PDA mounting alternatives

[Jack Glendening]

I'm thinking about "upgrading" from a Cambridge LNAV/GPS to a more
modern setup using a PDA. But I've noticed that the usual setup has
the PDA mounted vertically on the canopy, which I would not like since
it obscures a portion of the outside view and for me the visual
aesthetics of being able to look out and sightsee while I am flying
are very important (and the main reason why I own a DG with its large
canopy area). I would think there are other alternatives such as
strapping the PDA on one's thigh - but perhaps the usual setup is
mandated by some factor, such as sun-washout of the screen if it were
to be more horizontal (per the thigh-mounted approach). So I was
wondering if anyone has experience with a non-canopy-mounted PDA which
they like and would recommend (and which does not impede the external
view).
Jack

[[email protected]]

Dr Jack,

Check out this photo: http://www.asa-soaring.org/images/front/pic7.jpg

Are you looking for something like that? If so you can use a 3, 6 or 9
inch gooseneck mounted on either your instrument panel or the inside
wall of your fuselage. Works great.

-ted/2NO

[[email protected]]

Dr Jack,

Check out this photo: http://www.asa-soaring.org/images/front/pic7.jpg

Are you looking for something like that? If so you can use a 3, 6 or 9
inch gooseneck mounted on either your instrument panel or the inside
wall of your fuselage. Works great.

-ted/2NO

[Marc Ramsey]

Jack Glendening wrote:
> I'm thinking about "upgrading" from a Cambridge LNAV/GPS to a more
> modern setup using a PDA. But I've noticed that the usual setup has
> the PDA mounted vertically on the canopy, which I would not like since
> it obscures a portion of the outside view and for me the visual
> aesthetics of being able to look out and sightsee while I am flying
> are very important (and the main reason why I own a DG with its large
> canopy area). I would think there are other alternatives such as
> strapping the PDA on one's thigh - but perhaps the usual setup is
> mandated by some factor, such as sun-washout of the screen if it were
> to be more horizontal (per the thigh-mounted approach). So I was
> wondering if anyone has experience with a non-canopy-mounted PDA which
> they like and would recommend (and which does not impede the external
> view).

Actually, I don't know anyone who mounts their PDA such that it obscures
a significant of the outside view. In my DG, I mounted the PDA on the
side of the instrument pod, the only thing it obscured was the view of
my toes. If you strap the PDA to your thigh, you'll be spending a bit
too much time looking down and away from the sky.

The other thing to consider is how well your eyes can handle to the
(low) contrast of the PDA screen. These days, I find that the closer I
mount the PDA to my eyes, the better (and quicker) I can see what it is
displaying, so mounting on an arm on the canopy rail, slightly below the
sight line to the outside, might be the best solution. Just make sure
there is some way for the power/data cable to break or disconnect if you
need to eject the canopy...

Marc

[Jim Kelly]

Marc makes good points, to which I would add:
1. Remember that it helps to not change your focal length such
that the outside view is out of focus. Folks over 45yrs or so
will apparently have difficulty in this regard.
2. You need to be able to use your pointer finger easily, and
sometimes to eject the stylus.

Jim Kelly



"Marc Ramsey" > wrote in message
...
Jack Glendening wrote:
> I'm thinking about "upgrading" from a Cambridge LNAV/GPS to a
> more
> modern setup using a PDA. But I've noticed that the usual
> setup has
> the PDA mounted vertically on the canopy, which I would not
> like since
> it obscures a portion of the outside view and for me the visual
> aesthetics of being able to look out and sightsee while I am
> flying
> are very important (and the main reason why I own a DG with its
> large
> canopy area). I would think there are other alternatives such
> as
> strapping the PDA on one's thigh - but perhaps the usual setup
> is
> mandated by some factor, such as sun-washout of the screen if
> it were
> to be more horizontal (per the thigh-mounted approach). So I
> was
> wondering if anyone has experience with a non-canopy-mounted
> PDA which
> they like and would recommend (and which does not impede the
> external
> view).

Actually, I don't know anyone who mounts their PDA such that it
obscures
a significant of the outside view. In my DG, I mounted the PDA
on the
side of the instrument pod, the only thing it obscured was the
view of
my toes. If you strap the PDA to your thigh, you'll be spending
a bit
too much time looking down and away from the sky.

The other thing to consider is how well your eyes can handle to
the
(low) contrast of the PDA screen. These days, I find that the
closer I
mount the PDA to my eyes, the better (and quicker) I can see what
it is
displaying, so mounting on an arm on the canopy rail, slightly
below the
sight line to the outside, might be the best solution. Just make
sure
there is some way for the power/data cable to break or disconnect
if you
need to eject the canopy...

Marc

[Bill Daniels]

"Jack Glendening" > wrote in message
.net...
> I'm thinking about "upgrading" from a Cambridge LNAV/GPS to a more
> modern setup using a PDA. But I've noticed that the usual setup has
> the PDA mounted vertically on the canopy, which I would not like since
> it obscures a portion of the outside view and for me the visual
> aesthetics of being able to look out and sightsee while I am flying
> are very important (and the main reason why I own a DG with its large
> canopy area). I would think there are other alternatives such as
> strapping the PDA on one's thigh - but perhaps the usual setup is
> mandated by some factor, such as sun-washout of the screen if it were
> to be more horizontal (per the thigh-mounted approach). So I was
> wondering if anyone has experience with a non-canopy-mounted PDA which
> they like and would recommend (and which does not impede the external
> view).
> Jack

New panel with the instruments moved to the sides leaving a PDA shaped
vacant spot in the middle.

Bill Daniels

[Greg Arnold]

I was
>>wondering if anyone has experience with a non-canopy-mounted PDA which
>>they like and would recommend (and which does not impede the external
>>view).
>> Jack
>
>
> New panel with the instruments moved to the sides leaving a PDA shaped
> vacant spot in the middle.
>
> Bill Daniels
>

I tried this several years ago, and it didn't work for me. It is hard
to read small print that far away, and even harder to use a touch screen
at arm's length.

..

[Eric Greenwell]

Jim Kelly wrote:
> Marc makes good points, to which I would add:
> 1. Remember that it helps to not change your focal length such
> that the outside view is out of focus. Folks over 45yrs or so
> will apparently have difficulty in this regard.

For a lot of pilots, that puts the PDA quite far away. I don't need
glasses for distance, but I do need reading glasses. "Sunreader"
sunglasses combine nonprescription sunglasses with bifocal areas low on
the glasses; additionally, the bifocal area has very little tinting.
This arrangement is perfect for PDA use in a glider. Cheap, too, at $25.

Pilots needing prescription sunglasses could get them with the bifocal
area, preferably with very little tinting. More than $25, of course!

In any case, definitely look at the PDA you are considering, and do it
in the sunlight. Their screens differ markedly in visibility, and some
of the older ones are better than the newer ones. I use a 3835, which is
noticeably better than the newer 2210 I first purchased.

> 2. You need to be able to use your pointer finger easily, and
> sometimes to eject the stylus.

I suppose this varies with the software you use, as my finger works fine
in flight using SeeYou Mobile. On the ground, for entering tasks and
other fiddly things not needed in flight, I do use the stylus.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Eric Greenwell]

Eric Greenwell wrote:


>> 2. You need to be able to use your pointer finger easily, and
>> sometimes to eject the stylus.
>
> I suppose this varies with the software you use, as my finger works fine
> in flight using SeeYou Mobile. On the ground, for entering tasks and
> other fiddly things not needed in flight, I do use the stylus.

And using a finger was even easier with Glide Navigator, which I used
for years before Mobile. Didn't ever use a stylus with it.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Jack Glendening]

Thanks to all those who responded or sent me photos of their setup. I'm
happy to hear that view blockage can be much less than in the two
gliders I had looked at. And I had not previously seen a gooseneck
installation. Sounds like I need to find and sit in a few more gliders
with PDAs. Jack

[[email protected]]

The nice thing about the flexible gooseneck is that you can move it
around in flight. Mine (9 inch) is attached to the upper right
quadrant of the panel, holds it's position well, even on wave tows, and
can be easily adjusted for glare. I typically move it off to the right
during takeoff and landing.

Ray Warshaw
1LK

[Jim Kelly]

I agree entirely Eric. My point is that the stylus often needs a
lot of room above the unit (for ejection). It is easy to forget
this when mounting (eg) below the lip in a glareshield.

jk





"Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
...
Eric Greenwell wrote:


>> 2. You need to be able to use your pointer finger easily, and
>> sometimes to eject the stylus.
>
> I suppose this varies with the software you use, as my finger
> works fine
> in flight using SeeYou Mobile. On the ground, for entering
> tasks and
> other fiddly things not needed in flight, I do use the stylus.

And using a finger was even easier with Glide Navigator, which I
used
for years before Mobile. Didn't ever use a stylus with it.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Jim Kelly]

Another advantage with the 'stick-on' bifocals is that you can
carefully trim them to make them narrow in width (about 60% of
their original width), thus preserving the ability to look
'outside and down' without their intrusion.

Jim Kelly


"Eric Greenwell" > wrote in message
...
Jim Kelly wrote:
> Marc makes good points, to which I would add:
> 1. Remember that it helps to not change your focal length such
> that the outside view is out of focus. Folks over 45yrs or so
> will apparently have difficulty in this regard.

For a lot of pilots, that puts the PDA quite far away. I don't
need
glasses for distance, but I do need reading glasses. "Sunreader"
sunglasses combine nonprescription sunglasses with bifocal areas
low on
the glasses; additionally, the bifocal area has very little
tinting.
This arrangement is perfect for PDA use in a glider. Cheap, too,
at $25.

Pilots needing prescription sunglasses could get them with the
bifocal
area, preferably with very little tinting. More than $25, of
course!

In any case, definitely look at the PDA you are considering, and
do it
in the sunlight. Their screens differ markedly in visibility, and
some
of the older ones are better than the newer ones. I use a 3835,
which is
noticeably better than the newer 2210 I first purchased.

> 2. You need to be able to use your pointer finger easily, and
> sometimes to eject the stylus.

I suppose this varies with the software you use, as my finger
works fine
in flight using SeeYou Mobile. On the ground, for entering tasks
and
other fiddly things not needed in flight, I do use the stylus.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Bela]

Jack Glendening wrote:
> Thanks to all those who responded or sent me photos of their setup. I'm
> happy to hear that view blockage can be much less than in the two
> gliders I had looked at. And I had not previously seen a gooseneck
> installation. Sounds like I need to find and sit in a few more gliders
> with PDAs. Jack

Speaking for the over 55 pilots, I became much more happy with my PDA
viewing when switched to a tri-focal glass. Why move your PDA inches
when you can change your focal distance with a few millimeters of
eyeball movement.
Bela

[Eric Greenwell]

Jim Kelly wrote:
> Another advantage with the 'stick-on' bifocals is that you can
> carefully trim them to make them narrow in width (about 60% of
> their original width), thus preserving the ability to look
> 'outside and down' without their intrusion.

I used them for several years on Serengeti sunglasses and liked them,
but switched to the Sunreaders when I discovered those even better
because they were untinted in the bifocal area, and because the stick-on
bifocals introduced some glare when the sun hit that area. I think the
two extra surfaces between the sunglasses and bifocals caused it;
nonetheless, they can be a good solution for people with prescription
sunglasses. At ~$20, they are cheap to try, and cutting them down as Jim
suggests is a good idea. You can probably get them to stick better, and
reduce the glare I got.

--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

[Raphael Warshaw]

I'm using auto-darkening glasses with a "blend" prescription. Although I've
heard complaints from others that the auto-darkening lenses are still not
dark enough, mine have worked out well and the distance adjustment has
become automatic.

Ray Warshaw
1LK

"Bela" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Jack Glendening wrote:
>> Thanks to all those who responded or sent me photos of their setup. I'm
>> happy to hear that view blockage can be much less than in the two
>> gliders I had looked at. And I had not previously seen a gooseneck
>> installation. Sounds like I need to find and sit in a few more gliders
>> with PDAs. Jack
>
> Speaking for the over 55 pilots, I became much more happy with my PDA
> viewing when switched to a tri-focal glass. Why move your PDA inches
> when you can change your focal distance with a few millimeters of
> eyeball movement.
> Bela
>