AUTOPILOTS, Garmin, STEC, King, etc.

[DCarlton]

From a safety perspective, I'm curious about the capabilities of the various autopilots that have shown up in M20's over the years.  I've only flown behind a Brittain in a Mooney and haven't flown another airplane with an autopilot in 20 years.  I've noticed the long threads about pitch oscillations with the new GFC and didn't want to complicate that thread.  Which autopilots (Garmin, King, STEC, etc) can get you back to wings level and reliably hold altitude "with a push of a button" so to speak (perhaps from an unusual attitude)?  Any of them?  My Brittain is fairly sluggish getting you wings level and it doesn't feature altitude hold.  Thanks.  

[hubcap]

The “blue button” on the Garmin GFC500 will put you “wings level” very quickly from an unusual attitude.

FWIW - I have a GFC500, and I do not experience any pitch oscillations. 

[Ragsf15e]

38 minutes ago, DCarlton said:

From a safety perspective, I'm curious about the capabilities of the various autopilots that have shown up in M20's over the years.  I've only flown behind a Brittain in a Mooney and haven't flown another airplane with an autopilot in 20 years.  I've noticed the long threads about pitch oscillations with the new GFC and didn't want to complicate that thread.  Which autopilots (Garmin, King, STEC, etc) can get you back to wings level and reliably hold altitude "with a push of a button" so to speak (perhaps from an unusual attitude)?  Any of them?  My Brittain is fairly sluggish getting you wings level and it doesn't feature altitude hold.  Thanks.  

Even the newer autopilots with “blue” buttons have engagement limits.  So for example, outside of 65 degrees of bank or 30 of pitch (those aren’t exact, but ballpark from hazy memory), the gfc autopilot on a Cirrus won’t engage when you push the button.  So there are limits.  However, if you keep the esp function on, it starts bumping you back to level before you get a significant bank, pitch or airspeed excursion.

my stec 30a does have a straight/level function and it works but I wouldn’t trust it past about 30 degrees of bank, however I haven’t tried it.  When engaged with the trim set properly, it will reliably hold altitude.  If the trim isn’t set properly (or you slow down/speed up), it will yell at you enough to get your attention before going off altitude.  

The gfc autopilots have a lot more functionality that makes them great for ifr (altitude selection, approach modes, climb type, etc), but my stec is very reliable for vfr and helps out reasonably in ifr.

edit: this is from the gfc500 manual for a pa-28.  Point is there are engagement limits in airspeed (high/low), bank and pitch.  They are big, but I have personally seen someone try to recover an SR-20 from ~70 degree bank with the button and nothing happened.  It took a couple seconds to realize and recover by hand which reinforced the need to practice handling recoveries manually.

[Ragsf15e]

4 minutes ago, hubcap said:

The “blue button” on the Garmin GFC500 will put you “wings level” very quickly from an unusual attitude.

FWIW - I have a GFC500, and I do not experience any pitch oscillations. 

Do you know the engagement limits? 

[hubcap]

46 minutes ago, Ragsf15e said:

Do you know the engagement limits? 

I do not. I assume the limits would be published.

[DCarlton]

1 hour ago, Ragsf15e said:

Even the newer autopilots with “blue” buttons have engagement limits.  So for example, outside of 65 degrees of bank or 30 of pitch (those aren’t exact, but ballpark from hazy memory), the gfc autopilot on a Cirrus won’t engage when you push the button.  So there are limits.  However, if you keep the esp function on, it starts bumping you back to level before you get a significant bank, pitch or airspeed excursion.

my stec 30a does have a straight/level function and it works but I wouldn’t trust it past about 30 degrees of bank, however I haven’t tried it.  When engaged with the trim set properly, it will reliably hold altitude.  If the trim isn’t set properly (or you slow down/speed up), it will yell at you enough to get your attention before going off altitude.  

The gfc autopilots have a lot more functionality that makes them great for ifr (altitude selection, approach modes, climb type, etc), but my stec is very reliable for vfr and helps out reasonably in ifr.

edit: this is from the gfc500 manual for a pa-28.  Point is there are engagement limits in airspeed (high/low), bank and pitch.  They are big, but I have personally seen someone try to recover an SR-20 from ~70 degree bank with the button and nothing happened.  It took a couple seconds to realize and recover by hand which reinforced the need to practice handling recoveries manually.

Now I’m wondering how the GFC would respond if you were IFR with the GFC active and got tossed beyond the limits.  Would it disengage for example?  

[Ragsf15e]

31 minutes ago, DCarlton said:

Now I’m wondering how the GFC would respond if you were IFR with the GFC active and got tossed beyond the limits.  Would it disengage for example?  

Good question, but that would be a pretty solid jolt to get outside 70 degrees bank or 50 in pitch (from the picture I attached above)!

[Pinecone]

The KAP-150 (currently installed in my M20K) will maintain the current pitch angle and roll wings level when you engage the autopilot.  So it will sort of help you out.

If you put the ALT button, it will pitch to hold the current altitude.

FYI, my KAP-150 DOES have pitch oscillations at times.  If I just tap the CWS button, they stop.

[DCarlton]

4 hours ago, Pinecone said:

The KAP-150 (currently installed in my M20K) will maintain the current pitch angle and roll wings level when you engage the autopilot.  So it will sort of help you out.

If you put the ALT button, it will pitch to hold the current altitude.

FYI, my KAP-150 DOES have pitch oscillations at times.  If I just tap the CWS button, they stop.

Is the KAP still fairly serviceable?  Plenty of life left in those?  I see quite a few aircraft listed with those installed.  
 

[Fly Boomer]

25 minutes ago, DCarlton said:

Is the KAP still fairly serviceable?  Plenty of life left in those?  I see quite a few aircraft listed with those installed.  
 

I have the same autopilot.  There are a number of experts around, but the one that hangs out here on MooneySpace and has provided help to scores of users is @Jake@BevanAviation.  Like everything old, parts can be a hassle, but we're not dead yet.

[kortopates]

Now I’m wondering how the GFC would respond if you were IFR with the GFC active and got tossed beyond the limits.  Would it disengage for example?  

Couldn’t imagine it getting anywhere near that far out of range without pulling the CB first. The ESP will take over per the chart above with just a 45 degree bank and pitch somewhere above 20. You have to pull the CB just to do steep turns and stalls without fighting the AP.

Although legacy AP used parts are almost free these days, i doubt it makes economic sense to install a complete used system. About half the cost of the GFC must be labor. My recollection was about 60 hrs and the wiring on the GFC is much simpler with its canbus than the BK KFC-150 which has much more to integrate with. Then when things don’t work perfectly after install, the troubleshooting cost eat up more unanticipated cost.
But by far, the best of all the legacy ones will be the KFC-150 or a newer -225. The weak links are their servos.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DCarlton]

2 hours ago, kortopates said:

Couldn’t imagine it getting anywhere near that far out of range without pulling the CB first. The ESP will take over per the chart above with just a 45 degree bank and pitch somewhere above 20. You have to pull the CB just to do steep turns and stalls without fighting the AP.

Although legacy AP used parts are almost free these days, i doubt it makes economic sense to install a complete used system. About half the cost of the GFC must be labor. My recollection was about 60 hrs and the wiring on the GFC is much simpler with its canbus than the BK KFC-150 which has much more to integrate with. Then when things don’t work perfectly after install, the troubleshooting cost eat up more unanticipated cost.
But by far, the best of all the legacy ones will be the KFC-150 or a newer -225. The weak links are their servos.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ever seen a valuation on a GFC + G5 or GI275 install?  If I bite the bullet, you'd think you could get at least 50% ?? of the fully installed price back if you decide to sell in the nearer term.  

[thread and thoughts coming from the mindset of someone that's getting older, becoming even more safety conscious, and trying to decide if it makes sense to put that kind of AMUs into an older F, or move up to something newer before it's too late; getting my fuel tanks sealed in Sep and will be in overall great shape from an airframe and firewall forward perspective.]

[Fly Boomer]

1 minute ago, DCarlton said:

Ever seen a valuation on a GFC / G5 or GI275 install?  If I bite the bullet, you'd think you could get at least 50% ?? of the fully installed price back if you decide to sell in the nearer term.  

[thread and thoughts coming from the mindset of someone that's getting older, becoming even more safety conscious, and trying to decide if it makes sense to put that kind of AMUs into an older F, or move up to something newer before it's too late; getting my fuel tanks sealed in Sep and will be in overall great shape from an airframe and firewall forward perspective.]

Don't know how old you are, but I think you are smart to jump to your final airplane sooner rather than later.  Building a bone-deep familiarity with a new airplane takes awhile.

[DCarlton]

2 minutes ago, Fly Boomer said:

Don't know how old you are, but I think you are smart to jump to your final airplane sooner rather than later.  Building a bone-deep familiarity with a new airplane takes awhile.

Very true.  I know the one I have extremely well and it took a long time.  They become part of you.  :>  That in itself has tremendous value.  

[kortopates]

Ever seen a valuation on a GFC + G5 or GI275 install?  If I bite the bullet, you'd think you could get at least 50% ?? of the fully installed price back if you decide to sell in the nearer term.  
[thread and thoughts coming from the mindset of someone that's getting older, becoming even more safety conscious, and trying to decide if it makes sense to put that kind of AMUs into an older F, or move up to something newer before it's too late; getting my fuel tanks sealed in Sep and will be in overall great shape from an airframe and firewall forward perspective.]

The general guidance is installed avionics are generally worth their cost, just not the installation labor.
In reality many shops sell the parts at a discount from msrp, passing on a bit of their discount to you, knowing they’ll make it up in labor. So might get a bit of the install cost back that way.
But i find it impossible to take a used aircraft price and come up with a component wise valuation that fairly gives a full breakdown. It’s more complicated than that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DCarlton]

5 minutes ago, kortopates said:

The general guidance is installed avionics are generally worth their cost, just not the installation labor.
In reality many shops sell the parts at a discount from msrp, passing on a bit of their discount to you, knowing they’ll make it up in labor. So might get a bit of the install cost back that way.
But i find it impossible to take a used aircraft price and come up with a component wise valuation that fairly gives a full breakdown. It’s more complicated than that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have Jimmy / GMAX's guide.  I'll have to dust it off and see what it says.  

[Vance Harral]

24 minutes ago, DCarlton said:

coming from the mindset of someone that's getting older, becoming even more safety conscious

If you have dollars to spend on "safety", the best use of that money is not avionics.  Not even an autopilot with envelope protection.  The best use of safety dollars is training, training, training: dual instruction, simulator training, training for additional certificates and ratings... anything you can do to increase your basic muscle memory and decision making in unexpected situations.  Spend your safety money on instruction and avgas, not on transistors.

This is in no way a criticism of modern autopilots - there are lots of great reasons to have them.  They make non-emergency flying more comfortable and more fun.  But don't kid yourself that you're buying down your risk by installing them.  Digital autopilots first reached the GA market about two decades ago, and a substantial portion of the fixed wing, non-commercial fleet is now equipped with them.  But there has been no meaningful change in the accident rate, and I'm not aware of any insurers adjusting rates based on what autopilot you run.  This makes sense when you look at where and why the accidents occur.  The vast majority of accidents involve scenarios in which fancy autopilots don't offer any help, e.g. basic aircraft control during takeoff and landing, fuel mismanagement, etc.  There is a pretty good summary at https://www.redbirdflight.com/landing/ga-safety-trends-what-should-we-worry-about

I think the community is best served by thinking about modern autopilots the same way you think of having a killer sound system in your car.  It's cool, and fun, and adds a lot to the enjoyment of trips both short and long.  But it's not a safety tool.  I know the manufacturers and the community tell you it's safer, but there's just no evidence to back this up.

[Pinecone]

7 hours ago, DCarlton said:

Is the KAP still fairly serviceable?  Plenty of life left in those?  I see quite a few aircraft listed with those installed.  
 

Another place that can do repairs is Larry at Sarasota Avionics at the Sarasota location.

He did some minor repairs to mine when I was there for other work.

I agree with the others that I would not install one.  But I would (and did  ) buy an airplane with one and fly it until you are ready to upgrade.

[Andy95W]

4 hours ago, Vance Harral said:

 

I think the community is best served by thinking about modern autopilots the same way you think of having a killer sound system in your car.  It's cool, and fun, and adds a lot to the enjoyment of trips both short and long.  But it's not a safety tool.

Strongly disagree.  Used correctly, it’s a huge safety tool.  There’s a 73 year old Ovation owner that just crashed and died today after departing in low IFR conditions.  Don’t you think he’d likely still be alive if he’d used his autopilot?  Or looking back 20 years, that the same could be said about JFK Jr.?

The rest of your post was spot-on IMO.  Spending money on training is far more effective than adding avionics- and part of that training should be the effective and proper use of automation.

 

[Vance Harral]

5 minutes ago, Andy95W said:

Used correctly, it’s a huge safety tool.

There's a correct, but huge caveat in your statement.  Used correctly.

Every aircraft owner who installs a "safety device" in their aircraft presumes they'll use it correctly, to great benefit, in an emergency.  But both the accident rate, and my personal, anecdotal experience as an instructor, belie this assumption.  Whether it's backup attitude on an iPad via a Stratus, or the LVL button on the GFC500 autopilot, I find over and over again that when I ask pilots to demonstrate how they'd use these things in an actual emergency, that many of them have either never practiced with it, or they tried it once, a couple of years ago to make sure it worked, haven't done anything with it since, and aren't particularly confident about how it works.  In some cases, their lack of skill in using this backup safety equipment creates a situation worse than not having the backup equipment at all.

But you don't have to take my anecdotal word for it.  Again, the accident rate isn't changing, despite a widespread proliferation of technology.  Seems like every week here on Mooneyspace someone else is installing a GFC500 and/or a full glass panel.  My understanding is Garmin has sold many thousands of these units in the last 5 years.  But why pick on Garmin?  Brittain had a wing leveler 50+ years ago, and many of our Mooneys are/were equipped with them.  So why isn't this stuff helping?  If you've got a theory, I'm all ears.

21 minutes ago, Andy95W said:

There’s a 73 year old Ovation owner that just crashed and died today after departing in low IFR conditions.  Don’t you think he’d likely still be alive if he’d used his autopilot?

I know this seems slam-dunk obvious to you.  But it's not to me, based on actual experience with actual pilots who have actual instrument ratings, fumbling around with their advanced equipment.  What makes you think the gentleman in question wasn't trying to use an autopilot to save himself?  We don't actually have any idea what caused the accident, but let's "go there" and assume it was spatial disorientation.  Your position is that a modern autopilot could have saved the man, at an installation cost of $10K or $20K or whatever.  Maybe it could have.  But my position is that a tenth of that cost spent on instrument training would have been much more likely to save him, if the cause was indeed spatial disorientation.

I'm sorry for being grumpy about it.  But I just can't believe the number of people who will put their airplane in the shop for months and drop five figures on "enhanced safety", but can't be bothered to find a couple of hours on a weekend and spend $50 of avgas on an IPC.  As my kids were taught about gear when learning to play sports, "It's the wizard, not the wand."

[DCarlton]

6 hours ago, Vance Harral said:

If you have dollars to spend on "safety", the best use of that money is not avionics.  Not even an autopilot with envelope protection.  The best use of safety dollars is training, training, training: dual instruction, simulator training, training for additional certificates and ratings... anything you can do to increase your basic muscle memory and decision making in unexpected situations.  Spend your safety money on instruction and avgas, not on transistors.

This is in no way a criticism of modern autopilots - there are lots of great reasons to have them.  They make non-emergency flying more comfortable and more fun.  But don't kid yourself that you're buying down your risk by installing them.  Digital autopilots first reached the GA market about two decades ago, and a substantial portion of the fixed wing, non-commercial fleet is now equipped with them.  But there has been no meaningful change in the accident rate, and I'm not aware of any insurers adjusting rates based on what autopilot you run.  This makes sense when you look at where and why the accidents occur.  The vast majority of accidents involve scenarios in which fancy autopilots don't offer any help, e.g. basic aircraft control during takeoff and landing, fuel mismanagement, etc.  There is a pretty good summary at https://www.redbirdflight.com/landing/ga-safety-trends-what-should-we-worry-about

I think the community is best served by thinking about modern autopilots the same way you think of having a killer sound system in your car.  It's cool, and fun, and adds a lot to the enjoyment of trips both short and long.  But it's not a safety tool.  I know the manufacturers and the community tell you it's safer, but there's just no evidence to back this up.

I’ll probably get grilled for saying this and stir up another debate, but when I train, I always hand fly the plane.  Agree training is number one.   Then ….  If you’ve got money to spend … how about them autopilots … 

Appreciate the safety trends report.   Good stuff.  
 

[kortopates]

5 minutes ago, DCarlton said:

I’ll probably get grilled for saying this and stir up another debate, but when I train, I always hand fly the plane.  Agree training is number one.   Then ….  If you’ve got money to spend … how about them autopilots … 

Appreciate the safety trends report.   Good stuff.  
 

Agreed, but training has to be on all the available equipment just like a check ride covers all the available equipment with the exception of NDB/ADF (which for most of us is dead weight these days). IPC requirements are based on these basic tenants too - you only get to use the AP one approach of the minimum three.

There is certainly no substitute for lack of training and proficiency - they are #1. And also there is no denying that a big part of pilot proficiency in advanced cockpits is buttonology.

But I wouldn't be so dismissive about the help a modern AP like the GFC-500 could have had in this scenario in WI - if we assume for a moment it was spatial disorientation. (although there are also less likely possibilities like a beyond limits aft CG from an airplane baggage area loaded with stuff for his summer home) . But the along SD lines, first off, even without the autopilot engaged the ESP would have been kicking in to fight the pilot's over banking past 45 degrees and steep pitch changes the ads-b track shows. That counts for something but don't know if it would have prevented the outcome - the track was all over the place. But I have no doubt that a SD pilot could have survived such a fate by just hitting the blue level button. That too requires some equipment familiarization but an easy action to save an upset we didn't have with the older technology.

 

[Andy95W]

1 hour ago, Vance Harral said:

 

I'm sorry for being grumpy about it.  But I just can't believe the number of people who will put their airplane in the shop for months and drop five figures on "enhanced safety", but can't be bothered to find a couple of hours on a weekend and spend $50 of avgas on an IPC.  As my kids were taught about gear when learning to play sports, "It's the wizard, not the wand."

@Vance Harral - Please read the last sentence of my previous post.  I specifically said, “Spending money on training is far more effective than adding avionics- and part of that training should be the effective and proper use of automation.”

As a CFI-I myself, I have always agreed with your point- training is more beneficial than technology.  In the airplane I fly at work, we use the autopilot and we are well trained in the automation.  Unless it was inop (unlikely), the Ovation had an extremely capable autopilot already installed in it.  Owners of such aircraft should be as proficient in its use as they are with hand flying.  My point remains that airplanes are crashing due to spatial disorientation even though they have capable autopilots already installed in them.

[midlifeflyer]

16 hours ago, kortopates said:

You have to pull the CB just to do steep turns and stalls without fighting the AP.

ESP can be turned off without pulling the CB. Holding the AP disconnect button temporarily disables it. If you have G5s, better solution -  it can be turned off through the menus (there are probably other Garmin PFDs that have that function, but I don't know for sure).

[Pinecone]

I feel that advanced avionics are safety items.  But you do not automatically get the added safety by just installing them.  You have to learn to use them and practice with them.

I am a HUGE fan of flying practice approaches by hand.  But if you are not flying coupled approaches on a regular basis, you need to through in one every practice session.

And the person needs to be trained to accept the help.  Look at Cirrus.  Early days, their mishap rate was the same or higher than similar aircraft, even with the parachute.  A vigorous training program turned that around and people starting using the parachute.

And there is always the fact that most times, the pilot feels they can handle it and does not need the help.  Until it is too late and the help can't help.

So, like so many things, it is combination of good equipment and good training to make a safer system.