Looking for a project

[Dave[_16_]]

Hi all,

I'm taking a break from the corporate world and want to make something.

I'm looking for suggestions that could make your aviation life easier.

Is there a electronic gadget or widget that would make your flying or
airplane experience better?


Something for the panel or a stand alone box or something?

Thanks

Dave



take the "@@" and "_REMOVE_" out

[RESO / Claude GUTH]

Your welcome to join my project :

http://openavionics.sourceforge.net/

"Dave" > a écrit dans le message de news:
...
> Hi all,
>
> I'm taking a break from the corporate world and want to make something.
>
> I'm looking for suggestions that could make your aviation life easier.
>
> Is there a electronic gadget or widget that would make your flying or
> airplane experience better?
>
>
> Something for the panel or a stand alone box or something?
>
> Thanks
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> take the "@@" and "_REMOVE_" out
>

[kmh1]

Dave

With the good availability of boxes to do flight/engine/nav display, the
last remaining cause of untidyness on the panel is the avionics. At the
compact end of the scale many com radio's have low output and the intercoms
are awful. At the other end of the scale the units are large and heavy.

We need a compact avionics box, to match our other boxes, that incorporates
audio control, intercom, com (with listen on sby frq), and transponder.

Unless there's some technical reason they can't go together?

Regards
Mal


"Dave" > wrote in message
...
> Hi all,
>
> I'm taking a break from the corporate world and want to make something.
>
> I'm looking for suggestions that could make your aviation life easier.
>
> Is there a electronic gadget or widget that would make your flying or
> airplane experience better?
>
>
> Something for the panel or a stand alone box or something?
>
> Thanks
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> take the "@@" and "_REMOVE_" out
>

[Morgans[_2_]]

"kmh1" > wrote

> With the good availability of boxes to do flight/engine/nav display, the
> last remaining cause of untidyness on the panel is the avionics. At the
> compact end of the scale many com radio's have low output and the
> intercoms are awful. At the other end of the scale the units are large and
> heavy.
>
> We need a compact avionics box, to match our other boxes, that
> incorporates audio control, intercom, com (with listen on sby frq), and
> transponder.
>
> Unless there's some technical reason they can't go together?

I don't know about you, but in choices of home electronics, I have found it
to be a big mistake to get too many units all combined into one box.

When one part of it goes tits up, there is the problem of what to do with
all of the other stuff that still works.

I know with home electronics nowadays, they are not economical to fix, where
with avionics, they usually are worth repairing.

When one part of an "all inclusive avionics box" finally is not economical
to repair, that means you have a bunch of other functioning items that have
suddenly become useless, and will all have to be replaced to get the one
broken item replaced, which means a lot of value gets tossed out, and a lot
of money will have to be spent to get all of the previously working items
replaced.

I'm basically a tightwad, and hate to toss out a bunch of functioning stuff,
just because one part of it is broken. I would rather stick to keeping
items separate.

It _would_ be nice to see an economical package that is compact and light,
and modular in design, so that you could add functions as desired, and
replace items as needed, and still keep it all neat, easy to read, and easy
to replace.
--
Jim in NC

[kmh1]

I don't disagree with you Jim. I'm a tightwad too, but I like simplicity and
also like to reduce my workload. I was thinking along the lines of the G1000
which I have been enjoying a lot since getting used to it. Don't know what's
behind the integrated displays, whether the components are line replacable
modules or not. But I love the integrated approach.

For example on the G1000 the transponder takes up less than half the size of
a postage stamp and is controlled by soft keys that perform multiple
functions (and it automatically changes mode when you leave the ground, so
on a VFR flight you never have to touch it, don't even have to turn it on).
That type of thing would be so much better for homebuilts where panel space
is limited.

But I agree, such a system would need to be economically repairable.

Mal


"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "kmh1" > wrote
>
>> With the good availability of boxes to do flight/engine/nav display, the
>> last remaining cause of untidyness on the panel is the avionics. At the
>> compact end of the scale many com radio's have low output and the
>> intercoms are awful. At the other end of the scale the units are large
>> and heavy.
>>
>> We need a compact avionics box, to match our other boxes, that
>> incorporates audio control, intercom, com (with listen on sby frq), and
>> transponder.
>>
>> Unless there's some technical reason they can't go together?
>
> I don't know about you, but in choices of home electronics, I have found
> it to be a big mistake to get too many units all combined into one box.
>
> When one part of it goes tits up, there is the problem of what to do with
> all of the other stuff that still works.
>
> I know with home electronics nowadays, they are not economical to fix,
> where with avionics, they usually are worth repairing.
>
> When one part of an "all inclusive avionics box" finally is not economical
> to repair, that means you have a bunch of other functioning items that
> have suddenly become useless, and will all have to be replaced to get the
> one broken item replaced, which means a lot of value gets tossed out, and
> a lot of money will have to be spent to get all of the previously working
> items replaced.
>
> I'm basically a tightwad, and hate to toss out a bunch of functioning
> stuff, just because one part of it is broken. I would rather stick to
> keeping items separate.
>
> It _would_ be nice to see an economical package that is compact and light,
> and modular in design, so that you could add functions as desired, and
> replace items as needed, and still keep it all neat, easy to read, and
> easy to replace.
> --
> Jim in NC
>