed. I
will try it with flaps up and compare the descent rates. My CFI was
certain to use full flaps. Apparently this was a procedure used on other
GA aircraft he had flown.
Jim C
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 7:55 PM, DLM <dlm34077@q.com> wrote:
> **
> IIRC; the transport aircraft use thrust levers to flight idle, gear down,
> pitch down 30 and bank 30-45. I don't think the flaps are lowered to
> prevent possible structural overload since the wing is weaker with the
> flaps extended. IIRC this was used for medical emergencies as well as
> depressurization events depending on location of course. My point is that
> flaps should remain up. Power, pitch and bank should be used to control
> descent. Prop should be full forward (fine pitch) to act as a big brake.
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: BFR - Things to try |
Yeah. Like I've said, I've never done it in a -10. But I'm hoping some
folks can comment on their experience doing it in various configurations.
What concerns be a bit is the "Departure from Controlled Flight" discussion
a few years ago related to slipping with full flaps.
Phil
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 7:01 PM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky@gmail.com> wrote:
> I did make some turns to align for a field that I had targeted (very close
> to being right under me). You are correct, it really comes down faster.
> This is NOT the best glide (Flaps Up).
>
> Something to definitely put in the bag of tricks for flying (Not just the
> -10)
>
> Jim C - Do Not Archive
>
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Phil Perry <philperry9@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On your decent, try the same setup you described and put the airplane
>> into a 45-60 degree bank to fly a spiral to the ground. When you put it in
>> the bank, you are dropping the vertical component of lift significantly.
>> Now you're coming down under control and much faster than 3000 fpm.
>>
>> I haven't tried it in the -10, so you might tip-toe into it. But the
>> more vertical lift you can shed the faster you're going to get down.
>>
>> Phil
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On May 25, 2012, at 5:11 PM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I did my third BFR in the -10 this week. After 360 hours there are still
>> things to be learned. During our ground training work, we discussed
>> runaway trim and max decent procedures.
>>
>> Runaway Trim - I don't have anything that can control my trim unit other
>> than the DPDT switch on the panel. KISS - it's a good thing. But we did
>> decide to run the trim to the limits during flight to see how fast does it
>> happen and can the pilot override it. The -10 has a LOT of up elevator
>> trim authority. Unless you slow WAY down you can't override it. It takes
>> a while to travel to full UP but I still think it would take a pilot by
>> surprise if it happened without warning. We never really got to full up
>> trim. Just way too much pressure needed to keep the nose down. Down trim
>> is manageable but still will take a pilot by surprise. Having a means to
>> turn off power to the trim would most likely not happen fast enough. Your
>> first focus would be on keeping the nose of the airplane where it needs to
>> be, then trying to figure out what happened. By then the trim would be all
>> the way to the limit. It was great to try that during the BFR with an
>> experienced pilot / CFI. Made me really glad I don't have a trim
>> controller. in short, it's not pretty at all.
>>
>> Maximum Decent - First, you really need to set this up with some extra
>> AGL altitude. The scenario was this. You have an emergency and need to
>> get to the ground (Anywhere, and NOW). What is the fastest decent? Power
>> back and slow down to max flap speed and deploy full flaps. Push the nose
>> over to get to top of white arc (86 Knots). VSI was pegged at 3K. I meant
>> to get the data from the EFIS but have not done that yet. You are coming
>> down fast with full control. YES the ground is in FULL view. You really
>> have to push the nose over to get to the 86 knots with full flaps. Get
>> down to your landing area and ease up on the forward stick to set up your
>> landing. Try this. Any passengers need to know what you are going to do
>> before you do it. Not uncomfortable, but you do come down FAST and with
>> full control for any turns or positioning to the landing area.
>>
>> Jim C
>> N312F - 370 hours
>>
>> *
>>
>> =========
>> ://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> ==========cs.com
>> ==========matronics.com/contribution
>> =========
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> tp://forums.matronics.com
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> *
>>
>>
> *
>
> *
>
>
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: | Re: BFR - Things to try |
Now that I think of it, it was Reflex and Slips... One or the other, but
the tail didn't want to stay put. I'll have to go search the archives.
Phil
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Phillip Perry <philperry9@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah. Like I've said, I've never done it in a -10. But I'm hoping some
> folks can comment on their experience doing it in various configurations.
>
> What concerns be a bit is the "Departure from Controlled Flight"
> discussion a few years ago related to slipping with full flaps.
>
> Phil
>
>
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 7:01 PM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I did make some turns to align for a field that I had targeted (very
>> close to being right under me). You are correct, it really comes down
>> faster. This is NOT the best glide (Flaps Up).
>>
>> Something to definitely put in the bag of tricks for flying (Not just the
>> -10)
>>
>> Jim C - Do Not Archive
>>
>> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Phil Perry <philperry9@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On your decent, try the same setup you described and put the airplane
>>> into a 45-60 degree bank to fly a spiral to the ground. When you put it in
>>> the bank, you are dropping the vertical component of lift significantly.
>>> Now you're coming down under control and much faster than 3000 fpm.
>>>
>>> I haven't tried it in the -10, so you might tip-toe into it. But the
>>> more vertical lift you can shed the faster you're going to get down.
>>>
>>> Phil
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On May 25, 2012, at 5:11 PM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I did my third BFR in the -10 this week. After 360 hours there are
>>> still things to be learned. During our ground training work, we discussed
>>> runaway trim and max decent procedures.
>>>
>>> Runaway Trim - I don't have anything that can control my trim unit other
>>> than the DPDT switch on the panel. KISS - it's a good thing. But we did
>>> decide to run the trim to the limits during flight to see how fast does it
>>> happen and can the pilot override it. The -10 has a LOT of up elevator
>>> trim authority. Unless you slow WAY down you can't override it. It takes
>>> a while to travel to full UP but I still think it would take a pilot by
>>> surprise if it happened without warning. We never really got to full up
>>> trim. Just way too much pressure needed to keep the nose down. Down trim
>>> is manageable but still will take a pilot by surprise. Having a means to
>>> turn off power to the trim would most likely not happen fast enough. Your
>>> first focus would be on keeping the nose of the airplane where it needs to
>>> be, then trying to figure out what happened. By then the trim would be all
>>> the way to the limit. It was great to try that during the BFR with an
>>> experienced pilot / CFI. Made me really glad I don't have a trim
>>> controller. in short, it's not pretty at all.
>>>
>>> Maximum Decent - First, you really need to set this up with some extra
>>> AGL altitude. The scenario was this. You have an emergency and need to
>>> get to the ground (Anywhere, and NOW). What is the fastest decent? Power
>>> back and slow down to max flap speed and deploy full flaps. Push the nose
>>> over to get to top of white arc (86 Knots). VSI was pegged at 3K. I meant
>>> to get the data from the EFIS but have not done that yet. You are coming
>>> down fast with full control. YES the ground is in FULL view. You really
>>> have to push the nose over to get to the 86 knots with full flaps. Get
>>> down to your landing area and ease up on the forward stick to set up your
>>> landing. Try this. Any passengers need to know what you are going to do
>>> before you do it. Not uncomfortable, but you do come down FAST and with
>>> full control for any turns or positioning to the landing area.
>>>
>>> Jim C
>>> N312F - 370 hours
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> =========
>>> ://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> ==========cs.com
>>> ==========matronics.com/contribution
>>> =========
>>> *
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> tp://forums.matronics.com
>>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>
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: BFR - Things to try |
I made no attempt at slipping. Always used coordinated flight. I
remembered the "Departure from Controlled Flight" discussions.
Jim C
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Phillip Perry <philperry9@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah. Like I've said, I've never done it in a -10. But I'm hoping some
> folks can comment on their experience doing it in various configurations.
>
> What concerns be a bit is the "Departure from Controlled Flight"
> discussion a few years ago related to slipping with full flaps.
>
> Phil
>
>
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 7:01 PM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I did make some turns to align for a field that I had targeted (very
>> close to being right under me). You are correct, it really comes down
>> faster. This is NOT the best glide (Flaps Up).
>>
>> Something to definitely put in the bag of tricks for flying (Not just the
>> -10)
>>
>> Jim C - Do Not Archive
>>
>> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Phil Perry <philperry9@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On your decent, try the same setup you described and put the airplane
>>> into a 45-60 degree bank to fly a spiral to the ground. When you put it in
>>> the bank, you are dropping the vertical component of lift significantly.
>>> Now you're coming down under control and much faster than 3000 fpm.
>>>
>>> I haven't tried it in the -10, so you might tip-toe into it. But the
>>> more vertical lift you can shed the faster you're going to get down.
>>>
>>> Phil
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On May 25, 2012, at 5:11 PM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I did my third BFR in the -10 this week. After 360 hours there are
>>> still things to be learned. During our ground training work, we discussed
>>> runaway trim and max decent procedures.
>>>
>>> Runaway Trim - I don't have anything that can control my trim unit other
>>> than the DPDT switch on the panel. KISS - it's a good thing. But we did
>>> decide to run the trim to the limits during flight to see how fast does it
>>> happen and can the pilot override it. The -10 has a LOT of up elevator
>>> trim authority. Unless you slow WAY down you can't override it. It takes
>>> a while to travel to full UP but I still think it would take a pilot by
>>> surprise if it happened without warning. We never really got to full up
>>> trim. Just way too much pressure needed to keep the nose down. Down trim
>>> is manageable but still will take a pilot by surprise. Having a means to
>>> turn off power to the trim would most likely not happen fast enough. Your
>>> first focus would be on keeping the nose of the airplane where it needs to
>>> be, then trying to figure out what happened. By then the trim would be all
>>> the way to the limit. It was great to try that during the BFR with an
>>> experienced pilot / CFI. Made me really glad I don't have a trim
>>> controller. in short, it's not pretty at all.
>>>
>>> Maximum Decent - First, you really need to set this up with some extra
>>> AGL altitude. The scenario was this. You have an emergency and need to
>>> get to the ground (Anywhere, and NOW). What is the fastest decent? Power
>>> back and slow down to max flap speed and deploy full flaps. Push the nose
>>> over to get to top of white arc (86 Knots). VSI was pegged at 3K. I meant
>>> to get the data from the EFIS but have not done that yet. You are coming
>>> down fast with full control. YES the ground is in FULL view. You really
>>> have to push the nose over to get to the 86 knots with full flaps. Get
>>> down to your landing area and ease up on the forward stick to set up your
>>> landing. Try this. Any passengers need to know what you are going to do
>>> before you do it. Not uncomfortable, but you do come down FAST and with
>>> full control for any turns or positioning to the landing area.
>>>
>>> Jim C
>>> N312F - 370 hours
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> =========
>>> ://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> ==========cs.com
>>> ==========matronics.com/contribution
>>> =========
>>> *
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> tp://forums.matronics.com
>>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>> *
>>
>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> tp://forums.matronics.com
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> *
>>
>>
> *
>
> *
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | BFR - Things to try |
Jim,
Don't you have the Safety Trim in your -10? I think Tim has a write up on t
his and I am sure I am telling you something you already know but the Safet
y Trim prevents the trim from running more than 3 seconds in a row. Additio
nally with the ST you have a switch that will both shut off the trim and al
so make the trim work in reverse in case you lose one trim direction you ca
n reverse the trim to get back to a more natural configuration. I also have
a switch on my panel that completely disengages the co-pilots stick functi
on. I leave the co-pilots stick inactive in all but a few scenarios where I
can confirm the person in the co-pilots seat knows how the stick grip func
tions and has a need to fly the plane.
[Description: J:\Users\Robin_2\Pictures\Airplanes\RV-8A\RV-8A Build Photos\
Safety Trim Switch.jpg]
http://www.tcwtech.com/Safety-Trim-Page.htm
Great tip on the rapid decent
Robin
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@m
atronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim Combs
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 5:07 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: BFR - Things to try
We tried the prop both full forward and full out. No noticeable difference
.
Without the flaps I don't think one would get the decent rate needed. I wi
ll try it with flaps up and compare the descent rates. My CFI was certain
to use full flaps. Apparently this was a procedure used on other GA aircra
ft he had flown.
Jim C
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 7:55 PM, DLM <dlm34077@q.com<mailto:dlm34077@q.com>
> wrote:
IIRC; the transport aircraft use thrust levers to flight idle, gear down,
pitch down 30 and bank 30-45. I don't think the flaps are lowered to preven
t possible structural overload since the wing is weaker with the flaps exte
nded. IIRC this was used for medical emergencies as well as depressurizatio
n events depending on location of course. My point is that flaps should rem
ain up. Power, pitch and bank should be used to control descent. Prop shou
ld be full forward (fine pitch) to act as a big brake.
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: | Re: BFR - Things to try |
For runaway nose up trim or un-commanded pitch up, rolling into a step
bank may provide some extra time to react and figure out what happened
before the airplane stalls . As the airspeed bleeds off in the turn
control forces should diminish.
Dick Sipp
425 Hours
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 8:01 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: BFR - Things to try
I did make some turns to align for a field that I had targeted (very
close to being right under me). You are correct, it really comes down
faster. This is NOT the best glide (Flaps Up).
Something to definitely put in the bag of tricks for flying (Not just
the -10)
Jim C - Do Not Archive
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Phil Perry <philperry9@gmail.com>
wrote:
On your decent, try the same setup you described and put the airplane
into a 45-60 degree bank to fly a spiral to the ground. When you put it
in the bank, you are dropping the vertical component of lift
significantly. Now you're coming down under control and much faster
than 3000 fpm.
.
I haven't tried it in the -10, so you might tip-toe into it. But the
more vertical lift you can shed the faster you're going to get down.
Phil
Sent from my iPhone
On May 25, 2012, at 5:11 PM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky@gmail.com> wrote:
I did my third BFR in the -10 this week. After 360 hours there are
still things to be learned. During our ground training work, we
discussed runaway trim and max decent procedures.
Runaway Trim - I don't have anything that can control my trim unit
other than the DPDT switch on the panel. KISS - it's a good thing. But
we did decide to run the trim to the limits during flight to see how
fast does it happen and can the pilot override it. The -10 has a LOT of
up elevator trim authority. Unless you slow WAY down you can't override
it. It takes a while to travel to full UP but I still think it would
take a pilot by surprise if it happened without warning. We never
really got to full up trim. Just way too much pressure needed to keep
the nose down. Down trim is manageable but still will take a pilot by
surprise. Having a means to turn off power to the trim would most
likely not happen fast enough. Your first focus would be on keeping the
nose of the airplane where it needs to be, then trying to figure out
what happened. By then the trim would be all the way to the limit. It
was great to try that during the BFR with an experienced pilot / CFI.
Made me really glad I don't have a trim controller. in short, it's not
pretty at all.
Maximum Decent - First, you really need to set this up with some
extra AGL altitude. The scenario was this. You have an emergency and
need to get to the ground (Anywhere, and NOW). What is the fastest
decent? Power back and slow down to max flap speed and deploy full
flaps. Push the nose over to get to top of white arc (86 Knots). VSI
was pegged at 3K. I meant to get the data from the EFIS but have not
done that yet. You are coming down fast with full control. YES the
ground is in FULL view. You really have to push the nose over to get to
the 86 knots with full flaps. Get down to your landing area and ease up
on the forward stick to set up your landing. Try this. Any passengers
need to know what you are going to do before you do it. Not
uncomfortable, but you do come down FAST and with full control for any
turns or positioning to the landing area.
Jim C
N312F - 370 hours
=========
://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
=========
cs.com
=========
matronics.com/contribution
=========
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: | Re: GRT Panel Layout |
I've been trying to make that point over and over, but most people
can't see past the $dollar signs$. ADS-B is AWESOME to add to
a panel for traffic. (Bested of course by active traffic) It's
also fantastic to have for WX for "free". But, I would not want
it as my ONLY WX. For the RV-10, which is a serious X/C machine,
you want more serious WX if you travel X/C a lot. You will
NOT get coverage everywhere, even when it's fully rolled out.
You will also NOT get coverage down low in some spots. There
will be areas in the US where you need to be >5000'AGL to get
coverage, or more. That means you can't sit on the ramp in
a large percentage of airports and see if that storm bearing
down on you is close, or what it's doing. That means that
you often will have to launch into iffy skies, only knowing
what you either A) have on your ipad right now, or B) saw
in the FBO when you were there (if they were open).
For me, that's a deal breaker. It's worth the $30-50/mo to
get my WSI Wx as my primary WX. It's also well worth it to
have it on my PRIMARY instruments. ADS-B WX would be a great
addition for an iPad, or for your secondary EFIS if you have
one. May as well outfit with it with the price as low as it
is. But it is not, and never will be, a substitute for
satellite based weather products.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
do not archive
On 5/25/2012 6:58 PM, Bill Watson wrote:
> After several steps forward (Cheap Bastard, XM on the 396, XM on the
> GRT) I feel like I've taken a step backwards with ADS-B on the GRT.
> When it's there, it's as good as the XM on the GRT. But it's not always
> there (out west) and is frustratingly sporadic at the darndest times
> (Asheville NC during storms).
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: BFR - Things to try |
I have pull-able CB's, side by side and well marked, for the trim and autopilot.
The CB's are over my right knee, easy to reach with my right hand.
I also did not put a trim switch on the right stick. Flying from the right I use
a panel mounted switch. I also use the Trio autopilot's trim function even when
hand flying, for fine adjustments. The down side is that if I have a trim
runaway I have to pull both CB's (which is why they are placed side by side) and
then figure out where the problem is. I wrote a POH and these breakers are
prominently mentioned.
Years ago, the "power off steep spiral descent to a landing" was a required commercial
pilot maneuver. It was certainly more useful than lazy eights!
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=373975#373975
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: GRT Panel Layout |
I too am a bit blinded by the $$. Will have to re-think this.
Yesterday I ran over to a close by airport (30 miles) to do a radio
swap. Had to avoid strong rain showers coming and going. Didn't have
ADSb weather going over until in the pattern. Was told there is an ADSb
antenna on the airport. Had weather on the ground and traffffic on
takeoff. Maintained it all the way home. I'm going to have to learn
more about how this stuff works and doesn't work. It should perform
better than that.
Bill "ADS-B is not so awesome but traffic and nexrad is" Watson
do not archive
On 5/25/2012 9:26 PM, Tim Olson wrote:
>
> I've been trying to make that point over and over, but most people
> can't see past the $dollar signs$. ADS-B is AWESOME to add to
> a panel for traffic. (Bested of course by active traffic) It's
> also fantastic to have for WX for "free". But, I would not want
> it as my ONLY WX. For the RV-10, which is a serious X/C machine,
> you want more serious WX if you travel X/C a lot. You will
> NOT get coverage everywhere, even when it's fully rolled out.
> You will also NOT get coverage down low in some spots. There
> will be areas in the US where you need to be >5000'AGL to get
> coverage, or more. That means you can't sit on the ramp in
> a large percentage of airports and see if that storm bearing
> down on you is close, or what it's doing. That means that
> you often will have to launch into iffy skies, only knowing
> what you either A) have on your ipad right now, or B) saw
> in the FBO when you were there (if they were open).
> For me, that's a deal breaker. It's worth the $30-50/mo to
> get my WSI Wx as my primary WX. It's also well worth it to
> have it on my PRIMARY instruments. ADS-B WX would be a great
> addition for an iPad, or for your secondary EFIS if you have
> one. May as well outfit with it with the price as low as it
> is. But it is not, and never will be, a substitute for
> satellite based weather products.
>
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
> do not archive
>
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: GRT Panel Layout |
For the VFR vs IFR (but in VMC) debate, don't forget the third option: file IFR
and if the controller won't allow your requested deviation, ask for VFR on top
at 500' above your altitude, assuming you are in VMC. Controller will be happy
because he's relieved of separation responsibility; you'll be happy because
you're still in the system, so if the weather goes below VFR just call them
up to get back to a "real" IFR clearance. This also works to avoid routing you
don't want. Of course you need VMC.
As to the partial panel question: yes I think it can be done, but:
In this emergency have you also lost pitch trim? (no power?). Flying pp without
pitch trim is a handful. I think you'd have to fly the approach at unusually
high speed, whatever indicated speed the plane was trimmed for when power was
lost.
Also, Murphy's law dictates that this failure will happen in turbulence, where
the TC will be rocking back and forth, you'll need to average by eye. I think
the basic roll stability of the -10 is just sufficient for this, I wouldn't want
to be forced to do it in an RV-7.
Does anyone know the current draw of a typical turn coordinator? Is it feasible
to run it off a small backup battery for, say, two hours?
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=373984#373984
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! --
|