Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

GNS-430W?

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

jesse(at)saintaviation.co
Guest

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 5:05 am Post subject: GNS-430W?

Has anybody flown the 430W or 530W yet?  If so, have you flown it with an autopilot that has Vertical Steering?  If so, please enlighten the group as to your thoughts on it.  

   

Jesse Saint  

Saint Aviation, Inc.  

jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)  

www.saintaviation.com  

Cell: 352-427-0285  

Fax: 815-377-3694  

   

       [quote][b]

Vern(at)teclabsinc.com
Guest

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 7:50 am Post subject: GNS-430W?

Hi Jesse,  

   

I think Rob Kermanj has a 530W. He had a positing around 5/2/07 with the subject line of: G530W, Trutrak and GRT. I saved it in my files so if you can’t find it let me know and I will repost the body of it.  

   

Also, maybe Rob will give us an expanded report on his system.  

   

Vern Smith (#324)    

         

  

From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jesse Saint

 Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 6:03 AM

 To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: GNS-430W?  

  

   

Has anybody flown the 430W or 530W yet?  If so, have you flown it with an autopilot that has Vertical Steering?  If so, please enlighten the group as to your thoughts on it.  

   

Jesse Saint  

Saint Aviation, Inc.  

jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)  

www.saintaviation.com  

Cell: 352-427-0285  

Fax: 815-377-3694  

    	  Quote: 	
		    http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4

      [quote][b]

sfdarton(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 8:06 am Post subject: GNS-430W?

I have been flying a Caravan with a 530W 430W and

KFC225 autopilot for a couple of months now. Both the

lateral and vertical guidance is more stable than the

ILS it overlays. At KSLC the LNAV/VNAV approaches that

I fly overlay the ILS, so I set up the ILS on the

number 2 nav. On these approaches there is no

difference in the course or glideslope and the

autopilot tracks either RNAV or ILS equally well.

Steve 40212

--- Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   Has anybody flown the 430W or 530W yet?  If so, have

 you flown it with an

 autopilot that has Vertical Steering?  If so, please

 enlighten the group as

 to your thoughts on it.

 

  

 

 Jesse Saint

 

 Saint Aviation, Inc.

 

 jesse(at)saintaviation.com

 

 www.saintaviation.com

 

 Cell: 352-427-0285

 

 Fax: 815-377-3694

flysrv10(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 8:53 am Post subject: GNS-430W?

Jesse,

I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago.  It should be in the archive.  If you need additional information you may contact me at 772-460-3907.  I will be flying the 10 to NM on Friday but will return you call when I get back.



Vern,  The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches are very stable.  The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS approaches.  I also like the simplicity of this approach; no localizer frequency to set up.  It seems like a small thing, but in real IFR conditions, I think the name of the game is to do as little work as possible and as little cross checking/verifying as possible.



If I were to do this again,  I would have seriously considered getting the Trutrak Soccer.  With my set-up, you have to switch the autopilot to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed approaches, DME arcs and Procedure Turns.  Again, not a very big deal but it is one more thing to remember during the critical part of the flight.



Rob.

On May 22, 2007, at 11:46 AM, Vern W. Smith wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  

Hi Jesse,

 

I think Rob Kermanj has a 530W. He had a positing around 5/2/07 with the subject line of: G530W, Trutrak and GRT. I saved it in my files so if you can’t find it let me know and I will repost the body of it.

 

Also, maybe Rob will give us an expanded report on his system.

 

Vern Smith (#324)  

 



From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com)] On Behalf Of Jesse SaintSent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 6:03 AMTo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)Subject: GNS-430W?



 

Has anybody flown the 430W or 530W yet?  If so, have you flown it with an autopilot that has Vertical Steering?  If so, please enlighten the group as to your thoughts on it.

 

Jesse Saint

Saint Aviation, Inc.

jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)

www.saintaviation.com

Cell: 352-427-0285

Fax: 815-377-3694

  	  Quote: 	
		    http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List  	
0 	  Quote: 	
		    	
1 	  Quote: 	
		    	
2 	  Quote: 	
		    	
3 	  Quote: 	
		    	
4

 	  Quote: 	
		    	
5

jesse(at)saintaviation.co
Guest

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 9:11 am Post subject: GNS-430W?

Will it fly the vertical portion on standard (non-precision) GPS approaches?

Does anybody know the percentage of ILS approaches that have a LNAV/VNAV

approach to match?



Thanks.



Jesse Saint

Saint Aviation, Inc.

jesse(at)saintaviation.com

www.saintaviation.com

Cell: 352-427-0285

Fax: 815-377-3694

--

flysrv10(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 9:29 am Post subject: GNS-430W?

I am not sure it it will do the "step down".  I will have to try it  

and let you know.  It will fly the vertical on the LPV approaches.   

You need to have the 29e software from GRT.



I don't know of the percentage.



do not archive.



On May 22, 2007, at 1:10 PM, Jesse Saint wrote:



[quote] 

 <jesse(at)saintaviation.com>



 Will it fly the vertical portion on standard (non-precision) GPS  

 approaches?

 Does anybody know the percentage of ILS approaches that have a LNAV/ 

 VNAV

 approach to match?



 Thanks.



 Jesse Saint

 Saint Aviation, Inc.

 jesse(at)saintaviation.com

 www.saintaviation.com

 Cell: 352-427-0285

 Fax: 815-377-3694

 --

Vern(at)teclabsinc.com
Guest

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 10:35 am Post subject: GNS-430W?

Rob,  

If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a Trutrak Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldn’t run it through GRT EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR workload. I’m all for reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is true, this would allow the use of any EFIS or even analog gauges and still have the ability to do LPV approaches. Cool.   

   

This is very helpful as I’m trying to hold off on buying an EFIS- lots of interesting changes in the market place. But, I’m to the point if I don’t start running wires I’ll have to duct tape them to the outside;)  

Thanks,  

   

Vern (#324 fuselage)   

Do not archive        

  

From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Kermanj

 Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AM

 To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: GNS-430W?  

  

   

Jesse,    

   

    

I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago.  It should be in the archive.  If you need additional information you may contact me at 772-460-3907.  I will be flying the 10 to NM on Friday but will return you call when I get back.  

    

   

    

Vern,  The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches are very stable.  The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS approaches.  I also like the simplicity of this approach; no localizer frequency to set up.  It seems like a small thing, but in real IFR conditions, I think the name of the game is to do as little work as possible and as little cross checking/verifying as possible.  

    

   

    

If I were to do this again,  I would have seriously considered getting the Trutrak Soccer.  With my set-up, you have to switch the autopilot to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed approaches, DME arcs and Procedure Turns.  Again, not a very big deal but it is one more thing to remember during the critical part of the flight.  

    

   

    

Rob.  

    

   

    

   

  

      [quote][b]

flysrv10(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 11:14 am Post subject: GNS-430W?

You are correct.  I would let the auto pilot be auto pilot and have one source drive the plane.  I would also recommend that you talk to John at Trutrak.  As I found out, the WASS is all new and not much is published.  Make sure that you ask him specific question about the Soccer and see if you need a NAV indicator to take full advantage of it's capabilities.

do not archive



On May 22, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Vern W. Smith wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  

Rob,

If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a Trutrak Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldn’t run it through GRT EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR workload. I’m all for reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is true, this would allow the use of any EFIS or even analog gauges and still have the ability to do LPV approaches. Cool.

 

This is very helpful as I’m trying to hold off on buying an EFIS- lots of interesting changes in the market place. But, I’m to the point if I don’t start running wires I’ll have to duct tape them to the outside;)

Thanks,

 

Vern (#324 fuselage)

Do not archive



From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com)] On Behalf Of Rob KermanjSent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AMTo: rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)Subject: Re: GNS-430W?



 

Jesse,

 



I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago.  It should be in the archive.  If you need additional information you may contact me at 772-460-3907.  I will be flying the 10 to NM on Friday but will return you call when I get back.



 



Vern,  The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches are very stable.  The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS approaches.  I also like the simplicity of this approach; no localizer frequency to set up.  It seems like a small thing, but in real IFR conditions, I think the name of the game is to do as little work as possible and as little cross checking/verifying as possible.



 



If I were to do this again,  I would have seriously considered getting the Trutrak Soccer.  With my set-up, you have to switch the autopilot to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed approaches, DME arcs and Procedure Turns.  Again, not a very big deal but it is one more thing to remember during the critical part of the flight.



 



Rob.



 



 



 	  Quote: 	
		           - The RV10-List Email Forum - class="Apple-converted-space"> --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List              - NEW MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -  class="Apple-converted-space">   --> http://forums.matronics.com

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2872

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 11:55 am Post subject: GNS-430W?

One additional thing about the 530W.  It's a fantastic radio, but

Rob would also probably tell you that it was his way into a good

IFR machine...and when you combine a sorcerer and a 530W, you're

putting in over $20,000 into those 2 items to get the functionality

that you'd want.  If you were to take some of that money and spend it

on one of the higher end EFIS systems (OP, G900, Chelton) you would

be enhancing your overall system by actually not just having a

radio and a Nav/Com that work well together, but an EFIS that has

that integration level.  Thrown in a GMX-200 and you really start

having to wonder if you wouldn't just be better off moving up to

a higher end system as your cornerstone of your panel.  Rob started

off with a GRT, which led him to later add the 530W.  I think he's

now got something he's happy with, but the question is, what would

he do if he were doing it over again?  Since he's got a flying RV-10,

with a working system and did it two ways, he's got some good input

I'm sure.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Rob Kermanj wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   You are correct.  I would let the auto pilot be auto pilot and have one 

 source drive the plane.  I would also recommend that you talk to John at 

 Trutrak.  As I found out, the WASS is all new and not much is 

 published.  Make sure that you ask him specific question about the 

 Soccer and see if you need a NAV indicator to take full advantage of 

 it's capabilities.

 

 do not archive

 

 On May 22, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Vern W. Smith wrote:

 

> Rob,

>

> If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a 

> Trutrak Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldn’t run it 

> through GRT EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR workload. 

> I’m all for reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is true, this would 

> allow the use of any EFIS or even analog gauges and still have the 

> ability to do LPV approaches. Cool.

>

>  

>

> This is very helpful as I’m trying to hold off on buying an EFIS- lots 

> of interesting changes in the market place. But, I’m to the point if I 

> don’t start running wires I’ll have to duct tape them to the outside;)

>

> Thanks,

>

>  

>

> Vern (#324 fuselage)

>

> Do not archive

>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com 

> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rob Kermanj

> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AM

> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list(at)matronics.com>

> *Subject:* Re: GNS-430W?

>

>  

>

> Jesse,

>

>  

>

> I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago.  It should be 

> in the archive.  If you need additional information you may contact me 

> at 772-460-3907.  I will be flying the 10 to NM on Friday but will 

> return you call when I get back.

>

>  

>

> Vern,  The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches are 

> very stable.  The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS approaches.  

> I also like the simplicity of this approach; no localizer frequency to 

> set up.  It seems like a small thing, but in real IFR conditions, I 

> think the name of the game is to do as little work as possible and as 

> little cross checking/verifying as possible.

>

>  

>

> If I were to do this again,  I would have seriously considered getting 

> the Trutrak Soccer.  With my set-up, you have to switch the autopilot 

> to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed approaches, DME arcs and 

> Procedure Turns.  Again, not a very big deal but it is one more thing 

> to remember during the critical part of the flight.

>

>  

>

> Rob.

>

>  

>

>  

>

> *         - The RV10-List Email Forum - class="Apple-converted-space"> --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List              - NEW MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -  class="Apple-converted-space">   --> http://forums.matronics.com*

> *

> *

 *

 *

 

 **

 

 

 **

flysrv10(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 12:44 pm Post subject: GNS-430W?

You are right Tim.  I kinda got myself cornered into the setup I  

have.  I have not commented on any other set up since I do not have a  

first hand knowledge about anything else.



 From what I have read and heard, I would have bought the Chelton and  

a compatible autopilot instead.  Especially,  when the prices were  

more affordable.  GRT is a great bang for the buck but it has it's  

limitations.  I must admit that GRT qualifies the fact that it is not  

an IFR EFIS.  On the other hand, GRT functions so well with SL30 that  

I wondered if they were just trying to limit their liability (with  

such declaration) and went ahead and bought them.



I also admit that I am not 100% happy with my setup for the reasons I  

have mentioned previously.  But the alternative is so much more  

expensive now that it is no longer an option for me.



do not archive





On May 22, 2007, at 3:54 PM, Tim Olson wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   



 One additional thing about the 530W.  It's a fantastic radio, but

 Rob would also probably tell you that it was his way into a good

 IFR machine...and when you combine a sorcerer and a 530W, you're

 putting in over $20,000 into those 2 items to get the functionality

 that you'd want.  If you were to take some of that money and spend it

 on one of the higher end EFIS systems (OP, G900, Chelton) you would

 be enhancing your overall system by actually not just having a

 radio and a Nav/Com that work well together, but an EFIS that has

 that integration level.  Thrown in a GMX-200 and you really start

 having to wonder if you wouldn't just be better off moving up to

 a higher end system as your cornerstone of your panel.  Rob started

 off with a GRT, which led him to later add the 530W.  I think he's

 now got something he's happy with, but the question is, what would

 he do if he were doing it over again?  Since he's got a flying RV-10,

 with a working system and did it two ways, he's got some good input

 I'm sure.



 Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

 do not archive

 Rob Kermanj wrote:

> You are correct.  I would let the auto pilot be auto pilot and  

> have one source drive the plane.  I would also recommend that you  

> talk to John at Trutrak.  As I found out, the WASS is all new and  

> not much is published.  Make sure that you ask him specific  

> question about the Soccer and see if you need a NAV indicator to  

> take full advantage of it's capabilities.

> do not archive

> On May 22, 2007, at 2:33 PM, Vern W. Smith wrote:

>> Rob,

>>

>> If I understand your last paragraph, the idea system would be a  

>> Trutrak Soccer tied directly to the 530W. So you wouldn’t run it  

>> through GRT EFIS? And by doing this it will simplify the IFR  

>> workload. I’m all for reducing pilot workload. Also, if this is  

>> true, this would allow the use of any EFIS or even analog gauges  

>> and still have the ability to do LPV approaches. Cool.

>>

>>

>> This is very helpful as I’m trying to hold off on buying an EFIS-  

>> lots of interesting changes in the market place. But, I’m to the  

>> point if I don’t start running wires I’ll have to duct tape them  

>> to the outside;)

>>

>> Thanks,

>>

>>

>> Vern (#324 fuselage)

>>

>> Do not archive

>>

>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- 

>> ----

>>

>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10- 

>> list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rob Kermanj

>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 22, 2007 9:53 AM

>> *To:* rv10-list(at)matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list(at)matronics.com>

>> *Subject:* Re: GNS-430W?

>>

>>

>> Jesse,

>>

>>

>> I wrote a little about my set up a couple of weeks ago.  It  

>> should be in the archive.  If you need additional information you  

>> may contact me at 772-460-3907.  I will be flying the 10 to NM on  

>> Friday but will return you call when I get back.

>>

>>

>> Vern,  The only thing that I can expand on is that LPV approaches  

>> are very stable.  The needles do not wobble at all unlike ILS  

>> approaches.  I also like the simplicity of this approach; no  

>> localizer frequency to set up.  It seems like a small thing, but  

>> in real IFR conditions, I think the name of the game is to do as  

>> little work as possible and as little cross checking/verifying as  

>> possible.

>>

>>

>> If I were to do this again,  I would have seriously considered  

>> getting the Trutrak Soccer.  With my set-up, you have to switch  

>> the autopilot to the 530W to do LPVs, track the missed  

>> approaches, DME arcs and Procedure Turns.  Again, not a very big  

>> deal but it is one more thing to remember during the critical  

>> part of the flight.

>>

>>

>> Rob.

>>

>>

>>

>> *         - The RV10-List Email Forum - class="Apple-converted- 

>> space"> --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10- 

>> List              - NEW MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -  class="Apple- 

>> converted-space">   --> http://forums.matronics.com*

>> *

>> *

> *

> *

> **

> **

jjessen

Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 285
Location: OR

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 12:51 pm Post subject: GNS-430W?

But, that's the basic question, is it not.  



What's frustrating to a non-IFR pilot is anticipating what you want, knowing

that you'll be flying IFR one of these days.  Many of us do not have enough

knowledge to determine what combination of things gets you the best

functionality at the best price.  Most of these combinations are just as

good or better than the best IFR panel 5-10 years ago.  Some integrated

systems, perhaps Op and Chelton, are much better.  Why they are much better

is the issue.  I don't even know the very difficult approach issues that

would require high workloads with some systems versus almost no workload

with another.  I'm not sure if having a Sorcerer is necessary compared to

one model down, when coupled with whatever EFIS and whatever nav/com/gps

box.  There's a lot of money at stake here, with tons of useless capacity

sitting in the panel as a potential consequence of uniformed decision

making.  



Enough ranting.  I don't expect anyone to create a grid of all possible

combinations so we can pick and choose, and this is obviously where the

"self education" comes in.  It's just a little frustrating not knowing what

you need to know in order to know.  And, besides, this stuff is changing too

fast to really know what you need to know when you finally need to know it.

So, I'll shut up.  As Randy says, stop wasting time and just go build.  



John (finally back and going to the hanger tonight) Jessen 

  #40328



do not archive

--

speckter(at)comcast.net
Guest

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 1:41 pm Post subject: GNS-430W?

With the price of Dynon and others at under $3000, make that your only VFR

instrument and finish the aircraft.  When and if you want to go IFR you can

then build the panel you need and not have anything to scrap as you can use

the Dynon as the backup system.



Gary

40274



--

flysrv10(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 2:15 pm Post subject: GNS-430W?

John, you are absolutely right and I agree with everything you said.   

I must say that we all have different threashold for pain and what  

might be an unnecessary work load to someone could be an improvement  

for others.  I think that you are also right by saying "self  

education".  In my opinion all education will cost you something and  

in this case, it is the cost of the panel.  You will learn from your  

purchase and most likely, you will not be 100% happy with it once you  

discover it's limitations.



I have one suggestion though. Talk to someone with experience and  

explain what you are trying to do with your plane.  In my opinion,  

most avionics shops are not qualified to advise you on your needs  

especially today, with so many new things.  I also believe that the  

reason we have so many "new" options is partly due to the  

introduction of   immature products to the market and subsequent  

improvements/additions to the product.  I would hesitate to buy  

anything that has just come out.



You should find someone that flies GA planes regularly.  Consider the  

advice you get very seriously and expect again, that you ultimate  

panel may be different than what you end up with.



Also, once you commit, be happy and no longer look for the latest.



Enough of being on the Soap Box!



Do not archive

On May 22, 2007, at 4:48 PM, John Jessen wrote:



[quote] 



 But, that's the basic question, is it not.



 What's frustrating to a non-IFR pilot is anticipating what you  

 want, knowing

 that you'll be flying IFR one of these days.  Many of us do not  

 have enough

 knowledge to determine what combination of things gets you the best

 functionality at the best price.  Most of these combinations are  

 just as

 good or better than the best IFR panel 5-10 years ago.  Some  

 integrated

 systems, perhaps Op and Chelton, are much better.  Why they are  

 much better

 is the issue.  I don't even know the very difficult approach issues  

 that

 would require high workloads with some systems versus almost no  

 workload

 with another.  I'm not sure if having a Sorcerer is necessary  

 compared to

 one model down, when coupled with whatever EFIS and whatever nav/ 

 com/gps

 box.  There's a lot of money at stake here, with tons of useless  

 capacity

 sitting in the panel as a potential consequence of uniformed decision

 making.



 Enough ranting.  I don't expect anyone to create a grid of all  

 possible

 combinations so we can pick and choose, and this is obviously where  

 the

 "self education" comes in.  It's just a little frustrating not  

 knowing what

 you need to know in order to know.  And, besides, this stuff is  

 changing too

 fast to really know what you need to know when you finally need to  

 know it.

 So, I'll shut up.  As Randy says, stop wasting time and just go build.



 John (finally back and going to the hanger tonight) Jessen

   #40328



 do not archive

 --

CJohnston(at)popsound.com
Guest

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 2:16 pm Post subject: GNS-430W?

Just to chime in here - 



When I started my build I was a non-IFR pilot, and during the build, it

became apparent to me that there were decisions that needed to be made

that required a working knowledge of what IFR ops are all about.  I

decided to bite the bullet and add another 13-14 thousand on to my

airplane budget and get my IFR ticket so I could see what the hub-bub

was about, and maybe make some better decisions about equipment, layout,

and other stuff.  It definitely helped.  I'm building a much different

plane than I started out building, and much of that is due to the better

understanding of aviation in general, and IFR ops in the specific.  Some

places, I'm spending WAAAY too much money for a seemingly small issue

(I'll come clean on that someday), and some places I've discovered I can

cut the extras out, gain some simplicity, and save some money.  Getting

the IFR ticket doesn't really give you all the answers to your panel

questions, but it does help teach you how you need to be thinking when

it comes to IFR flight, and that helps with the decision making process.

I'm sure that Tim O. could tell you that I'm still full of questions,

and I agonize over everything.



Getting the instrument rating did drive home this one major point to

me...

SINGLE PILOT IFR IS VERY CHALLENGEING.  I have a VERY healthy respect

for IFR ops now, and I will go a very long way to lighten my workload in

IFR situations, even just a little bit.  EVERY LITTLE BIT COUNTS.

Especially when you're a super green, low-time pilot such as myself.  



Now I'm sort of spoiled in a weird way, because I have this super sweet

Chelton unit on the bench, and I have really no desire to go out and fly

IFR in some beat up Cessna with super old, super crappy gear in it.

Funny, I'm not even flying yet and I'm spoiled 



As always, these are just things that I think.  I don't know anything.



cj

#40410

fuse/finishing

www.perfectlygoodairplane.net



--

sfdarton(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 4:09 pm Post subject: GNS-430W?

Jesse,

I can,t remember the exact numbers. At a WAAS seminar

I attended 2 months ago they said there are currently

6-800 GPS approaches with vertical guidance and 1400

ILS's. In the next two years they expect 26-2800 GPS

approaches with vertical guidance.

Steve 40212

--- Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com> wrote:



[quote] 

 <jesse(at)saintaviation.com>

 

 Will it fly the vertical portion on standard

 (non-precision) GPS approaches?

 Does anybody know the percentage of ILS approaches

 that have a LNAV/VNAV

 approach to match?

 

 Thanks.

 

 Jesse Saint

 Saint Aviation, Inc.

 jesse(at)saintaviation.com

 www.saintaviation.com

 Cell: 352-427-0285

 Fax: 815-377-3694

 --

pitts_pilot(at)bellsouth.
Guest

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 6:04 pm Post subject: GNS-430W?

My partner in the -10 flies a Gulfstream 2000 for Net Jets.  I started 'panel wishing' early on for a super-functional glass panel with 3 axis autopilot.  Then I had a conversation with another builder who asked what my 'mission' was.   I don't reaally know that answer.  I've never had a fast 4-place airplane before.  I seldom venture outside my state now, and then only in fair weather since I'm not IFR rated.  His advice was to build a simple panel with minimal electronics for VFR flight and go fly.  My panel will be easily removeable/modular so upgrading it will not be a frustrating undertaking.  That means a standard 6 pack, a nav/com and a GPS ..... and the autopilot.  Everything but the 6 pack can go into a state-of-the-art panel along with some redundant radios etc. if I get serious later on.  I liked the advice.  With all the new 'toys' coming on the experimental market, all I'm going to do is make sure that the equipment I choose now will be compatible with the new stuff.  And I'm keeping an eye on what's coming up.

 Linn

 do not archive

 

 Chris Johnston wrote:

 [quote]   [quote]--> RV10-List message posted by: "Chris Johnston" <CJohnston(at)popsound.com> (CJohnston(at)popsound.com)  Just to chime in here -   When I started my build I was a non-IFR pilot, and during the build, it became apparent to me that there were decisions that needed to be made that required a working knowledge of what IFR ops are all about.  I decided to bite the bullet and add another 13-14 thousand on to my airplane budget and get my IFR ticket so I could see what the hub-bub was about, and maybe make some better decisions about equipment, layout, and other stuff.  It definitely helped.  I'm building a much different plane than I started out building, and much of that is due to the better understanding of aviation in general, and IFR ops in the specific.  Some places, I'm spending WAAAY too much money for a seemingly small issue (I'll come clean on that someday), and some places I've discovered I can cut the extras out, gain some simplicity, and save some money.  Getting the IFR ticket doesn't really give you all the answers to your panel questions, but it does help teach you how you need to be thinking when it comes to IFR flight, and that helps with the decision making process. I'm sure that Tim O. could tell you that I'm still full of questions, and I agonize over everything.  Getting the instrument rating did drive home this one major point to me... SINGLE PILOT IFR IS VERY CHALLENGEING.  I have a VERY healthy respect for IFR ops now, and I will go a very long way to lighten my workload in IFR situations, even just a little bit.  EVERY LITTLE BIT COUNTS. Especially when you're a super green, low-time pilot such as myself.    Now I'm sort of spoiled in a weird way, because I have this super sweet Chelton unit on the bench, and I have really no desire to go out and fly IFR in some beat up Cessna with super old, super crappy gear in it. Funny, I'm not even flying yet and I'm spoiled   As always, these are just things that I think.  I don't know anything.  cj #40410 fuse/finishing www.perfectlygoodairplane.net  --

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum