Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - The Perfect Panel...how to decide

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

The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

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 1:58 pm Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

It sounds like it wouldn't be a bad idea to put together a chart with a

rating system for different options out there.  For example, if you want to

buy a printer, there is no perfect printer out there, but each one has a

rating for cost, a rating for ease of use, a rating for quality, a rating

for ease of setup, a rating for cost of consumables, etc.  If someone like

me wants a budget printer, I won't worry about ease of setup because I know

computer and can work my way through that, but initial cost and cost of

consumables is very important.  For my dad, ease of setup and use is a huge

factor that he has to consider before even looking at the other options.

For some, quality comes before everything else.  Is there an easy way to

setup a web page with a rating system and people can also put in their

personal reviews of the different products.  Would having that information

quantified in a single location help?  There are exactly 17,569,293

different instrument panel combinations for the RV-10, so having this

information might be helpful.  Also having a compatibility rating system

would help.  Man, this sounds like a project.  Anybody know of an easy way

to do this, like maybe even a shopping cart page that has a rating system

built in, so people can pick and choose and it will calculate a total panel

cost (minus general stuff like wiring, switches and breakers, antennas,

labor, etc.)?



There is TONS of information that has gone through the list over the past

2.5 years, but wading through that has got to be enormously painful.



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 2:22 pm Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

Sounds like a Tim Olson job!



do not archive.



On May 22, 2007, at 5:58 PM, Jesse Saint wrote:



[quote] 

 <jesse(at)saintaviation.com>



 It sounds like it wouldn't be a bad idea to put together a chart  

 with a

 rating system for different options out there.  For example, if you  

 want to

 buy a printer, there is no perfect printer out there, but each one  

 has a

 rating for cost, a rating for ease of use, a rating for quality, a  

 rating

 for ease of setup, a rating for cost of consumables, etc.  If  

 someone like

 me wants a budget printer, I won't worry about ease of setup  

 because I know

 computer and can work my way through that, but initial cost and  

 cost of

 consumables is very important.  For my dad, ease of setup and use  

 is a huge

 factor that he has to consider before even looking at the other  

 options.

 For some, quality comes before everything else.  Is there an easy  

 way to

 setup a web page with a rating system and people can also put in their

 personal reviews of the different products.  Would having that  

 information

 quantified in a single location help?  There are exactly 17,569,293

 different instrument panel combinations for the RV-10, so having this

 information might be helpful.  Also having a compatibility rating  

 system

 would help.  Man, this sounds like a project.  Anybody know of an  

 easy way

 to do this, like maybe even a shopping cart page that has a rating  

 system

 built in, so people can pick and choose and it will calculate a  

 total panel

 cost (minus general stuff like wiring, switches and breakers,  

 antennas,

 labor, etc.)?



 There is TONS of information that has gone through the list over  

 the past

 2.5 years, but wading through that has got to be enormously painful.



 Jesse Saint

 Saint Aviation, Inc.

 jesse(at)saintaviation.com

 www.saintaviation.com

 Cell: 352-427-0285

 Fax: 815-377-3694

 --

indigoonlatigo(at)msn.com
Guest

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 2:42 pm Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

Where are you guys finding the time to be doing stuff like this. Does 

anybody on this list eat, drink, exercise, sleep, play with the wife or 

poop?



Give us working class folk a break...do it for us!

exactly 17,569,293 options..how did you figure this out. Man I'm getting 

stressed out...I'm building with a bunch of geniuses.



Do not archive



John G. Drilling teeth, not aluminum

[quote]From: "Jesse Saint" <jesse(at)saintaviation.com>

Reply-To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

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

Subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 17:58:20 -0400






It sounds like it wouldn't be a bad idea to put together a chart with a

rating system for different options out there.  For example, if you want to

buy a printer, there is no perfect printer out there, but each one has a

rating for cost, a rating for ease of use, a rating for quality, a rating

for ease of setup, a rating for cost of consumables, etc.  If someone like

me wants a budget printer, I won't worry about ease of setup because I know

computer and can work my way through that, but initial cost and cost of

consumables is very important.  For my dad, ease of setup and use is a huge

factor that he has to consider before even looking at the other options.

For some, quality comes before everything else.  Is there an easy way to

setup a web page with a rating system and people can also put in their

personal reviews of the different products.  Would having that information

quantified in a single location help?  There are exactly 17,569,293

different instrument panel combinations for the RV-10, so having this

information might be helpful.  Also having a compatibility rating system

would help.  Man, this sounds like a project.  Anybody know of an easy way

to do this, like maybe even a shopping cart page that has a rating system

built in, so people can pick and choose and it will calculate a total panel

cost (minus general stuff like wiring, switches and breakers, antennas,

labor, etc.)?



There is TONS of information that has gone through the list over the past

2.5 years, but wading through that has got to be enormously painful.



Jesse Saint

Saint Aviation, Inc.

jesse(at)saintaviation.com

www.saintaviation.com

Cell: 352-427-0285

Fax: 815-377-3694

--

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2872

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 4:11 pm Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

This list cracks me up sometimes. 



I have to say, to me, a real geek, and a pilot who looks at that grey

thick wet layer of clouds as a perfect day to go for a pleasure flight

and build some experience, the panel is my favorite part of the plane.

It's not a status thing, or an ego thing, but a genuine interest in

actually taking a creation I made, and have it do flights with ease that

were painful to me only 2,3, or 5 years ago.  There is no comparison

to the old equipment when you look at the relative ease and safety that

you can navigate yourself through the sky.  And, increasingly it becomes

not a matter of whether you have the "nerve" to psychologically manage

yourself for the approach, but whether you spent the time understanding

your systems that you can manage them through the approach.  I now

find instrument flying a lot more relaxing than before, yet stressful

enough to keep you from allowing yourself to be complacent.



My advice for John J is the same as I've said many times over....and

that's to actually take the time to go fly a system before you put the

money down.  Actually watch how it does an approach, and how many

button pushes, screen flips, and knob turns it takes to not only load

it, but fly it.  Even if you aren't a current instrument pilot, some of

the features will stand out to you when you see them in action.  So

go get some real-life in-cockpit flying time behind any system and

you'll be doing yourself a favor.  I love my system, and I love the

way it came out and am proud of how I made it work.  That's why I

invite people interested in that sort of thing to fly with me.  There

are lots of people who don't have the wants or the needs for such a

system, and I've been known to tell those people not to go this

route just because it doesn't fit them.  But for a person who wants

to do some real IFR flying with their families, it's recommended to put

in the requisite time to learning the benefits of the various systems

and integrations of all components.



As far as the 17,569,293 panel combinations goes, I actually was hoping

to put together an EFIS FAB page (Features, advantages, benefits), with

perhaps a disadvantages side too.  The problem is, it really takes

first-hand and pretty in depth knowledge of a system to really be able

to point out it's strengths and weaknesses.  Rest assured, the strengths

will be put out by the manufacturers marketing.  The tough part is

the weaknesses are tough to come by.  People who fly a system don't

want to talk about the bad side of what they have, and the manufacturers

who make them don't either.  And then there are always those who

haven't flown with the higher-end stuff so they spend time justifying

the low end stuff...and make it appear "adequate".   In truth, much of

it indeed is adequate.  As one reply said, most of this stuff is much

easier to fly behind than the good gear of only a few years ago...even

the lower-budget stuff.  But, if you don't take the time to fly a

system, it's very hard to understand why some of the features would

have value or stand out.  For me, the HITS was one of those.  I never

thought of it as anything other than a cheesy gimick, and in fact when

I bought the system my intention was to turn it off so I didn't have it.

After using it, I found it truly amazing.  What makes having a website

of panel combos and EFIS so tough is many-fold...



How do you get the knowledge for all the systems?

How do you keep it updated with all the changes going on?

How HUGE of a list of features do you want to list?

Can you get reviewers to objectively list the good and the bad?

If *I* wrote the list, would anyone even trust if I were objective?

Who in their right mind has the time for such a project?

and many more...



As the various companies build features into systems, like synthetic

vision, IFR databases for approaches, and all the goodies, one thing you

can count on is that the old radio stack with a GPS/Nav/Com will become

sort of like steam gauges are today. (but not nearly that extreme)

An EFIS that functions as a MFD and has all the trimmings definitely has

the capability to improve safety.  And, with all the players improving

feature sets, even the cheap gear will eventually have a full feature

set.  I love reading the "aftermath" type articles in magazines, but I'm

always left with the thought that there are a lot of those accidents

that could have been prevented if the technologies we are able to put in

our planes were affordable to the certified masses.  We *really* have a

huge benefit over a certified plane owner, and truly, even the most 

expensive RV-10 panels of the flying -10's today don't even come 

anywhere near the price that the same equipment capabilities would cost 

you in a certified plane.  Those many accidents were had in planes

that were as capable or more capable than ours, but what failed them

is their information presentation, and ability to be flown easily.



So yeah, this is a tough subject for many people to wade through.  I

can appreciate the many viewpoints.  Some people think it's silly to

even want these things.  That's fine too, but there are quite a few

who do want them.  For those people, I say, ask lots of questions.

Learn what the limitations are, and then make your choice.

I'll never forget being at the BMA booth 2 or 3 years ago, asking

if the EFIS one could fly a GPS approach and command the Autopilot

down vertically for the approach. The person said, and I quote,

"Why would you want to do that?".  And on further questioning, it was

apparent that at that time, it could not, and that they were not at

all interested in considering their system an IFR system for real,

true, IFR use, with an IFR database.  That opened my eyes, and told me

that even the stuff I thought of as waaaaay cool, fantastic looking

stuff, had it's shortcomings....and if I didn't find them, I'd be

unhappy later.  Luckily for me I waded the sharkpool and ended up

completely satisfied.



EFIS questions, along with GNS430/480 questions, tend to start list

wars.  No big deal there, it's kind of fun some days.  But, I'd

encourage people to get real flying time behind a system of

choice, and if they can't, then contact someone by phone and

ask questions in depth.  I'm game for that too.



Gotta go...I'm being pulled away forcibly from my keyboard...I'm

sure many appreciate that. 



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Rob Kermanj wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Sounds like a Tim Olson job!

 

 do not archive.

Bill Schlatterer

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 195

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 5:44 pm Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

Just another view but picking the right panel becomes a lot easier if you

define the mission first.  Chelton are great, Fully coupled autopilots are

wonderful, WAAS GPS supreme and you can get it all for only a gazillion

dollars.  The question in my mind is how much do we really need,... Granted

if it's a "want" then all the discussion about price and package is moot. (

BTW, Tim defined his mission as "a real geek, and a pilot who looks at that

grey thick wet layer of clouds as a perfect day" so if that is not you, it

will make a difference")



For example, I fly a lot in the south,  Ark, LA, Texas, Ok and normally

approaches flown to mins plus 500 are good enough.  I would guess that to be

80% of the time when you actually need an approach which is an even smaller

amount of your total flight time.  This is from memory but I have flown

about 40 cross country trips in the last two years (200-400) miles.  All

have been filed IFR, of them only 5 or 6 actually required an approach at

the end and then only one was to mins plus about 300.  Everything else was

basically just to let down through a layer to about 1,000 agl.  BTW, My

whole attitude/experience would be different if I flew in the North East or

in California Coastal fog!



All of the really nice IFR stuff is only needed at the mins so you are

buying a lot of equipment for the rare approach to mins.  In most cases, you

are put on vectors, intercept the approach NAV course from vectors, and then

descend from the FAF at a fixed rate of 400-800 fpm to mins plus 400- 500 or

more.  Given that, any equipment that will let you fly with a heading bug

while holding altitude, while monitoring the approach VOR or GPS but

preferentially by GPS for spatial awareness will comfortably work for any

but the most die hard IFR pilots.  At the FAF, dial in your descent rate and

leave the NAV coupled and you really don't need a coupled glide slope to get

comfortably to mins plus 500 or so.



Now, all of this is up for grabs if you really want to fly to 200' mins on

the rare occasion but reasonable risk management on the ground prior to

take-off makes even the most basic equipment more than adequate "most" of

the time. 



Bottom line is that you can have a nice economical IFR panel that will work

well with nominal flight management or a really high dollar system that will

take you to mins with your hands off.  Knowing which you will be comfortable

with should be the first part of the planning process.  In some cases, we

just can't afford the stuff we would like to have and fly with less but

manage the risk better.  Your call, but knowing what you really want to do

"most" of the time is important.  The other question you have to ask is "if

I buy this fancy system, will I (the pilot) be ready to take it to mins when

the time comes."



If you plan on serious IFR and need that kind of panel for really hard IFR,

then don't forget that heated pitot and static ports and fuel vents are

things to consider just like wing and prop de-ice.  All nice but more

complexity and more dollars.  HOWEVER if you fly IFR at all, you just gotta

have a Garmin 396/496 with weather! It's the real minimum IFR equipment in

my mind.



Pick the mission, then pick the panel.  



Just my .02



Bill S

7a Ark



--

Deems Davis

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 925

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 8:10 pm Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

I recall vividly going through all of the 'FOG' when deciding on my 

panel components. there has already been a lot of good advice in 

response to this. So I'll limit it to this:



1.  DON'T just follow someone else's decision/logic. YOUR panel is 

probably the most intimate set of decisions you will make regarding YOUR 

plane. MAKE SURE that you have a really SOLID understanding of WHAT 

YOUR, requirements/wants/needs/preferences are. something that someone 

else says / does may sound good/logical at the moment, but if it 

doesn't' match your spec's,  it's interesting but not relevant. This 

goes for panel builders / vendors as well.   e.g one of my factors in 

EFIS choice was the amount of information displayable on a single 

screen, I like a LOT, I know of one other builder that made their EFIS 

choice because they specifically did NOT want a lot of info 

simultaneously  displayed.



2. IT IS CONFUSING - at least at first, but I recommend that everyone 

take the time to wade through the options on their own. My 1st challenge 

was just to understand all of the acronyms and what they meant  (ADC, 

AHRS, EFIS, MFD, PFD , EIS, WAAS, ....... on and on).  The process is 

EXTREMELY educational and informative, it will tell you a LOT about what 

IS or IS NOT important to you. The education that you get will be 

invaluable to you in operating and troubleshooting your plane/panel.  

Don't short cut your learning opportunity.



3. The printed information from the vendors is unfortunately, not always 

that revealing, particularly when it come to system limitations. TAKE 

every advantage to talk 1st hand to the vendors, OSH and other shows are 

great opportunities, but don't be afraid to pick up the phone and call 

direct. The response will tell you something about the company you are 

considering dealing with.



4. If you ask another builder/pilot if they 'LIKE' their particular 

system and they say YES, don't necessarily put too much weight into that 

single comment. I've read/seen lots of posts and I've yet to see one 

from someone that says 'I made a terrible mistake, this thing is a pile 

of !#(at)$#"  We all tend to be very proud of our decisions and tend to 

defend them strongly. Very few if any of us have significant flight 

experience with ALL of even MOST of the systems available. We tend to 

like what we know and are most familiar with.



My  2 cents



Deems Davis # 406

Finishing - ( A Misnomer ! )

http://deemsrv10.com/

 	  Quote:

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2872

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 8:36 pm Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

Bill Schlatterer wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Just another view but picking the right panel becomes a lot easier if you

 define the mission first.  Chelton are great, Fully coupled autopilots are

 wonderful, WAAS GPS supreme and you can get it all for only a gazillion

 dollars.  The question in my mind is how much do we really need,... Granted

 if it's a "want" then all the discussion about price and package is moot. (

 BTW, Tim defined his mission as "a real geek, and a pilot who looks at that

 grey thick wet layer of clouds as a perfect day" so if that is not you, it

 will make a difference")

 


	


Actually, that statement I made was less of my "mission", but much

more my "style".  My "mission" might better be summed up like this 

slightly edited reply to an offline comment I got.



"When people say I don't "need" all that stuff in the panel, I 

think....as far as I'm concerned, I'm not willing to trust my "superior" 

  (laughing) skills are good enough to put my families life on the line

with, risking their lives unnecessarily.  For me, what I "need" is

"the best I can do".  It may cost a few dollars, but I want every

bit of ease, safety, and help that I can get, so that I can be

more assured that I'll have another day to fly another flight."



For me, it's about totally enjoying IFR flight, but putting

all the technology to good use in actually keeping my family and

passengers alive.  IFR flight isn't something you dabble in.  VFR and

IFR are absolute black and white, when you play by the rules.  For a

VFR only pilot, I wouldn't get any of the high-end systems, and my

main GPS would just be a 496 even as a gadget guy.  For an IFR pilot,

there is a lot more at stake.  The accident records clearly state the

highly increased risk in GA IFR flight, especially single-pilot.  Having

a very good system at your hands is like having a 2nd pilot.  In fact,

when I first began my actual IFR experience post-training, I immediately

purchased an autopilot for my old plane, because I was not willing to

even consider flying my family IFR without an autopilot.  This is just

an extension of that caution, brought about by a little more

experience, and, because it's possible to GREATLY increase the survival

chances in an IFR aircraft with the technology today.  There are so

absolutely many accidents that need never happen.  I remember reading

an article recently where a plane flew a few hundred feet below the

glideslope due to some misc. errors in reading when to descend on

final.  With todays synthetic vision approaches, that kind of thing

just doesn't need to happen.  It's a world where the slightest

mis-interpretation of a piece of paper can mean sudden death.  Even

WITH the equipment, there is plenty of risk, but for those who fly

their families (IFR), what do you want to do to minimize it?  I'm

selfish enough in that I love IFR flight so much that I'll actually

be willing to FLY IFR with them on board, whereas I could just adamantly

become a VFR pilot, and ignore that risk.   But, I'm also not willing

to make it harder than I have to, to ensure their long-term health.

Many have seen my kids photos.....what do YOU think I should consider

Danielle's value as.....$5,000,  $20,000, or $50,000?  And is Colleen

worth more, or less?  Quite literally, the money I spent has the

potential to save just one, very minor, mistake while in IMC, at

some point in our lives, that will make even $100,000 for that extra

"software feature" worth every penny.



So my mission is the ability to fly in IMC with as little risk

of life and limb as possible.



Also, I know that this kind of discussion bores the ba-jeeses out

of some people, but keep in mind that in that survey done by Van's

way back as to what kind of plane (IFR or VFR) the builders were

building, the vast majority were building IFR aircraft.  So, I

usually prefer to consider meaningful panel discussions as IFR panel

discussions.  If it's a VFR panel, there's very little that is critical

about planning a panel.



Wouldn't it be cool if 5 years from now, the accident record for IFR

flight were to actually equal what it is for VFR flight...and then

some!?!  (If we could just get people to fill up with fuel when needed,

that would even help the VFR's safety record)

 	  Quote: 	
		   For example, I fly a lot in the south,  Ark, LA, Texas, Ok and normally

 approaches flown to mins plus 500 are good enough.  I would guess that to be

 80% of the time when you actually need an approach which is an even smaller

 amount of your total flight time.  This is from memory but I have flown

 about 40 cross country trips in the last two years (200-400) miles.  All

 have been filed IFR, of them only 5 or 6 actually required an approach at

 the end and then only one was to mins plus about 300.  Everything else was

 basically just to let down through a layer to about 1,000 agl.  BTW, My

 whole attitude/experience would be different if I flew in the North East or

 in California Coastal fog!


	


Very true...but now you're arguing that a person who's only going to

be doing minimal low approaches should maybe think about lesser

equipment, right?  IMHO, it's probably the opposite, and your point

would be perfectly valid.  Here's my thought....



It's hard enough for a private pilot to stay IFR current, with plenty of

IMC experience.  If you're going to fly approaches in IMC, the pilot

with less currency could probably benefit more from some of the more

substantial equipment than the guy who does it every week, which your

40 flights is quite a portion of a year.  You may indeed have the

"superior" skills that I laughingly mentioned about myself above.

Then, it's just a matter of the same economics of what is the value

to you in life and limb dollars?  (Keep in mind I really believe that

some of today's technology has the breakthrough possibility of

changing the accident rate....and SOMEBODY is going to die doing it,

so why not err on the safe side?)

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 All of the really nice IFR stuff is only needed at the mins so you are

 buying a lot of equipment for the rare approach to mins.  In most cases, you

 are put on vectors, intercept the approach NAV course from vectors, and then

 descend from the FAF at a fixed rate of 400-800 fpm to mins plus 400- 500 or

 more.  Given that, any equipment that will let you fly with a heading bug

 while holding altitude, while monitoring the approach VOR or GPS but

 preferentially by GPS for spatial awareness will comfortably work for any

 but the most die hard IFR pilots.  At the FAF, dial in your descent rate and

 leave the NAV coupled and you really don't need a coupled glide slope to get

 comfortably to mins plus 500 or so.

 


	




I don't disagree with your thoughts for the most part.  That's how I

feel about my backup gauges....I mean, how much do you absolutely

need when the crap hits the fan?  With ATC help, and radar contact,

you can probably pull off a whole lot if you stay calm.  As far as I'm

concerned, you have it exactly right for how I feel if I have a major

EFIS failure.  Other than that though, for a few bucks I have the

opportunity to keep that safety level up.  For what it's worth, some of

my more fearful moments were not on the low portion of an approach.

In fact, on the last few seconds before breaking out, it hasn't been

bad at all.  For me the climb phase, and some enroute and vectoring

phase time has been pretty tough.  Spatial disorientation is something

I became acutely aware of, along with vertigo.  Interestingly, while

I commonly at least felt the "leans" in turbulent IMC before, I haven't

had that experience with synthetic vision.  I can only surmise that

this is partly due to the added "visibility" I'm now seeing.  There are

times, that I can honestly say that I had my hands full just keeping

myself hand-flying the plane to keep it upright while feeling

the leans in a big way.  Having that experience was pretty humbling.

I do understand that it's something that can be overcome, but, does

the *average* IFR pilot fly enough approaches to realistically keep

their proficiency to what is *really* required for safety? (Not the

standard legal definition of currency)



Also, it wouldn't be responsible of me to tell someone that there's

such a thing as "light" IFR where you just go busting through

thin layers and then continue on top.  You truly can get yourself

into some situations that way.



I catch your comment about if you were in the North East or California's

coastal fog, but in almost all areas of the country you can find some

tough IFR flying, and the question is are you planning to take your

plane all over the country and just fly VFR when you get some soggy

clouds in your way?

 	  Quote: 	
		   Now, all of this is up for grabs if you really want to fly to 200' mins on

 the rare occasion but reasonable risk management on the ground prior to

 take-off makes even the most basic equipment more than adequate "most" of

 the time. 

 

 Bottom line is that you can have a nice economical IFR panel that will work

 well with nominal flight management or a really high dollar system that will

 take you to mins with your hands off.  Knowing which you will be comfortable

 with should be the first part of the planning process.  In some cases, we

 just can't afford the stuff we would like to have and fly with less but

 manage the risk better.  Your call, but knowing what you really want to do

 "most" of the time is important.  The other question you have to ask is "if

 I buy this fancy system, will I (the pilot) be ready to take it to mins when

 the time comes."

 


	


All good points.  I do agree that financial things do play a part in

the decision process.  For me, I would probably be more of an IFR

avoider with the family on board without the gear, yet I feel that

experience is experience, and the only way to actually GET the

experience is to DO the flight, if Convection, hail, ice, and lightning,

and turbulence aren't involved.  Personally, knowing that not

everyone can afford exactly what they want, I would encourage

people to do whatever they can from a proficiency and personal-minimums

standpoint to minimize their risk.  Proficiency is expensive though

too, as it costs $50/hr just for the fuel to keep proficient.



Also, I agree with your sentiments about will the pilot be ready, if

they are used to flying the fancy system.  Having that fancy system

also requires you to stay proficient at it's operation...the same as

any GPS/NAV/COM of course.  I worried about how it would be if

not only the EFIS failed, but what if I had to hand-fly

with or without the EFIS.  So far I haven't felt like I will have

a problem keeping hand-flying proficient, although it's tough to

fly as good as the computer these days.  It pays to try to stay

current in all regards.  There again, the pilots best friend in

an emergency is his autopilot...if it's still working.



 	  Quote: 	
		   If you plan on serious IFR and need that kind of panel for really hard IFR,

 then don't forget that heated pitot and static ports and fuel vents are

 things to consider just like wing and prop de-ice.  All nice but more

 complexity and more dollars.  HOWEVER if you fly IFR at all, you just gotta

 have a Garmin 396/496 with weather! It's the real minimum IFR equipment in

 my mind.


	


Also great points.  You're absolutely right about the Wx.  It's

one of those things that I don't know what I'd do without.  Attached

is a WSI screenshot from Saturday. It was very helpful knowing exactly

which direction held the large cells, and how thick the line was.

It was a VFR flight, which is much more comfortable when you have

any red spots in your area.  The visual picture said go, but only

when diverting from the direct route.



FWIW, I actually had the offer of wing de-ice, but decided to pass on

that one in favor of avoiding ice altogether.  But since I passed, a

good buddy o'pal of mine will now get the honors of having the first

de-ice'd RV-10 out there.  Yep, it's coming available down the road.



Add my .02 to everyone's .02, and pretty soon we'll be millionaires!



Just read Deems's post.  Totally wonderful information there as well.

I especially agree with #4.  While I know some of the limitations of

some of the other systems, I don't know all of the exact positive

features, so I speak mainly to my own knowledge base of the Chelton.

Many of the others got scratched off the list as I went along when

I found something that was a deal-breaker to me...but that doesn't

mean that it's not something that fits your goals.  I love talking

about the capabilities of what I have.  Unlike when you talk about

the RV-10 and have to admit that the doors suck, when I talk EFIS

I really have very little to complain about, and that's after

getting married to it and having the honeymoon pass.



Tim



[quote] 

 Pick the mission, then pick the panel.  

 

 Just my .02

 

 Bill S

 7a Ark

 

 

 

 --

WXshot.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

88.84 KB

Viewed:

808 Time(s)

Vern(at)teclabsinc.com
Guest

Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 7:03 am Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

Tim,



Thinking of the process. Would it be much work to put a web page

together that was like eopinion, but just for efis systems? It could

list the basic facts and then have a place where individuals could give

their observation of the system. This last part would be subjective but

still informative.



Just a thought,



Vern Smith (#324)



--

ScooterF15

Joined: 19 Jun 2006
Posts: 136

Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 7:09 am Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

Tim,

  

 Try putting up an EFIS Wiki and let us do the work.

  

 -Jim

  

 In a message dated 5/22/2007 8:13:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  Tim(at)MyRV10.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  How do    you get the knowledge for all the systems?

How do you keep it updated with    all the changes going on?

How HUGE of a list of features do you want to    list?

Can you get reviewers to objectively list the good and the bad?

If    *I* wrote the list, would anyone even trust if I were objective?

Who in    their right mind has the time for such a project?

and many    more...

	


 



  

 Jim "Scooter"  McGrew

http://www.mit.edu/~jsmcgrew  



See what's free at AOL.com. 

  [quote][b]

rene(at)felker.com
Guest

Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 7:21 am Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

If there is enough interest, I would be willing to code and host something

like that.  I am not much of a layout designer but can hack some ASP code to

make it work.  But, other people would have to provide the content......



Rene' Felker

N423CF

40322

801-721-6080

--

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2872

Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 7:29 am Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

For me personally, that would be a pretty big project, as although

I have skills in lots of areas, scripted web programming isn't

one of the big ones.  Not to mention it would take some time to

put content together and post it.  But, it is a good idea.  I do

think you'd end up with some Looooooong replies and threads

though.  I'll have to think through how I could help with this

one.  I will say that I wouldn't hold your breath though, because

it could take some time.  Some of those web pages I throw

together as write-ups actually take a few hours per page

to dig up the info and post.  It's fun, but it's not something

that's easy to fit into a normal day and still get any sleep.



It may be that if "power users" with the various systems could

write up a common format of details about the features of their

systems, I could put a page together for each type, with a list

of features and pros and cons and limitations.  Then, I could

just take any info that people mail me as additional comments

and link that as a separate text for reading.  As long as it

didn't continue on updating the comments forever it would be

somewhat manageable.



We'll just have to see...



Jim's EFIS Wiki idea is good too.  I just have to find

the time and a good structure for it to support all the

major EFIS systems.



For the actual Chelton owners, I made CheltonEFISpilots.com, but

that's really more of a forum for specific owners and users of

the system so once someone has made their choice there isn't

constant garbage in and out that doesn't add to the ownership/user

experience.  It's too bad not every system has a private support

forum for it because once you own the product it's a great way

to get more in depth knowledge.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Vern W. Smith wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Tim,

 

 Thinking of the process. Would it be much work to put a web page

 together that was like eopinion, but just for efis systems? It could

 list the basic facts and then have a place where individuals could give

 their observation of the system. This last part would be subjective but

 still informative.

 

 Just a thought,

 

 Vern Smith (#324)

jesse(at)saintaviation.co
Guest

Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 7:43 am Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

I don't think I would get a lot out of it personally since I have been

through a lot of the reviews already, but I would probably refer people to

it regularly.  If the content were added by people who have flown, I think

it could be a fantastic resource for that headache-causing decision-making

process.



I would certainly give my input (good and bad) on what I have experience

with (Dynon, TruTrak, Garmin stack items)



Do not archive



Jesse Saint

Saint Aviation, Inc.

jesse(at)saintaviation.com

www.saintaviation.com

Cell: 352-427-0285

Fax: 815-377-3694



--

scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 7:47 am Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

The Cheltons are more than wonderful, they are amazing. I read the same article about the IFR accidents in Aftermath and thought the same thing,"If those pilots had Cheltons and had their flight plan in it, they would probably all be alive today."  When I fly IFR I load the 430 which then transfers all the data over to Grand Rapids, then I load the Chelton with the flight plan. The situational awareness of the HITS is where the Cheltons shine.  I have both the Grand Rapids and the Cheltons in my panel and if I were to do it all over again I would put a three screen Chelton system in.  Now the price difference is huge, I paid around $10K for my Grand Rapids and the Cheltons were $27K and I still may have to purchase the PinPoint AHRS down the road which is another $3K I think.

  

 The Cheltons are also great for VFR flight but the Grand Rapids are just as good for that application.  It is very nice to have the HITS for VFR approaches to unfamiliar airports especially when they have parallel runways. I like the customization of the engine page on Grand Rapids better but it isn't that big of a deal. I really like the support over at Grand Rapids although Chelton has already done much better than Direct2Avionics ever did.  I have about 12 hours behind the G1000, and now have 180 hours behind the Cheltons and Grand Rapids and I can say the Cheltons really have impressed me beyond what I thought.  

  

 Just like anything, and like Tim said, go fly behind them and see the difference yourself.  Three screens really would be nice for the Cheltons because of all the different screen options. 

  

 The OP Technologies stuff look really cool too. I can't wait to play with that at Oshkosh.

  

 By the way, I am going to upgrade my 430 to WAAS sometime this year just to have it but my Cheltons will still be driving the autopilot and I will only monitor the 430W.    

  

 One other observation I have heard from non-pilots that I take up is how relaxed they feel when the see those Cheltons and Grand Rapids in the panel.  There is always some anxiety when passengers first here about going flying in an experimental but after they fly I have heard that the panel is not what they expected and they felt safer because of it, kind of interesting. 

  

Scott Schmidt

scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com  



 ---

Vern(at)teclabsinc.com
Guest

Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 9:16 am Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

I don't think it is reasonable or practical to think one person will

populate all the information. But, as you suggested, a common format or

template that others could fill in would work well. I for one would be

happy to set down with some of the manufactures and grill them for the

needed information and then write it up in a specific format. 



Updates would be a challenge. Things are changing fast enough some of

the vender can't even keep their websites up to date. So how could we

keep it up to date for all the options?



Vern (#324)   



Do not archive

--

rvbuilder(at)sausen.net
Guest

Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 6:19 pm Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

What about using the Matronics Wiki.  

   

http://wiki.matronics.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page  

   

Michael  

Do not archive  

       

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

 Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:09 AM

 To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W  

  

  

         

Tim,  

    

   

    

Try putting up an EFIS Wiki and let us do the work.  

    

   

    

-Jim  

    

   

    

In a message dated 5/22/2007 8:13:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Tim(at)MyRV10.com writes:  

   	  Quote: 	
		    

How do you get the knowledge for all the systems?

 How do you keep it updated with all the changes going on?

 How HUGE of a list of features do you want to list?

 Can you get reviewers to objectively list the good and the bad?

 If *I* wrote the list, would anyone even trust if I were objective?

 Who in their right mind has the time for such a project?

 and many more...  	
  

  

    

   

    

Jim "Scooter" McGrew

 http://www.mit.edu/~jsmcgrew   

  



 

         

  

See what's free at AOL.com.   

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

      [quote][b]

Bill Schlatterer

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 195

Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 6:31 pm Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

Tim, also great points but all I was really suggesting is that while

everyone that flies IFR should be capable of safe easy flight to mins, there

are different ways to get there.  I agree that one shouldn't fly IFR if they

can only handle "light" IFR but the equipment you choose can dictate how

much risk you are willing to handle.  Like you I'm sure, there should be no

IFR flight without a solid backup(out)plan.  If I have an autopilot failure,

I'm not going to mins if there is any way out but I would probably hand fly

to LOC mins plus 500 with no qualms. Risk management is what IFR is all

about.  You feel better with a full load of equipment, my suggestion is that

it isn't required for the majority of IFR flight BUT if I had the budget I

would have it too.  BTW, I consider an AP mandatory for single pilot IFR so

I would not even consider a true "minimalist" approach to panel choices.



Also not arguing the "light IFR" point, but there is VFR and Marginal VFR

and there really is IFR and LOW IFR so you do get to make a choice of how

much you're willing to bite off.  Your mode of risk management is to load up

the airplane, be very pilot current, and you're good to go.  More equipment

IS better risk management but at a cost.  If you can do it, I would too but

after the first 15K of equipment, the next 10K or 20K is just cause it makes

us marginally safer if you attack the same conditions.  If you just don't go

there when the ceiling is 300, that's a way to do it as well.



Nice discussion, always enjoy reading your posts.  So last question,...

Would you say that a basic IFR airplane with AP and on board Wx is safer

than a loaded panel with no weather ?  We do have to make choices on limited

budgets   A real question for a lot of folks is to either have a

better(more expensive) AP/NAV combination or alternately add WX with some

additional monthly fees.  Personally, I will take the Wx every time if I

can't afford both.



Bill S

BTW, I did opt for a dual GRT, 430W, TT VSVG, Garmin 396 with WX and backup

instruments in my 7 and would have done Chelton if I had the dough but

didn't 



Do not archive



--

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2872

Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 7:26 pm Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

Bill, This is a fantastic reply.  I hope you don't get the idea that I'm

dictating to anyone or suggesting that everyone do the same, or even

that my choices are the "right" or necessary choices.  It's really

all so widely individual that indeed there are as many appropriate

combinations as there are builders....although not all builders

choose appropriate combinations for themselves. 



As far as philosophy of IFR flight goes, I can tell that we agree far

more than any disagreement...that's for sure.  Your thoughts are

pretty much really good and valid as far as I'm concerned.  About the

only thing I disagree with below is that jumping to some of the

more expensive stuff only adds marginal improvement.  For 80-90% of

the feature list, I'd agree, but I really think there are a couple

of things available today that if widely used would no doubt change

the accident rates significantly.  But from a general point, you're

right...the more money you throw at anything, the more marginal

the return gets.  LNav/Vnav GPS approaches vs. LPV approaches is

an example.



Regarding your last question about Wx.  I have actually said that

before.  The single best thing in my plane that changes everything

is the onboard Wx as far as changing the overall possiblities of

flight.  It's well worth the fee.  Behind that I'd have to say is

the synthetic vision and HITS and the ability for the AP to

actually do a hands-off approach.  Coming from a steam gauge

background, the WX changes completely the situations you'd get

in to.  But then the Synthetic vision and HITS completely change the

ease at which approaches are flown.  If someone were on their

last few hundred bucks on their panel though, with even a VFR

panel, my #1 recommendation would be for WX...and that's even

for any VFR x/c pilot.  You're right that it's just a totally

experience changing feature.



The features I see as far less useful are things like on-screen

charts.  There are good ways to deal with that for much less

money.  Many people don't realize that Jepp subscriptions for

things like that are very very pricey, and the feature itself

costs a fortune too.  The G900 unlock code for chartview

costs $3000 alone, plus the subscription.  The GMX-200 costs

$2000 for the unlock code, and then *requires* a subscription

to jeppview for $738/yr + 100 to activate it.   Jeppview is

only available for Garmin and Avidyne right now.  I have a

pricey database subscription for the Chelton, which is a

necessary evil just like on a GNS-430/530/480, but charts

are much more reasonable on a tablet.  $400 or less for

the software, and $200/yr for a complete set of IFR/VFR/

Hi-Lo Alt Enroute, WAC's, and the works.  That's actually

affordable....and it's not the cheapest possible way to do things.

So there are definitely features that are "nice" to have and

add lots of cost, but only provide some marginal improvements.

Even my tablet will overlay my plane on an approach chart, and

it'll do it without messing up my screen display.



Bill, I totally appreciate your 100% gentlemanly posts, and very

great points.  I know there are a lot of people reading, and it's

a very worthy discussion.  Having it with a guy with your demeanor

is fantastic.  No flame suit required.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Bill Schlatterer wrote:

[quote] 

 

 Tim, also great points but all I was really suggesting is that while

 everyone that flies IFR should be capable of safe easy flight to mins, there

 are different ways to get there.  I agree that one shouldn't fly IFR if they

 can only handle "light" IFR but the equipment you choose can dictate how

 much risk you are willing to handle.  Like you I'm sure, there should be no

 IFR flight without a solid backup(out)plan.  If I have an autopilot failure,

 I'm not going to mins if there is any way out but I would probably hand fly

 to LOC mins plus 500 with no qualms. Risk management is what IFR is all

 about.  You feel better with a full load of equipment, my suggestion is that

 it isn't required for the majority of IFR flight BUT if I had the budget I

 would have it too.  BTW, I consider an AP mandatory for single pilot IFR so

 I would not even consider a true "minimalist" approach to panel choices.

 

 Also not arguing the "light IFR" point, but there is VFR and Marginal VFR

 and there really is IFR and LOW IFR so you do get to make a choice of how

 much you're willing to bite off.  Your mode of risk management is to load up

 the airplane, be very pilot current, and you're good to go.  More equipment

 IS better risk management but at a cost.  If you can do it, I would too but

 after the first 15K of equipment, the next 10K or 20K is just cause it makes

 us marginally safer if you attack the same conditions.  If you just don't go

 there when the ceiling is 300, that's a way to do it as well.

 

 Nice discussion, always enjoy reading your posts.  So last question,...

 Would you say that a basic IFR airplane with AP and on board Wx is safer

 than a loaded panel with no weather ?  We do have to make choices on limited

 budgets   A real question for a lot of folks is to either have a

 better(more expensive) AP/NAV combination or alternately add WX with some

 additional monthly fees.  Personally, I will take the Wx every time if I

 can't afford both.

 

 Bill S

 

 

 BTW, I did opt for a dual GRT, 430W, TT VSVG, Garmin 396 with WX and backup

 instruments in my 7 and would have done Chelton if I had the dough but

 didn't 

 

 Do not archive

 

 --

MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com
Guest

Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 4:48 am Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

A real good discussion Bill & Tim and all - Thanks for hashing this one 

around.  Before making a few additional observations, a little 

background on my experience.  I earned my IFR rating and 100% of my IMC 

experience in a minimally equipped Maule.  A Garmin 300XL, regular steam 

stack, no autopilot, and a Precise Flight vac backup.  A simple, slow 

aircraft with minimal but well maintained equipment.  Most notably, I 

flew it hard for 5+ years in the southeast US with a schedule that 

encouraged me to fly every week, day and night,  with specific 

destinations in mind.  Think personal short haul airline for the wife 

and I.  I'm sure that 90+% of the flying was in VFR conditions though 

90+% of it was flown on an IFR plan.  And that my actual IMC flight time 

is still under 20 hours.  I've probably flown fewer than 5 approaches to 

minimums.   But the IFR system is what makes light aircraft travel easy, 

fun, and safe for this pilot.  In exchange for the rating, you get to 

run your own personal airline.  With the RV10 you get to fly it your own 

personal aircraft.  An unimaginable privilege.  Anyway,

Mission is the big issue we all face.  And life tends to make one's 

mission change over time.  I agree that a VFR-only ship needs only the 

most basic panel with a 496 for Wx.  IFR capability adds the $$$ no 

matter what route you take.  But how can you predict your mission while 

in the middle of one of the more life changing experiences you may ever 

experience - building an plane?  Ironically, my decision to build my 

dream cross country cruiser has completely changed my flying - no more 

personal airline, I now want to stay home and build.  Who knew?  When I 

finish the '10, will I return to personal airliner mode?  No idea.  

Mission drives the big and small decisions but I know my ability to 

predict my mission is close to zero.  Some critical decisions you simply 

have to make and live with the consequences.

Tim's observations on Wx match mine.  It is a total game changer for VFR 

and IFR where I live.  Sort of like the invention of the wheel for those 

that travel.  I used the infamous Cheap Bastard software on an old RF 

Palm before the 396.  When dodging buildups in central Florida, a single 

30 min old picture is worth a thousand words from those incredibly 

helpful  JAX controllers.

I've never flown behind an autopilot!!  Can't wait.  Needing to hand fly 

the Maule in all conditions drives all aspects of my IFR flight planning 

and execution.  Nothing that is done well is done casually.  Every map 

is folded, every plate indexed, pencils are halved and dulled, backup 

pencils mounted, flashlights charged, headlights worn. relief bag 

prepped.  Did I mention avionics yet?  I am convinced that the autopilot 

capability  is paramount.  Many of my panel planning decisions will 

revolve around maximizing this capability and it's proper integration.

Let me add my 2 cents on the "I'm only going to do layer busting with 

the occasional approach to 500 and 5" discussion.  I totally agree with 

the point that,  the less you plan to do low approaches to minimums the 

more you will benefit from the high end equipment.  No matter how well 

you plan, or at least no matter how well you plan to plan, safety 

dictates you have to be prepared to fly to standard in all 

situations....wait! Let me get off that high horse... here's the 

experience and situation that brought it home to me. The typical late 

flight home to my base.  Sun is setting, conditions are benign.  I may 

have to poke thru some broken to get down to 2,000 or so before VFRing 

home.  20 minutes out, I notice the ground temperature dropping to the 

dew point and suddenly fog has turned RDU IFR at minimums or less.  

Whoa!  Let's see, I can backtrack to GSO.  Nope, same thing.  RIC?  Same 

thing.  As far as I can 'see', a light fog is developing over every 

airport within 1.5 hours of my home.  A day VFR trip with an evening 

landing has turned into multiple night approaches into fog!  I've since 

come to understand that this is not an uncommon unforecast situation 

here in the summer.  Fortunately, if fog isn't predicted, it will 

probably disappear in an hour or so.  Probably.  I still don't know how 

to plan myself out of this one.  The less you plan to use the ticket, 

the more you need all the help you can get.

I haven't seriously begun my panel planning but I'm convinced that the 

latest equipment (HITS, Wx, integrated autopilot, etc) provides 

significantly greater capability than the steam stack needles with 

moving map.  Most important, it can provide a large safety margin and 

great risk mitigation for the more casual, recreational pilot.  Yes, 

there are some traps in that thinking but one can avoid many others with 

ease.

 Bill "dreaming of a great panel while sorting thru the beginnings of a 

wiring layout for my wings" Watson

Tim Olson wrote:

[quote] 

 Bill, This is a fantastic reply.  I hope you don't get the idea that I'm

 dictating to anyone or suggesting that everyone do the same, or even

 that my choices are the "right" or necessary choices.  It's really

 all so widely individual that indeed there are as many appropriate

 combinations as there are builders....although not all builders

 choose appropriate combinations for themselves. 

 As far as philosophy of IFR flight goes, I can tell that we agree far

 more than any disagreement...that's for sure.  Your thoughts are

 pretty much really good and valid as far as I'm concerned.  About the

 only thing I disagree with below is that jumping to some of the

 more expensive stuff only adds marginal improvement.  For 80-90% of

 the feature list, I'd agree, but I really think there are a couple

 of things available today that if widely used would no doubt change

 the accident rates significantly.  But from a general point, you're

 right...the more money you throw at anything, the more marginal

 the return gets.  LNav/Vnav GPS approaches vs. LPV approaches is

 an example.

 Regarding your last question about Wx.  I have actually said that

 before.  The single best thing in my plane that changes everything

 is the onboard Wx as far as changing the overall possiblities of

 flight.  It's well worth the fee.  Behind that I'd have to say is

 the synthetic vision and HITS and the ability for the AP to

 actually do a hands-off approach.  Coming from a steam gauge

 background, the WX changes completely the situations you'd get

 in to.  But then the Synthetic vision and HITS completely change the

 ease at which approaches are flown.  If someone were on their

 last few hundred bucks on their panel though, with even a VFR

 panel, my #1 recommendation would be for WX...and that's even

 for any VFR x/c pilot.  You're right that it's just a totally

 experience changing feature.

 The features I see as far less useful are things like on-screen

 charts.  There are good ways to deal with that for much less

 money.  Many people don't realize that Jepp subscriptions for

 things like that are very very pricey, and the feature itself

 costs a fortune too.  The G900 unlock code for chartview

 costs $3000 alone, plus the subscription.  The GMX-200 costs

 $2000 for the unlock code, and then *requires* a subscription

 to jeppview for $738/yr + 100 to activate it.   Jeppview is

 only available for Garmin and Avidyne right now.  I have a

 pricey database subscription for the Chelton, which is a

 necessary evil just like on a GNS-430/530/480, but charts

 are much more reasonable on a tablet.  $400 or less for

 the software, and $200/yr for a complete set of IFR/VFR/

 Hi-Lo Alt Enroute, WAC's, and the works.  That's actually

 affordable....and it's not the cheapest possible way to do things.

 So there are definitely features that are "nice" to have and

 add lots of cost, but only provide some marginal improvements.

 Even my tablet will overlay my plane on an approach chart, and

 it'll do it without messing up my screen display.

 Bill, I totally appreciate your 100% gentlemanly posts, and very

 great points.  I know there are a lot of people reading, and it's

 a very worthy discussion.  Having it with a guy with your demeanor

 is fantastic.  No flame suit required.

 Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

 do not archive

 Bill Schlatterer wrote:

> 

> <billschlatterer(at)sbcglobal.net>

>

> Tim, also great points but all I was really suggesting is that while

> everyone that flies IFR should be capable of safe easy flight to 

> mins, there

> are different ways to get there.  I agree that one shouldn't fly IFR 

> if they

> can only handle "light" IFR but the equipment you choose can dictate how

> much risk you are willing to handle.  Like you I'm sure, there should 

> be no

> IFR flight without a solid backup(out)plan.  If I have an autopilot 

> failure,

> I'm not going to mins if there is any way out but I would probably 

> hand fly

> to LOC mins plus 500 with no qualms. Risk management is what IFR is all

> about.  You feel better with a full load of equipment, my suggestion 

> is that

> it isn't required for the majority of IFR flight BUT if I had the 

> budget I

> would have it too.  BTW, I consider an AP mandatory for single pilot 

> IFR so

> I would not even consider a true "minimalist" approach to panel choices.

>

> Also not arguing the "light IFR" point, but there is VFR and Marginal 

> VFR

> and there really is IFR and LOW IFR so you do get to make a choice of 

> how

> much you're willing to bite off.  Your mode of risk management is to 

> load up

> the airplane, be very pilot current, and you're good to go.  More 

> equipment

> IS better risk management but at a cost.  If you can do it, I would 

> too but

> after the first 15K of equipment, the next 10K or 20K is just cause 

> it makes

> us marginally safer if you attack the same conditions.  If you just 

> don't go

> there when the ceiling is 300, that's a way to do it as well.

>

> Nice discussion, always enjoy reading your posts.  So last question,...

> Would you say that a basic IFR airplane with AP and on board Wx is safer

> than a loaded panel with no weather ?  We do have to make choices on 

> limited

> budgets   A real question for a lot of folks is to either have a

> better(more expensive) AP/NAV combination or alternately add WX with 

> some

> additional monthly fees.  Personally, I will take the Wx every time if I

> can't afford both.

>

> Bill S

> BTW, I did opt for a dual GRT, 430W, TT VSVG, Garmin 396 with WX and 

> backup

> instruments in my 7 and would have done Chelton if I had the dough but

> didn't 

>

> Do not archive

>

> --

bldgrv10450(at)comcast.ne
Guest

Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 5:47 am Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

Bill and others on topic

Thanks for your input. On my recent trip to SnF, I considered instrument 

choices the most difficult. Sort of feels like being in the fog. I found 

making one choice and then building around that selection helps clear your 

path. It's nice to have all the wonderful products to choose from. I am 

still undecided on panel design and instrumentation. I'm concentrating on 

fuselage details and watching the technology grow, products improve and 

prices becoming more competitive.

Paul Grimstad

RV10 40450

Portland, Or.



do not archive

---

jesse(at)saintaviation.co
Guest

Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 6:32 am Post subject: The Perfect Panel...how to decide - was GNS-430W

I agree that products improve, but I don't know about the prices becoming

more competitive.  This is just shooting from the hip, but I don't remember

any price drops in any instruments that I have been buying for a long time.

It seems like prices are going up if any change at all.  I guess you could

argue that, because of inflation, prices are dropping, but I think that

probably accounts for some of the price hikes.



I certainly haven't seen Hartzell prices come down since MT and Aero

Composites have become more popular.



I haven't seen Garmin prices come down since Chelton and GRT have entered

the market, and they certainly aren't even considering Dynon, AFS and

TruTrak as competition.  In fact, I seem to remember the price of the

GNS-480 going UP when the 430W and 530W came out.  They have just started

offering their G900X, but the price on that doesn't seem to be driven by

competition.



This is not a slam, just pointing out that, while products may become more

powerful, you aren't probably going to be paying anything less for them in 2

years than you would now (not counting the time value of money - there's

that accountant in me coming out).



I do very much agree, however, that mission should be the first driving

factor, then budget (to the degree that it matters, which for some is very

little and for others is enormous), then picking the most important piece of

equipment and building around it.  For some, this will be starting with the

Chelton.  For others, it will start with the GNS-430, 480 or 530.  For the

VFR folks, it will probably start with the 296, 396 or 496.  Some may even

start with the Auto Pilot and work out from there based on what drives it

best.



This same process should also drive instrument panel layout IMHO, with the

important things close and the less important things a little further away

(I sure like having the radios left of center - bracing).



Jesse Saint

Saint Aviation, Inc.

jesse(at)saintaviation.com

www.saintaviation.com

Cell: 352-427-0285

Fax: 815-377-3694



--

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Page 1 of 5

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