I placed an order for a 4 probe EGT system from Aircraft Spruce at Oshkosh Monday. The latest in a series of corrections for wrong decisions in the build process of my RV-6A. The single probe is not adequate when you are trying to maximize performance.
Previous wrong decisions - original rationale - reason the decision was wrong:
No autopilot - didn't use the one I had in the Archer for 22 years including hard IFR and daily commutes to work - the RV is just too fast and quick for comfortable IFR operations without it
No CHT - never had one before - essential for efforts to reduce cooling drag
One cheap VOR/LOC/GS and no DME/ADF/(Approach approved) GPS - this was the minimum I felt I could get by with to fly IFR - many approaches (most) require systems I don't have and the reliability of what I have is marginal (plus the companies do not exist anymore), making for some very stressful experiences [Haven't fixed this one yet but I'm looking at the Garmin GNS480 very hard.]
Individual instruments for all of the operational parameters I want to monitor - if I have an electrical failure or instrument failure I will still have most of my performance information available - this was actually a good decision operationally but the panel area required conflicts with the IFR Nav equipment space requirement [I have not dealt with this either but something is going to have to give to address the need for IFR Nav hardware space.]
Bob Axsom
Previous wrong decisions - original rationale - reason the decision was wrong:
No autopilot - didn't use the one I had in the Archer for 22 years including hard IFR and daily commutes to work - the RV is just too fast and quick for comfortable IFR operations without it
No CHT - never had one before - essential for efforts to reduce cooling drag
One cheap VOR/LOC/GS and no DME/ADF/(Approach approved) GPS - this was the minimum I felt I could get by with to fly IFR - many approaches (most) require systems I don't have and the reliability of what I have is marginal (plus the companies do not exist anymore), making for some very stressful experiences [Haven't fixed this one yet but I'm looking at the Garmin GNS480 very hard.]
Individual instruments for all of the operational parameters I want to monitor - if I have an electrical failure or instrument failure I will still have most of my performance information available - this was actually a good decision operationally but the panel area required conflicts with the IFR Nav equipment space requirement [I have not dealt with this either but something is going to have to give to address the need for IFR Nav hardware space.]
Bob Axsom
Last edited:
