![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
John, Raul and other MRX users
How does the MRX perform when thermalling? The manual suggests that the aerial should be vertical for good reception and for the software calculations. Does it give the right sort of readout, and beep at the right time when you are thermalling? Rory At 13:30 30 August 2006, Jcarlyle wrote: Zaon MRX - This was the one I bought. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Rory,
I flew with my new MRX three times yesterday, but unfortunately each flight was a sleigh ride - no thermals were found. As we've got Ernesto moving in, I'm afraid I won't be able to answer your question for a week or so. Hopefully someone else can tell you sooner! -John Rory O'Conor wrote: John, Raul and other MRX users How does the MRX perform when thermalling? The manual suggests that the aerial should be vertical for good reception and for the software calculations. Does it give the right sort of readout, and beep at the right time when you are thermalling? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Rory,
Flying level or turning in a thermal, the MRX seems to work just fine! - 3R Rory O'Conor wrote: John, Raul and other MRX users How does the MRX perform when thermalling? The manual suggests that the aerial should be vertical for good reception and for the software calculations. Does it give the right sort of readout, and beep at the right time when you are thermalling? Rory At 13:30 30 August 2006, Jcarlyle wrote: Zaon MRX - This was the one I bought. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Rory wrote: How does the MRX perform when thermalling? My observation so far is that it performs the same while thermalling and cruising. Rory wrote: Does it give the right sort of readout, and beep at the right time when you are thermalling? Yes. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 30 Aug 2006 06:25:18 -0700, "jcarlyle" wrote:
Last week, before the Minden midair, I reviewed Collision Avoidance Systems with the intent of putting one in my transponder-less ASW-19. I was interested in such a system because my glider club lies inside the Mode C veil of PHL, because an active military air base is 5 miles away, and because there are several airways that lie within several miles of us. Here's the result of my research; I hope it might be of help to others. Zaon MRX - This was the one I bought. Pros - shows threat distance and height; receives civilian signals A, C, S and 3/A, as well as military signals X, Y and 2; alerts are visual and aural (high pitched beeps); uses internal power (but can use aircraft power); is the smallest system available; can be panel mounted with remote antenna. Cons - does not show threat direction; doesn't output threats via RS232 to PocketPC type devices. List price $499 Zaon XRX - This is the one I really liked. Pros - shows threat direction as well as distance and height; receives civilian signals A, C, S and 3/A, and also military signals X, Y and 2; alerts are visual and aural (synthesized voice); outputs threats via RS232 to PocketPC type devices. Cons - needs aircraft power; fairly large and tall, and must be mounted on the glare shield. Supposedly Zaon will offer a panel mount version with remote antenna in the future. List price $1795 Proxalert R5 - I rejected this one. Pros - shows threat distance and height; shows squawk code of three threats (but threats combined if same squawk); alerts are visual and aural (high pitched beeps); outputs threats via RS232 to PocketPC type devices; can be panel mounted with remote antenna. Cons - Combines threats with same squawk code on same line showing closest threat distance, and flip-flops threat altitude; needs aircraft power; only receives civilian A, C and S signals; fairly large and hangs over glare shield lip. I also was turned off by the web site, when I see poor English in sales literature I can't help but wonder if the engineering was also done carelessly. List price $795 Monroy ADT-300 - I rejected this one. Pros - shows threat distance and height (but only if you have an altitude encoding transponder); alerts are visual and aural (synthesized voice); second smallest available; can be panel mounted with remote antenna. Cons - Needs altitude encoding transponder to show threat height; needs aircraft power; only receives civilian A, C and S signals; doesn't output threats via RS232 to PocketPC type devices. List price $795 Please note that this list is biased towards my own needs, in a quiet glider with no transponder, operating with civilian and military aircraft. You might have different requirements, so do check out the manufacturer's sites for fuller specs and manuals: http://www.zaonflight.com/ http://www.monroyaero.com/ http://www.proxalert.com/ A good single reference page to many Collision Avoidance Systems is he http://www.avionix.com/collis.html There are also some (fairly old) threads on RAS on this subject; you might wish to search for them. Be careful up there! -John (I have absolutely no connection or financial interest with any of the companies named in this message). I bought my MRX early this season, and I have been very pleased with it's performance in both level and thermalling flight. The audio warning could be louder, but is sufficient for sailplane use. The LED displays are super bright even in bright sun; l catch display changes in my peripheral vision pretty well as a result. Like the other posters, I too have been surprised by how much more traffic I see, especially coming up from behind. It would be the best of all worlds to have heading info on traffic, but the MRX will at least allow you to quickly concentrate either above or below the horizon when traffic is closing. I found that the battery powered arrangement peters out fast, as I like the display set for bright as it will go. So, I've hard wired my unit on it's own fuse block, and also have an antenna extension, that functions well beneath my DG's pedestal shroud. Very tidy installation. Our Glider Club flies by written agreement within a moderately busy Class D. It's not departing traffic in close that worries me, but rather approaching heavy IFR traffic letting down thru a nice cloud street about 25 miles out. Nothing gets your attention like bouncing around 500 below cloudbase (of course ![]() seeing that display light up....... 5 miles, 1000' above..... and descending. Worth the price of the unit right there ![]() N531RW |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jean,
FLARM is a very nice concept, but it will never, ever be in the US (as per the manufacturer's wishes). Even if it were, it wouldn't help with the problem highlighted by the Minden mid-air, unless the manufacturer embraces the Aussie design and allows it to interact with ADS-B. But, ADS-B is going to take a number of years before it's in all aircraft. So really your best bet right now to get a handle on what's in the air with you is to get one of the collision avoidance systems mentioned at the top of this thread, so you can keep track of the transponders most of the powered aircraft carry. -John Jean wrote: The European standard is FLARM - http://www.flarm.com/index_en.html In Switzerland, Germany and France it looks like 75% of the ships are equipped, |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"jcarlyle" wrote in message
oups.com... FLARM ... wouldn't help with the problem highlighted by the Minden mid-air, unless the manufacturer embraces the Aussie design and allows it to interact with ADS-B. But, ADS-B is going to take a number of years before it's in all aircraft. I was always curious: what are the principal differences between FLARM and ADS-B? (Besides, that is, the fact that one of them is developed by a small private corporation and the other by large governmental or international agency(-ies), and therefore both the time-to-market and the total cost of ownership will be an order or two of magnitude higher for the latter...) If you excuse my ignorance for a second... Both seem to be doing basically the same thing: broadcast their GPS coordinates and listen to other units around them detecting potential conflicts. Ignoring for the moment the differences in radio frequencies and transmission power levels, as well as some details of collision detection algorithm that appears to be more tuned for gliders in FLARM (knowing about thermalling etc.)... are they the same? -- Yuliy |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Collision Avoidance Systems | [email protected] | Products | 0 | May 21st 06 10:15 PM |
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder | John Doe | Piloting | 145 | March 31st 06 06:58 PM |
Air Force One Had to Intercept Some Inadvertent Flyers / How? | Rick Umali | Piloting | 29 | February 15th 06 04:40 AM |
Nearly had my life terminated today | Michelle P | Piloting | 11 | September 3rd 05 02:37 AM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |