Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #23623
From: rfreilich <rfreilich@sbcglobal.net>
Sender: Marvin Kaye <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: RE: [LML] N511WD
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 20:11:38 -0400
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>

 

 

> Ex-judge, now of Diamondhead, dies in plane crash

 

It grieves me that we've lost yet another brother.  I've followed this list for several years now and come to rely on the opinions and experiences of our list community.  Yet, I am disturbed. 

 

In full Monday morning quarterback mode, I’d like to put out some thoughts. 

 

From the linked photos, there appears to be a non-certified Blue Mountain EFIS/ONE in the panel mock-up, but the installed panel shows an equally non-certified Dynon EFIS-D10 and a Garmin GPSMAP196.  Neither the Garmin or Dynon electronic displays are recommended for IFR flight or even as primary instruments in VFR (without back-up -Dynon).  There is no AI backup. I don't see a wet compass at all.  Also out of the normal scan range is what appears to be an altimeter and airspeed indicator on the passenger side.  IMHO, this panel was seriously deficient. 

 

Let me pose a hypothetical situation.  Cruising along VFR using autopilot/Garmin GNS4xx correctly set and flying straight, level and on course, the aircraft encounters the smooth backside of IMC.  Conditions quickly deteriorate due to the speed of the aircraft, the rate-based autopilot kicks off due to turbulence and the pilot tries to transition to panel, slow the aircraft and reverse course.  So far, the standard VFR into IMC scenario.  

 

Using the panel equipped as 511WD, the pilot is at a serious instrument disadvantage because: 1) Both displays are very small, so reading and interpreting the instruments in turbulence is almost impossible.  2) Neither display can keep up with abrupt attitude/altitude diversions because of internal gyro rate limitations and/or 3) reboot/fail outright because plastic planes and cold clouds are ideal conditions for static discharge.  So for all intents, there are no primary instruments. 4) The few conventional instruments that are installed are spaced across the width of the panel requiring constant head and neck movement.  In a turn, this leads to spatial disorientation.  The odds are stacked against a successful outcome - high time IFR-rated or not.       

 

How many knowledgeable aviation people saw this panel before it was installed?  Didn't someone try to suggest a more complete panel or am I the only one that has a problem with inexpensive, stand-alone devices as primary flight displays?  With complex, fast and capable planes such as the Legacy or IV, inadvertent entry into IMC is a distinct probability and IMHO these panels should be equipped for IFR with appropriate ratings to go with them. Of course, only God can protect you if you fly into a severe thunderstorm.        

 

I am not advocating using only certified instruments or PFDs, nor am I promoting/dissing any experimental product, but using a larger, more capable, integrated PFD (with a reasonable amount of redundancy) or a standard 6-Pack + wet compass may have increased the pilot’s chances.

 

If my ramblings here have made ONE person reassess the competency of their panel and change it for the better, I will gladly keep the

 

Flame suit - ON

Richard Freilich   

 

 

        

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster