Cambridge 302 -or- Borgelt B50 plus data logger

I am soliciting opinions on which is the best way to go:

1. Cambridge Aero 302

-or-

2. Borgelt B50 system combined with a data logger: a. CAI 302A
b. Colibri
c. Volkslogger

I would appreciate comments with consideration to ease of
installation, ease of use, performance (to include comments about
timing and accuracy of indication vs. actual conditions as well as
one's liking of the respective vario's audio tones), compatability,
reliability, factory support, etc.--especially from anyone who has
experience flying with both systems.

Add'l info: I intend to couple either system with a PDA using
GlideNav II. Also, I live in the U.S.

Thanks in advance,

RD

"Romeo Delta" wrote...
I am soliciting opinions on which is the best way to go:

1. Cambridge Aero 302

-or-

2. Borgelt B50 system combined with a data logger: a. CAI 302A
b. Colibri
c. Volkslogger

I've owned and used both, and have a few comments. As a vario I think the
B50 is a noticeably better instrument. It is responsive, has pleasant
audio, excellent factory support, and completely reliable. The downsides
are that it takes more panel space, some GPS sources are incompatible with
its multiplexing capabilities (but the listed flight recorders should work
fine), it is difficult to get the polar right for netto and speed to fly,
and changing the polar also requires opening the case, which makes it
unsuitable for gliders with multiple spans.

The 302 is a decent instrument, and the vario is a big improvement over the
LNAV and predecessors (don't believe the hype about it being less sensitive
to gusts, though). It has the option of using electronic total energy,
which is an advantage in some installations. The audio and meter response
times can be set independently. The polar can be changed by the PDA, it is
pretty easy to get usable netto and speed to fly. The MacCready and ballast
settings can be changed by the PDA or on the 302 itself, which means you can
use whatever is more comfortable to reach. The meter (and audio) can
indicate well over 20 knots, which is great for flying someplace like
Tonopah. The primary downside is that the servo-driven 360 degree meter is
slow, confusing, and hard to get used to. I also question the overall
reliability of the 302, as I know several people who have had to return
their units to Cambridge more than once for repairs, and several of the LCD
segments on my 302 are currently out. The "new" Cambridge also seems to
have lost the reputation the old one had for quick turn-around on service.

Marc

At 19:30 25 May 2004, Romeo Delta wrote:
I am soliciting opinions on which is the best way to
go:

1. Cambridge Aero 302

-or-

2. Borgelt B50 system combined with a data logger:
a. CAI 302A

b. Colibri

c. Volkslogger

I would appreciate comments with consideration to ease
of
installation, ease of use, performance (to include
comments about
timing and accuracy of indication vs. actual conditions
as well as
one's liking of the respective vario's audio tones),
compatability,
reliability, factory support, etc.--especially from
anyone who has
experience flying with both systems.

Add'l info: I intend to couple either system with
a PDA using
GlideNav II. Also, I live in the U.S.

Thanks in advance,

RD

RD,

I have had a Borgelt B100 in one glider, a 302+303+
GN11 (with Borgelt B40 backup) in another, currently
fly with a temporary 302A/GN11 combination with a B2000
in the post, and am awaiting a new glider for which
I have been going through the same questions as you
pose.

My experience of the Borgelt varios is that they are
great thermalling varios and ours have been very reliable.


The 302 vario was repeatedly unreliable (and is U/S
again in my ex glider at present) but the logger aspect
is excellent.

The 302A is fine but at present the interaction with
GN11 is limited by the fact that the 302A cannot calculate
winds and GN11 also does not do a wind calculation
when attached to a 302A as it seems to expect winds
as from a full 302. Paul Remde says this is on the
to do list.

I plan to have a B50/B2000 system in the new glider
using a small dedicated GPS unit to drive them - this
would be the main vario and back up logger (non approved
in the B2000). I plan a 302A as the main logger (independent
of the B50) and my 1550/GN11 can hang from the 302A
as the back up nav system. A B40 would be the obvious
back up vario choice to my mind.

This set up gives redundancy (definitely needed) but
takes up a lot of panel holes. It would be ideal if
the B50 were to be developed into a one panel hole
unit (hint). Alternatively, if a second hand one becomes
available at a good price I could take a chance on
another full 302 as main logger/ backup vario - thus
deleting the B40.

I don't plan to have a Volklogger or Colibri just because
I dislike all that stuff mounted along the cockpit
sides. Also the current Volklogger memory capacity
is a bit marginal and it needs to be emptied between
flights because it does not roll over.

John Galloway

"John Galloway" wrote in message
...
At 19:30 25 May 2004, Romeo Delta wrote:
snipped ........
I don't plan to have a Volklogger or Colibri just because
I dislike all that stuff mounted along the cockpit
sides.

So don't put it there! If you are using a PDA, bury the logger behind the
panel or behind the seat. There is no reason to have it on the cockpit side.

Consider an LX1600, colibri and a good PDA. A nice integrated package and
only one 57mm hole in the panel!

Ian
www.internationalsoaring.org/nimbus/IMG_2422.jpg

I do not have any of these instruments but for my ASW20 I am putting a B50
in it
due to reliability issues with cambridge gear,at our field some praise some
curse
cambridge 50\50, I prefer 100% reliability and Borgelt gear seems to fit
this ideal
gary
"Romeo Delta" wrote in message
om...
I am soliciting opinions on which is the best way to go:

1. Cambridge Aero 302

-or-

2. Borgelt B50 system combined with a data logger: a. CAI 302A
b. Colibri
c. Volkslogger

I would appreciate comments with consideration to ease of
installation, ease of use, performance (to include comments about
timing and accuracy of indication vs. actual conditions as well as
one's liking of the respective vario's audio tones), compatability,
reliability, factory support, etc.--especially from anyone who has
experience flying with both systems.

Add'l info: I intend to couple either system with a PDA using
GlideNav II. Also, I live in the U.S.

Thanks in advance,

RD

I have a B50 and it is probably the best averager I
have ever flown with. It is reliable, acurate and very
easy to use. I have it linked to a PDA and a Volklogger
and the system as a whole is great. (It may also be
worth stating that I completely re-worked the tubing
when I bought the glider (there wasnt a problem Ian
but we re-did the whole panel!)). My only problem is
the 'push' noise. I hate the noise but to be fair it
leaves you in no doubt that you are at the wrong speed!

I have three mates who all run 302's in their glider.
Two have gone back to the dealer for repairs (one of
those has been back more than once) and the third person
is having problems. I dont want to slag off CAI instruments
because in general I think they are good but the 302
seems to have some issues.

Owain

At 09:36 26 May 2004, Goneill wrote:
I do not have any of these instruments but for my ASW20
I am putting a B50
in it
due to reliability issues with cambridge gear,at our
field some praise some
curse
cambridge 50\50, I prefer 100% reliability and Borgelt
gear seems to fit
this ideal
gary
'Romeo Delta' wrote in message
. com...
I am soliciting opinions on which is the best way
to go:

1. Cambridge Aero 302

-or-

2. Borgelt B50 system combined with a data logger:
a. CAI 302A

b. Colibri

c. Volkslogger

I would appreciate comments with consideration to
ease of
installation, ease of use, performance (to include
comments about
timing and accuracy of indication vs. actual conditions
as well as
one's liking of the respective vario's audio tones),
compatability,
reliability, factory support, etc.--especially from
anyone who has
experience flying with both systems.

Add'l info: I intend to couple either system with
a PDA using
GlideNav II. Also, I live in the U.S.

Thanks in advance,

RD

(Romeo Delta) wrote in message . com...
I am soliciting opinions on which is the best way to go:

1. Cambridge Aero 302

-or-

2. Borgelt B50 system combined with a data logger: a. CAI 302A
b. Colibri
c. Volkslogger

I would appreciate comments with consideration to ease of
installation, ease of use, performance (to include comments about
timing and accuracy of indication vs. actual conditions as well as
one's liking of the respective vario's audio tones), compatability,
reliability, factory support, etc.--especially from anyone who has
experience flying with both systems.

Add'l info: I intend to couple either system with a PDA using
GlideNav II. Also, I live in the U.S.

Thanks in advance,

RD

I have been flying with 302 for over 2 years and recently added a B40
to my panel. My previous glider had a Cambridge MNAV. I have had no
reliability problems with the 302. I did have a problem with the unit
being delivered with a bad recorder seal but that was fixed on my
schedule. I also lost a contest day because of a problem with the
download utility. That was promptly fixed by Cambridge.

The 302 indicator response, when set for 2.3 sec, is very similar to
the B40. It is a little hard to correlate the reading though because
of the unsusual +/- 180 scale on the 302. Initially I didn't like the
way the 302 responded but after half a season I found that my tripple
probe had been delivered with one passage almost completely blocked.
I also found that my static lines were kinking when the canopy was
closed. When I sorted out those problems I find the 302 indicator and
audio easy to fly and similar to the B40. I much prefer the 302 audio
to the B40, perhaps because of all the years I flew with the MNAV.

The recorder of the 302 is hard to beat. I sample every 2 seconds and
have space for lots of flights. Unlike some recorders it never needs
erasing and the current flight will always be recorded.

I use the gear and airbrake warning system of the 302. It works as
advertised and saves installing a separate buzzer.

No problem with installation and, as someone else mentioned, you have
the choice of electronic or probe TE compensation.


Andy

Sorry to say - but I've had bad luck with my 302 which was plagued from =
the beginning with the "bad seal" problem. This has been compounded by =
a bit of "musical chairs" as to who owns the company and warranty =
responsibility.

Also the "fully integrated" concept is a 2 edged sword. It fits in a =
neat little hole in the panel for sure - but when it's broken in flight =
(or needs to go for repair) you are without anything - no vario, no =
averager, no logger, no gps souce. In short :"zip"

The only thing I really trust is my winter mechanical!

Good luck

Roy.

(Andy Durbin) wrote in message om...

I have had no reliability problems with the 302.


Correction - I had 2 temperature probe failures. The first during
initial installation and the second after a few flights. The 302 will
not boot up with a failed temperature probe connected. It will
operate if the failed probe is disconnected.

Both replaced under warranty but a pain to have to replace them.


Andy

Owain Walters wrote:

...My only problem is the 'push' noise.
I hate the noise but to be fair it
leaves you in no doubt that you are at the wrong speed!

Dear Owain,

Can one program the B50 to emit audio only when in lift?
Is there a choice of tones available?

RD