VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Avionics / Interiors / Fiberglass > Glass Cockpit
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41  
Old 07-11-2016, 10:51 AM
Brantel's Avatar
Brantel Brantel is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Newport, TN
Posts: 7,496
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walt View Post
I think if we had a triple ADAHRS system that actually "voted" we would have a more fault tolerant system, but right now to the best of my knowledge, I don't thinks that's available for us. The pilot has to sort out which system(s) are or are not working.
There may be a technical limitation on why the G5 is not included in the miscompare monitoring. Trying to compare a panel mounted ADAHRS with a rigidly mounted strap down ADAHRS may prove problematic.
__________________
Brantel (Brian Chesteen),
Check out my RV-10 builder's BLOG
RV-10, #41942, N?????, Project Sold
---------------------------------------------------------------------
RV-7/TU, #72823, N159SB
Lyc. O-360 carbed, HARTZELL BA CS Prop, Dual P-MAGs, Dual Garmin G3X Touch
Track N159SB (KK4LIF)
Like EAA Chapter 1494 on Facebook
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 07-11-2016, 12:59 PM
Walt's Avatar
Walt Walt is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dallas/Ft Worth, TX
Posts: 5,686
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brantel View Post
There may be a technical limitation on why the G5 is not included in the miscompare monitoring. Trying to compare a panel mounted ADAHRS with a rigidly mounted strap down ADAHRS may prove problematic.
Yes but even if we had 3 GSU25's installed which the G3X will support, to my understanding (G3X team please correct me if I'm wrong), we still wouldn't have a system capable of figuring out which ADAHRS doesn't match the other two and lock that bad unit out, it's still up to the pilot to do the comparison and decide which ADAHRS is not performing correctly and then manually select the right one. A 'miscomp" message only tells you that you that they don't match and you need to look at it and figure it out yourself.
__________________
Walt Aronow, DFW, TX (52F)

EXP Aircraft Services LLC
Specializing in RV Condition Inspections, Maintenance, Avionics Upgrades
Dynamic Prop Balancing, Pitot-Static Altmeter/Transponder Certification
FAA Certified Repair Station, AP/IA/FCC GROL, EAA Technical Counselor
Authorized Garmin G3X Dealer/Installer
RV7A built 2004, 1700+ hrs, New Titan IO-370, Bendix Mags
Website: ExpAircraft.com, Email: walt@expaircraft.com, Cell: 972-746-5154
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 07-11-2016, 01:02 PM
Brantel's Avatar
Brantel Brantel is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Newport, TN
Posts: 7,496
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walt View Post
Yes but even if we had 3 GSU25's installed which the G3X will support, to my understanding (G3X team please correct me if I'm wrong), we still wouldn't have a system capable of figuring out which ADAHRS doesn't match the other two and lock that bad unit out, it's still up to the pilot to do the comparison and decide which ADAHRS is not performing correctly and then manually select the right one. A 'miscomp" message only tells you that you that they don't match and you need to look at it and figure it out yourself.
You are correct, I may have misunderstood. It is up to the pilot to decide which to trust...
__________________
Brantel (Brian Chesteen),
Check out my RV-10 builder's BLOG
RV-10, #41942, N?????, Project Sold
---------------------------------------------------------------------
RV-7/TU, #72823, N159SB
Lyc. O-360 carbed, HARTZELL BA CS Prop, Dual P-MAGs, Dual Garmin G3X Touch
Track N159SB (KK4LIF)
Like EAA Chapter 1494 on Facebook
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 07-11-2016, 01:36 PM
vic syracuse vic syracuse is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Locust Grove, GA
Posts: 2,626
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brantel View Post
You are correct, I may have misunderstood. It is up to the pilot to decide which to trust...
Yep. It was the same with steam gauges. Sometimes a failure of the pitot/static system could take a while to sort out. With glass it is certainly getting a little more complicated, and it's only as good as the code, which is constantly improving.

That's why I like a separate autopilot. Gives me time "look at my watch" and sort things out. Granted the odds are low, as someone mentioned earlier, but if you fly long enough you learn that it's all about stacking the odds in your favor as much as possible.

Vic
__________________
Vic Syracuse

Built RV-4, RV-6, 2-RV-10's, RV-7A, RV-8, Prescott Pusher, Kitfox Model II, Kitfox Speedster, Kitfox 7 Super Sport, Just Superstol, DAR, A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor/Flight Advisor, CFII-ASMEL/ASES
Kitplanes "Unairworthy" monthly feature
EAA Sport Aviation "Checkpoints" column
EAA Homebuilt Council Chair/member EAA BOD
Author "Pre-Buy Guide for Amateur-Built Aircraft"
www.Baselegaviation.com
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 07-11-2016, 06:12 PM
sibriggs sibriggs is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Concord, NH
Posts: 215
Default Auto-Pilot

I read in one of the notes about not flying in actual IFR without an AP. Here's a different thought.

Hand flying is like your car driving. Once you've got enough miles under your belt you sub conscious mind takes over the tasks involved and you can continue to control the vehicle/plane while sharing your attention with other issues.

Remember when as a new teenage driver you almost ran off the road changing the station on the radio. Now I bet you can drive down the road while reading something. (not smart but I bet you can do it).

Well, hand flying in actual weather for enough hours will get you the same ability to control the aircraft under all conditions while handling different distractions. I think the number of hours is probably somewhere greater than 100 actual IFR without autopilot.

I couldn't afford an autopilot in an Apache I owned. I flew over 300 hrs in actual conditions with all the missed approaches, holding patterns and distractions involved, some of it using only needle ball and airspeed. It got a lot easier as I passed the 100hr point.

While it's reassuring to have redundant backup technology, it's more reassuring to know you can fly the aircraft in any situation.

Just some food for thought.

Steve
__________________
Steve Briggs. RV9, G3x, G5, VPX, GTN625, PMags, A&P, IA, ATP-CFII
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 07-11-2016, 08:41 PM
Icarus Icarus is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: D.C.
Posts: 303
Default

I'll keep this short to avoid unnecessary thread drift.

I agree with a piece of your assessment. Mainly that large amounts of time in actual plus recency breeds proficiency. I also don't buy into the "IMC without an AP is suicide" mentality.

That said...comparing it to driving doesn't pass the sniff test. Hand flying in true IMC conditions for durations of time is physiologically demanding on a level most pilots may never understand. Maybe you are just exceptional, and I'll applaud you for it and admit I'm jealous.

All that said...when your having a bad day...or disorientation kicks in without warning...you can't step on the brakes and pull off the side of the Victor airway to take a break.



Quote:
Originally Posted by sibriggs View Post
I read in one of the notes about not flying in actual IFR without an AP. Here's a different thought.

Hand flying is like your car driving. Once you've got enough miles under your belt you sub conscious mind takes over the tasks involved and you can continue to control the vehicle/plane while sharing your attention with other issues.

Remember when as a new teenage driver you almost ran off the road changing the station on the radio. Now I bet you can drive down the road while reading something. (not smart but I bet you can do it).

Well, hand flying in actual weather for enough hours will get you the same ability to control the aircraft under all conditions while handling different distractions. I think the number of hours is probably somewhere greater than 100 actual IFR without autopilot.

I couldn't afford an autopilot in an Apache I owned. I flew over 300 hrs in actual conditions with all the missed approaches, holding patterns and distractions involved, some of it using only needle ball and airspeed. It got a lot easier as I passed the 100hr point.

While it's reassuring to have redundant backup technology, it's more reassuring to know you can fly the aircraft in any situation.

Just some food for thought.

Steve
__________________
Paul M.
Fayetteville, NC
Airport Bum
RV-4 / PA28-180
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 07-12-2016, 05:22 AM
vic syracuse vic syracuse is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Locust Grove, GA
Posts: 2,626
Default

I don't think flying without an autopilot is suicide, as many of us hand flew in IMC for many years before autopilots started to get affordable for the lower end GA market, and especially the Amateur-built world. Without starting a war, I would point out that the amateur-built aircraft we fly now do not have near the stability of the the certified aircraft. Of course, that's what makes them so much fun to fly!
While a C-182 or others might have some very positive stability that carries over to IMC flying, the RV's do not. You really do have to stay on top of them, and for a long length of time it can be very tiring without an autopilot. Couple that with trying to load an approach or a complicated clearance in bumpy conditions and things can go south in quite a hurry.

Again, an autopilot is not required, but it sure is an enabler for a less stressful flight. And unless you are really proficient in IMC I would recommend you only tackle going up or down through thin layers if possible until you gain experience and proficiency in the type of aircraft you are flying.

The neat thing about RV's is that they are very capable cross-country airplanes, so every once in a while you may need the skills and equipment to go up or down through a layer. That's the way we primarily use the capabilities in the 10. After all, we really like flying so we can sight see. If we absolutely have to get there on a schedule we use the Airlines (although that is not always reliable at times).

Vic
__________________
Vic Syracuse

Built RV-4, RV-6, 2-RV-10's, RV-7A, RV-8, Prescott Pusher, Kitfox Model II, Kitfox Speedster, Kitfox 7 Super Sport, Just Superstol, DAR, A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor/Flight Advisor, CFII-ASMEL/ASES
Kitplanes "Unairworthy" monthly feature
EAA Sport Aviation "Checkpoints" column
EAA Homebuilt Council Chair/member EAA BOD
Author "Pre-Buy Guide for Amateur-Built Aircraft"
www.Baselegaviation.com
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 07-12-2016, 07:15 AM
David-aviator David-aviator is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Chesterfield, Missouri
Posts: 4,514
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vic syracuse View Post
I don't think flying without an autopilot is suicide, as many of us hand flew in IMC for many years before autopilots started to get affordable for the lower end GA market, and especially the Amateur-built world. Without starting a war, I would point out that the amateur-built aircraft we fly now do not have near the stability of the the certified aircraft. Of course, that's what makes them so much fun to fly!
While a C-182 or others might have some very positive stability that carries over to IMC flying, the RV's do not. You really do have to stay on top of them, and for a long length of time it can be very tiring without an autopilot. Couple that with trying to load an approach or a complicated clearance in bumpy conditions and things can go south in quite a hurry.

Again, an autopilot is not required, but it sure is an enabler for a less stressful flight. And unless you are really proficient in IMC I would recommend you only tackle going up or down through thin layers if possible until you gain experience and proficiency in the type of aircraft you are flying.

The neat thing about RV's is that they are very capable cross-country airplanes, so every once in a while you may need the skills and equipment to go up or down through a layer. That's the way we primarily use the capabilities in the 10. After all, we really like flying so we can sight see. If we absolutely have to get there on a schedule we use the Airlines (although that is not always reliable at times).

Vic
Well said Vic.

I flew part 141 single engine charters without auto pilot before it was mandated for such flights..it can be a hand full as anyone who has done it knows.

At this point in my life, I like the auto pilot flying VFR. I am not IFR equipped but I do have tracking and altitude hold, it is very nice.
__________________
RV-12 Build Helper
RV-7A...Sold #70374
The RV-8...Sold #83261
I'm in, dues paid 2019 This place is worth it!
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 07-12-2016, 04:46 PM
BrentCameron BrentCameron is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Hawkestone, Ontario
Posts: 4
Default

You can get proficient without an autopilot flying hard IFR in a high performance airplane but it takes a lot of time and attention. A few of those in a day and you'd swear you'd been on a chain gang instead. I've flown hundreds of hard IFR hours single pilot in twin Cessna's without A/P's and it's certainly doable but I've also flown dozens of NDB approaches in mountains to minimums and I'd much rather sit behind synthetic glass and have a good autopilot do the hard work so I could sit back and monitor the situation. There are no end of stories of guys getting distracted by bad information and flying it into the ground. Having an autopilot doesn't stop that but it does give you one more chance to catch it before it kills you. This day and age, they are so cheap, it doesn't make sense to fly IFR without one. My passengers are worth more to me than the few thousand bucks it costs to put one into an experimental.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 07-12-2016, 08:43 PM
sibriggs sibriggs is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Concord, NH
Posts: 215
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrentCameron View Post
You can get proficient without an autopilot flying hard IFR in a high performance airplane but it takes a lot of time and attention. A few of those in a day and you'd swear you'd been on a chain gang instead. I've flown hundreds of hard IFR hours single pilot in twin Cessna's without A/P's and it's certainly doable but I've also flown dozens of NDB approaches in mountains to minimums and I'd much rather sit behind synthetic glass and have a good autopilot do the hard work so I could sit back and monitor the situation. There are no end of stories of guys getting distracted by bad information and flying it into the ground. Having an autopilot doesn't stop that but it does give you one more chance to catch it before it kills you. This day and age, they are so cheap, it doesn't make sense to fly IFR without one. My passengers are worth more to me than the few thousand bucks it costs to put one into an experimental.
Yes, I agree completely. Even though I never used an autopilot in a plane I owned, I'm looking forward to turning on the AP in the G3X package I'm putting in my RV9. With the quality of the technology now avaialbe it's really a no brainer if one plans to fly IFR today.

Steve (who's anxoius to get current in an Rv9)
__________________
Steve Briggs. RV9, G3x, G5, VPX, GTN625, PMags, A&P, IA, ATP-CFII
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:23 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.