Butterfly

27pilot wrote, On 8/30/2013 7:41 PM:
I agree, if you already have a clearnav, give serious consideration
to the clearnav vario, I have well over 200 hours on mine and am
extremely satisfied with it. If someone stole it from my glider
today I would replace it with another without even giving
consideration to the competition.

Thanks for the remarks. It's still my first choice, but I don't need to
make a decision for several months, so I'm considering other possibilities.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm
http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

On Wednesday, August 28, 2013 1:39:50 PM UTC-4, John Carlyle wrote:
On Tuesday, August 27, 2013 10:02:49 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:

I have one and I like it. But I have not used an LX7000 so I cannot compare. It has a zillion more functions and features than the CAI 302 that it replaced in my panel, and has a very nice user interface. It does a bunch of things buut its unique features seem to be:



* Nearly instantaneous wind calculation (inertially derived)



* Inertially derived Vertical Airmass Movement (VAM) which in theory eliminates horizontal gust errors



* Artificial Horizon Reference



The VAM requires some interpretation, but I think supplies some new information that I didn't have before. There are some other varios on the market claiming to use inertial sensing, but it is less clear what they actually do with it, if anything.



What do you think the VAM is telling you that you don't already know?



-John, Q3

This is a good point. I considered buying the Butterfly variometer to replace the 302 but ended up buying ClearNav. The price was not much of consideration. I watched a couple of videos of the Butterfly variometer in real flight situation and the VAM and the variometer indications hardly ever agreed.. This was very confusing. Instead of feeling air pilot would spend more time with eyes in the cockpit watching not one but two indicators and get confused by conflicting information. What sense does it make to increase the workload?

The VAM is not used to filter out gusts probably because no one can figure out the algorithm to do so considering what seems often as conflicting information.

I think the LX, ClearNav and Butterfly as variometers come very close the rest seems just like options on a well equipped car.

I only wish ClearNav sound to be nicer. The sound award goes to Butterfly and LX. ClearNav are you listening? We want nicer sounding variometer.

Due to sound of ClearNav vario if I were to choose again I would have gone with LX.

lauantai, 31. elokuuta 2013 17.14.55 UTC+3 kirjoitti:

This is a good point. I considered buying the Butterfly variometer to replace the 302 but ended up buying ClearNav. The price was not much of consideration. I watched a couple of videos of the Butterfly variometer in real flight situation and the VAM and the variometer indications hardly ever agreed. This was very confusing.



Isn't this logical considering variometer shows change of total energy including horizontal gusts, and VAM only vertical airmass movement?






The VAM is not used to filter out gusts probably because no one can figure out the algorithm to do so considering what seems often as conflicting information.




I think there is quite good reason for (sometimes) conflicting information, and the use of two indicators has been good solution, based on appr. 100hrs of flying with Butterfly. I bet writing down algorithm to combine inertial and total energy data is difficult, as no one has managed to do it succesfully.

krasw

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 7:14:55 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Wednesday, August 28, 2013 1:39:50 PM UTC-4, John Carlyle wrote:

On Tuesday, August 27, 2013 10:02:49 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:



I have one and I like it. But I have not used an LX7000 so I cannot compare. It has a zillion more functions and features than the CAI 302 that it replaced in my panel, and has a very nice user interface. It does a bunch of things buut its unique features seem to be:







* Nearly instantaneous wind calculation (inertially derived)







* Inertially derived Vertical Airmass Movement (VAM) which in theory eliminates horizontal gust errors







* Artificial Horizon Reference







The VAM requires some interpretation, but I think supplies some new information that I didn't have before. There are some other varios on the market claiming to use inertial sensing, but it is less clear what they actually do with it, if anything.







What do you think the VAM is telling you that you don't already know?







-John, Q3



This is a good point. I considered buying the Butterfly variometer to replace the 302 but ended up buying ClearNav. The price was not much of consideration. I watched a couple of videos of the Butterfly variometer in real flight situation and the VAM and the variometer indications hardly ever agreed. This was very confusing. Instead of feeling air pilot would spend more time with eyes in the cockpit watching not one but two indicators and get confused by conflicting information. What sense does it make to increase the workload?



The VAM is not used to filter out gusts probably because no one can figure out the algorithm to do so considering what seems often as conflicting information.



I think the LX, ClearNav and Butterfly as variometers come very close the rest seems just like options on a well equipped car.



I only wish ClearNav sound to be nicer. The sound award goes to Butterfly and LX. ClearNav are you listening? We want nicer sounding variometer.



Due to sound of ClearNav vario if I were to choose again I would have gone with LX.

There are many settings on both the vario and VAM filtering. Watching a short video will not give you much of a feel of the capability of these features, as it might in an older, simpler instrument. For example the VAM can be set up as derived from completely barographic information (like traditional netto) in which case it will track the vario needle quite well - and any additional information be effectively discarded. Set up the way I have it, the VAM and vario sometimes don't agree, and I cannot understand why. Much of the time though, when they don't agree it makes perfect sense. In straight flight it pretty much always makes sense, so like others I use the VAM rather than vario for target speed in cruise making it less likely you are chasing gusts instead of rising or sinking air.

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 12:11:44 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
On Saturday, August 31, 2013 7:14:55 AM UTC-7, wrote:

On Wednesday, August 28, 2013 1:39:50 PM UTC-4, John Carlyle wrote:



On Tuesday, August 27, 2013 10:02:49 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:







I have one and I like it. But I have not used an LX7000 so I cannot compare. It has a zillion more functions and features than the CAI 302 that it replaced in my panel, and has a very nice user interface. It does a bunch of things buut its unique features seem to be:















* Nearly instantaneous wind calculation (inertially derived)















* Inertially derived Vertical Airmass Movement (VAM) which in theory eliminates horizontal gust errors















* Artificial Horizon Reference















The VAM requires some interpretation, but I think supplies some new information that I didn't have before. There are some other varios on the market claiming to use inertial sensing, but it is less clear what they actually do with it, if anything.















What do you think the VAM is telling you that you don't already know?















-John, Q3







This is a good point. I considered buying the Butterfly variometer to replace the 302 but ended up buying ClearNav. The price was not much of consideration. I watched a couple of videos of the Butterfly variometer in real flight situation and the VAM and the variometer indications hardly ever agreed. This was very confusing. Instead of feeling air pilot would spend more time with eyes in the cockpit watching not one but two indicators and get confused by conflicting information. What sense does it make to increase the workload?







The VAM is not used to filter out gusts probably because no one can figure out the algorithm to do so considering what seems often as conflicting information.







I think the LX, ClearNav and Butterfly as variometers come very close the rest seems just like options on a well equipped car.







I only wish ClearNav sound to be nicer. The sound award goes to Butterfly and LX. ClearNav are you listening? We want nicer sounding variometer.







Due to sound of ClearNav vario if I were to choose again I would have gone with LX.



There are many settings on both the vario and VAM filtering. Watching a short video will not give you much of a feel of the capability of these features, as it might in an older, simpler instrument. For example the VAM can be set up as derived from completely barographic information (like traditional netto) in which case it will track the vario needle quite well - and any additional information be effectively discarded. Set up the way I have it, the VAM and vario sometimes don't agree, and I cannot understand why. Much of the time though, when they don't agree it makes perfect sense. In straight flight it pretty much always makes sense, so like others I use the VAM rather than vario for target speed in cruise making it less likely you are chasing gusts instead of rising or sinking air.

In my opinion a variometer to be useful needs reduce pilot's workload. If I have to interpret the two indicators I would rather use my own sensor (the rear end). Maybe there is value in Butterfly variometer it is just not immediately obvious or helpful out of the box.

I have about 60hours experience with the BFV installed in my Ventus 2b, soaring in the Alps. The instantaneous wind is very helpful when flying mountain terrain, wave, and convergence. VAM is helpful sorting out gusts vs real usable lift. The BFV sensors, display, hardware and cables are first rate. I am very happy with my purchase and feel the price for all included is a real bargain.

El martes, 27 de agosto de 2013 20:59:06 UTC-4, escribió:
Hello

The Butterfly vario was advertise has a revolution, well almost, on the market.

Is there any pilots using the Butterfly vario who care to comment on the advantages,if any, of this instrument? I am serously interested in acquiring

one but it as to be better than my LX 7000.

Thanks for your input.

Gilles

Hi
I guess this tread has seen it's end. I started it and it confirm my intuition,
the vario is the best but the other pages are not that usefull, one need a
navigation display of some sort.
Thank you all for your input.
Gilles

On Monday, September 2, 2013 11:04:50 AM UTC-7, wrote:
El martes, 27 de agosto de 2013 20:59:06 UTC-4, escribió: Hello The Butterfly vario was advertise has a revolution, well almost, on the market. Is there any pilots using the Butterfly vario who care to comment on the advantages,if any, of this instrument? I am serously interested in acquiring one but it as to be better than my LX 7000. Thanks for your input. Gilles Hi I guess this tread has seen it's end. I started it and it confirm my intuition, the vario is the best but the other pages are not that usefull, one need a navigation display of some sort. Thank you all for your input. Gilles

Gilles,

I have approximately 250 hours flying with the Butterfly it does not have all the features of the LX7000, but when connected to an Ultimate Le it has many more features than the LX7000.

Butterfly Vario combines Vario/Speedcommand, basic Backup-Navigation with final-glide calculation, a digital compass, Butterfly FLARM®-Radar with FLARM®-voice output, a robust artificial horizon with true airspeed and true altitude, a fully certified IGC-flight-recorder with many other features that simplify flying.

Please see for all the features:

http://www.craggyaero.com/butterfly.htm

http://www.craggyaero.com/ultimate_le.htm


Richard
www.craggyaero.com



Richard
www.craggyaero.com

Hi

I guess this tread has seen it's end. I started it and it confirm my intuition,

the vario is the best but the other pages are not that usefull, one need a

navigation display of some sort.

Thank you all for your input.

Gilles

It is a variometer/logger with some additional functions. Why would you compare it to full blown computers? Comparable systems are LXNav V7, Clearnav Vario, C302 etc. Apples and oranges.

I have flown with one since the spring in combination with an Oudie,it replaced a a L-NAV/GPS-NAV system. Although it fits the smaller 67mm panel hole it's front footprint is almost the size of an 80mm instrument. I would recommend placing it in a 80mm hole using a reducer ring. The instrument is very daylight readable, functions as advertised except for the wind info. Maybe I have a defective ISU too as was posted by someone else. I bought it as it seemed to be the most advanced instrument on the market since I was doing a major panel upgrade. The Flarm data from a portable flarm unit passed through the Butterfly to a NEMA interface box and then onto the Oudie display. It actually showed the flight path of other gliders near me right on the Oudie moving map. Very useful. The Flarm display on the Butterfly is of little value except as a secondary backup display. Voice warnings work very well however. This device is more expensive than others but not all that much more. Good support from the manufacture too. email or call if you want more info. 847-922-1234 USA

On Tuesday, August 27, 2013 7:59:06 PM UTC-5, wrote:
Hello

The Butterfly vario was advertise has a revolution, well almost, on the market.

Is there any pilots using the Butterfly vario who care to comment on the advantages,if any, of this instrument? I am serously interested in acquiring

one but it as to be better than my LX 7000.

Thanks for your input.

Gilles