![]() |
Really amazing how every VP question turns into a debate over whether a solid state electrical system is worth it.
Look, if you don't like it, don't put it in your plane. But, golly, it gets tiring watching the non-stop judgments of people's decisions with their EXPERIMENTAL airplanes. If it's not to early for New Year's Resolutions, here's one we should embrace: Let people build the planes they want to build. |
I've noticed a transformation of is website over the last few years. It used to be a builders' support forum, with a lot of how to do's and what to do's, with photos and diagrams.
At some point, I think that the basic aircraft became so easy to build that the emphasis changed to the personalization and customization of our aircraft, best illustrated by the use of new technologies in the cockpit, especially panels and electrical systems. Even fancy paint jobs have threads! We've moved well beyond the basics and are now looking at plug and play avionics and panels. Even the basic electrical system has be reimagined by VPX, MGL and others. At this point we have become system integrators rather than designers. As a result, we start to share opinions rather than information. This leads to endless debates. I recognized the engineering elegance of the VPX system and see why it is so desireable. I chose to build a load center out of relays and breakers because I like to do that stuff. Others may not, and since the wiring is near the end of the project, it saves a lot of time to use the VPX. So, for those who want Dynon to continue support for the VPX, how much are you willing to pay? I thought $200 was a bargain price for a license from Dynon, given the value provided. If I were Dynon, however, I would be selling my own load center.... then they could actually make a return on investment. Watch this space! |
Quote:
1) Firmware updates right from the EFIS screen 2) Control from an EFIS with no hardware converters needed 3) Redundant control if you have more than one EFIS screen 4) Auto AIR/GND switching without a squat switch that maintains compliance with the TSO 5) Ability to be SIL=1 affordably with the Dynon SV-GPS-250, giving all customers full traffic coverage 6) Ability to be SIL=3 the industry's lowest cost 2020 compliant GPS position source 7) Ability to know if an external GPS is connected and operating correctly, allowing the system to self-audit 91.227 compliance 8) Dynon's standard 3 year warranty (instead of two with Trig) So while we did start with the smallest, lightest, most affordable Mode-S transponder transponder on the market, we also did a lot to make it better, and then sold it for less than you could buy a TT22 for. |
Claude,
Right now we expect to put the VP-X on the HDX, but we don't have a timeframe we'd promise. We have a lot of things we want to keep adding to our systems so we're prioritizing VP-X along with everything else. Knowing customer demand sure helps. I think we'd also say that if VP-X support is critical to you, you shouldn't go with the HDX right now. Because we cannot promise a timeframe, we don't want anyone to purchase HDX and then be stuck without control of their electrical system. That's the most honest answer we can give you. We don't want to set any false expectations. |
I appreciate the straight answer. The unfortunate thing is that this lack of support was not known to customers until weeks after the HDX started shipping. I for one would not have ordered the HDX if there was any hint of VP-X support not being included. I now find myself with an unworkable configuration. I'm going to have to sell either the HDX or the VPX for a loss. It's a tough decision that I wish I didn't have to make. Maybe Dynon can buy back the HDX, it was a special order so ACS won't allow a return.
|
Quote:
I thought we were having a lively discussion on how to find a solution for Claude's problem. Now that we know Dynon's position, clearly explained in the above posts, perhaps Claude is open to a new approach on the electrical system. Quote:
Many of us are using a combination of circuit breakers or switched circuit breakers that serve blade fuse sub panels. My 10 has a panel full of avionics and only 7 visible circuit breakers/switches. 3 of those are serving one Avionics sub panel, and one each for 2 instrument sub panels. These in turn allow for a total of 24 circuits to hook up those groups of instruments. I am not counting the light SCBs since you would need some form of switch whether you use a VP-x or other system. https://goo.gl/photos/5j7DgU1uwcSxBk6A7 I can see the attraction to a VP-X and by all means build your airplane your way. Knowing what you know now, you'll have to pass on the VP-X, trade your HDX for a compatible unit from another EFIS provider or modify your plans for the electrical system. My recommendation for your New Years resolution: Plan on building with the "bricks" that are available to you at this time. |
Critical path thinking ...
Quote:
The VP-X integration phase becomes important to display the circuits in the cockpit setting, and see the actual switch operations and current loads. The switches are simply grounding a 'pin assignment' which causes the circuit operation to occur (and the PC-based app will also confirm some of this data.) In fact, loss of the EFIS/VP-X integration feature in-flight does not necessarily affect the circuit switches operations, it just means you lose the display information. Even if you turn OFF the EFIS most of the VP-X functionality remains (depending on a few builder configuration choices). The point is this --- build on and monitor Dynon's progress and you'll probably be happy to find they achieve integration before it becomes critical path negative to the average build schedule. The 2nd thought; (Dynon confirmation needed here) -- someone may want your HDX as a secondary display to a 'Classic' SV D1000, and already has the VP-X integration covered on their primary display. I think the HDX has compatibility when paired with a Classic SkyView although the VP-X feature will only be visible on the D1000 PFD. Dynon has certainly outperformed and over delivered on features during my build window ... |
Claude,
We will of course work with you if the lack of VP-X support on the HDX causes you issues. That's just the Dynon way. Give us a call on Monday if you want to discuss further. |
The 3 quick responses to my last post are a bit amusing. I'm looking at a decision, and then I get three new options to consider. My brain hurts.
Seriously though. I quite appreciate each response. Ernst's hybrid approach is intriguing. I would miss a few VP-X features, such as the flap controller items, but I could see this working. Gary's idea to build on considering that I don't need the EFIS integration until I'm flying is good. A little risky I guess, but it might not be an issue. The HDX doesn't integrate with the touch or classic displays though. And thanks Dynon for being willing to work with me. Swapping the HDX for 1000T might give me the best outcome. I guess I have some thinking to do. I really want all of the toys at the same time, but I'm way too old and nowhere near rich enough for the spoiled rich kid act. Thanks for all the comments, it helps. |
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:36 AM. |