 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ronlee(at)pcisys.net
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:21 am Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
 |
|
Bill, perhaps I misread your post. If I had to have only one of the two,
I would pick the EZ-Pilot (wing leveler/follow GPS course). Besides
following a course perfectly, it adds the safety of a wing leveler IF I ever
enter clouds, a 180 degree option if you enter clouds plus other functions.
I can maintain altitude semi-well without an altitude hold and not flying it
but an altitude hold with the EZ-Pilot (two axis control) would be ideal.
Ron Lee
[quote] ---
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
sportav8r(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:52 am Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
|
|
Ron - from a safety standpoint, it is as you say, but for convenience, I find that hand flying a GPS course line on cross country to be a piece of cake compared to maintinaing a VFR cruise altitude when fumbling with cockpit chores in my RV. Hence I would sooner give up the a/p function than the convenience of altitude hold. Both work well and I'm very glad I have them. I have not yet upgraded them over the most basic functionality.
On Dec 10, 2007 2:13 PM, Ron Lee <ronlee(at)pcisys.net (ronlee(at)pcisys.net)> wrote:
[quote] Bill, perhaps I misread your post. If I had to have only one of the two,
I would pick the EZ-Pilot (wing leveler/follow GPS course). Besides
following a course perfectly, it adds the safety of a wing leveler IF I ever
enter clouds, a 180 degree option if you enter clouds plus other functions.
I can maintain altitude semi-well without an altitude hold and not flying it
but an altitude hold with the EZ-Pilot (two axis control) would be ideal.
Ron Lee
[quote] ---
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
n212pj(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 4:13 pm Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
|
|
This thread is interesting to me. I'd not considered the Trio. TT seemed to be the leader and well liked. Now I see that many seem satisfied with the Trio. Why is it if their units are so good (and the pricing seems okay) and their support very good, that they are not being supported by GRT? Why is it they are not commanding the popular numbers of TT? Do they lack product depth? Is their need for a separate knob and bezel for the altitude hold unit a drawback? Is it lack of GPSS steering? Maybe they are just as popular as TT? What's the deal?
John Jessen
do not archive
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Boyd
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2007 11:35 AM
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold
Ron - from a safety standpoint, it is as you say, but for convenience, I find that hand flying a GPS course line on cross country to be a piece of cake compared to maintinaing a VFR cruise altitude when fumbling with cockpit chores in my RV. Hence I would sooner give up the a/p function than the convenience of altitude hold. Both work well and I'm very glad I have them. I have not yet upgraded them over the most basic functionality.
On Dec 10, 2007 2:13 PM, Ron Lee <ronlee(at)pcisys.net (ronlee(at)pcisys.net)> wrote:
[quote] Bill, perhaps I misread your post. If I had to have only one of the two,
I would pick the EZ-Pilot (wing leveler/follow GPS course). Besides
following a course perfectly, it adds the safety of a wing leveler IF I ever
enter clouds, a 180 degree option if you enter clouds plus other functions.
I can maintain altitude semi-well without an altitude hold and not flying it
but an altitude hold with the EZ-Pilot (two axis control) would be ideal.
Ron Lee
| Quote: | ----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Boyd (sportav8r(at)gmail.com)
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com (rv-list(at)matronics.com)
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2007 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: Trio Customer Service
Absolutely. I'd give up my EZ pilot before I gave up my altitude hold, for comfortable x/c flying. Trio is first-rate. If/when they interface with the GRT EFIS systems for full functionality (tru-trak is the favorite with GRT for now) I'll be totally content (and perhaps finish my panel upgrade to all-glass.)
-Stormy
On Dec 10, 2007 11:52 AM, Ron Lee <ronlee(at)pcisys.net (ronlee(at)pcisys.net)> wrote:
| Quote: | I agree that they are very good. My EZ-Pilot allowed me to fly eight hours
in one day recently with minimal fatigue other than a sore derrierre.
Now I need to get the altitude hold to make long cross-countries even easier.
Ron Lee
| Quote: | ----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Besing (pbesing(at)yahoo.com)
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com (rv-list(at)matronics.com)
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2007 8:41 AM
Subject: Trio Customer Service
Hey all..quick note. Have an EZ Pilot in my RV-4. Put it in about a year +. It quit holding a course and would engage and disengage the servo. I called trio, they said, "another one is on the way". 2 Days later I had a new one. They said to ship the other back when I had the chance. I installed it, it was programmed already for my aircraft, and it worked perfectly. Absolutely wonderful customer service. Don't forget those guys when you are building your panel.
Paul Besing
RV-4 N73DD
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
|
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
|
|
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sbuc(at)hiwaay.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:15 pm Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
|
|
I don't have answers to all the questions raised in this post but I'll
take a stab at some of them.
John Jessen wrote:
| Quote: | This thread is interesting to me. I'd not considered the Trio. TT seemed
to be the leader and well liked.
|
I suspect TruTrak is the market leader in volume of units in the field
because they have been in the experimental autopilot market longer than
anyone except Navaid. They make good products and their market share is
deserved.
I know the individuals at Trio and their high level of business ethics
prevented them from releasing their EZ-Pilot until it was ready for
prime time. It was tough for the Trio guys to sit on their baby during
development as TT gained market share, but they were determined to
release no units before their time.
Now I see that many seem satisfied with
| Quote: | the Trio. Why is it if their units are so good (and the pricing seems okay)
and their support very good, that they are not being supported by GRT?
|
I don't have personal background in this particular instance since I
don't use GRT equipment. I can tell you that "supporting" a particular
autopilot is not necessarily a simple endeavor. It is particularly
difficult for the Trio guys because they designed their unit to be
compatible with only data that strictly follows standard NMEA protocol.
The software designer at Trio has a ballistic missile guidance
background and he is *very picky*  about having his unit only track
pristine data. There have been vendors (not GRT) that have not been able
to support the EZ-Pilot because their hardware didn't send standard NMEA
AnywhereMap's PDA-based system being a prime example).
I suspect the reason GRT has supported TT is due more to marketing and
personal reasons than hardware issues. Maybe they wanted to piggyback
the company with the largest market share.
Why
| Quote: | is it they are not commanding the popular numbers of TT?
|
Less time in the market, fewer ad $$$$$$'s spent, a much smaller product
line, which no doubt has resulted in less market inertia.
Do they lack
Guess that depends on your point of view and what you want your
autopilot system to do.
Is their need for a separate knob and bezel for the altitude
| Quote: | hold unit a drawback?
|
I don't think so. Trio's interface allows the system to offer a huge
feature set with only a "separate knob and bezel".
| Quote: | Is it lack of GPSS steering?
|
That is a perceived difference but there is much more to the GPSS
steering issue than meets the uneducated eye. I won't delve into that,
just to say that for most of us "GPSS" is vastly overrated, and is not
unique in an operational sense to TT.
Maybe they are just as
Yes, with their customers they are avidly endorsed.
What's the deal?
Don't know what else I can add beyond what has already been presented in
this thread. It is great to have two wonderful vendors of fantastic
equipment. Do your homework and chose what is best for your mission profile.
Sam Buchanan
http://thervjournal.com
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
speed3guy(at)comcast.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:09 pm Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
|
|
I’m not flying yet, so you can take my comments for what they are worth. The feature set and price were consideration, but servo design was the primary selling factor for the Trio. I design aerospace hardware for a living and know that things can and do go wrong. In my opinion, the Trio Servo is the most failsafe servo out there. When the system is powered down (by a real mechanical switch in the control head), the servo is physically disengaged from the control arm. This means that when the system is powered down you’re not moving the servo every time you move the stick (maintain control feel). Since the gears between the servo and control arm are held together by an electric solenoid, if you cut power to the system, it disengages. Period. On top of that, there’s an adjustable slip clutch instead of a shear pin between the linkage and the servo. This means that if you have to overpower the system, you don’t damage the servo.
To summarize, despite the popularity and obvious quality of TT I decided Trio had more features for less money. The redundant safety systems in the servo cause me to write the check.
Kind Regards,
Guy
This thread is interesting to me. I'd not considered the Trio. TT seemed to be the leader and well liked. Now I see that many seem satisfied with the Trio. Why is it if their units are so good (and the pricing seems okay) and their support very good, that they are not being supported by GRT? Why is it they are not commanding the popular numbers of TT? Do they lack product depth? Is their need for a separate knob and bezel for the altitude hold unit a drawback? Is it lack of GPSS steering? Maybe they are just as popular as TT? What's the deal?
John Jessen
[quote] [b]
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doug Gray
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 112
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 3:51 am Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
|
|
On Mon, 2007-12-10 at 19:11 -0600, Sam Buchanan wrote:
| Quote: | autopilot is not necessarily a simple endeavor. It is particularly
difficult for the Trio guys because they designed their unit to be
compatible with only data that strictly follows standard NMEA
protocol.
The software designer at Trio has a ballistic missile guidance
background and he is *very picky* about having his unit only
track
p
|
Sam and others,
| Quote: | From what I have seen the NMEA sentences are not properly defined in the
first instance and are interpreted differently by just about every
|
manufacturer.
Because of these differences most software that reads NMEA sentences (or
any other nav data for that matter) must be validated with each sending
device one by one.
The differences are not just the sentence structure (when does a null
value mean zero, is an integer 0 the same as a float zero 0.0) where
well tested bullet proof software is necessary to be able to parse all
manner of data variants. Some of these differences can be very subtle.
Though not NMEA related I have personally seen a navy frigate nav system
fail because it received a heading of 360.0 degrees rather than 0.0
degrees. There are well documented incidents of nav failures when
aircraft have crossed the International Date line.
Did you know some GPSs will send data for more than 12 satellites -
ambiguous in NMEA and in the manufacturers spec but only discovered when
the constellation grew. You don't want your system to crash when
satellite #13 shows up in the messages.
There are also significant dynamic differences between GPSs.
Each GPS chip-set manufacturer implements it's own proprietary (and
secret) algorithms. This will include the type and nature of the
filtering and these factors will significantly alter the interaction
between a GPS and say an autopilot.
For example it is reasonably clear how the cross track error responds
along a straight course segment, but what about near to or transiting
through a way point. How does the smoothing algorithm alter this
behaviour.
Also another factor - what about a reduced satellite signal strength
(sunspots/antenna preamp problems/out of band interference) impact on
position error and resulting tracking performance.
Garmin is pretty lean with specifications on their products performance
and are no better than any other chip-set maker at specifying how the
dynamics work. This makes it pretty difficult for an auto pilot or alt
hold manufacturer to make GPS coupling work well with any NMEA source.
Even then each will require considerable testing.
IF GRT and TRIO are as reputable as people are reporting I am not
surprised that we do not see immediate support. Perhaps it will come
when they have the interfaces properly specified between themselves.
'nuf said, rant over.
Doug Gray
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ronlee(at)pcisys.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:38 am Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
|
|
I know the individuals at Trio and their high level of business ethics
| Quote: | prevented them from releasing their EZ-Pilot until it was ready for prime
time. It was tough for the Trio guys to sit on their baby during
development as TT gained market share, but they were determined to release
no units before their time.
|
Note the issues with one electronic ignition system. At least one forced
landing resulted from what may have been software/hardware issues.
| Quote: |
> Is it lack of GPSS steering?
That is a perceived difference but there is much more to the GPSS steering
issue than meets the uneducated eye. I won't delve into that, just to say
that for most of us "GPSS" is vastly overrated, and is not unique in an
operational sense to TT.
|
Since I don't understand GPSS I just read this link:
http://www.avionicswest.com/articles/GPSS.htm
I still have no idea why I want or need it. My Trio EZ-Pilot tracks
courses,
intercepts courses, maintains a heading if GPS is lost and will follow GPS
approaches (probably VOR and ILS as well...I just don't remember).
You have options and I am not going to bash TruTrak. I suspect that it
is a fine system.
Ron Lee
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sbuc(at)hiwaay.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 11:14 am Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
|
|
Ron Lee wrote:
| Quote: | >> Is it lack of GPSS steering?
>
> That is a perceived difference but there is much more to the GPSS
> steering issue than meets the uneducated eye. I won't delve into that,
> just to say that for most of us "GPSS" is vastly overrated, and is not
> unique in an operational sense to TT.
Since I don't understand GPSS I just read this link:
http://www.avionicswest.com/articles/GPSS.htm
I still have no idea why I want or need it. My Trio EZ-Pilot tracks
courses,
intercepts courses, maintains a heading if GPS is lost and will follow GPS
approaches (probably VOR and ILS as well...I just don't remember).
|
Ron, I think what builders considering an autopilot need to keep in mind
in regards to "GPSS" is that the current digital systems work so well
that GPSS is for all practical purposes a moot point. It seems to me
that the effort TruTrak has taken to promote GPSS is primarily to
differentiate their system from the legacy systems (Century, S-Tec,
etc). As you mentioned, our Trio EZ-Pilots track so accurately that we
have no need for "GPSS". GPSS sounds pretty cool if all you have flown
are the old analog autopilots, but for us fortunate enough to enjoy the
digital toys in our experimental aircraft, our systems far outperform
the old stuff.
I still marvel at how a sub-$2000 autopilot can hold my plane within a
wingspan of the course line with an inexpensive handheld GPS providing
the data! How many King Airs and Citations can match that?
Sam Buchanan
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ronlee(at)pcisys.net
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob Perkinson
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 51
Location: Hendersonville, Tennessee
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:07 pm Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
|
|
I chose the Trio because of the way it worked in a friend’s airplane. It was simple and easy to operate. That is what I like simple. The servo looks good, that’s just it, it just looks good, and the slip clutch is easy to calibrate, if it needs any calibration at all. I have not flow yet but when I do the Trio should be intuitive to operate.
At Sun n Fun they took the time to explain all how the system works, they worked hard to get it down to a level that I could understand, that’s what I like simple, for a simple minded guy like me, they got it down right. They ant paid me nothing for this either.
Bob Perkinson
Do Not Archive
[quote]-------------- Original message from John Jessen <n212pj(at)gmail.com>: --------------
This thread is interesting to me. I'd not considered the Trio. TT seemed to be the leader and well liked. Now I see that many seem satisfied with the Trio. Why is it if their units are so good (and the pricing seems okay) and their support very good, that they are not being supported by GRT? Why is it they are not commanding the popular numbers of TT? Do they lack product depth? Is their need for a separate knob and bezel for the altitude hold unit a drawback? Is it lack of GPSS steering? Maybe they are just as popular as TT? What's the deal?
John Jessen
do not archive
From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Boyd
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2007 11:35 AM
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold
Ron - from a safety standpoint, it is as you say, but for convenience, I find that hand flying a GPS course line on cross country to be a piece of cake compared to maintinaing a VFR cruise altitude when fumbling with cockpit chores in my RV. Hence I would sooner give up the a/p function than the convenience of altitude hold. Both work well and I'm very glad I have them. I have not yet upgraded them over the most basic functionality.
On Dec 10, 2007 2:13 PM, Ron Lee <ronlee(at)pcisys.net (ronlee(at)pcisys.net)> wrote:
[quote] Bill, perhaps I misread your post. If I had to have only one of the two,
I would pick the EZ-Pilot (wing leveler/follow GPS course). Besides
following a course perfectly, it adds the safety of a wing leveler IF I ever
enter clouds, a 180 degree option if you enter clouds plus other functions.
I can maintain altitude semi-well without an altitude hold and not flying it
but an altitude hold with the EZ-Pilot (two axis control) would be ideal.
Ron Lee
[quote] ---
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob Perkinson
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 51
Location: Hendersonville, Tennessee
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2007 9:47 pm Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
|
|
| Quote: |
Sam,
You know that the accuracy of the GPS coupled to the autopilot is probably what caused the Brazilian GOL 737, and the Embraer Legacy 600 Collision in October 06 both were at 37,000 feet and on opposing courses between Brasilia and Manause, both probably used the airport coordinates in a common data base. There are probably not more than 75 airplanes in the air in northern Brasil at one time. Sometimes being accurate down to the micron is not good, and being able to fly an offset course is good. The Trio will do that easily all day long. Just a thought. Trying to justify being a sloppy pilot }:> )
Bob Perkinson
I still marvel at how a sub-$2000 autopilot can hold my plane within a
wingspan of the course line with an inexpensive handheld GPS providing
the data! How many King Airs and Citations can match that?
Sam Buchanan
|
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marty_away(at)hotmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 5:13 am Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
|
|
Doesn't TRIOs have a offset feature that allows the pilot to chose by 1/10th of a mile how far right of center line (up to 2 miles) the autopilot will track?
Last year, I heard at an FAA safety conference about a program call SLOP; stategic lateral offset procedure.... basically you either fly on center line, 1 mile right or 2 miles right....
Helps avoid this type of airborne Russian roulette....
Marty Heller
RV-7 (fitting interior systems)
| Quote: | From: bobperk90658(at)bellsouth.net
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 05:46:08 +0000
| Quote: |
Sam,
You know that the accuracy of the GPS coupled to the autopilot is probably what caused the Brazilian GOL 737, and the Embraer Legacy 600 Collision in October 06 both were at 37,000 feet and on opposing courses between Brasilia and Manause, both probably used the airport coordinates in a common data base. There are probably not more than 75 airplanes in the air in northern Brasil at one time. Sometimes being accurate down to the micron is not good, and being able to fly an offset course is good. The Trio will do that easily all day long. Just a thought. Trying to justify being a sloppy pilot }:> )
Bob Perkinson
I still marvel at how a sub-$2000 autopilot can hold my plane within a
wingspan of the course line with an inexpensive handheld GPS providing
the data! How many King Airs and Citations can match that?
Sam Buchanan
blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
t=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List
p://forums.matronics.com
|
|
i’m is proud to present Cause Effect, a series about real people making a difference. Learn more [quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kahuna
Joined: 02 Feb 2007
Posts: 93
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:33 am Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
|
|
Yes. In fact the writter said exactly that below.
"Sometimes being accurate down to the micron is not good, and being able to fly an offset course is good. The Trio will do that easily all day long."
We even use the Trios offset to fly in route formation from A to B. Works like a champ. Bout half of us are running the Trio. The other half wish they were when the Trio is buzzing us along in formation hands free.
Mike
do not archive
[img]cid:1__=08BBF923DFDCD7FF8f9e8a93df938(at)us.ibm.com[/img]Marty Helller <marty_away(at)hotmail.com>
[img]cid:3__=08BBF923DFDCD7FF8f9e8a93df938(at)us.ibm.com[/img]
To
[img]cid:3__=08BBF923DFDCD7FF8f9e8a93df938(at)us.ibm.com[/img]
<rv-list(at)matronics.com> [img]cid:3__=08BBF923DFDCD7FF8f9e8a93df938(at)us.ibm.com[/img]
cc
[img]cid:3__=08BBF923DFDCD7FF8f9e8a93df938(at)us.ibm.com[/img]
[img]cid:3__=08BBF923DFDCD7FF8f9e8a93df938(at)us.ibm.com[/img]
Subject
[img]cid:3__=08BBF923DFDCD7FF8f9e8a93df938(at)us.ibm.com[/img]
RE: RV-List: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold [img]cid:3__=08BBF923DFDCD7FF8f9e8a93df938(at)us.ibm.com[/img][img]cid:3__=08BBF923DFDCD7FF8f9e8a93df938(at)us.ibm.com[/img]
Doesn't TRIOs have a offset feature that allows the pilot to chose by 1/10th of a mile how far right of center line (up to 2 miles) the autopilot will track?
Last year, I heard at an FAA safety conference about a program call SLOP; stategic lateral offset procedure.... basically you either fly on center line, 1 mile right or 2 miles right....
Helps avoid this type of airborne Russian roulette....
Marty Heller
RV-7 (fitting interior systems)
From: bobperk90658(at)bellsouth.net
To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: RV-List: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 05:46:08 +0000
Sam,
You know that the accuracy of the GPS coupled to the autopilot is probably what caused the Brazilian GOL 737, and the Embraer Legacy 600 Collision in October 06 both were at 37,000 feet and on opposing courses between Brasilia and Manause, both probably used the airport coordinates in a common data base. There are probably not more than 75 airplanes in the air in northern Brasil at one time. Sometimes being accurate down to the micron is not good, and being able to fly an offset course is good. The Trio will do that easily all day long. Just a thought. Trying to justify being a sloppy pilot }:> )
Bob Perkinson
I still marvel at how a sub-$2000 autopilot can hold my plane within a
wingspan of the course line with an inexpensive handheld GPS providing
the data! How many King Airs and Citations can match that?
Sam Buchanan
blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
t=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List
p://forums.matronics.com
i’m is proud to present Cause Effect, a series about real people making a difference. [url=htew]Learn more[/url]
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
105 Bytes |
| Viewed: |
7031 Time(s) |
|
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
1.23 KB |
| Viewed: |
7027 Time(s) |
|
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
45 Bytes |
| Viewed: |
7020 Time(s) |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sbuc(at)hiwaay.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:33 am Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
|
|
bobperk90658(at)bellsouth.net wrote:
| Quote: |
Sam, You know that the accuracy of the GPS coupled to the autopilot
is probably what caused the Brazilian GOL 737, and the Embraer Legacy
600 Collision in October 06 both were at 37,000 feet and on opposing
courses between Brasilia and Manause, both probably used the airport
coordinates in a common data base. There are probably not more than
75 airplanes in the air in northern Brasil at one time. Sometimes
being accurate down to the micron is not good, and being able to fly
an offset course is good. The Trio will do that easily all day long.
Just a thought. Trying to justify being a sloppy pilot }:>)
|
You're right Bob, the guys at Trio recognize that "accurate" sometimes
may not be the most comfortable way to navigate. The offset feature does
work very nicely even though I hardly ever use it since I'm usually
flying "direct" VFR. I have used the offset feature a few times when I
saw my direct route was going to take me over a power plant.
Another neat feature is the one-button automatic 180 turn. Fortunately I
have *never* found the need to use it.
Sam Buchanan
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ronlee(at)pcisys.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:36 am Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
|
|
At the altitudes I fly there is very little traffic. I use flight following
and I have been alerted to jets far more than GA aircraft.
Ron Lee
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shempdowling(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 9:05 am Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
|
|
Ditto.
Alt hold is WAY more helpful than course follower. Plus, if you're
flying ifr, you're allowed 5 miles off course but only 300 feet off
altitude.
However, having both these days is a no brainer.
do not archive
shemp
Bill Boyd wrote:
[quote] Ron - from a safety standpoint, it is as you say, but for convenience,
I find that hand flying a GPS course line on cross country to be a
piece of cake compared to maintinaing a VFR cruise altitude when
fumbling with cockpit chores in my RV. Hence I would sooner give up
the a/p function than the convenience of altitude hold. Both work
well and I'm very glad I have them. I have not yet upgraded them over
the most basic functionality.
On Dec 10, 2007 2:13 PM, Ron Lee <ronlee(at)pcisys.net
<mailto:ronlee(at)pcisys.net>> wrote:
Bill, perhaps I misread your post. If I had to have only one of
the two,
I would pick the EZ-Pilot (wing leveler/follow GPS course). Besides
following a course perfectly, it adds the safety of a wing leveler
IF I ever
enter clouds, a 180 degree option if you enter clouds plus other
functions.
I can maintain altitude semi-well without an altitude hold and not
flying it
but an altitude hold with the EZ-Pilot (two axis control) would be
ideal.
Ron Lee
---
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dale1rv6(at)comcast.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 9:37 am Post subject: Trio EZ-Pilot or Altitude Hold |
|
|
What kind of elevator trim do you have? If electric; does it have a setting
to allow fine tuning? Mine does. I can adjust the trim to hold altitude
within 100 feet reasonably. I would be disappointed if I was a builder,
could not afford both and bought alt hold instead of a Trio (or TruTrak)
that tracked. I have both and hundreds of hours of cross country before and
after installing each. Just wanted to present another opinion, supported by
a lot of flying. BTW, I also believe if you are doing frequent trips over
800 miles you deserve both.
Dale
RV6a TT 960hrs
--
| | - The Matronics RV-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
