How long until glass panels cost $5 bucks?

MAKG1 said:
You're proposing an ATTITUDE INDICATOR. It indicates the attitude of the phone, not the aircraft. Even if it were close to sensible accuracy (it isn't), Velcro simply is not a rigid, known datum for an attitude measurement. Full stop, end of story.

In moderate turbulence, the first thing to do is stabilize your attitude. Holding altitude is a mistake. Under that circumstance, this Velcro "mount" is going to flop in the breeze, and will read wildly different attitude from the aircraft.

And of course this all assumes you've thought this through far enough not to mount this thing to the yoke.

The "experiment" above is completely invalid. It tests only the nominal cases, purely qualitatively. Under perfect conditions, you don't need any of this instrumentation at all, and having all the loose items is a distraction (no Velcro, is not a secure mount). This is a BAD IDEA.

No amount of "technological advance" is going to keep people from doing stupid things.
Click to expand...

You are using the wrong kind of velcro. The screeching is sad, we have met the enemy and he is us.
 
bartmc said:
You mount an external box to the airframe and relay the data via bluetooth. Already being done. http://www.aviation.levil.com/AHRS_mini.htm it's "airplane money" cheap but not 5 bucks.
Click to expand...

Let me get this straight... you will bet your LIFE on Bluetooth?

I'll say it again. This is a pretty toy. It's a distraction in VMC. It has unproven accuracy, no specification for mounting, no reliability analysis nor testing, no data provenance, nothing. It's a toy.

To the doe-eyed fans here, you MUST understand the implication of that. It means these cannot be depended upon for ANYTHING. They are not backups, they are not situational awareness, they are just more things to take your attention inside the aircraft to manage, with no operational benefit whatsoever. When the brown stuff gets anywhere in the same state as the fan, these devices are hindrances to recovery. They are a risk. A sensible person would trade that risk off with benefits. But there aren't any!

Even well designed panels take significant heads-down time to manage. Which is fine in IMC, but it can get quite dangerous in visual conditions. "See and avoid" requires actually looking up.
 
Just so I understand this:
This thread is about suggesting that velcroing a tablet with electronic versions of our six pack over our six pack which are working perfectly fine is a good idea.

Okay, I am still confused.

Doug
 
MAKG1 said:
Let me get this straight... you will bet your LIFE on Bluetooth?

I'll say it again. This is a pretty toy. It's a distraction in VMC. It has unproven accuracy, no specification for mounting, no reliability analysis nor testing, no data provenance, nothing. It's a toy.

To the doe-eyed fans here, you MUST understand the implication of that. It means these cannot be depended upon for ANYTHING. They are not backups, they are not situational awareness, they are just more things to take your attention inside the aircraft to manage, with no operational benefit whatsoever. When the brown stuff gets anywhere in the same state as the fan, these devices are hindrances to recovery. They are a risk. A sensible person would trade that risk off with benefits. But there aren't any!

Even well designed panels take significant heads-down time to manage. Which is fine in IMC, but it can get quite dangerous in visual conditions. "See and avoid" requires actually looking up.
Click to expand...

It's good we have you here. You know, to set all us doe-eyes straight about what is important, and what is a hindrance to safe aviation. (not that I disagree with the need to look outside in VFR)

Please sir, what else MUST I understand?
 
ClimbnSink said:
Waaah. Someone own stock in Garmin?:lol:
Click to expand...
I would suggest that Garmin makes so much money from their nonaviation products, that I truly doubt if the aviation side of their business died out suddenly their stock prices would even notice.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Sometimes it seems like that's the direction we're all heading, no? Heck, the military is already there...
Click to expand...
Interestingly, some tend to blame the young-who-were-raised-with-computers. However, it doesn't seem as if we are split along generational lines in the current discussion and many similar ones.
 
douglas393 said:
Just so I understand this:
This thread is about suggesting that velcroing a tablet with electronic versions of our six pack over our six pack which are working perfectly fine is a good idea.

Okay, I am still confused.

Doug
Click to expand...

Jeepers.

It's a demonstration of the new capability of our sub-$200 Android Asus Nexus 7 tablets -- nothing more, nothing less.

In ~1922 some goofy pilots demonstrated the capability of two-way radio communication in airplanes. The radio equipment weighed over 100 pounds, and could not receive and transmit simultaneously.

Other pilots no-doubt pointed out how useless, foolish, and dangerous this technology was... :banghead:

Sent from my Nexus 7
 
douglas393 said:
I would suggest that Garmin makes so much money from their nonaviation products, that I truly doubt if the aviation side of their business died out suddenly their stock prices would even notice.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure. When's the last time you heard of someone buying a standalone Garmin Nuvi GPS for their car?

Everything in GPS is trending toward smart phones and tablets, whether it's auto, marine, or aviation.

Sent from my Nexus 7
 
Jay Honeck said:
I'm not so sure. When's the last time you heard of someone buying a standalone Garmin Nuvi GPS for their car?

Everything in GPS is trending toward smart phones and tablets, whether it's auto, marine, or aviation.

Sent from my Nexus 7
Click to expand...
Maybe not the auto market, but the nonprofessional marine market is largely either Garmin or Raytheon, and I suspect the markup on the marine stuff fills their coffers quite well.

Doug
 
MAKG1 said:
So, which kind of Velcro is known to provide rigid, secure mounts to arbitrary surfaces?
Click to expand...

How rigid do you need it? Even the cheapest velcro on the market will hold something like an oversized cellphone at whatever attitude it's placed on the velcro within 1-3 degrees of it's mounting position for at least a few weeks until the sticky stuff on the back comes off. If a few degrees off will roll you onto your back and into the ground, the problem is not the mounting method, it's either the toy not working properly or the pilot being completely incompetent.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Jeepers.

It's a demonstration of the new capability of our sub-$200 Android Asus Nexus 7 tablets -- nothing more, nothing less.

In ~1922 some goofy pilots demonstrated the capability of two-way radio communication in airplanes. The radio equipment weighed over 100 pounds, and could not receive and transmit simultaneously.

Other pilots no-doubt pointed out how useless, foolish, and dangerous this technology was... :banghead:

Sent from my Nexus 7
Click to expand...
Thank you and now I am no longer confused.

Doug
 
FWIW these kind of "glass panel apps" have been around for years and have always kind of sucked because the hardware just isn't up to the task.
 
jesse said:
FWIW these kind of "glass panel apps" have been around for years and have always kind of sucked because the hardware just isn't up to the task.
Click to expand...

I know! I remember downloading one for my Windoze laptop (with a separate GPS the size of a soup bowl), circa 2002-ish. It was really cool -- until I asked Mary to hold the laptop. :rolleyes2:

Now, they actually work. And the hardware is almost there. I give it another generation or two before it become widespread, but the experimental guys will soon be all over this stuff. Heck, they already are.
 
Jay Honeck said:
I know! I remember downloading one for my Windoze laptop (with a separate GPS the size of a soup bowl), circa 2002-ish. It was really cool -- until I asked Mary to hold the laptop. :rolleyes2:

Now, they actually work. And the hardware is almost there. I give it another generation or two before it become widespread, but the experimental guys will soon be all over this stuff. Heck, they already are.
Click to expand...

Yeah I see this mostly impacting the homebuilt guys. Maybe in the future builds it'll be common practice to leave the entire left side of the panel bare. That way you could velcro two iPads. One for the PFD and the other for MFD Nav. Who knows. :dunno:

I prefer things that are permanently mounted in the aircraft that are part of the aircraft. I look at everything in my plane as a whole. The avionics/instruments are as much a part of the interior as the seats and belts. That being said, glass is still too expensive. My two Blue Mountain displays are cheap at 5 grand a piece but the iPad/Nexus technology is starting to catch up at a fraction of the cost. Hopefully the big experimental companies such as Dynon and GRT will realize more and more pilots are using cheap handheld glass and it'll drive prices down. Even this new Dynon D1 can be replaced by using a cell phone app.

This stuff will never replace certified instruments, even if they are steam. The certification process is way too expensive and it reflects in the prices of glass. Heck we just replaced our AHARS in the helicopter last month for 18 grand! That was just for a black box.

The potential for all this stuff will always be as a gadget to show friends or an emergency back-up. I agree with above. If you're flying around VFR why even bother looking at the display? It's a pleasure flight, not an instrument flight. If it's an instrument flight, well then you better be looking at your instruments and not a phone.
 
Last edited:
Velocity173 said:
Yeah I see this mostly impacting the homebuilt guys. Maybe in the future builds it'll be common practice to leave the entire left side of the panel bare. That way you could velcro two iPads. One for the PFD and the other for MFD Nav. Who knows. :dunno:
Click to expand...

IIRC, the last time I saw Rutan's Boomerang it was configured so the entire panel consisted of two iPads.
 
kyleb said:
IIRC, the last time I saw Rutan's Boomerang it was configured so the entire panel consisted of two iPads.
Click to expand...

Yeah back in the 90's he flew it with a laptop and just some radios and engine instruments. Since the restoration last year it actually has a real panel. Still has an iPad mounted on the left running Foreflight though. :) It actually has a really nice interior now as well.
 
The recent turn in this discussion begs the question: As all this great technology evolves, at what point do pilot/owners consider putting their planes into the experimental category in order to take advantage of it? As the cost of aviation continues to rise, and certified gear costing multiple tens of thousands, some must be considering it.
 
I'm excited about the prospect of saving money by using a tablet, for example, dumping my $700/yr. XM subscription. Also, I am completely fascinated with both aviation and technology, so the explosion of using tablets in the cockpit melds both of those worlds for me.

Using a tablet with something like the Levil AHRS system, would allow me to enjoy some of the features of an Aspen or G1000 system when I can't justify the $15,000 pricetag of those certified products.

Think about how easy it is to keep your charts and obstacle database up to date now with our tablets as compared to the old method of either pulling out data cards or the entire GPS. From that perspective, using a tablet has already made flying safer for me. I think it's a very exciting time for general aviation.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
 
Last edited:
IIRC, FAA doesn't permit such other than for legitimate reasons, none of which include wanting to use experimental or video game components.

LDJones said:
The recent turn in this discussion begs the question: As all this great technology evolves, at what point do pilot/owners consider putting their planes into the experimental category in order to take advantage of it? As the cost of aviation continues to rise, and certified gear costing multiple tens of thousands, some must be considering it.
Click to expand...
 
LDJones said:
The recent turn in this discussion begs the question: As all this great technology evolves, at what point do pilot/owners consider putting their planes into the experimental category in order to take advantage of it? As the cost of aviation continues to rise, and certified gear costing multiple tens of thousands, some must be considering it.
Click to expand...
Probably real soon, but in reality the usefulness of these devices is pretty limited. They can give you a moving map, HI, altimeter(based on GPS, though with a internal barometer it should not be difficult to get a true altimeter), and some other things, but the stuff that I really use for VFR, radios, engine monitors, and my eyeballs they cannot replace. As for IFR use, it is going to take a huge change in the environment of safety in the FAA, and individual pilots to take the leap of faith to trust these devices, and I personally do not see happening anytime soon.

My other concern is durability of these devices. How many of use still have cell phones, tablets, or laptops that are two or more years olds. How many of use are still using 196's, 296's, ... that are over 5 years old. Yes I realize that some of these is because of technology leaps in the former, but a significant number of replacements of these devices also occur because they break, and I daresay a lot easier than the devices made for aviation. For example, I have a pair of Furuno 1st generation NavNets(imagine G1000 for boat) on my boat. They were one of the first sold in the US and are over 10 years old. They have been through New Jersey winters and Florida summers as well as New Jersey summers which are worse. I have used them in 10 foot seas and they have been soak in water more time than I can remember. They still work perfectly, and have needed no maintenance what so ever. Cannot say the same for my PC's, tablets, or cell phones.

Sometimes short term gain equals long term loss.

I think the demonstration that the OP did is interesting, but not world changing.

Doug
 
wabower said:
IIRC, FAA doesn't permit such other than for legitimate reasons, none of which include wanting to use experimental or video game components.
Click to expand...

When they do permit it, the restrictions are such that it makes th plane impractical for normal usage. I.e. no passengers or flight over populated areas. A reason to take a certified plane experimental would be if you were developing an stc for it or something like that. "I want a Dynon" probably wouldn't do it.
 
Challenged said:
I'm excited about the prospect of saving money by using a tablet, for example, dumping my $700/yr. XM subscription. Also, I am completely fascinated with both aviation and technology, so the explosion of using tablets in the cockpit melds both of those worlds for me.

Using a tablet with something like the Levil AHRS system, would allow me to enjoy some of the features of an Aspen or G1000 system when I can't justify the $15,000 pricetag of those certified products.

Think about how easy it is to keep your charts and obstacle database up to date now with our tablets as compared to the old method of either pulling out data cards or the entire GPS. From that perspective, using a tablet has already made flying safer for me. I think it's a very exciting time for general aviation.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
I think the comparison to a G1000 and though I am not familiar with the Aspen product but I think it is similar to the G1000 is far fetched. The AHRS is just one small thing that the G1000 does. The tablet is not giving me engine monitoring data, autopilot control, VOR, radio, transponder, flight planning, storm scope, TIS, terrain avoidance, CO monitoring, radios, etc. Start adding what you need to reproduce the G1000 completely and I would suggest that the price goes up quite quickly.

So I think though there is some usefulness to tablets, as a back up to what is already functioning in your plane, and to give you charts in a more accessible form, it's not replacing my instruments in my plane anytime soon.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Jeepers.

It's a demonstration of the new capability of our sub-$200 Android Asus Nexus 7 tablets -- nothing more, nothing less.

In ~1922 some goofy pilots demonstrated the capability of two-way radio communication in airplanes. The radio equipment weighed over 100 pounds, and could not receive and transmit simultaneously.

Other pilots no-doubt pointed out how useless, foolish, and dangerous this technology was... :banghead:

Sent from my Nexus 7
Click to expand...
Analogy does not work for me. The radio was a new device which provided avaitors with something they did not previously have. This replaces something that works perfectly well, is easily accessible, with something that does the same thing but requires some degree of jury rigging.

A better analogy would be suggesting that we replace our $1000(?) panel mounted radios and VORs with a handheld radio. Maybe use Sporty's radio and then you could also do a glidescope on ILS.

I have not seen any threads suggesting this. Have you?

Doug
 
douglas393 said:
Analogy does not work for me. The radio was a new device which provided avaitors with something they did not previously have. This replaces something that works perfectly well, is easily accessible, with something that does the same thing but requires some degree of jury rigging.
Click to expand...

Personally, I do not find steam gauges to be either reliable, affordable, or (especially!) accessible. Ever replaced a DG? I have, twice. The only thing that sucked more than the vacuum pump was the price, and the joy of installing the damned thing.

Sent from my Nexus 7
 
douglas393 said:
I think the comparison to a G1000 and though I am not familiar with the Aspen product but I think it is similar to the G1000 is far fetched. The AHRS is just one small thing that the G1000 does. The tablet is not giving me engine monitoring data, autopilot control, VOR, radio, transponder, flight planning, storm scope, TIS, terrain avoidance, CO monitoring, radios, etc. Start adding what you need to reproduce the G1000 completely and I would suggest that the price goes up quite quickly.

So I think though there is some usefulness to tablets, as a back up to what is already functioning in your plane, and to give you charts in a more accessible form, it's not replacing my instruments in my plane anytime soon.
Click to expand...

I agree, I'm not planning on replacing the instruments..that's exactly my main point, in fact. It's far too costly to replace the instruments in my plane, but I can take advantage of cheap tablet technology to supplement my current setup and get many of the advantages of a system that is cost prohibitive. Think about what we have available today using tablets (I've never used an iPad, so forgive my mostly Android bent on the features listed below):

Synthetic vision using separate AHRS boxes, or built-in (Wing-X on iPad)
Backup Attitude Indicator/Compass (Various apps, including support for external AHRS boxes)
Traffic information and warnings (ADS-B using various apps/hardware plus Zaon interface to tablets)
Real-time weather (ADS-B and XM using various apps/hardware)
Obstacle avoidance (Anywhere Map ,etc..)
Terrain warning systems (Anywhere Map ,etc...)
Geo-referenced taxi-diagrams and approach plates (Various apps)
NMEA output from the tablet to drive an autopilot (Naviator)
Virtual glide-slope to any runway (Anywhere Map)
Safe glide distance during engine outs (Anywhere Map)
Virtual HSI (Anywhere Map)
Graphical TFR notifications
Gear warning and fuel tank switch warnings (Anywhere Map)
 
Last edited:
wabower said:
IIRC, FAA doesn't permit such other than for legitimate reasons, none of which include wanting to use experimental or video game components.
Click to expand...

Which is an interesting take for the FAA, considering those exact same "video game components" are authorized to shoot approaches to minimums at the same distance requirements to air carriers as us Certified drivers just by saying they've self-tested the gear. Heh. ;)
 
douglas393 said:
Probably real soon, but in reality the usefulness of these devices is pretty limited. They can give you a moving map, HI, altimeter(based on GPS, though with a internal barometer it should not be difficult to get a true altimeter), and some other things, but the stuff that I really use for VFR, radios, engine monitors, and my eyeballs they cannot replace.
Click to expand...

I am especially excited about the potential of using tablets for engine monitoring. Have you seen what the tuners are doing with tablets and their little street racers? It's amazing.

I'd bet that JPI is working on this already. If not, they are fools.

As for durability, I have found the new tablets to be pretty tough. What usually breaks on radios? The knobs. The volume controls. The on/off switches. Solid state electronics rarely break -- and tablets have almost eliminated physical switches. My Nexus 7 has only two (power, and volume) and it could easily get by with just one.

Better yet, At $199 they are nearly disposable, in aviation monetary terms.

Another advantage? Complete redundancy. Lose one, and the others can do EXACTLY the same things. You could literally have 7 or 8 of them across your otherwise blank panel, doing everything from engine monitoring to in-flight movies.

I have seen the future, gentlemen. If there are any pilots left to enjoy it, the future looks bright, indeed.

Sent from my Nexus 7
 
docmirror said:
Please sir, what else MUST I understand?
Click to expand...

What it means to use improper or no testing techniques on a safety-critical system.

All the "fixes" proposed to this "low cost" system make it look a whole lot like existing panel mounted systems. An AHRS? Sure, that will help, if all the details are tested appropriately (including a reliable network and/or fault tolerant design). But low cost? Do all the same things, and the cost ends up being about the same.
 
Yahbut it's like the difference between BO and his dog Bo. Bo has papers.

denverpilot said:
Which is an interesting take for the FAA, considering those exact same "video game components" are authorized to shoot approaches to minimums at the same distance requirements to air carriers as us Certified drivers just by saying they've self-tested the gear. Heh. ;)
Click to expand...
 
Jay Honeck said:
What usually breaks on radios? The knobs. The volume controls. The on/off switches. Solid state electronics rarely break -- and tablets have almost eliminated physical switches.
Click to expand...

The SENSORS (antennas, for radios) and networks (wiring, mounting trays, etc.) break far more often than the units themselves. This is the same problem your tablet will face. Garbage in = garbage out.

And the older Narco radios seem to blow 7-segment displays constantly. Those are solid state. Sure, it's better than moving parts and vacuum tubes, but assuming solid state devices can't fail is wrong.

Your list of failure modes is highly truncated. The physical device is only one possible failure mode. There are many others.
 
Jay, you have done a very serious disservice to pilots and iphone users everywhere. This should have been handled via private messages. As it is now, the FAA and NTSB will now see it and demand that all electronic units that are capable of utilizing these APPs be TSOd before they can be sold to anyone.

Within a year, expect iphones to cost around ten thousand dollars. Nobody will be allowed to possess an older model iphone due to the slight possibility of a pilot utilizing one. The manufacturers of these devices will be forced to lay off many thousands of employees, causing a ripple effect through our entire economy.

You have done serious harm to our nation, not just to pilots and iphone users.

-John
 
Last edited:
The problem with all this handheld technology is that the aircraft suffers in the long run. Instead of people investing in their panels they figure, heck why bother upgrading when all I need are a couple of cell phones. So now you'll have 40 yr old aircraft with old instruments and avionics that'll never be upgraded. Also there will be those who can't afford to even keep their 40 yr old panel in a safe working condition, they'll just velcro some cell phones on the panel as a primary instrument. I wonder how many guys out there are filing IFR /G and using an iPad for primary Nav? Really that's the sad state of aviation right now. Most GA pilots can't afford to have new hitech certified systems installed in their aircraft.:(
 
John Baker said:
Jay, you have done a very serious disservice to pilots and iphone users everywhere. This should have been handled via private messages. As it is now, the FAA and NTSB will now see it and demand that all electronic units that are capable of utilizing these APPs be TSOd before they can be sold to anyone.

Within a year, expect iphones to cost around ten thousand dollars. Nobody will be allowed to possess an older model iphone due to the slight possibility of a pilot utilizing one. The manufacturers of these devices will be forced to lay off many thousands of employees, causing a ripple effect through our entire economy.

You have done serious harm to our nation, not just to pilots and iphone users.

-John
Click to expand...

:D :p

Sent from my Nexus 7
 
Velocity173 said:
The problem with all this handheld technology is that the aircraft suffers in the long run. Instead of people investing in their panels they figure, heck why bother upgrading when all I need are a couple of cell phones. So now you'll have 40 yr old aircraft with old instruments and avionics that'll never be upgraded. Also there will be those who can't afford to even keep their 40 yr old panel in a safe working condition, they'll just velcro some cell phones on the panel as a primary instrument. I wonder how many guys out there are filing IFR /G and using an iPad for primary Nav? Really that's the sad state of aviation right now. Most GA pilots can't afford to have new hitech certified systems installed in their aircraft.:(
Click to expand...


That could be a valid thought, but there is also the issue that most non commercial aircraft owners take a lot of pride in the toy they own. We all like our possessions to be the very best, it's an ego thing.

You are correct though, one heck of a lot of owners will forgo spending ten or so grand on upgrading an old panel when their phone will do the job.

Does it really matter though? As long as the engine works, and the wings will support it, isn't that enough?

My tongue in cheek post just above yours was making a stab at how government regulations have made aircraft unaffordable to most people, and is probably the biggest single reason for the decline of GA.

-John
 
Last edited:
Steve Job said:
How apropos is this article. iPad bails out B767 that lost all navigational capabilities:

http://www.avweb.com/blogs/insider/AVwebInsider_iPadBailout_207584-1.html
Click to expand...

If you read that a bit more carefully, the iPad was a chart. It didn't bail out the aircraft. A chart and whiskey compass did. The iPad happened to contain the chart. A few years earlier, and the exact same thing would have happened with the required paper chart and would have been virtually indistinguishable, except for the rustling sound of unfolding paper.

The article itself is about EMI, but forgets that certified flight deck electronic flight bags have WiFi and cellular disabled. That makes a lot of difference for that issue.
 
Velocity173 said:
The problem with all this handheld technology is that the aircraft suffers in the long run. Instead of people investing in their panels they figure, heck why bother upgrading when all I need are a couple of cell phones. So now you'll have 40 yr old aircraft with old instruments and avionics that'll never be upgraded. Also there will be those who can't afford to even keep their 40 yr old panel in a safe working condition, they'll just velcro some cell phones on the panel as a primary instrument. I wonder how many guys out there are filing IFR /G and using an iPad for primary Nav? Really that's the sad state of aviation right now. Most GA pilots can't afford to have new hitech certified systems installed in their aircraft.:(
Click to expand...

This just goes to show you that there is always someone who sees the pile of poop, instead of the pony.

Gentlemen, we are flying spam cans with satellite navigation, ADS-B uplinked weather and traffic, moving geo-referenced sectionals, and the ability to find the cheapest avgas -- all on a tablet.

What I demonstrated yesterday is that we are on the verge of having truly usable, Aspen-like modular glass cockpit technology -- again, all on cheap tablets.

This is Star Trek stuff, guys. Just a few years ago it only existed in Gene Roddenberry's fertile imagination!

We live in amazing times. Flow with it!

Sent from my Nexus 7
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top