X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 16:00:03 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imr-da04.mx.aol.com ([205.188.105.146] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.8) with ESMTP id 4362214 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:45:41 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.105.146; envelope-from=VTAILJEFF@aol.com Received: from imo-ma02.mx.aol.com (imo-ma02.mx.aol.com [64.12.78.137]) by imr-da04.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o5IGipPH028290 for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:44:51 -0400 Received: from VTAILJEFF@aol.com by imo-ma02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v42.9.) id q.e3d.175b4f9 (37095) for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:44:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtprly-mc01.mx.aol.com (smtprly-mc01.mx.aol.com [64.12.95.97]) by cia-db07.mx.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILCIADB075-d3cc4c1ba274383; Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:44:40 -0400 Received: from webmail-stg-m03 (webmail-stg-m03.sim.aol.com [64.12.222.102]) by smtprly-mc01.mx.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILSMTPRLYMC016-d3cc4c1ba274383; Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:44:36 -0400 References: X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Legacy Glass Panel Suggestions? X-Original-Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:44:36 -0400 X-AOL-IP: 75.63.175.243 In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: vtailjeff@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8CCDD1CABB2D3B1_1EFC_84B83_webmail-stg-m03.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 31888-STANDARD Received: from 75.63.175.243 by webmail-stg-m03.sysops.aol.com (64.12.222.102) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Fri, 18 Jun 2010 12:44:36 -0400 X-Original-Message-Id: <8CCDD1CAB93E128-1EFC-3B1CD@webmail-stg-m03.sysops.aol.com> X-Spam-Flag:NO X-AOL-SENDER: VTAILJEFF@aol.com ----------MB_8CCDD1CABB2D3B1_1EFC_84B83_webmail-stg-m03.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Stan, Were it not for the mechanical backup guages I installed in my IVP we woul= d not be having this conversation. If you are only concerned about lightni= ng you are only looking at a small portion of the hazard. Brent Regan has= posted extensively on this subject-- his remarks are worth their weight= in gold.=20 Jeff It would be=20 nteresting to know how many pilots flying dual EFIS panels with backup gau= ges=20 ere forced to rely on the gauges at some point.=20 -----Original Message----- From: Stan Fields To: lml@lancaironline.net Sent: Thu, Jun 17, 2010 5:07 am Subject: [LML] Re: Legacy Glass Panel Suggestions? Hello Tom, I was afraid someone would say that. Obviously looking at all the panels= in our=20 leet, most have steam gauges as primary or backup. While I don't intend to= =20 oust with Thor, it may be unavoidable some day. It may not be possible to= =20 solate all of the electronics from a lightning event but I'd hoped the sta= te of=20 he art had advanced enough to make that risk acceptably small. It would be= =20 nteresting to know how many pilots flying dual EFIS panels with backup gau= ges=20 ere forced to rely on the gauges at some point.=20 Building electronic redundancy gobbles up panel space but perhaps with a= little=20 huffling I can fit in a 3 pack - even with a small Legacy panel.=20 Stan ----Original Message----- rom: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Tom= =20 hibault ent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 10:58 AM o: lml@lancaironline.net ubject: [LML] Re: Legacy Glass Panel Suggestions? Stan, You wrote "I am an electrical engineer and worked for 8 years at Cessna as= an=20 nstrumentation engineer". You also said "I want to eliminate "steam gages= " but=20 ant equivalent electronic redundancy." Please elaborate on your reasoning for elimination of steam gauges. It se= ems=20 hat current generation GA certified airplanes still include steam backup.= For=20 xample, the Corvalis TT and Mooney Ovation web sites still shows airspeed,= =20 ttitude, altitude steam gauges right beside the G1000 equipped panels. Are you planning VFR only, for example? For me, who went through the same decision process for an IFR solution in= a 360=20 odel, the answer came out retain the steam. The considerations also inclu= ded a=20 istory of prior p-static upsets of electronics in the cockpit when flying= IFR=20 hrough rain. Of course, 360s are mostly E-glass, so static wicks to drain= the=20 uild up do not work, where they should on your Legacy. Regardless, I beli= eve=20 n relying on multiple types of physics for flight instruments. Pretty sur= e it=20 as Brent Reagan who recommended that first here in the mail list. In the event of p-static or lighting events, ALL the electronics could be= taken=20 ut, no matter how isolated, redundant, or battery backed up they may be.= In=20 hat event, at least basic aircraft control info would still be available= and a=20 and held comm/nav (not connected to any systems on the ship) could then be= used=20 o communicate and navigate out of the current instrument conditions. Hopefully a reasoned, non-emotional, discussion will ensue. Tom Thibault -- or archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html - or archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html ----------MB_8CCDD1CABB2D3B1_1EFC_84B83_webmail-stg-m03.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Stan,
 
Were it not for the mechanical backup guages I installed in my IVP we= would not be having this conversation. If you are only concerned about li= ghtning you are only looking at a small portion of the hazard. Brent Regan= has posted extensively on this subject-- his remarks are worth their weig= ht in gold.
 
Jeff
=
It would be=20
interesting to know how many pilots flying dual EFIS panels with backup ga=
uges=20
were forced to rely on the gauges at some point.
<= /div>



-----Original Message-----
From: Stan Fields <sdfields@austin.rr.com>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Sent: Thu, Jun 17, 2010 5:07 am
Subject: [LML] Re: Legacy Glass Panel Suggestions?

Hel=
lo Tom,

I was afraid someone would say that. Obviously looking at all the panels=
 in our=20
fleet, most have steam gauges as primary or backup. While I don't intend=
 to=20
joust with Thor, it may be unavoidable some day. It may not be possible to=
=20
isolate all of the electronics from a lightning event but I'd hoped the st=
ate of=20
the art had advanced enough to make that risk acceptably small. It would=
 be=20
interesting to know how many pilots flying dual EFIS panels with backup ga=
uges=20
were forced to rely on the gauges at some point.=20

Building electronic redundancy gobbles up panel space but perhaps with a=
 little=20
shuffling I can fit in a 3 pack - even with a small Legacy panel.=20

Stan


-----Original Message-----
From: Lancair Mailing List [mail=
to:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Tom=20
Thibault
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 10:58 AM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: Legacy Glass Panel Suggestions?

Stan,

You wrote "I am an electrical engineer and worked for 8 years at Cessna as=
 an=20
instrumentation engineer".  You also said "I want to eliminate "steam gage=
s" but=20
want equivalent electronic redundancy."

Please elaborate on your reasoning for elimination of steam gauges.  It se=
ems=20
that current generation GA certified airplanes still include steam backup.=
  For=20
example, the Corvalis TT and Mooney Ovation web sites still shows airspeed=
,=20
attitude, altitude steam gauges right beside the G1000 equipped panels.

Are you planning VFR only, for example?

For me, who went through the same decision process for an IFR solution in=
 a 360=20
model, the answer came out retain the steam.  The considerations also incl=
uded a=20
history of prior p-static upsets of electronics in the cockpit when flying=
 IFR=20
through rain.  Of course, 360s are mostly E-glass, so static wicks to drai=
n the=20
build up do not work, where they should on your Legacy.  Regardless, I bel=
ieve=20
in relying on multiple types of physics for flight instruments.  Pretty su=
re it=20
was Brent Reagan who recommended that first here in the mail list.

In the event of p-static or lighting events, ALL the electronics could be=
 taken=20
out, no matter how isolated, redundant, or battery backed up they may be.=
  In=20
that event, at least basic aircraft control info would still be available=
 and a=20
hand held comm/nav (not connected to any systems on the ship) could then=
 be used=20
to communicate and navigate out of the current instrument conditions.

Hopefully a reasoned, non-emotional, discussion will ensue.

Tom Thibault

--
For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/L=
ist.html


--
For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/L=
ist.html
----------MB_8CCDD1CABB2D3B1_1EFC_84B83_webmail-stg-m03.sysops.aol.com--