TruTrak Autopilot Pre Order's / Status Update

[Baker Avionics]

1 hour ago, Jesse Saint said:

Andrew was to owner of TruTrak before he sold to Bendix King. 
 

The Dynon auto pilot is being developed, but it’s still up to the FAA how long The approval takes.
 

The only approval that has happened since COVID is the Garmin. Not much of a level playing field, it would appear. 

 

1 hour ago, MIm20c said:

Garmin has been spending the necessary money to do free installs and necessary maintenance on tons of aircraft. They are putting the money up to get the job done and have procedures in place to provide a top performing system the the FAA can rely on. They’ve done this on countless certified airframes. Compare that to other companies that promised certification but required potential customers to try to get a one off approval that the company could run with. 
 

I wished Garmin would expand the network to include shops like yours. I’d drop my plane off ASAP at your shop if you had access to the g3x and gfc certified. 

Garmin is a little weird about new dealers.  We are on the airfield with a Garmin Dealer and they are struggling to get anything out and they treat customers horrible because if you want Garmin, you HAVE to go to them.  There are 2 other dealers in the area and they too are just difficult to work with, from what I hear from customers and the local FBO's (Which fly here to us for virtually everything).  We are killing it without Garmin and they tell us that they want us on their team but noone complains about the dealers they have now and they do not like the competition as they feel it would lower their sales.  Either way, fine with me because I have my hangars all full and if I did get Garmin right now, I have no place to put the aircraft and do not have enough quality techs to work on them.  I am already booked out until October and it is filling up quickly.  I am sure @Jesse Saint is in the same boat.

@Jesse Saint please shoot me an email if you don't mind as I would love to collaborate on having a great place for customer to go on the East Coast as well when they are there please.  

[Oldguy]

1 hour ago, Hyett6420 said:

Im going to ask the daft question, the trutrak autopilot is that bk aerocruz 230 or am i totally confused.

Totally confused. Closer to being the AeroCruze 100, I believe.

The 230, I am told, is available for our Mooney planes as long as you do not have an Aspen or similar unit fronting it.

[cliffy]

The 230 is a slide in replacement IF you have a 150 autopilot already installed. it uses the old servos.

The TT we are talking about is the 100

Many are waiting for the FAA to get their act together

[Sandman993]

11 hours ago, Navi said:

Not much Cliffy.. I don't think you missed anything.. (!)

Over on the Piper Forums, there have been thousands of TTs installed, a couple  hundred Garmins, (estimated by the group) and 3 Trio's that I know of.

I posted a question on there about how the Trios have worked out, no replies...  Several Trios have been removed from 182s and PA-32s, their one choice of servo  apparently struggles with the heavier airframes...  (TT delayed the intro of their AP on the PA-32 to upgrade the system with heavier gear and more powerful servo setup. (the TT servo has adjustable torque, set at the factory)

Some shops have informed up front that they will NOT install the Trio...

This is all 3rd hand info, but seems consistent among the forums..

FWIW! 

Nav.

One of my fly buddies has a trio in his 182... it works fine. Took a while to get sensitivity just right. You gotta set it airborne. Also voltage is a big deal. If the servo can drive that tank, it’s not weak. Albeit the Mooney drives like a dump truck... don’t get me wrong, I love my ship, but the controls are heavy.

if it’s true what you say about shops not wanting to install trio, it might be because they don’t know how to set it. For a stand alone, I think it’s pretty sh## hot. At least you don’t have to spend 10k extra to put gizmos in the panel to drive it. It’ll cost you about 25k to install a gfc 500 and the two gadgets if you want it to do everything. Or you could spend around 33 if you want to run a g3 touch.

me wonders if garmin keeps the TT from cert so you’ll be forced to buy theirs. I’ve lost a lot of faith after buying a buttload of garmin stuff. I see how they do business now. Plus they promised the autopilot would be affordable. Oh well, don’t get me started on that crap.

[Sandman993]

13 hours ago, steingar said:

Two years....

Two years...? For?

i repositioned a C150 for a friend to a different airport... that’s how long it took for my friends to stop making fun of me. 

 

[steingar]

10 hours ago, Sandman993 said:

Two years...? For?

i repositioned a C150 for a friend to a different airport... that’s how long it took for my friends to stop making fun of me. 

 

This thread started two years ago.  

[aviatoreb]

21 hours ago, Sandman993 said:

...

if it’s true what you say about shops not wanting to install trio, it might be because they don’t know how to set it. For a stand alone, I think it’s pretty sh## hot. At least you don’t have to spend 10k extra to put gizmos in the panel to drive it. It’ll cost you about 25k to install a gfc 500 and the two gadgets if you want it to do everything. Or you could spend around 33 if you want to run a g3 touch.

me wonders if garmin keeps the TT from cert so you’ll be forced to buy theirs. I’ve lost a lot of faith after buying a buttload of garmin stuff. I see how they do business now. Plus they promised the autopilot would be affordable. Oh well, don’t get me started on that crap.

I am wondering and guessing how can Garmin get stuff certified so smoothly and on schedule where all the others it takes years and also it takes years more than even their most pessimistic estimates.  Does Garmin have in house certification rights - good bad or ugly - in a manner comparable to what we have heard that Boeing has had that has now become famous with the 737max?  Or is it just a matter of having a legal-engineering team that is intimately familiar with the process and they have an especially insider relationship with the right FAA people?  In any case it is quite remarkable.

Edited June 27, 2020 by aviatoreb

[Navi]

11 hours ago, Sandman993 said:

One of my fly buddies has a trio in his 182... it works fine. Took a while to get sensitivity just right. You gotta set it airborne. Also voltage is a big deal. If the servo can drive that tank, it’s not weak. Albeit the Mooney drives like a dump truck... don’t get me wrong, I love my ship, but the controls are heavy.

if it’s true what you say about shops not wanting to install trio, it might be because they don’t know how to set it. For a stand alone, I think it’s pretty sh## hot. At least you don’t have to spend 10k extra to put gizmos in the panel to drive it. It’ll cost you about 25k to install a gfc 500 and the two gadgets if you want it to do everything. Or you could spend around 33 if you want to run a g3 touch.

me wonders if garmin keeps the TT from cert so you’ll be forced to buy theirs. I’ve lost a lot of faith after buying a buttload of garmin stuff. I see how they do business now. Plus they promised the autopilot would be affordable. Oh well, don’t get me started on that crap.

 

 

I understand it works well for some...  Was not aware of the voltage issue tho …  Could you elaborate?

2 Piper drivers have the Trio in 28s, and they are pleased with it, after many flights adjusting the settings.  Have not heard from them for a while...

>>>if it’s true what you say about shops not wanting to install trio, it might be because they don’t know how to set it. For a stand alone, I think it’s pretty sh## hot

I have heard that it is mainly a difficult install, and takes a while to set up, but many installers are not confident using "Clik Bond" fasteners on an old airframe.. (and mechanics around here agree with them)

It is a difficult installation, and needs some degree of expertise and a couple of extra joints in your arms... I suspect it is a difficult installation for an installation shop to  earn a fair margin on.. and that they must do to remain in business....

The TT installation is brilliantly simple, and most PA-28s and 32s fly "out the door" with the factory settings.  Rarely any fiddling with the setup adjustments...Install, setup. test flight and send plane and new AP owner on their way home...

Some of us have "tweaked" the settings (easy) but most end up back close to if not at the factory suggestions…

FWIW! 

N

Edited June 26, 2020 by Navi

[Navi]

12 minutes ago, aviatoreb said:

I am wondering and guessing how can Garmin get stuff certified some smoothly and on schedule where all the others it takes years and also it takes years more than even their most pessimistic estimates.  Does Garmin have in house certification rights - good bad or ugly - in a manner comparable to what we have heard that Boeing has had that has now become famous with the 737max?  Or is it just a matter of having a legal-engineering team that is intimately familiar with the process and they have an especially insider relationship with the right FAA people?  In any case it is quite remarkable.

Yes, I understand Garmin has "certification staff" on site full time...

Nav

[aviatoreb]

7 minutes ago, Navi said:

Yes, I understand Garmin has "certification staff" on site full time...

Nav

I would guess they have some kind of certification staff.  But are those staff FAA personal able to complete the process of certification, or are they simply laywer-DER-types capable of putting together the exact package.

[MBDiagMan]

Where is Al Mooney when you need him?  One of his specialties from his very beginning was knowing how to work the system to get things certified.

Edited June 26, 2020 by MBDiagMan

[steingar]

Used to be everyone who made airplanes or airplane stuff had folks who knew how to work the certification system. Not game it, they just knew how to present stuff to the FAA.  But when everyone shut down in the early 80's, a lot of that expertise dried up in the private sector.  Moreover, the guys at the FAA aged out and retired. Once GARA passed and the manufacturers started building airplanes neither the folks in the private sector nor the ones in the public sector really knew what they were doing.  So the process has become ridiculously inefficient and costs have skyrocketed.

 

[MBDiagMan]

Yes Steingar.  I did not mean to imply that Al gamed the system.  He was smart and just learned what it took to make it happen.

[Sandman993]

8 hours ago, Navi said:

 

 

I understand it works well for some...  Was not aware of the voltage issue tho …  Could you elaborate?

2 Piper drivers have the Trio in 28s, and they are pleased with it, after many flights adjusting the settings.  Have not heard from them for a while...

>>>if it’s true what you say about shops not wanting to install trio, it might be because they don’t know how to set it. For a stand alone, I think it’s pretty sh## hot

I have heard that it is mainly a difficult install, and takes a while to set up, but many installers are not confident using "Clik Bond" fasteners on an old airframe.. (and mechanics around here agree with them)

It is a difficult installation, and needs some degree of expertise and a couple of extra joints in your arms... I suspect it is a difficult installation for an installation shop to  earn a fair margin on.. and that they must do to remain in business....

The TT installation is brilliantly simple, and most PA-28s and 32s fly "out the door" with the factory settings.  Rarely any fiddling with the setup adjustments...Install, setup. test flight and send plane and new AP owner on their way home...

Some of us have "tweaked" the settings (easy) but most end up back close to if not at the factory suggestions…

FWIW! 

N

You’re correct, our maker didn’t give us a universal swivel for an arm... as good as a human arm is, the trio tested our patience a few times... inventing tools. No click bond in that application that I remember. I have a lopresti Landing light and the power supply is mounted on the firewall With click bond. I didn’t think it was a great idea at the time but was thankful it wasn’t necessary to drill etc. that said, I’m not sure I could get it to let go with a hammer.

the voltage has to be right at 12v maybe a smidge under for the servo to operate as advertised. While we were ground testing, we applied a battery charger to the system and it worked better. Old wires leaking voltage would be problematic me thinks. 

this autopilot was installed with care and looks as good as it gets. The head unit is fairly well done.

don't tease me about the tt being so good... I already need therapy from the long awaited anticipation of having one in my ship. 

[Sandman993]

3 hours ago, steingar said:

Used to be everyone who made airplanes or airplane stuff had folks who knew how to work the certification system. Not game it, they just knew how to present stuff to the FAA.  But when everyone shut down in the early 80's, a lot of that expertise dried up in the private sector.  Moreover, the guys at the FAA aged out and retired. Once GARA passed and the manufacturers started building airplanes neither the folks in the private sector nor the ones in the public sector really knew what they were doing.  So the process has become ridiculously inefficient and costs have skyrocketed.

 

Feckless 

[akaLoneStar]

On 3/4/2019 at 4:11 PM, Navi said:

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 2^nd 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

Thank you for sharing your experience with the TT autopilot.  I was wondering what sounds the autopilot makes.  Are there more than just the 3 beeps tones you mentioned when the autopilot disengages?  If so, what other sounds does it annunciate?

[cliffy]

You had to post that didn't you!   Now I'm drooling with a Pavlovian response

[drapo]

2 hours ago, cliffy said:

You had to post that didn't you!   Now I'm drooling with a Pavlovian response

I react that way every time a new post shows in this subject thinking it’s the official announcement of the FAA final approval for Mooneys 

[MBDiagMan]

If you’re hanging around this thread awaiting an approval announcement, make sure you bring a sandwich because you will certainly get hungry.

[Len T]

Is there any news for M20C models now that TruTrak is part of Honeywell? I prefer not to pay $20k for an S-Tec. 

[carusoam]

Welcome aboard Len.

Certification by airframe for each AP is around here somewhere...

Each manufacturer keeps a calendar for the various airframes they are pursuing...

Expect when BK is involved... be sure to check the year for any estimate... they always say something like available in Q4...and completely omit the year... then miss the date horribly after that...

Few avionics companies have been able to get this right... and the FAA doesn’t make it any easier...

PP thoughts only, not an avionics guy...

Best regards,

-a-

[NJMac]

So Garmin is charging full steam ahead. Still nothing from TT. About to book a slot to add the GFC 500 for my E. Tired of waiting.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[Marauder]

54 minutes ago, NJMac said:

So Garmin is charging full steam ahead. Still nothing from TT. About to book a slot to add the GFC 500 for my E. Tired of waiting.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
 

You sound surprised!  I am not surprised that Garmin is pounding away at the AML for all of the manufacturers. They are great at doing that. Quite honestly, I am in the same position with my STEC 60-2 autopilot. Although my STEC works great, I want altitude pre-select and constant IAS climbs. Genesys is asleep at the switch as well. Their proposed upgrade to their digital solution is to re-use the existing servos with the upgrade cost being more expensive than the MSRP for the GFC 500. And to boot, they want firm PO commitments before they will engage in the certification process. 

[cliffy]

Questions-

Does any one have what might be called  a real good estimate  (not just a guess) of what the full installed price would be for the Garmin GFC 500 A/P in a Mooney with no other Garmin products on board?  A cost for the most basic application- left right up down hold where you are altitude.  Just the same basic capability as the TT unit, nothing more. No CAT III capability needed. All most of us need is just the basics for cross country travel. 

Secondly, I brought this up a while back but I'll do it again- 

I once "pushed" the FAA into doing their job by going through a specific office in the FAA because they were dragging their feet on a project. I got it done in a few weeks after a year and a half delay from them. Is there no way to do the same on a project like this ASSUMING   BK is as interested in getting this done as all of us are - for the last 2 years? 

I can see no reason why BK would be so silent on the actual progress to just say "its in the hands of the FAA" when so much money is in the offing unless there is a back story. I'm sorry but this situation makes no sense at all. Even considering COVID This is business with lots of dollars (and reputation) on the line in a time of depressed industry. Even if it is the FAA, I'd be talking about what is happening and trying my DAMNEDEST through my elected representatives and the FAA (and letting the world know) to get something done  IF IN FACT THE FAA IS THE ONLY ROAD BLOCK. 

I'll even include the AV-30 in this concern as its the same scenario but a different company. There is no need for either company to be so silent (either to the public or pushing the FAA) if there isn't another back story involved. 

This is not the certification of a new SST. Nor is it the recert of a failed airliner. Its only the expansion of an STC of an  already certified appliance (TT A/P).

Somebody is dragging their feet here because other companies seem to be getting the job done or at least talking about it.  

Something smells funny  We have a couple of posters here who have tried to help (not knocking them in any way)  but at some point one just has to say something smells fishy. 

What we need is a good aviation investigative journalist.  

[NJMac]

1 minute ago, cliffy said:

Somebody is dragging their feet here because other companies seem to be getting the job done or at least talking about it.  

Something smells funny  We have a couple of posters here who have tried to help (not knocking them in any way)  but at some point one just has to say something smells fishy. 

Agree 100%.  Early bird gets the worm.  Im ready to go fishing.  Excuses don't catch fish. 

Edited July 16, 2020 by NJMac