What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Pix of the new GRT Horizon Hxr Installation

Brantel said:
Jay, do you have an instrument rating?
Click to expand...

Nope.

My instrument training went really well, back in 2002. I was close to being signed off for the flight test when we bought our first hotel.

That was the end of regularly scheduled "free time" as I knew it. :D

For two decades we've flown coast to coast, Canada to Mexico, all VFR. The instrument training certainly made me a more precise pilot, and it's nice to know that I probably wouldn't die if I inadvertently flew into IMC -- but finishing up that rating will have to wait until I retire, I'm afraid. Now that we live in a climate where icing and convective activity are relatively rare, the IR would occasionally be nice to have.
 
60av8tor said:
Perhaps it is irrelevant for your situation - just do another direct to, then - but it is not irrelevant to many. Say I want to deviate around a cell, but keep my original course and join it again (around a SUA perhaps). If it always updated from your current position, your new course line would always be changing and potentially now travel through an area you wish not to fly.

Sorry if none of this is coherent - perfectly understandable in my head:D:D
Click to expand...

No, it makes perfect sense. However... :D

It seems that with all the modern technology, making it necessary to press "Direct to" again is an unnecessary complication. The GPS already knows your destination, and could continually update the course line to the target.

Just as an automotive GPS continually updates (or "recalculates") the proper course to your destination.

Am I crazy? Doesn't that make more sense than flying you back to a (now irrelevant) original course line?
 
jjhoneck said:
As for your explanation of the behavior of the autopilot (flying back to the magenta line), I understand what it's doing -- but I did NOT tell my GPS to fly to "a course". I told it to fly to a DESTINATION.

What is the utility of making you push "Direct to" again, when it already knows the destination? There doesn't seem to be any utility in the GPS ordering the autopilot to fly back to a (now irrelevant) course line.

I'm sure there's a logic here, since you guys are telling me that this behavior is the norm for all GPS/autopilot combos. I'm just not getting why anyone would want it to behave this way?
Click to expand...

Good question.. First off, you put in a destination and said let's go. Almost the same as saying go direct, but since you programmed the "route" and you were at the starting point it seemed to you like you were going direct. Now, at a later time and at some point you have the plane off the "flight planned course", i.e. the magenta line and think I'll just go back Direct to the destination, so you hit NAV or ENAV or GNAV, whatever mode you engaged and the Autopilot turns back toward the magenta line, because it doesn't know anything except the magenta line. If you had hit Direct To on your GPS it would have redrawn the Magenta line from your current position. Then you you have to engage a NAV function on the AP. Two separate functions. Once you've done BOTH of those the AP will take you direct to where you want to go. Clear as mud huh..

As for, what is the utility of making you push Directo To again, All it knows is you initial route. So if you don't go Direct To again, it will always try to go back to the "now irrelevant" course line. It will be very relevant if ATC tells you to reintercept the airway, etc. Very different from going Direct.
 
jjhoneck said:
No, it makes perfect sense. However... :D

It seems that with all the modern technology, making it necessary to press "Direct to" again is an unnecessary complication. The GPS already knows your destination, and could continually update the course line to the target.

Just as an automotive GPS continually updates (or "recalculates") the proper course to your destination.

Am I crazy? Doesn't that make more sense than flying you back to a (now irrelevant) original course line?
Click to expand...

Your GPS is doing the same thing as the car GPS - just using your course line as the road. When you hit nav, it 'recalculates' to the road - your course line. If it continually updated, you'd be homing to the point instead of flying a wind correction to maintain a direct course.
 
Direct to

As others replied, 'direct to' - whether in the efis or an external gps - will keep you on a track to the destination from the place you were when you activated it. It will not continually update if you drift off, and heres why: if it were programed to continually update it would act just like an ADF in a crosswind if you kept the needle on the nose; you would slowly fly a spiral track, until you approached from downwind. It needs a fixed track to figure wind correction.

As I and everyone has said, complex avionics are complex! I know that some people feel the need to take classes (for $) for a Garmin 430, or the G1000 panel, and Garmin's manuals are excellent. It's just a lot of stuff to learn.

Here's something that worries me: two years from now, if my efis quits, I will remember to change the source selection switch from efis to gps. But will I remember how to operate the autopilot (either TT or Trio) from its front panel, having not touched it in two years?
 
Last edited:
60av8tor said:
Your GPS is doing the same thing as the car GPS - just using your course line as the road. When you hit nav, it 'recalculates' to the road - your course line. If it continually updated, you'd be homing to the point instead of flying a wind correction to maintain a direct course.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's NOT acting like an automotive GPS -- which was part of my confusion.

Look at it this way: When you program your automotive GPS, do you want it to continually try to route you back to your original course after making a wrong turn? Or would you rather it continually recalculate the proper course to your destination?

Automotive GPS makers have decided that continuous recalculating makes more sense. I would prefer it if my aviation GPS worked the same way. YMMV.
 
BobTurner said:
As others replied, 'direct to' - whether in the efis or an external gps - will keep you on a track to the destination from the place you were when you activated it. It will not continually update if you drift off, and heres why: if it were programed to continually update it would act just like an ADF in a crosswind if you kept the needle on the nose; you would slowly fly a spiral track, until you approached from downwind. It needs a fixed track to figure wind correction.
Click to expand...

Ah-HA! At last, someone has explained the logic behind the behavior of an aviation GPS!

Thanks for making that clear, Bob. THAT makes sense.
 
jjhoneck said:
Actually, it's NOT acting like an automotive GPS -- which was part of my confusion.

Look at it this way: When you program your automotive GPS, do you want it to continually try to route you back to your original course after making a wrong turn? Or would you rather it continually recalculate the proper course to your destination?

Automotive GPS makers have decided that continuous recalculating makes more sense. I would prefer it if my aviation GPS worked the same way. YMMV.
Click to expand...

If I am not mistaking, GPSS steering does this but unlike cars, I want my course of flying be dictate by me (the pilot) and not the GPS. So, if I want to deviate from the course and then make that my new path to my original destination, then I will push the direct-to button one more time and I am all set. Otherwise, I rather go back to my original course which may have been selected for some other reason (ground clearance, restricted airspace, etc.)
 
jjhoneck said:
Actually, it's NOT acting like an automotive GPS -- which was part of my confusion.

Look at it this way: When you program your automotive GPS, do you want it to continually try to route you back to your original course after making a wrong turn? Or would you rather it continually recalculate the proper course to your destination?

Automotive GPS makers have decided that continuous recalculating makes more sense. I would prefer it if my aviation GPS worked the same way. YMMV.
Click to expand...

The last sentence of my post that you quoted..;)

"If it continually updated, you'd be homing to the point instead of flying a wind correction to maintain a direct course."
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the good advice, guys. The learning curve on this amazing EFIS has been fairly steep, but it sure is an amazing instrument to fly behind.

I think back to when I got my ticket, and compare it to now, and it's like going from the horse and buggy days to the space shuttle!
:D
 
Manuals

Jay & Walt,

When I started at GRT a year and a half ago, our manuals were years behind and written in a language that Mike Starkey likes to call "Techno-Geek." Our tech support lines rang constantly. The HXr didn't even have its own manuals. I've worked my tail off over the past year and a half to produce the HXr Installation Manual; Equipment Supplements for ADS-B receivers, remote avionics, Garmin units, etc. with installation, setup and user information for each thing; the HXr Pilot's Guide, still in split chapter format but slowly becoming one cohesive book. I recently turned a 3-page autopilot handout into a 34-page step-by-step illustrated guide on installation of servos, flight testing and troubleshooting the GRT autopilot. I think writing manuals is the most enjoyable part of my job and I wish I had more time to devote to it. I have a background as a writer and flight instructor with several hundred hours flying GRT equipment, and nothing pleases me more than to help our customers learn and overcome challenges.

If you or anyone else has a question or can't find what you need, please ask me. If something is unclear or confusing, I would like to clarify it. I am always willing to help you find what you need, and if it doesn't exist, we will create it and post it for the benefit of everyone. In fact, most of our new material is created in response to customer tech questions. I prioritize my projects according to our customers' needs. In the past year, our tech support call volume has dropped off dramatically-- I take this as my main compliment. ;)

As for the website, it is a work in progress, shaped by complaints and compliments alike, and an improved version is actually almost finished. My goal is to post it before SNF. It has a dedicated HXr documentation page, customer gallery, and improved flow of product & support information.

Jay, I suggest reading each of the HXr user manual chapters page by page. It won't take long, and you will learn everything you need to know to fly it. It's not as boring if you sit in the plane with the trickle charger on and push buttons as you do it. Load the manuals onto your Nexus tablet and you'll be all set. As for a computer simulator, yes that would be cool but if we took the time and resources to create and maintain one, we would quickly fall behind in what we really need to do, which is keep creating great avionics.
 
KatieB said:
I have a background as a writer and flight instructor with several hundred hours flying GRT equipment
Click to expand...

That explains a lot concerning the huge improvement in the documentation that I have noticed.

Wish you lived on the left coast-----I would have to sign up for a couple hours of flight training on the EFIS's :D
 
KatieB said:
Jay & Walt,

When I started at GRT a year and a half ago, our manuals were years behind and written in a language that Mike Starkey likes to call "Techno-Geek." Our tech support lines rang constantly. The HXr didn't even have its own manuals. I've worked my tail off over the past year and a half to produce the HXr Installation Manual; Equipment Supplements for ADS-B receivers, remote avionics, Garmin units, etc. with installation, setup and user information for each thing; the HXr Pilot's Guide, still in split chapter format but slowly becoming one cohesive book. I recently turned a 3-page autopilot handout into a 34-page step-by-step illustrated guide on installation of servos, flight testing and troubleshooting the GRT autopilot. I think writing manuals is the most enjoyable part of my job and I wish I had more time to devote to it. I have a background as a writer and flight instructor with several hundred hours flying GRT equipment, and nothing pleases me more than to help our customers learn and overcome challenges.

If you or anyone else has a question or can't find what you need, please ask me. If something is unclear or confusing, I would like to clarify it. I am always willing to help you find what you need, and if it doesn't exist, we will create it and post it for the benefit of everyone. In fact, most of our new material is created in response to customer tech questions. I prioritize my projects according to our customers' needs. In the past year, our tech support call volume has dropped off dramatically-- I take this as my main compliment. ;)

As for the website, it is a work in progress, shaped by complaints and compliments alike, and an improved version is actually almost finished. My goal is to post it before SNF. It has a dedicated HXr documentation page, customer gallery, and improved flow of product & support information.

Jay, I suggest reading each of the HXr user manual chapters page by page. It won't take long, and you will learn everything you need to know to fly it. It's not as boring if you sit in the plane with the trickle charger on and push buttons as you do it. Load the manuals onto your Nexus tablet and you'll be all set. As for a computer simulator, yes that would be cool but if we took the time and resources to create and maintain one, we would quickly fall behind in what we really need to do, which is keep creating great avionics.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Katie! I've read everything on the "manuals" link. The Horizon Hxr is amazing, and I am loving flying with it.

If there was one thing I would ask, it would be that you add another "Ben" to the tech support line. I was unable to get ahold of anyone most of the times I tried to call. It usually took me two or three attempts, over several days, before I could get through, which was especially bad when the guy helping with the installation had to fly home to Minnesota, and the plane we were working on was in Texas! :D

Otherwise, once I got through, Ben was a delight to work with, and the unit has been nothing short of spectacular! Thanks again!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top