[Brantel]

Those that have and or are planning a Skyview system using the Dynon AP and expect to want to use the yet to be released advanced vertical coupling features might want to check out this thread:

http://dynonavionics.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1343843147/0#3

Seems Dynon is planning for the advanced version of their Skyview AP to require an external interface box something similar to the AP74 but for the Skyview.

If you already have a finished panel, you know what that means...if you are still building your panel, you might want to make provisions for it.

 

[Airzen]

Wow...

This is a definite a game changer for me .... Didnt expect this at all.

 

[Don Jones]

I figured everyone knew about it? I heard about it several months ago. I put the post out there on the Dynon forum to get them thinking about a horizontal panel since I have several good places for it. Yea, I wasn't thinking about having to cut into my nicely painted panel and I am not sure the vertical nav functions are worth it at this point. I would have probably gone a different route, if I hadn't already prewired everything for the Skyview system. Time will tell

 

[blahphish]

I certainly hope the panel mount item is optional. Maybe if enough folks expressed their interest in a software only vertical nav option Dynon will try to make that happen.

 

[Gash]

I, for one, am rather upset about this. My panel was recently finished 2 weeks ago after much planning, careful cutting, a beautiful powder coat paint job, and now my 2 Skyviews are installed and ready. If Dynon thinks I am going to cut a new hole in my panel just to get VNAV they are quite mistaken. Sure, coupled VNAV would be a nice to have feature, but not if I have to cram another box on the panel. No way. Frankly, if Dynon does not provide a software / Skyview panel-only option, I think many customers will consider this to be a case of very poor planning and marketing.

Dynon, what say you?

 

[bkthomps]

i don't care, i can build a plane i can change a panel, i think a dedicated AP interface is vital for anything that is going to descend me to 200ft AGL

I applaud this news

 

[RV8R999]

my post in the Dynon Forum:

Personally I'd prefer to have the advanced AP integrated into the display so I do not have cut into the panel however, I do see some advantages in having a dedicated control head and will be happy either way.

Some advanced features require more knob twisting and button pushing than others. With a MAP screen displayed one knob is already dedicated to map range scaling leaving only 1 other knob to handle: heading (or track/crs), altitude, baro, all the bugs, etc... Minimizing the number of knob/button sequences is important to workload management. Even now, to change heading (or any other parameter) requires the knob to be pushed left or right to bring up a knob menu, the knob twisted to highlight HDG as the selected parameter to change, then pushed again left or right to get rid of the menu, then twisted to the new hdg. This equates to 4 tasks required to change HDG. A dedicated panel can reduce this to the 1 task of twisting the new hdg = workload reduction.

features such as ALT-P (altitude hold preview) for example would be so much easier with a dedicated knob. Ditto for hdg/crs/trk changes as well. I have no idea if an ALT-P function will be available but I hope so as it allows the AP to maintain ALT hold at the current altitude while setting the next altitude "arming ALT-P" in the que. When ALT-P is engaged the plane climbs or descends to this altitude then switches to ALT hold mode. I'd envision a knob for twisting the desired preview altitude with an integral push-button to activate it. This is a great feature for instrument approaches allowing the pilot to stay ahead of the plane more easily.

Every model aircraft our company develops has glass cockpits and everyone of those has a dedicated AP control head....

 

[Brantel]

What I think is somewhat humorous is that for years AFS and GRT and lately Garmin have been touted as being somehow superior to Dynon when used in IMC conditions. None of them have a dedicated panel for controlling the AP.....While they do have a separate AP control head, 98-99% of the pilot interaction happens thru the EFIS.

I think if Dynon tries hard enough they can come up with a solution that fits both preferences....

 

[Gash]

Exactly!

 

[bkthomps]

What I think is somewhat humorous is that for years AFS and GRT and lately Garmin have been touted as being somehow superior to Dynon when used in IMC conditions. None of them have a dedicated panel for controlling the AP.....While they do have a separate AP control head, 98-99% of the pilot interaction happens thru the EFIS.

I think if Dynon tries hard enough they can come up with a solution that fits both preferences....

if AFS and TruTrak partner, they have the best of both worlds in that they offer the dedicated interface, or the integrated soft-button based one

Dynon would need to stay competitive with this

 

[Dynon]

So while it?s true that our plan of record has involved a required control panel to enable the ?advanced? autopilot features (like vertical nav and other IFR-centric features), our thinking is evolving. We definitely think that a control panel with dedicated buttons is a superior way to interface to the advanced autopilot features, and there absolutely will be one and we think our customers will love it ? especially IFR pilots. But don?t worry, we also will have the advanced capabilities available through the SkyView display menu system. There may be some limitations to the SkyView display interface because of the inherent design (we?re still working through the user interface, frankly), but the advanced autopilot won?t be crippled without the control panel.

We will have the full story about the autopilot and control panels as we get a little closer, but I hope this clears things up.

 

[RV8R999]

What I think is somewhat humorous is that for years AFS and GRT and lately Garmin have been touted as being somehow superior to Dynon when used in IMC conditions. None of them have a dedicated panel for controlling the AP.....While they do have a separate AP control head, 98-99% of the pilot interaction happens thru the EFIS.

I think if Dynon tries hard enough they can come up with a solution that fits both preferences....

so if you have to cut a hole in the panel for the 2% functionality Garmin leaves to the dedicated control head anyway, Dynon might as well pack it full of features...either way the work is the same.

 

[Brantel]

so if you have to cut a hole in the panel for the 2% functionality Garmin leaves to the dedicated control head anyway, Dynon might as well pack it full of features...either way the work is the same.

Your missing the point...but it does not matter since Dynon has said above that they will not leave those that cannot or will not cut another hole in their panel hanging.

I don't care one way or the other. What I care about is people getting caught unaware and that was the purpose of this thread....To bring awareness to the direction Dynon is going.

[ed. Brian, you lock your own thread down? Just checking (I didn't do it). br,dr]