FS Zaon MRX Collision Avoidance

[bumper[_4_]]

No longer need this excellent and small PCAS as its functions are
included in the PowerFlarm I've just installed.

IMO, no question the PF is the best answer for practical collision
avoidance in gliders. But if for whatever reason you won't be buying
one, then this Zaon MRX is the next best thing for a whole lot less
money. The MRX sells new for $450 - $499. Mine is line new, less than
20 hours, with all original packaging and manual for only $300 plus
$12 shipping in US.

bumperm frontier (insert the usual at and dot com stuff)

[Andy[_1_]]

On Jan 23, 11:12*am, bumper > wrote:
> No longer need this excellent and small PCAS as its functions are
> included in the PowerFlarm I've just installed.
>
> IMO, no question the PF is the best answer for practical collision
> avoidance in gliders. But if for whatever reason you won't be buying
> one, then this Zaon MRX is the next best thing for a whole lot less
> money. The MRX sells new for $450 - $499. Mine is line new, less than
> 20 hours, with all original packaging and manual for only $300 plus
> $12 shipping in US.
>
> bumperm frontier *(insert the usual at and dot com stuff)

Bumper,

Have you flown with both units at the same time? If so, do you have
any comments on the relative performance for proximate traffic and
alerting? I've been flying with the MRX for several years and hope
that PF brick will replace it but have not seen any (PCAS function)
performance reports yet.

Andy

[Andrzej Kobus]

On Jan 23, 5:28*pm, Andy > wrote:
> On Jan 23, 11:12*am, bumper > wrote:
>
> > No longer need this excellent and small PCAS as its functions are
> > included in the PowerFlarm I've just installed.
>
> > IMO, no question the PF is the best answer for practical collision
> > avoidance in gliders. But if for whatever reason you won't be buying
> > one, then this Zaon MRX is the next best thing for a whole lot less
> > money. The MRX sells new for $450 - $499. Mine is line new, less than
> > 20 hours, with all original packaging and manual for only $300 plus
> > $12 shipping in US.
>
> > bumperm frontier *(insert the usual at and dot com stuff)
>
> Bumper,
>
> Have you flown with both units at the same time? *If so, do you have
> any comments on the relative performance for proximate traffic and
> alerting? *I've been flying with the MRX for several years and hope
> that PF brick will replace it but have not seen any (PCAS function)
> performance reports yet.
>
> Andy

I have been flying with MRX for a long time and I am not willing to
part with it until I see PF is as good as MRX.

[bumper[_4_]]

To all, the MRX is sold, thanks.

The weather has been a little dicey for flying, but tomorrow looks
better. I'm really looking forward to a close encounter with another
PF equipped aircraft . . . though that'll have to wait as PF density
is low to non existant. SoaringNV has one, though not installed yet,
so I may be able to arrange an air-to-air PF to PF test soon I guess.

I agree the MRX is good. I've flown with it alongside my older, and
much larger Proxalert R-5 a number of times. Their performance is
essentially similar in terms of sensitivity, though range of threat
aircraft displayed varies back and forth between the two as one might
expect. The R-5 gets the nod for providing more info, as it displays
up to three threats at a time along with their squawk code. Squawk is
nice as you can tell if it's a glider (0440-here), descreet code - IFR
- and probably looking for me, or VFR (1200) not talking to ATC -
thus likely not informed of my presence. So I mostly flew with the R-5
in my power planes and only used the smaller MRX in the glider.

Since the MRK is sold, I won't do the comparison to the PF directly.
However, I'll compare the PF to the R-5 and report back. Given the
PF's ground performance, showing ADS-B airliners as far out as the 32
nm range scale and Mode-C around 16 nm or so, it should do fine as a
PCAS - I hope.

bumper

[bumper[_4_]]

I flew the Husky with ProxAlert R5 (PCAS) and the PowerFlarm on the
glareshield about 3 inches apart. Shortly after takeoff I realized the
R5 was interfering with the PowerFlarm, causing it to display a threat
aircraft at my exact position and altitude. At first I though the PF
was not blanking or ignoring my own transponder, but turning off the
R5 eliminated the false traffic. The PF did not appear to affect the
R5. For the balance of the flight I was turning one off, then the
other in an attempt to get a semi-valid comparison.

The PowerFlarm reports ADS-B traffic long before that traffic will
show up on the PCAS. Sensitivity of the R5 has always been good, the
PowerFlarm appears to be every bit as good in PCAS mode. Unable to
test Flarm to Flarm.

bumper