REFLECTOR:EFIS

Mon, 19 Jan 2004 11:44:29 -0500

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C3DEAB.825FB8C0
Content-Type: text/plain

Mike,

I generally agree.  As previously discussed, support and proven track
record; FAVOR Dynon....features; FAVOR GRT....price/value; DRAW.  As a side
note, I looked at that "Highway in the Sky" feature and initially thought it
was a good idea (and some other hi-end units has something similar), but
then I wondered just how well it works in real time flying.  It wouldn't be
the first instrument feature or do-dad that looks better on paper than it
flies.

It'd be interesting to actually fly one, but I don't know anyone with one
installed or what their thoughts are which, brings us to the biggest
shortcoming of GRT....the newness.  Microsoft taught us to never mess with
Alpha and Beta versions or any revisions less than R4.  Is a sophisticated
instrument different?  We can probably answer that better a year from now.
As has been posted previously, all of these companies are NOT going to be
around a couple or three years from now.

Chuck Jensen  

 -----Original Message-----
From: reflector-admin@tvbf.org [mailto:reflector-admin@tvbf.org]On Behalf Of
MikeWatsonSpg@cs.com
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 11:16 AM
To: reflector@tvbf.org
Subject: Re: REFLECTOR:EFIS

Chuck,

I also checked out the Dynon, but the GRT shows.
True Air speed
Indicated Airspeed
Ground Speed
Time to destination
RPM and MAP which I like a lot.
And that Highway in the sky is just as good or better than a Flight
Director.

Features for price, I think the GRT is comparable to the Dynon

Regards,

Mike W. 

------_=_NextPart_001_01C3DEAB.825FB8C0
Content-Type: text/html

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">

<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1276" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV>Mike,</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I 
generally agree.&nbsp; As previously discussed, support and proven track record; 
FAVOR Dynon....features; FAVOR GRT....price/value; DRAW.&nbsp; As a side note, I 
looked at that "Highway in the Sky" feature and initially thought it was a good 
idea (and some other hi-end units has something similar), but then I wondered 
just how well it works in real time flying.&nbsp; It wouldn't be the first 
instrument&nbsp;feature or do-dad that looks better on paper than it 
flies.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>It'd 
be interesting to actually fly one, but I don't know anyone with one installed 
or what their thoughts are which, brings us to the biggest shortcoming of 
GRT....the newness.&nbsp; Microsoft taught us to never mess with Alpha and Beta 
versions or any revisions less than R4.&nbsp; Is a sophisticated instrument 
different?&nbsp; We can probably answer that better a year from now.&nbsp; As 
has been posted previously, all of these companies are NOT going to be around a 
couple or three&nbsp;years from now.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Chuck 
Jensen&nbsp;&nbsp;</DIV>
&nbsp;
&nbsp;-----Original Message----- From: reflector-admin@tvbf.org 
[mailto:reflector-admin@tvbf.org]On Behalf Of 
MikeWatsonSpg@cs.com Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 11:16 
AM To: reflector@tvbf.org Subject: Re: 
REFLECTOR:EFIS 
<BLOCKQUOTE>Chuck, I also checked out the Dynon, but 
 the GRT shows. True Air speed Indicated Airspeed Ground Speed Time 
 to destination RPM and MAP which I like a lot. And that Highway in the 
 sky is just as good or better than a Flight Director. Features for 
 price, I think the GRT is comparable to the Dynon Regards, Mike 
 W. </BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C3DEAB.825FB8C0--