Garmin 1000 turn co-ordinator?

[John H. Kay]

Hi.

How do the new glass cockpits (Garmin or Avidyne) indicate rate of turn,
and also whether the plane is slipping or skidding?

I know we can do the simple rule of thumb sum for standard rate turns,
giving the approx. bank angle for the speed we're using, but we're all
trained to check the little wings and the ball for reassurance as part
of the scan in conventionally instrumented aircraft.

On any picture of these new screens, I can't see where there is an
indication of the rate of turn, although I think lack of co-ordination
may manifest itself by another pointer coming away from the main one on
the AI. No article I've read, so far, on these screens mentions these
points.

--
John H. Kay

[Peter R.]

John H. Kay wrote:

>
> How do the new glass cockpits (Garmin or Avidyne) indicate rate of turn,
<snip>

I asked this question at a G1000 demo and was shown that the rate of
turn indicator is located just above the heading indicator. In fact,
the pointer of the rate of turn indicator is also the pointer for the
heading indicator.

Seeing that the pointer for both was the same, I asked the Garmin rep if
the rate scale, rather than the pointer, will move during a turn. He
did not know the answer, but in thinking about it, he agreed that it
made sense that the scale will move.

Regarding the "ball" to indicate turn coordination, I didn't have a
chance to ask about that.

--
Peter










----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Teacherjh]

>>
Regarding the "ball" to indicate turn coordination, I didn't have a
chance to ask about that.
<<

That's one of the dumbest things. The ball is probably one of the most simple
and reliable indicators in an airplane cockpit. To replace it with a slew of
electronics makes no sense at all. There's gotta be a real ball in there
somewhere.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[John H. Kay]

Peter and Jose,

>>>
>Regarding the "ball" to indicate turn coordination, I didn't have a
>chance to ask about that.

Thanks for the first bit about the rate of turn.

> The ball is probably one of the most simple
>and reliable indicators in an airplane cockpit. To replace it with a slew of
>electronics makes no sense at all. There's gotta be a real ball in there
>somewhere.

Well, you'd think so, but apparently not.

Let's see if anyone else knows.
--
John H. Kay

[Mike Long]

Under the arc at the topmost part of the screen (the arc is the rate
of turn indicator), you will see a small trapezoid. This is the "ball
indicator" and shows skids and slips by moving in the appropriate
direction. It's in a very logical place and is an easy-to-monitor
indication.

This photo cut off for some reason but you can still see the white
reference point for turn rate (top) and the trapezoid below for the
ball, both on the left hand screen very top.

http://www.pbase.com/image/24574624/original

Mike


"John H. Kay" > wrote in message >...
> Hi.
>
> How do the new glass cockpits (Garmin or Avidyne) indicate rate of turn,
> and also whether the plane is slipping or skidding?
>
> I know we can do the simple rule of thumb sum for standard rate turns,
> giving the approx. bank angle for the speed we're using, but we're all
> trained to check the little wings and the ball for reassurance as part
> of the scan in conventionally instrumented aircraft.
>
> On any picture of these new screens, I can't see where there is an
> indication of the rate of turn, although I think lack of co-ordination
> may manifest itself by another pointer coming away from the main one on
> the AI. No article I've read, so far, on these screens mentions these
> points.

[Jim Harper]

> Let's see if anyone else knows.

Well, I can't address the Garmin 1000, but I am finishing up an RV-8A
with a glass cockpit...Blue Mountain Avaition EFIS 1 and a Garmin-AT
CNX-80.

I have no commercial involvement with Blue Mountain (well, they DO
have my $20K, but other than that...). If you want to see some pics of
how the Flight Director looks, go to www.bluemountainaviation.com.

Regarding standard rate turns, but blue mountain has ticks on the
flight director that represent standard rate turns. Actually, and
pretty cool, it is "aware" of the airspeed, so it sets the ticks to
cause a standard rate regardless of how fast I am going. There is an
artificial ball at the bottom of the flight director.

For backup, I have also added an electic T&B, which has that old
reliable sprirt level ball on it.

Hope that helps.

Jim

[Andrew Gideon]

Jim Harper wrote:


> Regarding standard rate turns, but blue mountain has ticks on the
> flight director that represent standard rate turns. Actually, and
> pretty cool, it is "aware" of the airspeed, so it sets the ticks to
> cause a standard rate regardless of how fast I am going. There is an
> artificial ball at the bottom of the flight director.

Checking my understanding...

This is the equivilant of having "standard rate" marks on the AI where the
marks move based upon airspace?

If so: Nice.

- Andrew

[Mike Rapoport]

Are you going to use any conventional instruments for redundancy? I have a
Murphy Moose kit on order and I am thinking ahead about what I want as far
as instruments and avionics go. I am considering both conventional and
glass cockpit types. I am weighing the weight and ease of installation
heavily against cost. It would be nice to forgo the vacuum system
altogether.

Mike
MU-2


"Jim Harper" > wrote in message
m...
> > Let's see if anyone else knows.
>
> Well, I can't address the Garmin 1000, but I am finishing up an RV-8A
> with a glass cockpit...Blue Mountain Avaition EFIS 1 and a Garmin-AT
> CNX-80.
>
> I have no commercial involvement with Blue Mountain (well, they DO
> have my $20K, but other than that...). If you want to see some pics of
> how the Flight Director looks, go to www.bluemountainaviation.com.
>
> Regarding standard rate turns, but blue mountain has ticks on the
> flight director that represent standard rate turns. Actually, and
> pretty cool, it is "aware" of the airspeed, so it sets the ticks to
> cause a standard rate regardless of how fast I am going. There is an
> artificial ball at the bottom of the flight director.
>
> For backup, I have also added an electic T&B, which has that old
> reliable sprirt level ball on it.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Jim

[Andrew Gideon]

Andrew Gideon wrote:


> This is the equivilant of having "standard rate" marks on the AI where the
> marks move based upon airspace?

Wups. Air*speed*. Not "space".

- Andrew

[Ron Natalie]

"Andrew Gideon" > wrote in message online.com...
> Andrew Gideon wrote:
>
>
> > This is the equivilant of having "standard rate" marks on the AI where the
> > marks move based upon airspace?
>
> Wups. Air*speed*. Not "space".
>
I thought it depended on who was chasing you (partially determined by the airspace) :-)

[Matthew S. Whiting]

Mike Rapoport wrote:
> Are you going to use any conventional instruments for redundancy? I have a
> Murphy Moose kit on order and I am thinking ahead about what I want as far
> as instruments and avionics go. I am considering both conventional and
> glass cockpit types. I am weighing the weight and ease of installation
> heavily against cost. It would be nice to forgo the vacuum system
> altogether.

If you look at the lifetime cost of a dry pump vacuum system, that
should be a fair bit to use to offset the cost of your glass cockpit
equipment.


Matt

[Mike Rapoport]

The question is: Can (should) I rely completely on the (single) electrical
system in my home built airplane?

Mike
MU-2

"Matthew S. Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > Are you going to use any conventional instruments for redundancy? I
have a
> > Murphy Moose kit on order and I am thinking ahead about what I want as
far
> > as instruments and avionics go. I am considering both conventional and
> > glass cockpit types. I am weighing the weight and ease of installation
> > heavily against cost. It would be nice to forgo the vacuum system
> > altogether.
>
> If you look at the lifetime cost of a dry pump vacuum system, that
> should be a fair bit to use to offset the cost of your glass cockpit
> equipment.
>
>
> Matt
>

[Matthew S. Whiting]

Mike Rapoport wrote:
> The question is: Can (should) I rely completely on the (single) electrical
> system in my home built airplane?

Yes, that is a good question to ask. However, if you have an alternator
failure warning light, you still have 30+ minutes of energy in the
battery, depending on battery size and how much load you can shed given
the conditions. I had a failure flying IFR into OSH several years ago
and flew the last 30 minutes mostly in IMC with one nav/com, the
transponder and my GPS. Still had enough juice to almost lower the
flaps for landing. :-)

So, there is a little bit of redundancy electrically. Contrast that to
the vacuum system where the only stored energy is what is in the gyros.
This typically is minutes at most. I had a precise flight standby
system in my Skylane which worked OK if you kept the manifold pressure
fairly low. However, enter a climb and you were toast.

I'm not sure what engine you have in mind for the Moose, but can you get
one with two alternator pads?


Matt

[Jim Harper]

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message .net>...
> Are you going to use any conventional instruments for redundancy? I have a
> Murphy Moose kit on order and I am thinking ahead about what I want as far
> as instruments and avionics go. I am considering both conventional and
> glass cockpit types. I am weighing the weight and ease of installation
> heavily against cost. It would be nice to forgo the vacuum system
> altogether.
>
> Mike
> MU-2

Hi, Mike.

I have steam airspeed, altimeter, and the electrric T&B. I am going to
be flying some IFR, and I think those'll get me home. I do have
redundant electrical systems. There are the two GPS's, and the CNX 80
has a VOR function...but I ramble. Yes, two steam instruments and a
T&B.

Jim

[Jim Harper]

Andrew Gideon > wrote in message e.com>...
> Andrew Gideon wrote:
>
>
> > This is the equivilant of having "standard rate" marks on the AI where the
> > marks move based upon airspace?
>
> Wups. Air*speed*. Not "space".
>
> - Andrew


Hi, Andrew...yup, they widen as airspeed increases. And for sure,
airspace is gonna widen too! :-)

Jim

[[email protected]]

A better image, but of the Avidyne Entegra, is here (about a megabyte):

http://www.avidyne.com/HighRez/P_Entegra_PFD.jpg

The black and white pyramid is the "ball" - when the top and bottom are
aligned then you're in trim.

I'm flying a (rental) Cirrus SR20 with this system these days, and
although I absolutely love the Avidyne/Garmin system I'm still not used
to this representation of coordination - it doesn't lend itself to "step
on the ball" very well. That said, and I keep forgetting this when I'm
flying, the SR20's backup AI has a conventional ball-tube mounted on it.

Dave Blevins

On 29 Dec 2003 05:31:09 -0800, (Mike Long) wrote:

>Under the arc at the topmost part of the screen (the arc is the rate
>of turn indicator), you will see a small trapezoid. This is the "ball
>indicator" and shows skids and slips by moving in the appropriate
>direction. It's in a very logical place and is an easy-to-monitor
>indication.
>
>This photo cut off for some reason but you can still see the white
>reference point for turn rate (top) and the trapezoid below for the
>ball, both on the left hand screen very top.
>
>http://www.pbase.com/image/24574624/original

[Mike Long]

Here is a better photo of the PFD. By the way, I did not take the
photo so please excuse the copyright notice to my name - I have not
found a way to delete it as pbase puts it automatically on my bird and
landscape photo's (which are mine). This shot is from Cessna's
library.

http://www.pbase.com/image/24595911

Mike

(Mike Long) wrote in message >...
> Under the arc at the topmost part of the screen (the arc is the rate
> of turn indicator), you will see a small trapezoid. This is the "ball
> indicator" and shows skids and slips by moving in the appropriate
> direction. It's in a very logical place and is an easy-to-monitor
> indication.
>
> This photo cut off for some reason but you can still see the white
> reference point for turn rate (top) and the trapezoid below for the
> ball, both on the left hand screen very top.
>
> http://www.pbase.com/image/24574624/original
>
> Mike
>
>
> "John H. Kay" > wrote in message >...
> > Hi.
> >
> > How do the new glass cockpits (Garmin or Avidyne) indicate rate of turn,
> > and also whether the plane is slipping or skidding?
> >
> > I know we can do the simple rule of thumb sum for standard rate turns,
> > giving the approx. bank angle for the speed we're using, but we're all
> > trained to check the little wings and the ball for reassurance as part
> > of the scan in conventionally instrumented aircraft.
> >
> > On any picture of these new screens, I can't see where there is an
> > indication of the rate of turn, although I think lack of co-ordination
> > may manifest itself by another pointer coming away from the main one on
> > the AI. No article I've read, so far, on these screens mentions these
> > points.

[Richard Kaplan]

"Matthew S. Whiting" > wrote in message >...

> Yes, that is a good question to ask. However, if you have an alternator
> failure warning light, you still have 30+ minutes of energy in the
> battery, depending on battery size and how much load you can shed given
> the conditions.

Except if you get smoke in the cockpit and you only have one elecrical
bus, you cannot isolate the problem by turning off each bus
individually -- you have to turn off the whole electrical system with
all of your nav/com/instrumentation equipment.. not good.

--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

[Andrew Gideon]

Matthew S. Whiting wrote:

> However, enter a climb and you were toast.

Like...a missed approach.

- Andrew

[Matthew S. Whiting]

Andrew Gideon wrote:
> Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
>
>
>>However, enter a climb and you were toast.
>
>
> Like...a missed approach.
>
> - Andrew
>

Bingo. And the only vacuum failure I ever had was during climb-out
right before entering the soup, where the standby system likely would
have been useless. Fortunately, the annunciator worked and I was able
to break off the climb while still in VMC and return.

I still think the standby vacuum system is essential with vacuum powered
instruments, and I even had a pretty reliable wet pump in my Skylane.
The ironic part is that my vacuum system failure was actually due to the
addition of the standby backup system! There was a T fitting that came
apart, and the fitting was added as part of the system. The pump itself
never failed in the >1000 hrs. that the airplane gained while I was in
partnership on it.

However, I really like the idea of an all electric airplane with
appropriate redundancy.


Matt

[PaulaJay1]

In article >, "Matthew S. Whiting"
> writes:

>However, enter a climb and you were toast.
>>
>>
>> Like...a missed approach.
>>
>> - Andrew
>>
>
>Bingo. And the only vacuum failure I ever had was during climb-out
>right before entering the soup, where the standby system likely would
>have been useless.

Not really so. I can hold level at 8000 and climb at 400 to 500 at 3000 while
getting 3 inches of vac with the precise flight standby vac. So it depends on
the alt of the airport. Here in Ohio we don't have those 5000 ft airports.

Chuck

[Matthew S. Whiting]

PaulaJay1 wrote:
> In article >, "Matthew S. Whiting"
> > writes:
>
>
>>However, enter a climb and you were toast.
>>
>>>
>>>Like...a missed approach.
>>>
>>> - Andrew
>>>
>>
>>Bingo. And the only vacuum failure I ever had was during climb-out
>>right before entering the soup, where the standby system likely would
>>have been useless.
>
>
> Not really so. I can hold level at 8000 and climb at 400 to 500 at 3000 while
> getting 3 inches of vac with the precise flight standby vac. So it depends on
> the alt of the airport. Here in Ohio we don't have those 5000 ft airports.
>
> Chuck

I was at about 8,000 feet at the time of the failure on a climb to 10 or
11 can't remember which now. I doubt I could have maintained sufficient
vacuum during climb at those altitudes. Possible, but I wouldn't have
wanted to have to count on it. However, I'm still a Precise Flight fan
as even having vacuum during a descent to land is a lot better than
flying partial panel.


Matt