Re: REFLECTOR: EFIS

["R. Wayne Owens" <wamowens@bellsouth.net>]

Remember the thing has undergone another year of development so take what I
say FWIW.  We patched into my Grumman's pitot Static system and obviously
did this VFR a couple of different flights.  The Gyro first used precessed
too much and Rick dumped it.

1) Easier to scan than what? A bunch of dials and gauges?
Exactly No head movement required only the eyes  altitude angle of attack
DG ASI  and all of it,and the engine alarms  and other inputs  are to the
alarm annunciator  so no leaning over during an approach to see if the motor
quit

2) How did you like the terrain display?
When I flew the prototype  terrain was not part of the display just
airports.

3) Was the presentation jumpy or flickery?
The slow processor they were using back then did cause the display to
flicker some  but I doubt that is a problem now. I believe the  test box had
an old  386 numbercruncher.
The heading was somewhat jerky then but there was no flux gate input back
then.  The instrument approaches seemed somewhat like my student  days doing
NDB approaches. Now I think they  were planning to integrate a fluxgate but
maybe the GPS engine updates it fast enough. We could ask Nate  if that is
so.

4) Did they have the mysterious remote indicator?
They were experimenting with an interface to RMI's  airdata box but (I hope
this isn't proprietary too them ) believe they decided  to use the updated
EIS Monitor from Greg Tulhouse. By the way his older box with only a serial
output  was a great way to take data for my test stand runs. I recorded
EGT's,CHT's,fuel flow  ,RpM  manifold pressure, voltage, oil temperature and
pressure,elapsed time, and water temperature once per second into a laptop
and graphed them later . Finally learned how to cool a water cooled engine.

5) Do you think a heading only display with a separate attitude indicator
would be hard to scan?
no worse than DG and  AI now  and at least the airspeed and VSI  would be on
the primary flight display along with the  initial point and boxes to fly
through.

6) How about all those boxes and rings in the sky? Useful or clutter?
For me they are much more intuitive than some little airplane on an AI.  Of
course from what I have seen of pilots they dont want something easier
because they have always done it the old way  so that must be best.  I dont
know if they will let you download their simulator  but I used it  and
learned to survive after a couple of approaches. My understanding from Rick
Price is that it is learned in about 5 minutes by an 8 to 12 year old child.
7) Is it realistic to switch between EFIS and NAV pages (one screen) in
flight?
I sure wouldn't try it on approach but if you were in the soup on autopilot
or wing leveler  why not. It wouldn't be any worse than unfolding a low
altitude enroute to cover the whole front end.

8) Is the pitch and bank information worth doubling the price?
Im building a Velocity because  it was the only 4 place  A/C I could afford.
That thing is  getting up thier in Glanceair 4P  territory from my
perspective.Alas financial reality has set in  and I recognize it is out of
my reach.  Too bad they couldn't figure out how to deal with the precession
in the first  gyro they tried.

9) Any noticeable lag?
I understand the new processor is a 586 so  the refresh rate should be
pretty good.  Like I said the DG was slow but they were planning to add a
flux gate last I heard. Maybe GPS heading is good enough now with the
faster computer.  Maybe Nate  will respond.
10) Have you run their computer demo? If so, how does the real thing
compare?
My joy stick at home sucked The plane was easier. I dont know  if what Rick
loaded up for me is what they are supplying now.