What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

New AP's at SnF

S

SteinAir

Well Known Member
Hi All,

If you're heading to SnF, you'll no doubt want to see all the new gadgets.

In regards to AP's, of course Dynon will finally be showing their much anticipated Autopilot. But, if I were you guys I'd make an effort to stop by the Trio & TruTrak booths as well. Might be a few surprises in store!

Cheers,
Stein
 
Someone who is going there, please report back!

Hey Stein, I assume the TT stuff is related to the new EFIS based AP, what is going on with the TRIO?
 
Last edited:
TRIO Avionics

Here ya' go Brian.....From Trio Avionics:
_____________________________________________________

trio1.bmp

trio2.bmp


The Pro Pilot encompasses all of the performance and safety features of our current systems, and makes them available in a single, panel mounted instrument. The standard Pro Pilot will provide the excellent horizontal navigation capabilities you have come to expect from our products, and the vertical navigation provides altitude hold, climb/descent capability with airspeed limiting, and altitude pre-select. Climb/descent on airspeed is also featured. Options to be introduced in the near future are GPSS, GPSV and fuel management. Additional features to be announced. The system includes back-lighted buttons and illuminated faceplate nomenclature as part of a pleasing new industrial design. The Pro Pilot control head is compatible with existing Gold Standard intelligent servos.

_________________________________________________________
 
Awesome...I had a feeling this was coming from them. It just made sense. Does anyone know when they expect to ship this unit and how much it's going to set me back? I wonder if they will have an upgrade path for existing Trio customers.
 
Called

I just called Trio and the lady that answered stated that they are still testing the item and are hoping to ship before Osh. She did not have any information on pricing.
 
Wow, very interesting. I'm on the fence about what my future-autopilot may be. From what I understand, MGL's upcoming built in autopilot may do everything that the current Trio setup does (and more), but it's also integrated into their EFIS and is included in the price of the EFIS.

I like the idea of a separate autopilot, but not for thousands of dollars more. I'm curious to see what Trio offers as incentive to go with their product.

If I decide to go with MGL's built in autopilot, I'm hoping that they'll be compatible with the Trio servos (which is up to Trio). Some business is better than no business, I guess.
 
Stein at S n F ??

Stein,
Are you going to be at SnF this year ?? If so what booth ??
Hope to see you there
Bob
 
Thanks Stein - I've been waiting for this for 8 months now! This A/P is why I have 2 gold servos already installed in my 9A. I'm big on the idea of the A/P having its own seperate, dissimilar attitude reference.

Cool, made my day!
 
<<I wonder if they will have an upgrade path for existing Trio customers. >>

Don't know about that, but I know two guys who might be interested in buying current, slightly used Trio units....
 
MGL A/P

According to Rainier of MGL, his A/P will not work with any servo but the ones he will use. I do agree on keeping the two seperate. I never did care for the head of the Trio, looks shabby without a raised bezel. The new head has some class!

John H
RV-9 N194JH almost done!
 
Why not two EFIS systems?

IowaRV9Dreamer said:
Thanks Stein - I've been waiting for this for 8 months now! This A/P is why I have 2 gold servos already installed in my 9A. I'm big on the idea of the A/P having its own seperate, dissimilar attitude reference.

Cool, made my day!
Click to expand...

Why?

I would think that a system with two separate EFIS sources, in which either one could drive the auto pilot, would be just as good (like Dynon, and I'm sure other newer systems)

The present AP only systems have a much more limited EFIS display.... why not just use a redundant system of two EFIS units to drive the AP?

If you are relying on an EFIS to keep you upright in IFR, then you are probably using two systems anyway....:)

gil A
 
Gil,

If you have two identical EFISes and one of them leans to the left while the other leans to the right whilst in IMC... how do you determine which one is correct? How do you decide which one is broke? If you have two EFISes that are driving the AP and they disagree, which one wins?

I'm an an advocate of redundancy, but I normally like to see a "backup" being a different technology or different mfgr/brand. Two identical units as redundancy has all kinds of things that make it less attractive than the mfgrs lead you to think...

Just my own 2 cents as usual!

Cheers,
Stein
 
SteinAir said:
Here ya' go Brian.....From Trio Avionics:
_____________________________________________________

trio1.bmp

trio2.bmp


The Pro Pilot encompasses all of the performance and safety features of our current systems, and makes them available in a single, panel mounted instrument. The standard Pro Pilot will provide the excellent horizontal navigation capabilities you have come to expect from our products, and the vertical navigation provides altitude hold, climb/descent capability with airspeed limiting, and altitude pre-select. Climb/descent on airspeed is also featured. Options to be introduced in the near future are GPSS, GPSV and fuel management. Additional features to be announced. The system includes back-lighted buttons and illuminated faceplate nomenclature as part of a pleasing new industrial design. The Pro Pilot control head is compatible with existing Gold Standard intelligent servos.

_________________________________________________________
Click to expand...


Hey Stein,
Talked to Sid from Trio yesterday at SNF re: new AP system. He was surprised to hear I had seen a picture.

We spent some time going over the features & functionality of the the Alt hold EZ1,2,3 systems. Great people. He never seemed rushed to chat about their product and gave me all the time to discuss their product.
I'm using their EZ-pilot and couldn't be happier about it's performance.
Will buy once the funds are available.
 
SteinAir said:
Gil,

If you have two identical EFISes and one of them leans to the left while the other leans to the right whilst in IMC... how do you determine which one is correct? How do you decide which one is broke? If you have two EFISes that are driving the AP and they disagree, which one wins?

I'm an an advocate of redundancy, but I normally like to see a "backup" being a different technology or different mfgr/brand. Two identical units as redundancy has all kinds of things that make it less attractive than the mfgrs lead you to think...

Just my own 2 cents as usual!

Cheers,
Stein
Click to expand...

Hmm,
so if I have a brand A leaning to the left and a brand B leaning to the right - which one do you believe ?
No, the answer is not the one that cost the most $$$.
You would need a third system and a voting mechanism.

Dual redundancy is only valuable in case of a total or obvious failure of one of the units. If you are talking small differences in readings - you have no way of telling which unit is correct. It does not matter if you have two identical panels, two different panels from the same source or two completely different panels.

Rainier
 
John H said:
According to Rainier of MGL, his A/P will not work with any servo but the ones he will use. I do agree on keeping the two seperate. I never did care for the head of the Trio, looks shabby without a raised bezel. The new head has some class!

John H
RV-9 N194JH almost done!
Click to expand...

Not quite.
I am indeed very open to use anybodies servos. TT are not supporting us so those are out. Trio I have asked but it does not seem they want either. Naviad is a little outdated I think.
So, if nobody wants us in their sandbox, that is fine as well - we'll just have to bring out our own toys.

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics
 
Rainier Lamers said:
Hmm,
so if I have a brand A leaning to the left and a brand B leaning to the right - which one do you believe ?
No, the answer is not the one that cost the most $$$.
You would need a third system and a voting mechanism.
Rainier
Click to expand...

A man with two watches never knows the correct time...*


* your Zen thought of the day...
 
az_gila said:
I would think that a system with two separate EFIS sources, in which either one could drive the auto pilot, would be just as good (like Dynon, and I'm sure other newer systems)
gil A
Click to expand...
Hi Gil - It's just a personal philosophy thing with me. Since we are talking about uncertified stuff here, I feel, for me, the dissimilar aspect is of increased importance. So, for me, I would rather have 2 different attitude references instead of 2 copies of the same AHRS. I guess I'm a bit with Stein, who talks about different technologies.

As for the "if you have 2, how do you know which is right" discussion, I agree with that line of thinking. I guess my EFIS indicates level, and I engage my autopilot and it makes my EFIS tilt, then I better check with my compass (or other backup) to see who is lying to me.

I certainly respect that others will make different choices that will be right for them. I also agree that if you have 2 EFIS's (EFII?) then it would be really cool to drive the A/P with either one! It's all good! The best part of E-AB is the choices we get to make, especially in avionics.
 
Last edited:
Trio

Does anyone have pricing on the new trio yet? Also, does Trio use the same servo for pitch and roll?
 
servos are very close

Hi Paul - the pitch and roll servos are very slightly different (at least mine are). The only external difference that I could see is the servo crank arm. One had more holes than the other. Also, you can get an option for the pitch servo to control your electric trim motor. That would be an internal difference.

Can't wait for pricing! Good Luck,
 
SteinAir said:
Gil,

I'm an an advocate of redundancy, but I normally like to see a "backup" being a different technology or different mfgr/brand. Two identical units as redundancy has all kinds of things that make it less attractive than the mfgrs lead you to think...

Just my own 2 cents as usual!

Cheers,
Stein
Click to expand...

For those of us who fly IFR Stein is on the money here. The VFR folks can get along just fine with a single source fully integrated system, but as long as I am flying IFR, I am going to have some kind of standalone autopilot capability.

I fly lots of "real" airplanes that don't have that luxury, but it is cost effectively available in the homebuilt world, and the Rocket would be a busy airplane to hand fly with the backup instruments.

Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
 
I hope this isn't a stupid question.
Can you fit 2 autopilot systems to an RV, and so still have an autopilot if one fails? Something like a basic wing leveller as backup system.
John
 
What is independant?

B25Flyer said:
For those of us who fly IFR Stein is on the money here. The VFR folks can get along just fine with a single source fully integrated system, but as long as I am flying IFR, I am going to have some kind of standalone autopilot capability.

I fly lots of "real" airplanes that don't have that luxury, but it is cost effectively available in the homebuilt world, and the Rocket would be a busy airplane to hand fly with the backup instruments.

Tailwinds,
Doug Rozendaal
Click to expand...

Doug... I the point I was trying to make is that two separate EFIS units are not necessarily an "integrated" unit. I would look at them as two separate units, with either one having the capability to drive the AP servos. This is not a "single source" system (where source = gyro reference, not vendor).

The "which one is right" problem comes up in all of the two (not three...:)...) unit discussions... you get to vote with your eyes and butt.

If you are concerned at this level, then you need three gyro reference units.

As to similar technology, once electronic units are burned in and operating, the chances of an identical failure happening at exactly the same time to both units are extremely rare. When I worked on satellite programs, the reliability folks used voting and multiple identical units, not different technologies...

This does leave open the chance of software errors, but flying IFR, you are relying on a lot of software in multiple boxes anyway...:rolleyes:

If you are looking for errors and failure rates, I bet the much more mechanical autopilot has a much higher probability of failure than the all solid state electronic EFIS gyro units.... which is why "Autopilot Disconnect" switches were invented....:)

gil A
 
Indeed you could have multiple AP's - and I've seen it, though typically only in planes owned by people like Trutrak or Trio. When you start down the slippery slope of having backups for the backups you're crossing the proverbial line of diminishing returns. Kind of like having a 3rd battery as a backup to your backup battery, so on and so forth. Adding extra redundancy in one area will inevitably lead to increased complexity/lower reliability in another.

With the exception of some heavy iron multiple AP's would be an excessive use of weight, money and time with little to no likely return on that expenditure. Even considering the heavy iron, the multiple AP's are typically not all always required to be operative except for certain CAT approaches and/or autoland procedures.

Backups are a great thing to have and should be carefully considered for IFR flight in these sport type planes, but we need to remember that we still have one big single point of failure no matter what we do with the panel....we've only got one fan turnin' out front. :)

It's a balancing act that should be contemplated if you plan on flying in the clouds.

My 2 cents as usual.

Cheers,
Stein
 
IMO, an autopilot should be a convenience, not a crutch. An autopilot should never be considered essential equipment. Sadly, very capable and automated airplanes are giving false courage to pilots to tackle flights they have no business flying. Proficiency first. Every crack-up costs us all dearly.
 
How about Tru Trak

Anything new with Tru Track. I was at SNF but missed them. so much to see... so little time.
 
az_gila said:
If you are looking for errors and failure rates, I bet the much more mechanical autopilot has a much higher probability of failure than the all solid state electronic EFIS gyro units.... which is why "Autopilot Disconnect" switches were invented....:)

gil A
Click to expand...

Not sure which autopilots you are referring to, but the systems from TruTrak and Trio are no more mechanical than those driven by an EFIS (Dynon, GRT, BMA, etc). Similar technology resides in all the digital EFIS and autopilot systems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top