Marauder Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 Yeah, the German company's add on was the reason I asked Aspen about that feature at SnF a couple of years ago. They suggested I wait for their version... You would swap out your STEC 60-2 for the Avidyne? In a heart beat, if they allowed me to keep my STEC servos. I use the Aspen's altitude pre-select all the time during flights. And if there is a gripe I have about the 60-2, it is the rate based climbs. I would much prefer to set an indicated airspeed and let it climb at whatever rate it can get. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Quote
Bob_Belville Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 In a heart beat, if they allowed me to keep my STEC servos. I use the Aspen's altitude pre-select all the time during flights. And if there is a gripe I have about the 60-2, it is the rate based climbs. I would much prefer to set an indicated airspeed and let it climb at whatever rate it can get. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Boy, our STECs are pretty reliable... I hear a lot of horror stories about other brands... I recognize this is probably clean sheet technology especially compared to the King and Century stuff. 1 Quote
Marauder Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 Boy, our STECs are pretty reliable... I hear a lot of horror stories about other brands... I recognize this is probably clean sheet technology especially compared to the King and Century stuff. I agree about the STEC reliability. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Quote
Mooneymite Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 In theory. I think the big difference is how deep you are into the upset. From what I read about the Cirrus version, it will handle some pretty extreme upsets. It would be interesting for someone (besides me) to see what the PC would handle in the way of an upset recovery. If an extreme rolling pull-out can be avoided, the PC should be an aid. I wonder if Bill Wheat, or any of the old time Mooney folks explored the capability of the PC in this respect. I suspect it would not be much help in a spin with an aft CG. I'm trying to never find out what its capabilities are. 1 Quote
Marauder Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 It would be interesting for someone (besides me) to see what the PC would handle in the way of an upset recovery.If an extreme rolling pull-out can be avoided, the PC should be an aid. I wonder if Bill Wheat, or any of the old time Mooney folks explored the capability of the PC in this respect. I suspect it would not be much help in a spin with an aft CG. I'm trying to never find out what its capabilities are. I think the big difference is that the PC system was designed to be on all the time to prevent an upset situation. The Avidyne product is designed to handle a true loss of control situation. But it would be interesting to hear if anyone did test the capabilities of the PC system. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Quote
Mooneymite Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 ...designed to handle a true loss of control situation. Airliners have had this feature for years. It's called a co-pilot. 1 Quote
cnoe Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 Quote: And if there is a gripe I have about the 60-2, it is the rate based climbs. I would much prefer to set an indicated airspeed and let it climb at whatever rate it can get. This is the reason I use the VS function on my altitude hold for "descents" but almost never for "ascents". It can climb you right into a stall if you're not paying attention. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Quote
cnoe Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 I have hell with quotes on Tapatalk. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk 1 Quote
amillet Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 My first Mooney was a '78 J with Apollo loran & DG (no FD) & Century II. It would follow a flight plan hands free. I was surprised when I got '97 J with KLN90B & KFC150 which requires manually turning course needle at every waypoint. Quote
amillet Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 My first Mooney was a '78 J with Apollo loran & DG (no FD) & Century II. It would follow a flight plan hands free. I was surprised when I got '97 J with KLN90B & KFC150 which requires manually turning course needle at every waypoint. Quote
amillet Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 My first Mooney was a 78 J with Apollo loran and DG (no FD) and Century II. It would follow a flight plan hands free. I was surprised when I got a 97 J with KLN90B and KFC150 which requires manually turning course needle at every waypoint. Quote
amillet Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 Sorry about the multiple posts. iPad confusion Quote
BigAirHarper Posted October 18, 2015 Author Report Posted October 18, 2015 Wow guys thanks for the great responses! It's helping in clearing up some of the confusion. I had some experience with an STEC, don't remember the exact model but it was coupled to a 530. Mainly tho my experience with AP is in the G1000/GFC700 setup in the 172 I rent. (And in a Cirrus I flew for the first time today, boy was that nice) So looks like an STEC carries more weight than some of these older AP models. It would def be nice to have something reliable and not prone to breaking. Another question: if the autopilot is coupled to a G430/530 does that automatically mean it has GPSS? The whole GPSS bit confuses me and maybe it's just because I don't understand the term. Quote
DonMuncy Posted October 18, 2015 Report Posted October 18, 2015 The uncomplicated answer is that the GPSS hooks the GPS and the autopilot together. The GPS knows where everything is, but doesn't control the airplane at all. The autopilot makes the plane fly, but has no idea where anything is. The GPSS takes the info from the APS and feeds it to the autopilot so it can tell the airplane where to go. I'm not sure what "the autopilot being coupled to the GNS430/530" means, but I consider the GPSS to be that coupling. 2 Quote
Marauder Posted October 18, 2015 Report Posted October 18, 2015 Wow guys thanks for the great responses! It's helping in clearing up some of the confusion. I had some experience with an STEC, don't remember the exact model but it was coupled to a 530. Mainly tho my experience with AP is in the G1000/GFC700 setup in the 172 I rent. (And in a Cirrus I flew for the first time today, boy was that nice) So looks like an STEC carries more weight than some of these older AP models. It would def be nice to have something reliable and not prone to breaking. Another question: if the autopilot is coupled to a G430/530 does that automatically mean it has GPSS? The whole GPSS bit confuses me and maybe it's just because I don't understand the term. GPSS as Don mention takes the GPS signal and uses additional input of ground speed and bank angle to generate a signal for the autopilot to follow. It is much more precise than following a VOR signal and can make turns. Here is a video that I made showing how I flew an entire procedure turn using GPSS. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Quote
carusoam Posted October 18, 2015 Report Posted October 18, 2015 (edited) The older the equipment is, the less capable it is to handle the complexity of real life situations. If it is using logic to calculate where it is in space and using roll rates to return to 'clean side up/dirty side down’ while the weather is providing up and down drafts, this is good. A strong digital computer is required with some pretty high end Attitude AHRS type accelerometer sensors. It was good to have an analog dial type telephone when it was the only thing available. Similar comparison to using an iPhone 6. look at the spec sheets for some older GPS devices. They operate at 1hz. Essentially knowing where they are and what they are doing once per second. This is good for smooth weather where flight dynamics change really slowly. Throw in turbulence and it will take too long to determine you are upside down and not have enough data to calculate the error and what to do next. If your sensor is based on a gyro, look for the gyro's limitations for what it is unable to handle. Modern technology is allowing us to do more than ever before. But there are some limitations. Putting a digital controller on the old vacuum based wing leveler with altitude hold, that would be great! best regards, -a- Edited October 18, 2015 by carusoam 1 Quote
cnoe Posted October 18, 2015 Report Posted October 18, 2015 Another question: if the autopilot is coupled to a G430/530 does that automatically mean it has GPSS? The whole GPSS bit confuses me and maybe it's just because I don't understand the term. No. Even though my GNS530W is coupled to my Century IIB it does not have roll steering (which I lust after). It does a semi-great job of following the magenta line and will track a precision approach to minimums. During procedure turns and holds use the heading bug to follow the dotted line on your 430/530 display. Not having true GNSS is a compromise but is way better than a wing leveler on no A/P at all. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk 2 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.