What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Vertical Power

asw20c

Well Known Member
I'm still working on my empennage so I'm a LONG way off from installing avionics, however I've looked briefly at the Vertical Power website and what their VP-X does. I'm not an electronics guy so I don't know the pros and cons, but it sure seems to make sense to use their product. If for nothing else it seems it greatly simplifies wiring. What's the downside?
 
It looks like one concern with VP-X is that they depend on the other EFIS suppliers to display the system information. It's the usual hardware / software / multiple vendors mating of cats with dogs problem. As Garmin and Dynon, et. al. rev their software apparently there is no guarantee the VP-X display will keep working. Take a look at this thread for an example: http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=143968
 
As a Garmin user, I am not affected by that Dynon problem mentioned above.

I really don't see a down side to it at all. I like the information and how it all integrates.

:cool: CJ
 
The VPX is an excellent component

The VPX is a real game changer. It drags aircraft electrical distribution systems into the 21st century. It is head and shoulders above the old circuit breaker/fuse and mechanical relay systems. The real bonus for me is that it empowers an electrical moron like me (I'm still not certain which end of the wire the electrons go in) to be the master of my electrical system. It will work with the Garmin G3X I am planning for my panel, so compatibility is no problem. The only downside is that it costs two aviation monetary units, but in the long run its a bargain. You can't go wrong with a system that is so comprehensive and reliable.
 
Clay, as you say, you're a long way from avionics choices. A great many things can change in a year or three.

Marc Ausman, the VPX's creator, has written a good "Aircraft Wiring Guide" (title) which does a very fair job illustrating conventional and VPX wiring side by side. At this stage of the game, you should buy it, as well as a copy of Bob Nuckolls' book (search "Aero Electric Connection"). Study them both. EAB is about education and recreation, so do the homework.

VPX or no VPX is not a question of simplified wiring. The VPX does offer a long list of "functionalities". Some users value them greatly, while others consider them to be toys. You'll need to study the list and make up your own mind.

The system has not been as reliable as originally claimed, said claims being based on the good record of solid state circuit interruption devices. As an integrated airframe component, failure tends to ground the aircraft, with no chance of field repair. Loaner units can be scarce; use the search function.
 
I enjoyed reading Steve's comment above but I have to disagree about the VPX. Yes it does start to move aviation electronics into a new era but at a cost in both 'aviation units' and complexity.

In no way do I feel it is head and shoulders above fuse/breaker panels. It offers the same protections in a more complex fashion. Reliability may be a question mark compared to fuse/breakers which have a very well established operational record, but I'm comfortable with the VPX from that standpoint.

What it doesn't seem to offer is an actual simplification of wiring. If you substitute a fuse block for the VPX you end up with nearly identical wire runs and switches. I've built two airplane panels now and looked at the VPX both times. In both cases the wiring would not have been simplified at all.

What it does offer is much like what EFIS systems offer over steam gauges. You do have greater visibility into what is going on in your system. You do have control of the electrical system in a way that is not available with traditional fuse/breaker solutions. These controls can even be tied to software for alerting and taking actions.

However, that is were the added complexity is. You need to interface to an EFIS system to access those features. I don't blame Dynon for charging for a license to do that. It costs them money to write the interface software.

It also leads to issues where Dynon has updated to a new software load for their HDX but can't support the VPX system immediately. They will have it 'real soon now' as we say in the software business, and I believe them, but it does have repercussions for the VPX user that they have to be aware of.

Avionics in many modern business jets or turboprops have incorporated the ideas in the VPX into their systems so that the technology is being used effectively. It is integrated into the EFIS's of these aircraft and it makes the operation of the electrical system of these aircraft simpler and alerting more robust.

Most people are moving to glass panels not only because they are more functional and cool but the pricing of the units are now much more cost competitive to a new set of steam gauges.

The VPX offers a set of features that integrates nicely with the glass panel systems adding value to those systems, but the cost of a VPX system has a hard time competing with the cost of a fuse block.

The question is, do those features outweigh the cost. For me they did not, but I can see how others feel that they do.

In the case of my new G3x panel, speed scheduling of the trim system, flap controls, wig wag, and other features are included with one of the G3x boxes I added for half an 'aviation unit'. My fuse panel cost about one 'automobile unit'. (I'm defining an 'automobile unit' as one tenth of an 'aviation unit')

With no simplification of wiring, that leaves me with almost one and a half 'aviation units' to spend on something else. That easily covered my G5 with backup battery cost. I liked that trade better.
 
Last edited:
I would take those poll numbers with a grain of salt. All they really can give us is a minimum number of actual failures. It can't give us a rate. I'm sure there are failures but the rate number has no validity and I suspect is way high. We would have to know more.

It should be an easy box to swap in and out depending on how you install it.
 
This is becoming another never-ending debate. If you're still building the tail, focus on choosing whether to prime or not, and if so, what kind of primer to use. :D
 
Kurt has a point, but we all forward plan on the rainy days, so asking long lead questions is appropriate for our hobby. The other thing that bothers me about much in our world today is that high tech is the best tech. Wrong. Tech that gets the job done with the min of fuss is the right way. That does have to be evaluated by each person for each situation, but for me, I'll stick with the Timex solutions.

Physicists are paid to be perfect; engineers only for good enough. I-r-uh injunear.
 
In the case of my new G3x panel, speed scheduling of the trim system, flap controls, wig wag, and other features are included with one of the G3x boxes I added for half an 'aviation unit'. My fuse panel cost about one 'automobile unit'. (I'm defining an 'automobile unit' as one tenth of an 'aviation unit')

With no simplification of wiring, that leaves me with almost one and a half 'aviation units' to spend on something else. That easily covered my G5 with backup battery cost. I liked that trade better.

That's the GAD 27 you're referring to. More info at https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/p/521821 and VAF discussion thread at http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=131698. A fuseblock or two plus the GAD 27 give you simple, reliable power distribution & circuit protection plus the capabilities to control the stuff you typically need to interface to outside of the avionics (like flaps, trim, wig-wag, lighting/dimming control, and other stuff).

Besides low cost, high reliability, & simple installation, a big advantage to going the fuseblock route for circuit protection is that it's easy to understand how it works. When it comes to distributing power to an all-electric panel I like to be able to understand exactly what I'm dealing with, what the failure modes are, etc...
 
I would never build or repanel another plane without a VP-X. Truly far superior to breakers in many ways. But you have to make sure it will be compatible with whatever EFIS system you decide to install, most are no problem.
 
I would never build or repanel another plane without a VP-X. Truly far superior to breakers in many ways. But you have to make sure it will be compatible with whatever EFIS system you decide to install, most are no problem.

To each his own. I would never build a or repanel and airplane using any VPX product. Now if you use two VPX units you can avoid the major downside of the product - but shoot fire that gets pricey.

VPX is an eloquent sub-optimization of old thought airplane power distribution.

Carl
 
To each his own. I would never build a or repanel and airplane using any VPX product. Now if you use two VPX units you can avoid the major downside of the product - but shoot fire that gets pricey.

VPX is an eloquent sub-optimization of old thought airplane power distribution.

Carl

Ok Carl.. I'll bite... Why don't you like this product?
I've installed many CB's and my VP-X pro. It was a fluke that I got one to install, and I knew nothing about them, but I couldn't be happier that I did. It was tons less work, easy to install and very complete, does many many more things than just ECB's, reprogrammable in minutes, dual bus, has not given me a seconds problem in almost 4 years, great customer service and was totally compatible with my EFIS system. No doubt if it's installed improperly it will be problematic but it comes with a very complete manual. And it is pricey but I believe it's well worth it if you compare time and functions to plain CB's.
Please explain??
 
Mark,

Yes it is the GAD 27 that gives me the features I mentioned. However, I said the GAD 27 gave me Trim speed scheduling when I meant Trim mixing. Trim speed scheduling is provided by the Garmin servos. If your are going without an autopilot you don't get trim speed scheduling in a G3x system.

Your link does highlight all that the GAD 27 does. It is a good thread to read if one is considering these features in a G3x system.

I do value what the VPX system does. However, one thing I have heard over the years from people is that it simplifies the wiring. If someone is considering it for those reasons I would caution them to do a quick layout of any circuit they are considering and see if it really simplifies the number or location of runs, or switches. My contention is that it does not.

The value in the VPX system is the additional feedback and control through your EFIS.
 
Randy,

I offer that an in depth discussion on single fault risks is hard to capture in short notes like this. So, I'll try to boil my thoughts down to a few bullets. I'm not interested in winning any arguement but when I saw your very strong endorsement of the VPX product I figured the builders out there looking for ideas should have both sides of the story.

So some thoughts:
- If you are replicating a 1960 Cessna power generation and distribution system, the VPX just adds another (but less likely) single point failure risk. I agree that the product has proven reliable, but nothing put in an airplane is flawless.
- The only way to avoid the major single point failure risks in our airplanes requires a dual battery system. I reviewed the VPX install manual and while they talk about dual battery configurations, they all either just add a battery that is there "just in case" or another solenoid to provide an auxiliary power path.
- The VPX does indeed advertise dual bus capabiliy to enhance panel power reliabity. Looking at the diagram, this still has power coming from a single solenoid - so the weakest element is still present.
- The VPX does stuff like trim and flap relay functions - but so do other options that are less expensive.
- The VPX can provide a plethora of other information on current draws and such, and all this could be of limited value at some point. In practice however I offer such capabilies fall into the bells and whistles bucket.

The design elements of my panels include:
- Assume every component will fail. Does the panel go dark or does it degrade gracefully? If a component fails, can the downstream panel elements be routed power via anther path? The simple examples of this include no avionics master switch, no single contractor to the battery, no single ground path to the battery, and no single battery.
- If you do have an alternator failure, do you have adequate reserve battery power to continue full IFR supporte flight for X hours. You pick the X. For me that is 2.5 hours. This drives the overall size of the batteries and tells you if you need a standby alternaor or not.
- Nothing is along for "just in case". So this typically means the two batteries are of the same size and in parallel for engine cranking and for normal operations.

The list goes on.

Again, not looking for an arguement and if anyone is just replicating the standard Van's single battery and single battery contacor design the VPX works just fine.

I wonder however what happens if the VPX ground lead fails?

Carl
 
It was tons less work

Randy,

This is the only statement of yours that I disagree with. I hear it all the time.

I'm curious about what work it saved you? Isn't the wiring nearly the same?

My understanding of the VPX is that instead of...

fuseblock -> switch -> device/s

The VPX is...

switch -> VPX -> device/s
-------------|
------------\/
With EFIS Control and Display (this is the value add to me)

Same number of runs, same number of switches. No value added through wiring simplification.

I will concede that for the one or two circuits drawing a lot of power in a fuse block design you might add a relay depending on how much power. In my case, I have not used a relay for anything yet, although I might.

I like the features of a VPX. As I said, that is where the value is. For me, I got most of that value from the GAD 27. ATC fuses that illuminate when blown give me another portion of it. I do only see amp draw per alternator, not circuit.

As I have said, I looked at a VPX system twice now and found I could get better value going a different way.

I don't see it as a slam dunk decision either way, one has to decide on how much value they see in each.
 
To the OP, if you have any questions or concerns about installing or electrical planning, feel free to give me a call any time. I am more than happy to help. The VP-X is not for everyone, but for those that have chosen to use it, it is a real game changer.

So much of the online discussion is based on conjecture by those that do not own a VP-X, so I rarely engage in those discussions, but I will say one thing to Dan's point about loaners being scarce: simply not true. IF we have a need to get a customer up and running quickly based on an AOG situation, we overnight loaners at our expense to get customers back underway and address the issue as required (in the US; international is harder, but we will do what we can). We stand behind the product and will do everything we can to be sure our customers are happy with us and happy with the product.

Reliability numbers shown here on VAF are not complete, nor will they ever be because we don't have info from all owners, RV or otherwise...yes, RV owners are the highest user group, but nowhere near half of all VP-X's are installed in RV's, so take numbers generated here with a grain of salt.

We are proud of the reliability of the VP-X product line and the function and feature set it brings to modernize systems.
 
Hokey Pokey ice cream

The VPX is like Hokey Pokey Ice cream, once you try it, you never go back. The thought of having high amps running through a lot of switches, fuses and relays behind my panel when I don't have to is what sold me. Sorry - you will have to come down to NZ to try the ice cream.

Cheers
 
Wow... that's a lot to digest.... Let me hit on a few points asked. As far as much less work, that would depend on how many circuits one is going to use. I got the VP-X pro, it has I believe 27 circuits, and I use every bit of them and more. Now if had to drill and connect 27 + breakers and all the busses to connect them, yes that's lots of work and lots real estate on a small panel with dual glass screens. Installing one VP-X box takes little work. Next, wiring control switches is with small 22 gauge wire and all the switches have a common ground, again 22 gauge is more than enough. All the heavy gauge wires go to the VP-X not the switches, the side effect is switch life. Setting up the current (Amps) for each circuit is just a program setting, if you need to change it you don't have to remove a breaker and stuff another one in it's place. You build your panel and forget or add another circuit, no problem, no drilling or figuring out where to connect it. Next, back up power, the VP-X monitors a backup battery and you can run this backup outside of the VP-X (I do). Next, it locks out your starter once the engine starts, it connects to you trim servos so you don't need a relay board and you can slow them down as you pick up airspeed, it runs your flap motor and allows you to program flap degrees and one touch full up flaps, monitors amps per circuit on the EFIS, full control of all the circuits on the EFIS, displays an immediate fault on the EFIS, reset on the EFIS, backup battery voltage on the EFIS, circuits on/off status displayed on the EFIS, built in overvoltage to the field with alert. And much more.. Can't remember all of it, and it's not just bells and whistles, this is useful troubleshooting info. On the contrary, breakers/fuses do none of these features. BTW, the VP-X has multiple redundant grounds, it does not rely on one (since you asked).

I totally agree that these are not for everyone, it does require some electronic abilities to install properly and getting the most from the system and you do need a good EFIS system to use it. And they aren't cost effective for some, either. But with all that said, they are very reliable and the same failure points in an aircraft still exist with or without the VP-X. The battery goes to the master relay than to the VP-X, any failure before the VP-X is still there, relays and master wiring do fail. The VP-X can be bypassed for emergency power and it does not affect the VP-X system.

The only way you can compare a old breaker/fuse system to an VP-X system is to actually install one and use one. As you can see from VP-X users they would never go back and I agree with them. I've been down both roads and there is a very big difference between old and new. And as I said in a prior post, I knew nothing about these systems when I was offered the opportunity to install one. It was a bit foreign to me even though I have a lifelong electronics background, I design and build a lot of my own goodies for aircraft, but it seemed like a great idea and something new to try. I am very pleased with this product, unlike many other products, and I'd never go back.

I'm not trying to get anyone to buy one nor am I slighting breakers or fuses, this is on a level of it's own. Like comparing steam gauges to an EFIS system. They both do the job, they both have failure points, they each install differently. But they each have very different features. It's each to their own for sure. Mark designed a very powerful, full featured, reliable electronic circuit breaker system and it flat out works. High power MOSFET's are a tried and true technology. I've put 4 years on mine and not one hiccup. I wish I could say that about everything else I've installed.

If I forgot to answer any of the questions or concerns I'm sorry, there's plenty on the posts and I certainly don't know everything about the Vertical Power stuff... Hope this helps.
 
I got the VP-X pro, it has I believe 27 circuits, and I use every bit of them and more. Now if had to drill and connect 27 + breakers and all the busses to connect them, yes that's lots of work and lots real estate on a small panel with dual glass screens.

I think the point that some have tried to get across (and that I agree with), is that there are many different ways to design an electrical system, and that NOT going with a VPX doesn't automatically make it more work and/or more difficult, and/or less capable.

Many (my self included) have done installations with fuse blocks that use ATC type fuses. They can be very compact and put a lot of circuits in a small package (just like VPX). It requires the exact same amount of work.... A switch, wire (or wires) and a connection at the power source (VPX or fuse block) for each circuit regardless of which method is used.

If you want to only compare VPX to a panel full of expensive circuit breakers then I wouldn't disagree with you, but that is not the only other alternative.
 
Now if had to drill and connect 27 + breakers and all the busses to connect them, yes that's lots of work and lots real estate on a small panel with dual glass screens.

Remember my only real qualm is with the idea that the VPX is much simpler to wire up.

Here is my wiring case to compare to yours. I used fuse blocks. I needed 32 circuits split into two buses of 18 and 14 slots each (two spares on each for 28 used circuits, comparable to yours). I used one 20 and one 12 slot compact fuse block. They are mounted in the standard location for fuses or breakers in the RV14. It is hard to imagine that mounting those blocks and terminating the wires was harder than mounting a VPX. It also takes up no panel real estate.

I now have the same number of runs to switches and devices as you. The only difference in terms of wiring switches is that I used slightly heavier gauge wire than you but I still needed to make the same number of runs as you to switches and devices.

You are correct that you can connect the switch grounds but I would not do that had I used a VPX. I would run a ground from each switch to my grounding block. It's just a few switches so there is no real weight or cost penalty and then I would not be worried about a single ground termination failure taking out all my switched devices.

At this point I've spent $100 on fuse blocks etc and I believe less time than to mount and install a VPX.

For $500 more on a G3x I get all the features you like - and some more - except individual circuit monitoring and control from the EFIS.

So the questions is, assuming a VPX Pro, what gives me the most bang for the difference in bucks. Like I said, each time I did the math I chose another device. In this case, a Garmin G5 which gives me complete independent redundancy to keep the plane upright and flying in the right direction.

This gets to my point that it is not a slam dunk decision either way. A full breaker panel would cost more and take more time to fabricate, reducing the extra dollars and increasing build time from my example making it a closer call.

picture-66.jpg

picture-68.jpg
picture-69.jpg
 
Last edited:
Scott & Bob..... You're comparing apples to oranges. I won't even get into why I would never uses fuses but you both have completely overlooked 90% of the features and advantages of using a VP-X. If you want to compare getting 14 volts to a radio sure, you could use an alligator clip lead and a knife switch but that's not the purpose of ECB's. It's not just about power distribution, that's only the beginning.

But like usual, when someone starts a thread here about a product all the haters that never used the product come out to bash it, many attempt to compare apples to oranges. In this case how a block of car fuses is better than a high tech modern digital power system. That's like comparing a VW to a Ferrari. But one thing you don't read on this thread, or other VP-X threads, is anyone that has installed one and bashing it. What you do read is that anyone that's installed one would never go back and you read about all the benefits of using this type of system.

Like I've said a few times; If you don't want one don't buy one. But don't bash a system you have never installed yourself. Yes it's pricey and no it's not about power distribution.
 
Randy,

If for nothing else it seems it greatly simplifies wiring. What's the downside?

This is from the original post of this thread. He asked, I answered.

I simply disagree with the assertion that it greatly simplifies wiring. This is repeated often. To me it is not a reason to buy a VPX. I believe I gave a serious and good description of why it think that. Not bashing. The OP can make up his own mind.

I don't hate the product. I SERIOUSLY considered it for two projects. I wrote how modern avionics are incorporating ECB's into their systems and I like the abilities they deliver.

However, I have 110% of the non ECB VPX features in my panel for 1/4 of the cost and just as simple wiring. That's fair to say and is also not bashing.

I have none of the VPX ECB features that can be controlled from or displayed on my G3x. I would like to have them. Those features are why one should buy a VPX if the value is there for them.

Maybe in my third airplane.
 
. If you want to compare getting 14 volts to a radio sure, you could use an alligator clip lead and a knife switch but that's not the purpose of ECB's. It's not just about power distribution, that's only the beginning.

But like usual, when someone starts a thread here about a product all the haters that never used the product come out to bash it, many attempt to compare apples to oranges.

Now you are not being fair.....

One of the arguments repeatedly used is that it makes for a much simpler electrical system build. A good place to start then would be for all of the people that love it to stop stating that as a major advantage...... (and that is the only detail I have commented about, but maybe you are talking about the other Scott)
 
Its really difficult to be objective in these kind of discussions, and the VPX really does seem to polarise views. Those that have chosen the VPX are convinced they are correct, that its a wonderful feature rich device that no-one should be without - but they have spent the money and are very unlikely to admit their purchase was not the best way forward. Some of those who have chosen a different electrical system are equally certain that the VPX is a waste of money.

I don't have a VPX and am very unlikely to buy one. To me the downsides are cost, complexity, lack of expandability and lack of redundancy. It is expensive compared to some fuses and switches. It is complex, I don't get why I want to use my EFIS to monitor my electrical system (all I need to know is bus voltage). I don't want to give control of my trim, and flaps to a bunch of complex software and hardware. Once all the switching circuits are used the only expansion route is to install switches and fuses/cbs. If all the capabilities of a VP-X are used then every electrical service in the aircraft is dependent on the correct functioning of the VP-X, that's too many eggs in one basket for me. If by-pass circuits are included in the aircraft then the cost effectiveness and simplification arguments begin to disappear. I don't agree that wiring in fuses is complex, the concepts involved and the implementation are simple (to my mind).

To me the VPX is a solution looking for a problem. Why do nearly all cars still use fuses?

Pete
 
Its really difficult to be objective in these kind of discussions, and the VPX really does seem to polarise views. Those that have chosen the VPX are convinced they are correct, that its a wonderful feature rich device that no-one should be without - but they have spent the money and are very unlikely to admit their purchase was not the best way forward. Some of those who have chosen a different electrical system are equally certain that the VPX is a waste of money.

I don't have a VPX and am very unlikely to buy one. To me the downsides are cost, complexity, lack of expandability and lack of redundancy. It is expensive compared to some fuses and switches. It is complex, I don't get why I want to use my EFIS to monitor my electrical system (all I need to know is bus voltage). I don't want to give control of my trim, and flaps to a bunch of complex software and hardware. Once all the switching circuits are used the only expansion route is to install switches and fuses/cbs. If all the capabilities of a VP-X are used then every electrical service in the aircraft is dependent on the correct functioning of the VP-X, that's too many eggs in one basket for me. If by-pass circuits are included in the aircraft then the cost effectiveness and simplification arguments begin to disappear. I don't agree that wiring in fuses is complex, the concepts involved and the implementation are simple (to my mind).

To me the VPX is a solution looking for a problem. Why do nearly all cars still use fuses?

Pete

Cars don't fly, they do blow on occasion and if the engine quits you pull over and call AAA. Again folks...... You can't judge this or any product until you use it! Fact: In all my years of flying, building and servicing (A&P) I've had breakers fail, switches fail, wiring fail, fuses fail, the list goes on. In the four years I've used this VP-X it nor any electrical has failed. (I did have a field wire come loose on the alternator once). Install one then post your comments. It's unfair for the OP to get comments about a product from people that has never used one.
 
Info from a year and a half ago, and not relevant today.

Fair enough. What changed?

And I see that you edited your original response that took a nice personal dig at me...what has become known as traditional Dan Horton form.:rolleyes:

Yep, original posted at 6:53, edited change posted at 6:56. I elected to take a higher path. You may post the original for all to judge if you wish.
 
VPX product and parts life and availability

my RV7 is 2009 have VP-200 in it
VP200 was released in 2008 if i am not mistaking
and it is like 4 years that it was discontinued no service no parts!!!!

How long you guys think you will get support and parts for VPX 7-8 years???
fuses hold better!!!!!

if my VP200 goes bad that i cant fix it I go back to fuses
 
Chad Fan and the real question?

If Chad is involved, it is reputable and a good product.

Reliability is not the issue I've questioned, but evolution obsolescence with Vertical Power and others is my major concern. Several years ago Dynon discontinued software update support for the D-100 series that is now available for installation in thousands of certified aircraft, via the EAA STC. When I called to ask, with the EAA STC, if Dynon would renew support for the D-100 series, I was told no. I've followed the VP development and also read of several dealing with issues with VP legacy products. I hope VP support continues to support it's early adopters.
 
....It's unfair for the OP to get comments about a product from people that has never used one.

Don't think I agree with that philosophy. If someone has a reasonable opinion as to why a particular device might be inappropriate, whether or not they've actually used it, then since the OP specifically asked "What's the downside?" it's entirely on topic, as well as "fair," for them to discuss their opinion.

Dave
 
Don't forget the fate of the VP-400 that was sold. Astronics purchased VP and quickly discontinued the line and all support! Customers left high and dry with very little options. With their track record, I don't think you can expect VP to support their legacy equipment years down the road. These planes will easily fly for decades, as for VP? Who knows. Klixon breakers all the way!
 
.....If someone has a reasonable opinion as to why a particular device might be inappropriate, whether or not they've actually used it, then since the OP specifically asked "What's the downside?" it's entirely on topic, as well as "fair," for them to discuss their opinion.

Dave

While I agree totally with Dave, it would be useful to hear from those who have actually installed and flown behind a VPX, AND would not install it again in another build. How many are out there in this category?

In my case I installed and am flying behind a VP-200. If it were still in production I would definitely do it again. If it fails I would probably put in the VPX and all the switches I don't currently have to have.
 
This discussion is mainly about old way and new way. Thanks to VP-X to making us dreaming about something as boring as electrical panel, with no improvement since decades.

I've chosen to get EFIS+VP-X as a whole, and I don't care about duration because I perfectly know this "computerization" approach includes a level of planned obsolescence. I will be able to change my electrical panel if something goes wrong, so what? I'm not building for customers and even though the total life of my bird could be decades, the avionics will have to be replaced sometimes.

Talking about planned obsolescence, what about our medical?... What about our smartphones?

This is our choice as builders to setup the systems we want, the complexity we can manage and the price we can afford. This is about freedom, not about good or bad solution for a "problem that doesn't exist"... Same approach in driving a standard car or a luxury one, they both have four wheels and seats, but you have the right to choose, and you should fight to keep it this way.

I'm living in the homebuilders' world since I was born, and this is all about fun, passion and finding good reason to do unreasonable activities. Going to VP-X is a good reason for me, pushing the lines, trying something different, having some more fun in the way I'm building and flying.

For sure I do care about other's comments when this is about safety, with proper arguments and facts. I definitely don't care when it's about the way I decide to express my freedom and spend my money...

Wishing you all happy buildings, landings and new year!
 
Last edited:
Fair enough. What changed?



Yep, original posted at 6:53, edited change posted at 6:56. I elected to take a higher path. You may post the original for all to judge if you wish.

A review of the processes in place when we did have an AOG customer at that time. I was unaware that we didn't have a real AOG loaner program in place, but since then we have multiple Sports and Pro's on the loaner shelf so there will always be availability if necessary.

And no worries on the comment...I do appreciate you editing the original though. :cool:
 
How long you guys think you will get support and parts for VPX 7-8 years???

Well the great thing about Ballard Technology is we still support the original products that were produced 27 years ago when the company started, so product support longevity has been a hallmark of the company.
 
Last edited:
If Chad is involved, it is reputable and a good product.
Thanks Robby!

Don't forget the fate of the VP-400 that was sold. Astronics purchased VP and quickly discontinued the line and all support! Customers left high and dry with very little options. With their track record, I don't think you can expect VP to support their legacy equipment years down the road. These planes will easily fly for decades, as for VP? Who knows. Klixon breakers all the way!

This is a topic that has some ambiguity behind the scenes, but the short version is the VP-400 was never out of beta and the 7 units were purchased back before VP was sold to Astronics. Astronics owns the system, but since we are not in the autopilot business it wasn't a fit for the product line.

Marc did a great job in designing the products, and I won't speak for him regarding track record or business decisions when Vertical Power was his company. What I can say now is that as just mentioned in a previous post, Ballard still supports every product it has ever produced, going back to the beginning 27 years ago.

Hope that helps.
 
Thanks Robby!



This is a topic that has some ambiguity behind the scenes, but the short version is the VP-400 was never out of beta and the 7 units were purchased back before VP was sold to Astronics. Astronics owns the system, but since we are not in the autopilot business it wasn't a fit for the product line.

Marc did a great job in designing the products, and I won't speak for him regarding track record or business decisions when Vertical Power was his company. What I can say now is that as just mentioned in a previous post, Ballard still supports every product it has ever produced, going back to the beginning 27 years ago.

Hope that helps.

Chad,

I must have missed this along the way. Are you saying my VP100 would be supported should I have a failure? You guys would support it / be able to fix it should it breakdown on me?

I understand warranty is long gone with my 7 year old VP100.
 
A review of the processes in place when we did have an AOG customer at that time. I was unaware that we didn't have a real AOG loaner program in place, but since then we have multiple Sports and Pro's on the loaner shelf so there will always be availability if necessary.

Very good. So how many loaners were ultimately deemed necessary?

And no worries on the comment...I do appreciate you editing the original though. :cool:

Enough stinky innuendo. For the curious, the edited phrase was "Short memory for a young man", replaced with "Since you brought it up".
 
Autos & fuses

Most late model vehicles are switching away from fuses and going electronic control. Nissan calls it Intelligent Power Distribution Module (IPDM) Chrysler calls it Totally Integrated Power Module (TIPM) Began about 2006 or so. Other automakers are following.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure I would use the TIPM as an example. The TIPM modules in Chryslers cars that I am aware of are simply fuses and relays activated by switches via a computer.

The actual power routing is done via mechanical relays with commands issued by the computer and the circuit protection for most circuits is just typical auto fuses. That said very late models may be eliminating all fuses for ECB but I haven't seen them.

A quick lookup of TIPM problems in Chrysler vehicles between 2006 and 2014 would give you the heebie-jeebies if it was in your airplane. The failure modes are many, like hitting the horn and the wipers going on etc. or more simply, all controls ceasing to function.

I think comparing it to the VPX is not very accurate.
 
Chad,

I must have missed this along the way. Are you saying my VP100 would be supported should I have a failure? You guys would support it / be able to fix it should it breakdown on me?

I understand warranty is long gone with my 7 year old VP100.

Hi John,

Sorry, that's not what I'm saying. Ballard did not make the VP-100 (or 50/200/400/Original VP-X), so these products are not supported. The VP-X Sport and Pro, PPS, and whatever comes next will continue on and be supported.
 
Answer to OP

If for nothing else it seems it greatly simplifies wiring. What's the downside?

The pros and cons have been brought up but here is one more original thought.

By installing a box like VP-X, you are handing over a large part of your electrical installation to a company, a good company I am sure.
A large part of our "experimental" airplanes has already been pre-manufactured
and my observation shows that more and more components are fabricated by "professionals". Some would even have you believe that if you didn't buy these and other professionally fabricated components from vendors, you are somehow jeopardizing your own safety. In short, we are trending away from building our own airplanes.
While buying pre fabed hoses or an harness for avionics may be a matter of choosing convenience over a learning process that may stretch your time more than your money, giving up the entire electrical system component is an entirely different matter.
You are now beholden to a company for upgrades and support and in case of failure will be grounded with no other option to fix it but to send the box back to where it came from.
On the other hand, you will have an electrical system that you are thoroughly familiar with and never depend on anyone but yourself and hundreds of others with similar designs to help you solve any problems that might occur.

Are you willing to give up control of your entire electrical system design or
will you spend the time to learn and install your own or copied design?
 
Chad makes it sound that the buy-back for 7 vp-400 units was no big deal, when in reality it was quite a deal to those involved. Once the unit was not supported a complete change of panel had to be made - one that was very expensive and of which the buy-back offer did not come close to making one whole again! As it is not that easy to change a VP system to something else after installation you need to BE CAREFUL WITH YOUR DECISIONS AND INVESTMENT!
 
Chad makes it sound that the buy-back for 7 vp-400 units was no big deal, when in reality it was quite a deal to those involved. Once the unit was not supported a complete change of panel had to be made - one that was very expensive and of which the buy-back offer did not come close to making one whole again! As it is not that easy to change a VP system to something else after installation you need to BE CAREFUL WITH YOUR DECISIONS AND INVESTMENT!

My apologies...it was not my intent to make it sound that way at all. It was a big deal, but I wasn't involved when it happened and I didn't want to speak for Marc and his efforts with the VP-400.
 
as a 2012 RAM owner

I'm not sure I would use the TIPM as an example. The TIPM modules in Chryslers cars that I am aware of are simply fuses and relays activated by switches via a computer.

The actual power routing is done via mechanical relays with commands issued by the computer and the circuit protection for most circuits is just typical auto fuses. That said very late models may be eliminating all fuses for ECB but I haven't seen them.

A quick lookup of TIPM problems in Chrysler vehicles between 2006 and 2014 would give you the heebie-jeebies if it was in your airplane. The failure modes are many, like hitting the horn and the wipers going on etc. or more simply, all controls ceasing to function.

I think comparing it to the VPX is not very accurate.

...I was going to bring this up. The last thing Ballard should want is anyone comparing the VP-whatever to TIMP modules from Government Motors! Run away. Run away fast :eek: (from GM TIPM, not VP-X if that's your thing.)
 
Another perspective on the VPX

I was going to install fuses in my 14. However, a friend was using the VPX and suggested that I look at it. I am so glad that I did. I am trying to do everything myself so I planned to design and wire the panel myself. I found that the VPX-Pro software helped me a lot. Just one example, I wired the CO monitor into the VPX-Pro without having to decide if I wanted it turned on by the Avionics Master Switch or turned on by the Aircraft Master switch. The change from one to the other requires no wireing changes, it's just a software settings change for that ECB. Another nice feature is that I can set each ECB to the exact amperage that I want and if I set it a little too tight, changing it is just a software settings change.
When I actually start flying, If something fails I will get an immediate warning of the failure. Using fuses I only know of a problem if I see the popped fuse or notice a piece of equipment not working.
Regarding an earlier post that suggests that you're not really doing all he "experimental" stuff you could be if you use a new device like the VPX. I think that there is a learning curve associated with all these new technologies and I'm more interested in learning the new stuff rather than the old stuff.
I also found that the software that goes with the VPX-Pro was very helpful in designing the aircraft wireing.
 
Back
Top