In what context?Pitch & roll: is the margin of error 1%, 2%, 5%?
Installation calibration?I mean are they accurate to a degree or a tenth of a degree?
For TAS as well? My newish 275 reads a few knots faster than the steam gauge. Both are plumbed into the same pitot-static system (which had all the tubing replaced when the 275 went in). I wanna believe the 275 but just checking.Garmin is dead nuts accurate…
Absolutely! You paid good money to go fasterFor TAS as well? My newish 275 reads a few knots faster than the steam gauge. Both are plumbed into the same pitot-static system (which had all the tubing replaced when the 275 went in). I wanna believe the 275 but just checking.
Your steam gauge shows TAS?For TAS as well? My newish 275 reads a few knots faster than the steam gauge. Both are plumbed into the same pitot-static system (which had all the tubing replaced when the 275 went in). I wanna believe the 275 but just checking.
But I think you’re right.
OP: What time is it?As stated above, the question in the OP doesn't have a single clear answer.
Some background to help clarify:
1) Are you asking about accuracy or precision? In general, analog sensing has theoretically infinite precision but is limited by noise, mechnical issues, and accuracy of the installation and calibration; digital systems are precision-limited, based on the resolution of the A/Ds used in the system.
2) Are you asking about the sensor, the processing unit, or the display? Each limits the overall combined accuracy and precision, and the interactions are not always obvious.
3) Are you asking about theoretical maximum numbers, or are you asking how to determine the performance of an installed system?
That's pretty standard. I thought you were referring to to a direct readout rather than what is essentially an "in-the-ballpark" slide rule/E6B which depends on the accuracy of the ASI, the accuracy of the Kollsman, temperature and airspeed lines on both the ASI and the OAT, the accuracy of your reading of those items, and the degree of perfection of your manual fine-tuning lining things up.It has a knob you turn to set the temp vs alt, which moves a ring (white in the pix) to show TAS.
The knob correlates pretty well with the result I get from the E6B in my Aera 660 - typically either spot on or off by a knot either way. Same with the 275 and the E6B, for that matter, since the IAS is consistently lower on the steam gauge than the 275.That's pretty standard. I thought you were referring to to a direct readout rather than what is essentially an "in-the-ballpark" slide rule/E6B which depends on the accuracy of the ASI, the accuracy of the Kollsman, temperature and airspeed lines on both the ASI and the OAT, the accuracy of your reading of those items, and the degree of perfection of your manual fine-tuning lining things up.
Hmmm... I wonder which is more accurate
“It’s an industry term”Garmin is dead nuts accurate…
“Not primary” doesn’t correlate with “not as accurate.”If the pilot can’t use the altimeter in the GI275 as primary (per the GI275 manual - see warnings) why would the pilot be able to use the airspeed indicator as primary?
People often compliment me on the accuracy of my instruments.
Why does that line sound familiar?People often compliment me on the accuracy of my instruments.
Why does that line sound familiar?
I think you'd want to talk about how it performs in specific scenarios since the attitude sensing works, at least partially, by integrating the rate gyro and accelerometer signals - which will make the accuracy time variant.
I sometimes watch my AV-30 when flying aerobatics. It lags during aggressive maneuvering, eventually losing orientation after >5 complex maneuvers in close sequence, then recovers after 5-10 seconds of upright flight. But "aggressive maneuvering" means far more rapid attitude and heading changes than would ever be experienced in IFR flight. One of these days I'm going to video a test sequence and post it.
Most digital AI's that display airspeed and altitude have a trim function in setup to adjust for error.
Didn't you use to own an RCA that gave you better attitude performance? Honestly surprised, I would expect e-indicators plumbed to the pitot system to be more resilient than mems-only indicators like the RCA. Latter which I used to own too for a few months in the arrow before the bolts tried to come from together inflight, but I digress.
I sometimes watch my AV-30 when flying aerobatics. It lags during aggressive maneuvering, eventually losing orientation after >5 complex maneuvers in close sequence, then recovers after 5-10 seconds of upright flight.
If the box is built to one or more technical standard orders one of them or a referenced spec will have tolerances under a variety of conditions. If it meets the TSO it will be as good as or better than the tols.I haven't tried looking online at the Garmin website, but there's probably some regulation somewhere that publishes tolerances that have to be met.
Please never say that again. Ever. (ETA: I can't even find an emoji to convey the tone of this post.)manually quick-erected in level flight.
Uuh, do mean IAS? TAS is calculated from IAS and temp and pressure altitude.For TAS as well? My newish 275 reads a few knots faster than the steam gauge. Both are plumbed into the same pitot-static system (which had all the tubing replaced when the 275 went in). I wanna believe the 275 but just checking.
But I think you’re right.
It has a knob you turn to set the temp vs alt, which moves a ring (white in the pix) to show TAS. Both the CAS and TAS on the steam gauge consistently read a few knots lower than the 275.
Yep - I was at 16K in my (180hp) Warrior. A solid endorsement for ElectroAir!
View attachment 129200View attachment 129199
FIFY.OP: What is?
StraightnLevel: This is how you build a watch…..
Smaller instruments require higher precision...jus' sayin'People often compliment me on the accuracy of my instruments.
This is where we begin an argument about the difference between precision and accuracy. I think that this form of argument is colloquially known as a ****ing match.Smaller instruments require higher precision...jus' sayin'
This is where we begin an argument about the difference between precision and accuracy. I think that this form of argument is colloquially known as a ****ing match.
...thus explaining why sales drones talk about accuracy when they mean precision and talk about precision when they mean bovine excrement.*laugh*
Former engineering teaching assistant - this is specifically one of the points taught in the experimental engineering class I taught in. Not much of an argument in my class. You either knew it or you went into sales