Navi

Is this all a result of a comment by someone new at TT who has only been on the job 3 weeks? The same person that said someone was fired? I SERIOUSLY question the wisdom of ANYONE commenting on why or someone left a position, especially if casts them in a negative light.... . Here they would be hauled to account under privacy legislation, and it is ugly. TT have been working on the Mooney for months.. There is a Pix of the Mooney with the TT label on the side of it from last year somewhere.. ...

Hey Dustin.. Hold on sir.. I have a plane, my second, owned one since 2003. I have been licensed to push these things around the sky for almost 40 years.. I have a ton of "skin in the game" and been around long enough to feel some of it worn thin. Being a spectator now is not an option, I am in far too deep. I am now waiting for the TT<>Aspen interface, hopefully will happen before my old noisy DG craps out. So I am waiting like you.. I have no (and never had) any connection to any Aviation related company, but after 45 years as a small business owner I guess I am a bit more sympathetic to the challenges owning and operating a small business. So be it.. guilty... I ordered and paid for my TruTrak in Nov 2017 (caught the sale) , waited and waited and finally got it in March 2018, 5 months later. Shipped the same day TT got the STC document . Was never lied to, knew it was in the FAA hands all that time. They expected (and were told) a 5 week turnaround with the STC, but it was not to be. The Vizion was "approved" in December 2017, but the letter did not arrive at TT until March 2018 . My autopilot was shipped same day the letter arrived. Corey personally called all of the preorders and gave us the news. We installed it in the time they estimated. There was an issue just discovered with SOME Cherokees, mine was one of them. They jumped all over it, found a solution, fixed in record time. It worked correctly when powered up. Flew the plane properly and well with the factory settings. Continues to perform perfectly many hours and 12 months later. I documented our install and a produced a document to help others, and consequently heard back from many happy TT owners... For me, they got it right.. YMMV... Nav

Well stated Sir... And on top of all this, your best business plans, -- production, marketing, staff, design, whatever... just plain get trashed... from a direction you never even new existed... Be gentle, I have a T-shirt for this one... Nav

Jeeezzzeee… Tough crowd here... (!) Guys, liars have a basic instinct, they lie to gain something or to CYA.. Neither is present here. Nothing to gain. No need to get "ahead" of the competition. There isn't any. TT are working away at their own market, and if think the occasional Trio purchase is of a concern to them, you are dreaming in colour. What may have been said last year was probably based on the best information available at the time, and everyone is anxious to hear what they want to hear.. STC approvals are at best, a moving target. I do question the wisdom of anyone making substantial decisions on what "may" happen, or "when" it will happen. Such reasoning is basically unsound. .. You can cuff anyone here in this sentence, Garmin, TT Trio, Aspen… pick one... There are design issues, compatibility, financing, shipping, employee issues, parts supply, etc,, etc., and THEN there is the FAA. We have Transport Canada here... so no safe haven.. I don't have a Mooney, yet.. But I have reason to believe it is next in line, as TT resources are available. (it is also the next "logical" choice regardless) Hopefully now that the Cessnas are shipping, Zach will be able to devote more time to it now and get it done.. Remember they are the new kids to the FAA, and they have nowhere near the finances or the "people in place" that Garmin and Honeywell have.. I have owned and operated small businesses, and have the many "hats" you have to wear.. My humble offering, FWIW... :)

Corey was the sales and marketing guy, with a strong technical background.. New guy Steve has been with them a while (years) , and his strength is in the design and assembly of the products.. I spoke to Zach… Their Mooney is, as he puts it, is waiting on him... he said the servo mounting and placement has been worked out, so they are to that point on the Mooney. It is next in line... I could tell between the words that he has been spending endless hours with FAA types, mostly getting progress in tiny increments... 180, 182, 185 APs are shipping, and they are now building to their back log as fast as is practical.. I can tell it's been a terribly frustrating year for them . From a business point of view.. it must be challenging having $$$$ tied up in product you cannot ship without the paperwork and facing endless delays in getting the FAA to move along with a project.. 'Tis what it is I guess, but a very difficult business model...

Hmmmm…. As of 2 weeks ago Corey had left on good terms and was still assisting Steve in his new role . He had left to pursue his dream of flying commercially. He was building hours flying pipeline patrol for a local contractor.. Same young person I spoke to ( on another matter) (been there 3 weeks she said) was definitely...……. mmm… …… new .... Donno….

Ummm… I understand the "Approval process" stars long before the "paperwork" is submitted. Apparently an FAA inspector is assigned to a project early, and follows development along the way. When the "paperwork" (formal application) is finally "submitted" it has already been blessed by the FAA and the formal STC document to ship product will come in due course. This is how it is done in Canada with TC.. and I am told the FAA have a similar process... A good guvmint inspector can "steer" an applicant through the hurdles, even down to the acceptable "verbiage" in the application... the "Formal Application " is the result of this process... Nav

Two words... "Automatic" and "Pilot" .........… from a conversation with Transport Canada 2 years ago... "Displays" are easy, they don't kill people. .... "Pilots" , electrical or human, kill people. (translation, "kill voters" ) Each is an individual system in an individual airframe. Each has to be individually examined and approved or rated, human or electro-mechanical.. , medically or performance wise... "We are not going to let either drop an aircraft onto a citizen without serious oversight" Plus.... I suspect Garmin is on a first name basis with many of the FAA people involved, with a comfort level (and a map) established over many years. Dynon started from scratch. New kid on the block, probably not even known to the FAA guys... Dynon made some mistakes... Including the AP in the request for the STC, choosing the wrong market for their (25 AMU plus) system (The 172) (Really?) and vastly underestimating the time and effort involved... New "installers" are not signing on to their program in droves for the same reason.. (and they are straight out with ADSB installs as well) They apparently have, wisely (IMHO) retrenched and are stepping forward now , carefully on a new business plan. The 172 systems are not exactly flying of the shelves, and like many small businesses, probably depend on some initial market penetration success to finance further development (and to give further confidence to their investors) . The 172 market flopped, and has probably limited their resources going forward.. Disclaimer.. Business is my business, and this is from an observation only of what has happened. I have no direct knowledge of Dynon or Garmin, or any other. Having several of my own businesses, and having offered services to others as a business counsellor and consultant, some things are easy to see, it's a common pattern. Hindsight is easy.. Nav

I recall something said (written?) like that back in early 2017, but from Trio... Nav

I think your are correct with respect to the Dynon interconnection stuff, but connecting it to other legacy equipment can be time consuming. The HDX installs in Cessnas are consuming huge hours due to custom cutting and fitting of the panel, perhaps unfamiliarity with the process and that most Dynon installs have extensive interconnections and plumbing to many other devices. . Few Avionics techs are up to the metal working tasks involved and some shops will just not get involved in what is essentially "custom panel work". . This may improve with time, but it is going to take a long time with so few getting into the market.. Cap

Here ya go! This is for the Bo.. http://www.dynoncertified.com/pdfs/Bonanza-sheet.pdf But I went North of $15K before I got halfway down the page, and the installation is lengthy and complex… YMMV! Nav

Possibly... But I have not had a quote and it is not in my future.. but the numbers being tossed around on other forums are in that range... probably with addons... usually with the AP and an engine monitor... Note the 30K I spoke of above is for an "upgrade" not necessarily a Dynon upgrade... but the HDX figures prominently in those upgrades. The Quotes I have heard of for the required " new panel " to accommodate the HDX are running in several AMUs, before the glass is purchased and installed... .. I think you would be hard pressed to install the HDX with Autopilot for 15k. But I will leave that to others closer to these projects than I .. Nav

Think there is more to this… The FAA is an issue of course... But there appears to have been a serious mis-step by Dynon here.. From a business/ marketing view, I cannot understand why Dynon targeted the 172/PA-28 market in the first place.. Yes, the "raw" numbers are there, but most of these two aircraft types will NEVER be candidates for a 30K$ upgrade. Seldom does an upgrade get installed in an aircraft worth less than that. The proper target market for the HDX is aircraft worth 75 - 90 K and up. (And recent communications from them indicate they are stopping al efforts for these aircraft and focusing on the better market. ) Seems the disappointing results in the 172 marked has caused them pause and a (much needed) re evaluation of their business plan. I hope the mis-step has not hurt them too much..... Nav

Mostly yes... GPS data comes on 3 wires, ARINC 429 "A", ARINC 429 "B", RS232 + (and ground of course.) , +14V and (-) ground. Requires Pitot and static connection (hoses) Cap

Hmmmm… OK.. Thinking... With the hazards of a loooooog post.... OK... your questions first and I will copy here the test flight(s) post I placed in the Cherokee Group last year... for those whom wish to read for a while.. - Our Century I worked well, smooth and accurate. It worked well, with simple analogue steering, so the TT was a considerable step up for us. The GPSS steering anticipate turns and rolls the plane out smoothly on the desired track. I have flown behind some Garmin varieties and a S-tec 55. One Garmin had issues , so not fair to comment on that flight. The S-tec seemed to work well, but only had one flight in that aircraft.. LOTS of time behind the Century as PIC... IMHO the TT worked better than the others, and continues to do so a year later.. In comparison, it is deadly accurate in all flight modes... In all fairness, it is the only DIGITAL AP I have flown any amount. Here are the posts from the test flights last year... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TEST FLIGHT TODAY! Very bumpy, but an okay VFR day here at CYFC in Canada.. As this was also the first flight after the annual inspection, we cautiously orbited the airport WAY above the Control Zone to check out the plane thoroughly before heading out to the “training” area. The ground checkout was completed, we synced the AP to Altitude, then the AP was turned off and away we went. After the plane checked out OK, we headed to the training area. Following the flight test steps in the TRUTRAK manual, we held a steady altitude and heading and engaged the AP. It just took over and flew for us, holding the track solidly in a 15 Knot crosswind at 4000 Ft. We were bumped around a bit, and the AP held us within 30 ft. up or down, gaining alt slightly over the next 4-5 minutes. (ALT HOLD not engaged SVS set to ”0” only) We synced the AP to the new altitude, engaged it at a new heading in a 200 fpm climb and it held this well, requiring an increase in power and retrimming, following the trim indication on the AP screen. We then turned up (?) the ROC, the airspeed fell to the “MIN SPEED” and the AP dutifully lowered the nose as it is supposed to do. Next, leveled out and trimmed, we turned the knob from 340 to 040 and it slowly turned to the new track and held it within 1 or 2 degrees (remember the crosswind (20Knts + ) from the left on this track). Then we turned back to 340 and the turn was more aggressive (crosswind again), and it settled on 340 + - one or two degrees. (The test instruction sheet suggested 60 degree turns) OK! Feeling good, we then did a “Direct to” on the 796 GPS (RS 232 Steering Data only for this test flight) while heading almost directly AWAY from the airport. Turning left until it settled on a 45 degree intercept track to the DT track, it then turned and settled on the track smoothly with very little overshoot and held it accurately. Step 13 says to test a “Disconnect with the CWS button”. 3 Beeps, 3 flashes of the blue LED and the AP disconnected. Then we banked the plane, pushed the APLVL button, the AP engaged, leveled the plane and turned to resume the previous track. Steps 17 and 18 test the Altitude select, so we set it for 300 ft. lower, set the VS to -300 and down we went (TRIM !) and we leveled of within 30 ft. of the selected altitude in a rough layer. Step 21 tested the AEP,… worked great. Banked the plane past 45 Degrees and felt the noticeable “nudge“ back to level. (It just nudges the controls firmly, it does not level the plane) Well… end of the flight test page.. Yeah! J So, we tested the over speed protection. We set the VS to -500, attended the throttle and when we reached the pre-set max speed, the AP dutifully raised the nose to hold the speed from increasing. Oh ho ho ! .. WE ARE LIKING THIS NEW TOY!! J We set a new “Direct To” on the Garmin 796, set VS to -200, engaged “NAV” mode and the AP took us home. at - 200 ROD. We came into a smooth layer (!), so we engaged ALT HOLD. This thing NAILED the altitude and seemed to hold it with + - 10 feet as near as we could interpolate the altimeter, and the AP handled the plane very smoothly. Then the smooth layer was gone and we were done for the day… L Hoping for a SMOOTH day soon when we can really interpret just how well this AP does. We found it hard to allow for being bounced around so much at times, but today it got a good workout, and it did very well. The takeaways… Very pleased! Love having the AP hold altitude for us! (We came from a Century I wing leveler only) Trim! Very little attention needed when level, but keep “on it” (and the throttle) when transiting into and out of climbs and descents. It will take us a bit of practice to get the power settings correct for the climbs and descents. We will probably find power settings that work for various VS rates, and that will make transitions quick and easy. There is more than one way to do this…. It was a busy flight, with a lot to absorb, but so far, liking this! It WILL take some practice to use this tool properly, and get the most out of it. Our aircraft is back together, and our new Autopilot checked out 100%... a good day!! _______________________________________--- May 5/ 2018 FINALLY a calm day so I can really evaluate this TT autopilot…Everything worked exactly as it should.. It is deadly on a track, to one degree. Flew the plane accurately and positively.. Held altitude, well, the altimeter was essentially “stuck” …. If it was varying any , I could not see it. Commanded turns rolled out exactly on the new track. Climbs and descents . I think there is a way to do this smoothly. The autopilot will climb and take you to the programmed altitude accurately. The first one was from 3000 to 4000 at 500 fpm. At cruise (70%) power. It settled in at 500 fpm and eventually came to “MIN SP” and dutifully lowered the nose to maintain the minimum speed. I added power and trimmed “up” as requested and got it balanced so it went to 4000 and leveled off accurately, it asked for “dn” trim, then had to reduce power. Next time it was easier. Selected 4000, set the VS at 500 fpm. Set climb power and trim and rich mixture, - THEN engaged the AP. It immediately locked on to the climb and took us to 4000 ft. same as before, but I found this way to be less pilot effort. On the level out I reduced power to the previous setting (EDM) and retrimmed and we were on our way locked very accurately at 4000 ft. Descents need the same amount of work. Engaging the AP to decent to 3000 at 500 fpm got us going a bit fast, and the AP lifted the nose to keep the speed in range while I reduced the power. Again, the 2nd time I pressed the CWS , reduced power, trimmed for the descent , THEN engaged the AP and it locked on to the descent and held it to level out. I am going to play with both methods to see which I prefer. I would appreciate some feedback on this from others. (?) I did find out that , - if the AP is requesting a minor trim change, a little bump on the yoke may remove the trim request. (before going to the trim wheel. ) First time with GPSS.. Loved it. Flying directly away from the airport at 3000 ft. Did a “Direct to” back to the airport on the GPS and engaged the AP. The plane rolled into a 2x standard rate left turn for about 240 degrees, leveled and began a smooth right turn, held the altitude EXACTLY through the turn, (asking for “up” trim” ) and intercepted the outbound track EXACTLY… AND FLEW THROUGH MY OWN WAKE TURBULENCE !!! J After saying out loud “NO (snip) WAY! This was a teardrop reverse turn with ONLY the AP! OK, OK, … I KNOW this was a coincidence, and could probably never repeat it,…whatever.. but it did happen this time!… J But it WAS dead calm, and this was the ONLY wiggle in the entire flight. So far, so good. VERY pleased with our new toy!.. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Apologies for the exclamations.. but we did have fun! In many more hours over the past year, it has continued to exceed expectations... Before you ask... we do not have a WAAS navigator, so have not done approaches. Feedback from others is that it does approaches very well, following a good navigator of course. One pilot tested it all the war to the rnwy, (I think he had an IFD 440 ? ) nailing the center line in a crosswind until he discoed it at 10 feet, pulled the power off and flared... A new information. Almost all the TT APs in Cherokees fly the plane "out the door", with very little required "tuning" during test flights. The factory settings are unchanged in almost all the installations… Looks like TT flew the heck out of some Cherokees to get the settings this close... Our next project is the Aspen E5, which will interface with and steer the TT in all kinds of modes If you have any specific questions I will try to answer them here.. Hope this helps... Nav

>>> No disrespect was meant is questioning your observed install time Understood.. and no worries Sir! Thought I would comment on this whereas I actually DID do the install, and my times turned out to be typical of others on the Cherokee groups.. Please note, it was a BASIC install, no complications.. Our "shop" here had to stop an install of a S-Tec because the aircraft wiring was such a mess that they could not sign off the plane without making it "right". I am not that familiar with the Mooney but it is more cramped inside than the Cherokee and I can imagine it not being as easy, hence taking longer. I am here because one of our partners has expressed interest in a nice Mooney, and it has no autopilot. Our TT works SO WELL, and we would have the same installation in a Mooney in a heartbeat. TT are flying their Mooney around the country and the TT is working well in it, and I believe they awaiting the final letter from the FAA.. Hopefully they will get the letter soon for all the Mooneyiacs.. :) Nav

Yes To clarify. I, and my plane partner) actually DID the install within the TT quoted time... (at Feb last year they were estimating 20 man hours. ) To wit... Myself and my plane partner are considered good at stuff like this.. My background is in in electronics/ electrical technical work.. we know what tools to use and where wiring should or should not go. We had an experienced AME to guide us. We are able to read and follow the "book of words". We are familiar with the plane having done "owner assisted annuals" for years. (we can have seats and a side panel out in a few minutes) Autopilot experience …. I installed the Century I servos and head/relay six years ago with the same arrangement with our AME. (shop completed the wiring and checkout) David_H , The TT install (in the Cherokee) is simple, easy, you can SEE everything you are doing, the instruction book is very good with excellent pictures and diagrams. It was a fun, interesting project. A year ago, there was SO MUCH discussion around the install times that we decided to document the install. ( I was shipped one of the first units the same day the FAA letter got to Corey's hand) (documentation and picture taking times were not included) It should be a cakewalk for an experienced tech... (IMHO) In the Cherokee, it is just that easy. (well, except for changing the circuit breaker.. Grrrr) Cheers! Nav

Just to throw my hat into the mix... for information only! We have a 1976 Cherokee Warrior. We did most of the work installing the TruTrak ourselves under the watchful eye of our AME. We carefully recorded time and details. (LOTS more on this if you wish, but specific to the PA-28's ) We removed a Century I single axis with "Radio Tracker". The TT head dropped into an existing 3" hole A custom cutout for the flat pack and / or shuffling the radio stack will cost more time. Some have radio antennas mounted under the floor or other installations added over the decades that may have to be moved. It took 18 man hours, not including "reading, planning and fondling" . We had not done this before but are considered adept at the tasks required. NO antennas had to be removed, NO "rats nest/ old wiring " had to be removed. NO "deferred maintenance" items turned up. From all accounts, (then and since) we had a "typical, BASIC install". Time removing the Century was exchanged by being able to use the CWS switch, power wiring, master and GPS switch from the Century install. There was another hour for an AMO to check out and do the "Major Modification" (Canadian) form. A one hour check out flight. Add this up however you wish. A good AME /AP with all the tools at hand should have this out the door in 20 hours on a standard basic install. Of note here, there are only two tasks that require two people, each requiring less than 30 minutes. The TT install in a PA-28 is "brilliantly simple". (others words) My times have been reduced by some techs that are in their 3rd to 10th install of the TT AP.. I am aware of many basic installs that have been completed with out fuss in 25 hours or less, and some in as little as 14-16 hrs. if the tech has done it many times already. FWIW.. Y Moony MV! Nav

I have heard that they admitted that they were way optimistic at the time... It is also important to distinguish the difference between the HDX being certified, and the HDX with autopilot being certified… Information posted on the Piper forum would suggest the HDX to be later this year for the higher end Pipers, ( looks like they may now be targeting the "higher value" aircraft) but WITHOUT the Autopilot option... FWIW... Nav

Nice to see they are being up front with their future STC prospects. MUCH better than dodging and punting... TruTrak is the same, they tell it like it is, although the message is not what one want's to hear... I always find it easier to deal with too much information than to deal with not enough. A good sign … :) Nav

Yes, just about any autopilot out there, and will have unique compatibility with the TruTrak Vizion and any TT offering in the future, except the Garmin GFC 500. It REQUIRES at least one G5, two for full feature operation. The huge negative of the GFC 500 is that it is tied to the G5s , limiting your future options in using modern more capable nav heads. The TXI series make the GFC 500 an awesome product, but the $$$ are out of most budgets.

Keep an eye out for this plane. If it’s lined up with the runway certification is three months out. However, if the plane is lined up with the taxiway on short final it’s 6 months out (I know, I know 700 agl). Cannot fault your logic! :) Nav

That would be a boost to Garmin in the autopilot world..! The biggest negative to the GFC500 is that it NEEDS the G5's (two of them) to function at all. No options... Gan the G3X operate the GFC 500 in the experimental world? Nav

You may well be correct! Be nice if they surprised us all... But their past record is not encouraging… They did quote me 12 AMUs today, "suggested retail" FWIW....

PA - 28 151... Nav