Out of the box

Come on in for general chat and POLITE banter between LAA members

Moderators: John Dean, Moderator

dmcnicholl
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:25 pm

Out of the box

Post by dmcnicholl » Sat Dec 01, 2018 8:57 pm

My December copy of Light Aviation arrived today and I have to applaud the piece by Ian Fraser on his approach to upgrading his RV6 instrument panel. A sensible, level headed and practical approach to incorporating modern technology replacing old and less reliable 'certified' kit.

I also approve the man's view that such incorporation as he describes is no business of the LAA, the CAA, EASA or any other alphabet organisation.

I do have one question though. How does the placement of the two flat screen devices below affect the compass?
Donald McNicholl
006054

User avatar
Chris Martyr
Posts: 584
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 11:58 am
Location: Horsted Keynes Sussex

Re: Out of the box

Post by Chris Martyr » Sun Dec 02, 2018 11:26 am

Donald .
I reckon you are just boasting about how quick your copy of LA mag arrived .. :D ..As yet , mine's nowhere to be seen [unless 'she's' gone and hidden it]........ :evil:

Mind you , I suspect that when us normal folk receive our copies , the article you mentioned , along with your post , could start a bit of a bun-fight.

............Can't wait....!!.. :D
022516

User avatar
BobD
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Out of the box

Post by BobD » Mon Dec 03, 2018 9:15 am

Are you trying to re-ignite this thread Chris ? :twisted:

https://services.lightaircraftassociati ... f=5&t=5376
Bob Dawson
041667

User avatar
Chris Martyr
Posts: 584
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 11:58 am
Location: Horsted Keynes Sussex

Re: Out of the box

Post by Chris Martyr » Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:01 am

Having now read the article to which Donald refers , I can now see the relevance of his remark...
dmcnicholl wrote:I do have one question though. How does the placement of the two flat screen
devices below affect the compass?
It is certainly not where I would have placed a magnetic compass and even Boeings/Airbus's have them placed in an overhead and remote location .
There were some interesting points that came up , but despite Ian's warning to stay out of marginal conditions , I also couldn't help wondering if that would give some guys a bit of tacit encouragement to do just the opposite . [ I've seen it done]

I have never been a great fan of glass instrumentation in aeroplanes which fly solely in day/VFR . It's too much of a distraction ! I must admit however , that they do make for a neat , compact panel . And providing that a magnetic compass, alt & ASI are discretely included somewhere , then live and let live.

Just as long as guys don't go kidding themselves that they are now equipped on a par with the larger CAT traffic.
Ian questions the logic of , "You can't rely on satnav". with the retort that , "well the airlines do" .
Not quite correct. The airlines don't use satnav , they use satnav[s] normally channelled via three separate multi-mode receivers , with three separate autopilot systems , three separate laser gyro inertial ref. systems [ or ADIRU's if you're a bus driver] and normally six separate screens for PFD , ND and EFIS information , which may be switched accordingly by the FD crew in the event of a screen 'dropping out' [ and they occasionally do]

I am definitely not trying to start [yet another] analogue vs glass type discussion , and as an avid hater of D.I.'s myself probably should stay on the fence . My message ; just keep it functional , neat and safe.

And lastly [@ Ian ] Sorry mate,, :D but I don't mean this with malice :D ,,May one assume that your RV-6 panel is in a 'transient state' , as it belongs to neither the analogue nor the 'glass' category as it stands in the pic. on p.23.

And I'm sure that posh 'planes like RV's aren't equipped with stuff acquired at aerojumbles... :D
022516

dmcnicholl
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:25 pm

Re: Out of the box

Post by dmcnicholl » Wed Dec 05, 2018 9:03 pm

Chris, from my reading of the article it seems clear to me that Ian wasn' t kidding himself on that he was fully equipped for IFR. Rather that by making use of modern electronic technology he was giving himself more options should he ever find himself in unexpected and deteriorating conditions, and which of us has not met with that scenario?

Sure, there may be some who might believe they were all set up for blind flying and press on when they shouldn't but that is by no means the exclusive reserve of those with glass panels. I've known some who have done that with very little instrumentation of any kind, myself included. That they and I survived was probably more luck than judgement. Ian also was clear on the point that he was replacing failed certified kit with, probably, more reliable solid state devices, yet neither is necessary for VFR flight.

It might also be worth considering that until recently even smart ships like RV's, regardless of the instrument fit were strictly VFR only and arguably had no need of an AH, DI etc, yet you'd probably be hard put to find one with less than a six-pack. So we're talking about discretionary expenditure, desire, not need.

I have flown in an RV4 with the steam-six-pack and an RV7 with very modern glass, but both were still VFR aircraft, and certainly the complexity of the displays in the latter I found quite a distraction, though I'd probably get used to it in time.

I do still wonder about that compass, though.
Donald McNicholl
006054

User avatar
Chris Martyr
Posts: 584
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 11:58 am
Location: Horsted Keynes Sussex

Re: Out of the box

Post by Chris Martyr » Thu Dec 06, 2018 11:27 am

dmcnicholl wrote: it seems clear to me that Ian wasn' t kidding himself on that he was fully equipped for IFR. .
Definitely agree with that Donald , and I certainly was not implying that the author meant otherwise . I've never had the pleasure of meeting Ian , but he looks to be a very knowledgeable and experienced pilot.
But I know there are others , probably with less experience , who may just see this as an opportunity to test how well 3D synthetic vision really does work whilst in cloud.... :shock:

The really good points of Ian's article were that by making a sensible balance of choice , a lot of 'traditionally accepted' instrumentation may be dispensed with . Particularly D.I's and A.H.'s , it's not just the panel facia that they clutter up . They go back nearly a mile [OK , I exaggerate :D ] inside the panel too .

Oh,,and well done to Brian and team for yet another great LA mag..... :D
022516

PaulSS
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2017 7:04 am

Re: Out of the box

Post by PaulSS » Thu Dec 06, 2018 1:12 pm

But I know there are others , probably with less experience , who may just see this as an opportunity to test how well 3D synthetic vision really does work whilst in cloud.
Bit of a strange thing to write. This can happen any time the equipment is fitted to any aircraft, not just because an article has appeared in the LAA mag. If someone is stupid enough to do that with an EFIS then they'd probably be stupid enough to do it with steam gauges.

You don't like glass in a day, VFR aircraft. Fair enough but don't try scaremongering as if fitting glass suddenly turns pilots to do things they wouldn't usually do.
Paul Simmonds-Short
042301

User avatar
Chris Martyr
Posts: 584
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 11:58 am
Location: Horsted Keynes Sussex

Re: Out of the box

Post by Chris Martyr » Fri Dec 07, 2018 11:15 am

Chris Martyr wrote: I know there are others , probably with less experience , who may just see this as an opportunity to test how well 3D synthetic vision really does work whilst in cloud
My apologies if this seemed as if I was inferring that as a result of Ian's article , LAA members were being goaded into doing naughty things . I think that would be doing both Ian and LAA's general membership something of a dis-service .
I didn't mean it that way , but was merely pointing out a simple trait in human nature generally.

I was glad that Donald drew my attention to this excellent article , as I do tend to skim through these sort of articles quite quickly . But even this dyed in the wool old Luddite managed to benefit from Ian's wisdom and knowledge.

I also acknowledge my light-hearted comment about Ian's glass[ish] / analogue[ish] panel . But almost laughed aloud at his own description of it : 'Federated Multifunction' . Bloody brilliant.. 8) 8)

I've got to remember that one for the future.. :D
022516

User avatar
mikehallam
Posts: 539
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:12 pm
Location: West Sussex
Contact:

Re: Out of the box

Post by mikehallam » Fri Dec 07, 2018 12:21 pm

As another oldie, wedded (welded ?) to generally individual instruments I am comforted knowing that if one does/shows off readings and fibbing, then it's unlikely all the others will join it in death sympathy.

But, yes, an Avcomm EFIS occupies a hole now which does duplicate info as well as the horizon, pretty useful for cross Channel trips.
Never the less I find the digital ASI less than easy to assimilate, say, on finals, whereas the good old analogue needle instantly registers without refocussing during a busy time.

Happy Christmas.

dmcnicholl
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:25 pm

Re: Out of the box

Post by dmcnicholl » Fri Dec 07, 2018 4:29 pm

mikehallam wrote:...whereas the good old analogue needle instantly registers without refocussing during a busy time.
That's a major advantage of analogue over digital by which I mean the display not the 'mechanics' behind it. With digital you have to read and assimilate the number(s) but with analogue you need only register where the pointer is on the scale and if it's not where you expect it to be it gets your attention in a way that a different number will not.

It may be my ageing memory but I seem to recall in the early days of digital a difference of opinion between Boeing and Airbus, with Boeing favouring the analogue and Airbus the digital. Again I'm talking about the display, not the workings of the device. Now, of course, the digital device can replicate an analogue display, so best of both worlds?
Donald McNicholl
006054

PaulSS
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2017 7:04 am

Re: Out of the box

Post by PaulSS » Sat Dec 08, 2018 10:19 am

Never the less I find the digital ASI less than easy to assimilate, say, on finals, whereas the good old analogue needle instantly registers without refocussing during a busy time.
I think a little familiarity changes things a lot. I used to prefer analogue gauges because I thought they showed the rate of change better than digital. After a short while of using digital, with the associated trend vectors etc, it very quickly became 'old hat' and I am very definitely of the Digital Camp now. At work I have access to both because the 767 is a mix-mash of analogue and digital. I can look at the digital speed tape and get instant, accurate date. I don't have to look at the dial and wait for my brain to interpret its position relative to a scale and send me an answer. My previous aircraft didn't have both but, instead, just two big TV screens. It took a very short while for my brain to look where it needed to look for the data and gain a LOT more information.

I agree that those used to doing it one way will prefer that familiarity but the glass panels really are not the work of the Devil and can convey so much more without needing to try. They might appear quite daunting to start with, especially for those used only to a six pack but I find it is intuitive to 'look through' the stuff you don't need/want to see and allow my brain to instantly assimilate the stuff it does need.

I don't know if the image will display below (and I'm damned if I can figure out how to attach anything) but I really do question how '105' does not instantly stand out as the IAS, without any refocussing. And, as for that point, what 'refocussing'? You' are only looking at one screen and your eyes do not need to move around to different dials in a 'selective radial scan'. It's just there in front of you :D

Image
Paul Simmonds-Short
042301

User avatar
Chris Martyr
Posts: 584
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 11:58 am
Location: Horsted Keynes Sussex

Re: Out of the box

Post by Chris Martyr » Sat Dec 08, 2018 4:06 pm

PaulSS wrote: 767 is a mix-mash of analogue and digital.
Paul . :D Do you mean federated-multifunction ?.. 8)
022516

User avatar
mikehallam
Posts: 539
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:12 pm
Location: West Sussex
Contact:

Re: Out of the box

Post by mikehallam » Sat Dec 08, 2018 5:13 pm

Thanks for the explanation and photo's Paul,

Clearly a class or two of quality & sophistication apart from & beyond my Rans S6-116.
I guess your office is exceptionally trustworthy & I also agree the computer in one's head soon learns where to look etc.

Landing a very light a/c may require a different set of 'look' actions because one must keep one's eye's outside on the terrain during approach whilst completing a couple of relatively slow turns - especially the last onto 'finals' - exactly when airspeed needs to be nailed.

My small digital read-out does take a moment to see if it shows say 65, or 63 mph, whereas a glance at the large analogue ASI needle suffices to see it's pointing at the correct o-clock position.

mike hallam

PaulSS
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2017 7:04 am

Re: Out of the box

Post by PaulSS » Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:02 am

Chris, I was too dim to know if I did mean "federated multi-function" but now I've now looked up "federated" I realise I did. It is a very good description :D I haven't read my magazine yet, as I am separated from it by a few thousand miles, but I should be able to read the article in a week :mrgreen:

Mike, I've been 'testing' (there's really not much testing to do on an RV when there's >10300 airborne) an RV8 recently and that has the Dynon Skyview fitted, along with AoA. It took a couple of minutes to calibrate the AoA, with a bit of porpoising and a couple of stalls and then it was good to go. With the AoA tones there's no reason to look at the panel at all but, best of all, you know you're flying at the correct speed (because the tones are based on angle of attack) instead of 1.3 * a number that actually varies with weight etc etc. No head inside the cockpit and accurate speed.....what more do we want :D
Paul Simmonds-Short
042301

coxargus
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2015 2:57 pm

Re: Out of the box

Post by coxargus » Sun Dec 09, 2018 10:48 am

The Buccaneer had audio AoA from its inception in the late 50s/early 60s but we always checked it was 'On speed' for the AUW. To rely solely on it without cross checking when established on finals can lead to fast/slow 'problems' if the calibration has slipped.

Frank
Frank Cox
041606

Post Reply