ryoder Posted December 21, 2014 Report Posted December 21, 2014 I'd like to have an autopilot hooked up to a heading bug or nav1. I don't have a dg with a heading but but would like to install a lighted heading bug equipped and autopilot capable dg some day. After I do that how do I hook that heading bug up to the PC system without spending too much money? If it's too expensive I'll pass. I don't like the separate autopilot panel I saw in the for sale ad and would like it to be controlled by the bug.
Mooneymite Posted December 21, 2014 Report Posted December 21, 2014 The only inexpensive add-on I am aware of with that capability is Btitain's accutrak.
slowflyin Posted December 21, 2014 Report Posted December 21, 2014 +1 for Brittain. I added the heading bug this year and it works great.
Sabremech Posted December 21, 2014 Report Posted December 21, 2014 Another option is to wait and see if the FAR Part 23 re write actually happens. I doubt it will make the 2015 deadline as the law required, but if it does happen, you could install a very nice TruTrak autopilot for a fraction of the cost for a certified unit. I'm going to wait and see if it happens. David
Hank Posted December 21, 2014 Report Posted December 21, 2014 There's a Brittain AccuTrak for sale here. I love mine--set the heading bug, flip the switch to ON, and there she goes! Careful making large changes in IMC, though, as it will bank beyond standard rate.
scottfromiowa Posted December 21, 2014 Report Posted December 21, 2014 I actually prefer our Accu-Flite to the Accu-Trak. Accu-Flite is a heading bug DG that ties into the wing leveler. Doesn't need a GPS to work, just the DG. Pretty simple install (My A&P put ours in).
scottfromiowa Posted December 21, 2014 Report Posted December 21, 2014 There's a Brittain AccuTrak for sale here. I love mine--set the heading bug, flip the switch to ON, and there she goes! Careful making large changes in IMC, though, as it will bank beyond standard rate. You are describing an Accu-Flite Hank. Is that what you mean? The Accu-Trak ties into analog left/Right of a GPS vs. a heading DG with heading bug.
schule Posted December 21, 2014 Report Posted December 21, 2014 Looking to the future of aviation which you can get involved with right now every flight: Option 1--Take a young aspiring pilot/student pilot/spouse with you and engage their skill as required. Option 2--Buy a J with one already installed. And save a C for those looking to find an inexpensive Mooney to build their skill in. Either one will likely be more cost efficient than actually spending the cash on a C where its real draw is the lowest possible operating cost for good XC experience building performance. To add the options you want will likely cost several AMU right now. Good luck.
Hank Posted December 21, 2014 Report Posted December 21, 2014 You are describing an Accu-Flite Hank. Is that what you mean? The Accu-Trak ties into analog left/Right of a GPS vs. a heading DG with heading bug. My C came with both installed, I never can remember which is which. One uses the heading bug, the other flies from the GPS, including instrument approaches and holds. A Brittain can be purchased and installed for a fraction of the purchase price of an STEC system or similar, plus Zbrittain allows the STC to be transferred without doubling or tripling the equipment cost. I sent a servo back to Brittain two years who, the overhaul cost was $124 plus shipping. Even well-equipped Cs are bargains! 2
ryoder Posted December 21, 2014 Author Report Posted December 21, 2014 Looking to the future of aviation which you can get involved with right now every flight: Option 1--Take a young aspiring pilot/student pilot/spouse with you and engage their skill as required. Option 2--Buy a J with one already installed. And save a C for those looking to find an inexpensive Mooney to build their skill in. Either one will likely be more cost efficient than actually spending the cash on a C where its real draw is the lowest possible operating cost for good XC experience building performance. To add the options you want will likely cost several AMU right now. Good luck. Yeah I agree. I thought maybe there was a very cheap way to do it by having my mechanic bolt on some used parts.
Hank Posted December 21, 2014 Report Posted December 21, 2014 Yeah I agree. I thought maybe there was a very cheap way to do it by having my mechanic bolt on some used parts. Bolt on some used Brittain parts! There are some for sale IN THIS FORUM!! (Not the Classifieds, but this very forum, Vintage Mooneys). 1
Hector Posted December 21, 2014 Report Posted December 21, 2014 +1 for Brittain. I added the heading bug this year and it works great. I have the Accutrack and it works well. I would like to add the heading bug, however. I need to find the parts for the Accu-flite. Do you mind sharing how you found the parts? I keep looking but have not had any luck. I called Brittain some time ago and the did not have the parts. I should probably give them another call.
carusoam Posted December 22, 2014 Report Posted December 22, 2014 http://mooneyspace.com/topic/13862-brittain-auto-pilot-system-for-sale-alt-hold-heading-tracking-stabilization/?hl=brittain If anyone buys these, I wan't a finders fee that I can share with Hank... Or is there something you don't like about this seller? Best regards, -a-
Hector Posted December 22, 2014 Report Posted December 22, 2014 http://mooneyspace.com/topic/13862-brittain-auto-pilot-system-for-sale-alt-hold-heading-tracking-stabilization/?hl=brittain If anyone buys these, I wan't a finders fee that I can share with Hank... Or is there something you don't like about this seller? Best regards, -a- I looked at it but it's an older Brittain system than what I have installed. I'm looking for the Accu-Flite for heading bug to work alongside the Accutrack I already have. For those who have nothing this might be an alternative. 1
gsxrpilot Posted December 22, 2014 Report Posted December 22, 2014 Sorry... but the cheapest way to get a good AP in a C is to buy it with one. I've got the STec 30/alt hold coupled to a Century HSI and 530W in my C. I either bought an M20C with the above equipment installed at a huge discount, or maybe I bought the panel and got the airframe thrown in for nothing. Either way, it would be cheaper to sell the current C and buy one built out the way you want. Just my $0.02 4
TWinter Posted December 23, 2014 Report Posted December 23, 2014 Accutrack with STec 30 Alt Hold. Set the magenta line wherever you want to go on the GTN750 and set back and let it go..Mine stays dead on with just minor PC adjustments every now and then to compensate for fuel use or maybe slight wind if needed. A great system.
mike28w Posted December 25, 2014 Report Posted December 25, 2014 It seems to me that the cheapest autopilot ....is to bring another pilot ??? ( couldn't help myself) mike 1
slowflyin Posted January 1, 2015 Report Posted January 1, 2015 I have the Accutrack and it works well. I would like to add the heading bug, however. I need to find the parts for the Accu-flite. Do you mind sharing how you found the parts? I keep looking but have not had any luck. I called Brittain some time ago and the did not have the parts. I should probably give them another call. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
WardHolbrook Posted January 1, 2015 Report Posted January 1, 2015 Real pilots don't use autopilots. 1
Marauder Posted January 1, 2015 Report Posted January 1, 2015 Real pilots don't use autopilots. How did I know that was going to sneak into the conversation? I got a great comeback for you Ward... When was the last time you flew and did not? 1
WardHolbrook Posted January 3, 2015 Report Posted January 3, 2015 How did I know that was going to sneak into the conversation? I got a great comeback for you Ward... When was the last time you flew and did not? I've never once claimed to be a real pilot. I guess it's time to come out of the closet, I'm actually just a computer nerd... Seriously, it's been a few months since I last flew without one. The last airplanes I flew without a autopilot were the Decathlon and Citabria that we used during our company extreme upset recovery training. When it comes to autopilot usage, their usage in mandatory in RVSM airspace (FL290 through FL410) throughout most of the world, so yes, I spend most of my flight time droning away with the autopilot engaged. There are still those who actually say that real pilots don't use autopilots. That might sound good. but remember, there's no inherent virtue in avoiding the use of all available pilot aids including autopilots. They free up "mental bandwidth" that allow us to do other important stuff like keeping an appropriate watch out for other traffic and maintaining our situational awareness in busy airspace. The big issue with pilot aids is that if not careful, they become pilot crutches, but that's a training issue. If you've got the whistles and bells, you should use them. However, if you've got them you also need to be totally up to speed with how they operate and how ALL of the various modes work. This tends to be the weak point. Not a lot of schools or training centers teach this to the level required and you usually end up having to make an extra effort to seek out the appropriate training on your own. Inappropriate or incorrect use of automation can be disorienting and confusing. Confusion and disorientation in the cockpit is deadly. Properly implemented, automation enhances situational awareness and is worth it's weight in gold. Personally, as far as autopilot usage while IFR goes, I would like to believe that we can all hand fly all the various types of instrument approaches down to their respective minimums correctly and proficiently without any type of aid - flight director, autopilot, etc and it's something that we do each and every time we go to the sim. If a pilot cannot do that, then he needs to get more training or quit flying IFR - period. The autopilot is designed to be a pilot aid, not a pilot's crutch. That being said, aircraft owners spend great sums of money to provide redundancies for nearly every system on our aircraft - multi engines, dual this, triple that, etc., etc. Here's a question. When we hand fly an ILS approach down to minimums, what redundancy to we have in case of "pilot failure"? I believe that we should hand fly all of the "high and mid" minimums approaches we can, but when the ceiling gets below 500 feet and/or the visibility gets below a mile couple it up and let the autopilot do its thing. We then become the backup to the autopilot and we have injected an element of redundancy into the operation. In that rare case that the autopilot messes up and gets us sideways to the world, relief is only a click of the autopilot release button away. In the mean time, you have been able to watch and monitor the approach while covering the controls. If it ever becomes necessary, the transition is both instantaneous and seamless. OK, I'm climbing down off of my soapbox. Happy New Year everyone! 1
Marauder Posted January 3, 2015 Report Posted January 3, 2015 I've never once claimed to be a real pilot. I guess it's time to come out of the closet, I'm actually just a computer nerd... Seriously, it's been a few months since I last flew without one. The last airplanes I flew without a autopilot were the Decathlon and Citabria that we used during our company extreme upset recovery training. When it comes to autopilot usage, their usage in mandatory in RVSM airspace (FL290 through FL410) throughout most of the world, so yes, I spend most of my flight time droning away with the autopilot engaged. There are still those who actually say that real pilots don't use autopilots. That might sound good. but remember, there's no inherent virtue in avoiding the use of all available pilot aids including autopilots. They free up "mental bandwidth" that allow us to do other important stuff like keeping an appropriate watch out for other traffic and maintaining our situational awareness in busy airspace. The big issue with pilot aids is that if not careful, they become pilot crutches, but that's a training issue. If you've got the whistles and bells, you should use them. However, if you've got them you also need to be totally up to speed with how they operate and how ALL of the various modes work. This tends to be the weak point. Not a lot of schools or training centers teach this to the level required and you usually end up having to make an extra effort to seek out the appropriate training on your own. Inappropriate or incorrect use of automation can be disorienting and confusing. Confusion and disorientation in the cockpit is deadly. Properly implemented, automation enhances situational awareness and is worth it's weight in gold. Personally, as far as autopilot usage while IFR goes, I would like to believe that we can all hand fly all the various types of instrument approaches down to their respective minimums correctly and proficiently without any type of aid - flight director, autopilot, etc and it's something that we do each and every time we go to the sim. If a pilot cannot do that, then he needs to get more training or quit flying IFR - period. The autopilot is designed to be a pilot aid, not a pilot's crutch. That being said, aircraft owners spend great sums of money to provide redundancies for nearly every system on our aircraft - multi engines, dual this, triple that, etc., etc. Here's a question. When we hand fly an ILS approach down to minimums, what redundancy to we have in case of "pilot failure"? I believe that we should hand fly all of the "high and mid" minimums approaches we can, but when the ceiling gets below 500 feet and/or the visibility gets below a mile couple it up and let the autopilot do its thing. We then become the backup to the autopilot and we have injected an element of redundancy into the operation. In that rare case that the autopilot messes up and gets us sideways to the world, relief is only a click of the autopilot release button away. In the mean time, you have been able to watch and monitor the approach while covering the controls. If it ever becomes necessary, the transition is both instantaneous and seamless. OK, I'm climbing down off of my soapbox. Happy New Year everyone! Well said Ward. As a GA pilot, I'm a firm believer in equipment redundancy and if it were feasible, redundancy for the pilot (second pilot). The next best thing is recurrent training for the dummy in the left seat and a good autopilot when the dummy needs some help.
yvesg Posted January 3, 2015 Report Posted January 3, 2015 I got my IFR rating 3 years ago and only really started to use it a year ago (after my airplane got upgraded to fly IFR legally in Canada) .. so I consider myself "green" and have personal minimums that relate to my lack of experience. The few recent times I was IFR in bumpy conditions, I was really happy to have the wing leveler operative. This decreased the workload quite a bit and allowed me to concentrate on the navigation part and keep the shiny side up. Yves 2
ryoder Posted January 3, 2015 Author Report Posted January 3, 2015 I just waxed the hell out of the bottom of my Mooney and I now think the bottom is shinier than the top. I hope that doesn't confuse the wing leveler? 1
Recommended Posts