Trutrack Update

[Jeev]

Just updated my website to include the general install manual with the wiring diagram and the install manuals for the approved kits for Cessna & Piper so you all can get an idea of the install.  I will update this page with the Mooney manual when I get it.

https://wolfaviationsales.com/trutrak-autopilots

[N201MKTurbo]

On 9/18/2018 at 5:09 PM, N201MKTurbo said:

It should work fine. The TruTrack doesn’t need an external attitude reference. You will probably end up with redundant GPSS if you wire the autopilot output of the G5 to the TruTrack. If the TruTrack will accept an analog error signal.

I just read the install manual and it only accepts ARINC and RS232 signals. I don’t know if the heading bug or error is transmitted through the ARINC messages from the GPS. 

I guess we will have to wait for an answer. 

[Jeev]

2 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I just read the install manual and it only accepts ARINC and RS232 signals. I don’t know if the heading bug or error is transmitted through the ARINC messages from the GPS. 

I guess we will have to wait for an answer. 

Yes we will have to wait and I am certain there will be a revision on the install manual or appendix to include the Aspen / G5 interface.  I do know there are some empty pins in the current wiring harness that would be available for "upgrades" they are PINS 7, 18, 24 & 25 on the diagram.

[aviatoreb]

2 hours ago, Jeev said:

Just updated my website to include the general install manual with the wiring diagram and the install manuals for the approved kits for Cessna & Piper so you all can get an idea of the install.  I will update this page with the Mooney manual when I get it.

https://wolfaviationsales.com/trutrak-autopilots

Wow!

[N201MKTurbo]

1 hour ago, Jeev said:

Yes we will have to wait and I am certain there will be a revision on the install manual or appendix to include the Aspen / G5 interface.  I do know there are some empty pins in the current wiring harness that would be available for "upgrades" they are PINS 7, 18, 24 & 25 on the diagram.

I didn’t see anything in the install manual that would exclude a plane with a G5 or Aspen. The TruTrack doesn’t need anything from them.

[MIm20c]

3 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I didn’t see anything in the install manual that would exclude a plane with a G5 or Aspen. The TruTrack doesn’t need anything from them.

The key for me is having the heading bug work on the aspen and future integration with alt pre select and TAS climb. While I’m dreaming allow an ILS signal pass through to the AP as well. 

[cliffy]

1 hour ago, MIm20c said:

The key for me is having the heading bug work on the aspen and future integration with alt pre select and TAS climb. While I’m dreaming allow an ILS signal pass through to the AP as well. 

You can already have all that for 20K   Not the market TT is designed for. 

[MIm20c]

18 minutes ago, cliffy said:

You can already have all that for 20K   Not the market TT is designed for. 

I think the TT is great how it is. However, the aspen might be able to input multiple sources/capabilities into the unit. Here is a small piece of the new aspen software for the stec unit. The pfd might allow updated software to work with the TT in a similar way. 

[Jeev]

14 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I didn’t see anything in the install manual that would exclude a plane with a G5 or Aspen. The TruTrack doesn’t need anything from them.

Correct I was referring to open pins that can take an output from the Aspen or G5 for heading bug and other features.  Not needed as you said since the Trutrak can operate as a stand alone but it would be for "nice to have features".  We will see what is included when the update comes out. 

[N201MKTurbo]

3 minutes ago, Jeev said:

Correct I was referring to open pins that can take an output from the Aspen or G5 for heading bug and other features.  Not needed as you said since the Trutrak can operate as a stand alone but it would be for "nice to have features".  We will see what is included when the update comes out. 

I think that information may already be in the ARINC messages the TruTrack is receiving. My Avidyne 550, which has a heading display, shows the position of the heading bug from the G5. 

[N201MKTurbo]

On 9/16/2018 at 12:55 PM, jetdriven said:

Is it Approved to couple the approach down to LPV mins? Or ILS DA?

This is America, we are free to do what ever we want unless it is forbidden by law. We don't need approval for everything we do....

Edited September 21, 2018 by N201MKTurbo

[N9405V]

The GFC500 is nice, but unless I can install it myself, it isn’t a viable option for me.

And the GFC500 is not going to work if you have a short bodied Mooney.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bob - S50]

1 hour ago, N201MKTurbo said:

This is America, we are free to do what ever we want unless it is forbidden by law. We don't need approval for everything we do....

I'm kind of surprised to see that answer from you.  Not characteristic.  Here are a couple quotes from the TT flight manual supplement:

"3.6. Altitude Limitations
The Vizion autopilot system has an altitude engage / disengage height limit. This limit shall be used for all modes of flight.
• The minimum autopilot operating altitude is 700 feet AGL."

"3.8. Other Limitations
This autopilot has not been evaluated to meet certification requirements for coupled instrument procedures, including coupled approaches. Therefore coupled instrument approaches and procedures are not authorized without further approval."

In the Air Force we used to say not to do something that would result in having a base named after you (die) or a new safety rule.  While you can certainly do whatever you like, just be prepared to justify your actions if asked why you did it by the authorities.  As I've said before, is the TT capable of flying an LPV to minimums?  Probably.  Would I test it while VFR and VMC to see if it could?  Yes.  Would I then use it in an emergency?  You bet.  An example would be IMC with an ADI failure.  Let the TT fly the approach to get me down.  That I could justify.  All systems operating normally, weather as forecast, I just choose to ignore the limitation?  Nope.

[Hank]

1 hour ago, N9405V said:

 

And the GFC500 is not going to work if you have a short bodied Mooney.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Why not? --curious short body owner 

[N9405V]

Why not? --curious short body owner 

https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/p/604257#additional

The short bodies are excluded from the proposed stc list


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[N201MKTurbo]

1 hour ago, Bob - S50 said:

I'm kind of surprised to see that answer from you.  Not characteristic.  Here are a couple quotes from the TT flight manual supplement:

"3.6. Altitude Limitations
The Vizion autopilot system has an altitude engage / disengage height limit. This limit shall be used for all modes of flight.
• The minimum autopilot operating altitude is 700 feet AGL."

"3.8. Other Limitations
This autopilot has not been evaluated to meet certification requirements for coupled instrument procedures, including coupled approaches. Therefore coupled instrument approaches and procedures are not authorized without further approval."

In the Air Force we used to say not to do something that would result in having a base named after you (die) or a new safety rule.  While you can certainly do whatever you like, just be prepared to justify your actions if asked why you did it by the authorities.  As I've said before, is the TT capable of flying an LPV to minimums?  Probably.  Would I test it while VFR and VMC to see if it could?  Yes.  Would I then use it in an emergency?  You bet.  An example would be IMC with an ADI failure.  Let the TT fly the approach to get me down.  That I could justify.  All systems operating normally, weather as forecast, I just choose to ignore the limitation?  Nope.

I’m sorry you misunderstood me. I don’t violate the FARs 

I guess I object to the wording. It suggests that we need approval for everything we do and have to ask permission to get out of bed in the morning. I would have liked it better if they would have said that it was prohibited. I realize the two are synonymous in most thesauruses.

That being said, aren’t we capable of evaluating if it works or not? Shouldn’t we fly all coupled approaches on a hair trigger to disconnect and hand fly the airplane to the runway? That’s the way I fly.

i was flying Safety pilot with a guy once and during an approach I pulled the CB for the autopilot. He compleatly freaked out, got very mad, pulled off the hood and said if I ever screwed with his airplane again he would report me to the FAA (??). I said he needs to be able to hand fly the plane at any time. He said that he was not planning on hand flying today (??). To say the least I never flew with him again.

[Bob - S50]

24 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I’m sorry you misunderstood me. I don’t violate the FARs 

I guess I object to the wording. It suggests that we need approval for everything we do and have to ask permission to get out of bed in the morning. I would have liked it better if they would have said that it was prohibited. I realize the two are synonymous in most thesauruses.

That being said, aren’t we capable of evaluating if it works or not? Shouldn’t we fly all coupled approaches on a hair trigger to disconnect and hand fly the airplane to the runway? That’s the way I fly.

i was flying Safety pilot with a guy once and during an approach I pulled the CB for the autopilot. He compleatly freaked out, got very mad, pulled off the hood and said if I ever screwed with his airplane again he would report me to the FAA (??). I said he needs to be able to hand fly the plane at any time. He said that he was not planning on hand flying today (??). To say the least I never flew with him again.

OK, that sounds more like you.  I feel better now.

[cliffy]

In the new airline world its called "being an autopilot cripple"  Just look to the 777 in KSFO

If you can't click it off at any time and fly the airplane just as well as the AP, you ain't proficient. 

I'll go even further and say that if you can't fly an ILS to CAT III mins (50"), by hand, and keep the needles perfectly centered you ain't good enough yet!

Then 200 & 1/2 is a non-event. Almost like VFR. 

[takair]

Beyond testing for precision on approaches, one of the things cert authorities use to set minimum coupled altitude is hard-over recovery.  In other words, if the autopilot has a hardcover, and you insert a delay to recognize the issue (I think it is three long seconds) and then attempt to recover, will you still be at a safe altitude?  Not saying this is why they have the high minimum altitude on this autopilot, but pilots should be aware that this is one reason for the minimum coupled altitudes.  

[MIm20c]

1 hour ago, cliffy said:

In the new airline world its called "being an autopilot cripple"  Just look to the 777 in KSFO

If you can't click it off at any time and fly the airplane just as well as the AP, you ain't proficient. 

I'll go even further and say that if you can't fly an ILS to CAT III mins (50"), by hand, and keep the needles perfectly centered you ain't good enough yet!

Then 200 & 1/2 is a non-event. Almost like VFR. 

50 inches!!! I’m never going to get my instrument ticket. 

[toto]

35 minutes ago, MIm20c said:

50 inches!!! I’m never going to get my instrument ticket. 

It's to avoid descent into Stonehenge.

[EricJ]

42 minutes ago, MIm20c said:

50 inches!!! I’m never going to get my instrument ticket. 

 

5 minutes ago, toto said:

It's to avoid descent into Stonehenge.

I think it was 18"...
 

 

[toto]

4 minutes ago, EricJ said:

 

I think it was 18"...

 

They had to build in a safety margin above the terrain..

[cliffy]

OK OK I hit the wrong button   50'  FEET OK  You all knew what I meant anyway!  :-) :-)

And yes when i was doing it full time I could do 50 FEET every approach by hand. Anyone ever read about the GCAs in Greenland back in the old days? Sometimes it was necessary so one could get on the ground. I know, GCAs no one does them anymore. Dinosaur talking here but after 55 years a dinosaur that is still alive and well by doing what I preach. 

[Hank]

21 minutes ago, cliffy said:

OK OK I hit the wrong button   50'  FEET OK  You all knew what I meant anyway!  :-) :-)

And yes when i was doing it full time I could do 50 FEET every approach by hand. Anyone ever read about the GCAs in Greenland back in the old days? Sometimes it was necessary so one could get on the ground. I know, GCAs no one does them anymore. Dinosaur talking here but after 55 years a dinosaur that is still alive and well by doing what I preach. 

While that's all well and good, our planes are neither approved nor qualifiable for Cat III approaches. And I'm not ready to turn in my cert . . . .