Trio vs TruTrak

I’m at X35 in north central Florida. The 7,250 is for most approved models unless major removals need to be made. We’ve installed probably 50-100 TruTrak’s over the years.
 
Jesse Saint said:
I’m at X35 in north central Florida. The 7,250 is for most approved models unless major removals need to be made. We’ve installed probably 50-100 TruTrak’s over the years.
Click to expand...


You done any Trios? I like the layout better of those and the Trio looks like they edge out the TT on functions a little bit, but at what cost is the question. More important question though,,..... which servos will push around my fat, ugly T tail PA32 better?
 
I have worked just a little bit with Trios over the years. The need to deal with the STC Group and the more complicated install would make that probably a $10,000 system. The Trutrak would be $7,250. Neither is approved for the PA-32 yet, but the Trutrak with it’s metal gearbox, 80 in/lb clutch and capstan should have no problem handling your PA-32.
 
Jesse Saint said:
I have worked just a little bit with Trios over the years. The need to deal with the STC Group and the more complicated install would make that probably a $10,000 system. The Trutrak would be $7,250. Neither is approved for the PA-32 yet, but the Trutrak with it’s metal gearbox, 80 in/lb clutch and capstan should have no problem handling your PA-32.
Click to expand...

Not counting the G5s, how does that compare to GFC 500?
 
Jesse Saint said:
I have worked just a little bit with Trios over the years. The need to deal with the STC Group and the more complicated install would make that probably a $10,000 system. The Trutrak would be $7,250. Neither is approved for the PA-32 yet, but the Trutrak with it’s metal gearbox, 80 in/lb clutch and capstan should have no problem handling your PA-32.
Click to expand...

TT is approved already. My Installer confirmed it.

I talked to the STC group last week and they are waiting on final approval for the PA32. Apparently, they had to slightly rework a bracket which pushed them back a bit recently.
 
TruTrak is not approved yet, but should be really soon.
 
I think they had approval then realized they needed more torque so they had to go back and get the capstan servos and higher torque approved.
 
TT had to redesign the pitch system, they "didn't like " the way it flew the plane, so they put a hold on the PA-32 this past summer. It was lacking the authority to handle the heavier aircraft pitch control forces.

So they beefed up the mechanism and called in a more powerful servo. (TruTrak have MANY different servos, they design and build them in house) Approval on the upgraded system is almost ready.

Level flight is no problem, but "commanded" turns are another matter. 25-30 degrees of bank need some serious back pressure in a C182 or PA-32...

Some Trios have been removed from C182's, apparently they could not handle the pitch forces needed. Unfortunately , Trio has (or did) have only one servo.

Part of the "morphing" of "experimental" systems to our world... :( Most experimentals are light 2 place aircraft. A C182 or a PA-32 is a MUCH heaver aircraft, not to mention you may have a 300 Hp. six up front.... PA-28's and the lighter Cessnas are no problem.

Cap
 
Just got this text back from Corey when I asked if the PA-32 was approved yet:

“Negative. Should be very soon tho. About the same time as the 182. Both are submitted just waiting to start shipping.”
 
T
cappy48 said:
TT had to redesign the pitch system, they "didn't like " the way it flew the plane, so they put a hold on the PA-32 this past summer. It was lacking the authority to handle the heavier aircraft pitch control forces.

So they beefed up the mechanism and called in a more powerful servo. (TruTrak have MANY different servos, they design and build them in house) Approval on the upgraded system is almost ready.

Level flight is no problem, but "commanded" turns are another matter. 25-30 degrees of bank need some serious back pressure in a C182 or PA-32...

Some Trios have been removed from C182's, apparently they could not handle the pitch forces needed. Unfortunately , Trio has (or did) have only one servo.
Click to expand...
Trutrak actually still has just one certified Servo, but they can set the clutch torque as high as 120 in/lb. all shipped so far are set at 60 in/lb. they have many different arms depending on the travel and torque needed in the application. Now they will have a Capstan, which will further increase torque.

In the heavier experimentals they use a Capstan or torque enhancer for increased torque or travel when needed.
 
So when is the PA32 due? :skeptical:
 
It is in Ok City waiting for final approval. It’s anybody’s guess, but they haven’t asked for any further info, so it should be imminent. That and the the C180/2/5.
 
Unit74 said:
You done any Trios? I like the layout better of those and the Trio looks like they edge out the TT on functions a little bit, but at what cost is the question. More important question though,,..... which servos will push around my fat, ugly T tail PA32 better?
Click to expand...


Unit 74..

There is a "real world" cost of a Trio on another forum, PA-28 - 140 Straight wing, $11445.00, with roll servo under the seat... If the roll servo goes in the wing of the 32 (?), it could be an extra 10 hours. I think this cost was based on $80 per hour. Removal/balancing and reinstall of the Stabilator chews up a lot of manhours.

Just noticed you have a T tail.... TruTrak system will work for T-tail as well as straight tail.. The Trio system will not work for T-tails. The Trio design pitch design attaches the servo to the Stab balance beam, and the T-tails use a different system ?

Be aware that there are very few Trio installs being reported in the forums.. so the information sample is very small.

Cap
 
The install on the PA-32 should be very similar to the PA-28, so the install cost should be roughly the same, except that there are more PA-32’s that already have auto pilots that will need to be removed to make way for the TruTrak. Also, there are some PA-32’s that have the fuel valve under the middle seat installed in a way that may require a little modification to fit the TruTrak.
 
Good gouge Jesse..... thanks. Whattta think a Aspen Pro would cost these days installed in Lance? I think G5 is out since Garmin won’t be doing a GFC in the foreseeable future for me. Right from Garmin sales on that one.
 
Jesse Saint said:
T

Trutrak actually still has just one certified Servo, but they can set the clutch torque as high as 120 in/lb. all shipped so far are set at 60 in/lb. they have many different arms depending on the travel and torque needed in the application. Now they will have a Capstan, which will further increase torque.

In the heavier experimentals they use a Capstan or torque enhancer for increased torque or travel when needed.
Click to expand...


>>Now they will have a Capstan, which will further increase torque

Will that be another certified servo Jesse? or a variation of their existing?

Cap
 
The G5 is still a valid option for the Lance, even with the TruTrak. I can get numbers if you contact me via email. Jesse at saintaviation dot com.
 
A
cappy48 said:
>>Now they will have a Capstan, which will further increase torque

Will that be another certified servo Jesse? or a variation of their existing?

Cap
Click to expand...
A variation of their existing Servo. The capstan wheel will attach in place of an arm. The internal clutch may also be adjusted for increased torque.
 
Jesse Saint said:
A

A variation of their existing Servo. The capstan wheel will attach in place of an arm. The internal clutch may also be adjusted for increased torque.
Click to expand...


Nice! Lots of versatility in that design... The construction of the servo would indicate it is certainly capable of a lot more than the 60 in/lb. The gear train is silky smooth... 120 in/lb can move a lot...

Cap
 
Jesse Saint said:
The G5 is still a valid option for the Lance, even with the TruTrak.
Click to expand...

How so? I was told G5 and GFC or Aspen and pretty much take your pick of APs. I have an Altimatic IIIc right now so maybe just keep it and hand fly my own vert approaches. Coupled would be nice though.... But make me lazy too.
 
I just finished getting an Altimatic IIIc working with a pair of G5’s and GAD29B in a Lance. Yes, vertical is on you. The G5 will interface soon with the Lance, but probably only with heading bug. The TruTrak can drive off your GPS independent of the G5’s as well. The TruTrak doesn’t need the Aspen or G5 to work great.
 
So If Im' gonna spend the loot on new glass and an AP, really sounds like Aspen and the TT or Trio at this point if the G5 won't drive vert on the IIIC or anything but heading on the G5/TT set up.
 
It all depends. $5,000 plus installation for 2 G5’s or $10,000 plus installation for the Aspen Pro. More features with the Aspen for more dollars.

I think the Trio vs TruTrak has been sufficiently hashed out in this thread. Oh, plastic gears on the Trio vs metal gears in the TruTrak.
 
>>>Oh, plastic gears on the Trio vs metal gears in the TruTrak.

Glad you mentioned this...

If some who are trying to decide could only hold the TruTrak servo in one hand, and the Trio servo in the other....

Cap
 
If my main purpose was to get GPSS and a coupled approach, would the TT do that or would I still need the G5/Aspen head?

Or in other words, why by the glass when the AP will really do all I need?
 
If your main purpose is GPSS and a coupled (GPS) approach, then the TT will do all you need. The G5 and Aspen will give you some nice features, like controlling heading bug from the EFIS instead of the Auto Pilot head, and possibly syncing the baro altitude. There is absolutely no need to buy the glass.
 
Will the Analog DG drive the TT or does it basically inop the bug?
 
Unit74 said:
Will the Analog DG drive the TT or does it basically inop the bug?
Click to expand...

TruTrak needs a digital only source of steering. So, GPS is all thats currently supported. You'll need a GPS that can output on serial or using ARINC to feed the TruTrak. The unit by itself can follow course. The unit by itself will not follow a heading, it is ONLY course. As we all know, course and heading are two different things. A lot of us TruTrak users can "fake" a heading by using the CWS button, turning to the desired heading on the DG and releasing the CWS button on the TruTrak to set a course that is close to the desired heading, but you kind of have to keep an eye on it.

Now, what Jesse is referring to for heading bug: Aspen and Garmin (G5) are working with TruTrak to offer the ability to feed the TT steering information when a heading bug is used in the Aspen/Garmin units. So, if you have either an Apsen or a G5, you can switch the TruTrak's mode (once they get their software updates available) into "ASPEN" mode and from there you can work from your Aspen to either follow GPSS or follow a heading bug. In addition, TruTrak has promised the ability to sync the Baro setting from either the G5 or the Aspen to the TruTrak saving you from having to update the TT's altitude everytime you change your Baro on the Aspen/G5.
 
I guess course and track are the same thing in Lynn's wording. The TruTrak can fly with no GPS input, but it will just be a bank angle, which is far from ideal. Altitude will work fine for preselect because it uses static pressure to handle altitude. If it has a GPS position (NMEA or Aviation format), it will fly a ground Track, which is selectable from its rotary knob. If there is a GPS feeding it that had a flight plan, then you can fly GPS Nav or GPS Steering, depending on whether it is getting RS232 or ARINC429. The mode button will allow you to toggle between Track Select and GPS NAV/Steering. You can follow a heading by turning the Track select knob until the heading is what you want on your DG and/or compass, but in all flying, ground track is what you want and what ATC wants you to do, but they still supposedly correct for wind and give you a heading rounded to the nearest 10 degrees. The CWS is one way people handle it, but still that is the same as twisting the track select knob until the ground track selected give you the ground track you want or the heading you are given. If you are not given a heading by ATC, then you just dial the track you need to get to where you are going and the autopilot corrects for wind automatically.

The Baro sync should be done on the ground before takeoff, and then again periodically during flight, especially with a drastically changing baro setting. Each 100th of a baro adjustment is about 10 feet, so if you go from 29.92 to 30.02 without adjusting your altitude sync on the auto pilot, you will be about 100 feet off.
 
hah! indeed, I was using course, but Track is probably the more technically correct term, since a "course" denotes having an end point. The Baro sync is the only thing I really don't like about TruTrak, and its a small thing. And something that will be fixed with Aspen/G5 integration. I REALLY wished that Trutralk would have made the Baro / Altitude setting based on actual baro pressure, not altitude. :/ It sort of adds a step that isn't really needed, especially in bumpy air. When I change my alitimeter to the new baro which I get in in/mmhg from ATC or stations, I have to look at the new indicated altitude, and then go over to the Trutrak and try and twist the sensitive rotary knob to match by altitude, since TruTrak uses "altitude" instead of pressure. I would prefer the TruTrak to have the ability to just let me enter the actual pressure instead of having to finagle the rotary knob through feet of altitude, which gets....challenging... when its bumpy. Not to mention, as you are flying in bumpy weather, your altitude will be bouncing around by a few dozen feet, the Trutrak will show its altitude setting in feet, down to a single foot, so the display is jumping around like crazy while you are trying to rotate the rotary knob. Not a big deal in smooth air, but TN summer flying, we rarely have smooth air and its a pain to "chase" the desired altitude setting. I usually end up saying "screw it... 50-75 feet is close enough for this type of flying". If I could just rotate in the actual pressure I think it would be easier as the resolution issue would be muted at that point.
 
I kind of agree, but the Trutrak does adjust altitude by about the same amount as a bar adjustment per click. I want to say it’s 8 feet per click. Visually different. Functionally the same, or at least close. If you’re bumping, then a baro mismatch if 10-20 feet doesn’t matter.
 
Hi Jesse..

First of all, thank you for your ongoing insights into the technical abilities of the TruTrak..

In your last post, this...

>>but in all flying, ground track is what you want and what ATC wants you to do, but they still supposedly correct for wind and give you a heading rounded to the nearest 10 degrees.

My understanding is that ATC does NOT allow for wind correction, implying that they hope all their targets are "drifting" in the same direction at the same speed in the wind. Then those that would rather fly a true "heading" say that this is the problem with a lone wolf flying a "track" because this aircraft, not "drifting in the wind like the others, messes up the equation...

Perhaps this is different in the US? Anyone here close to ATC that could offer some input?

Cheers!

Cap
 
Jesse Saint said:
I kind of agree, but the Trutrak does adjust altitude by about the same amount as a bar adjustment per click. I want to say it’s 8 feet per click. Visually different. Functionally the same, or at least close. If you’re bumping, then a baro mismatch if 10-20 feet doesn’t matter.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it would be nice if the altitude your dialing in would just STAY and not fluctuate as your airplane bounced around. Its hard to chase a number in a bumpy cockpit when its bouncing around 10 feet or so. Sometimes it bounces so fast that its faster than the scree refresh rate, and the last digit just blurs. A simple fix would be to NOT have the altitude you are dialing go up and down as your aircraft goes up and down, but rather stay with whatever digit you "clicked in". An even better solution would be to have some heavy clicks in the knob, like the old Narco radios had....such a pleasant "thunk" and tactile feedback when you made a turn.

cappy48 said:
Hi Jesse..

My understanding is that ATC does NOT allow for wind correction, implying that they hope all their targets are "drifting" in the same direction at the same speed in the wind. Then those that would rather fly a true "heading" say that this is the problem with a lone wolf flying a "track" because this aircraft, not "drifting in the wind like the others, messes up the equation...

Perhaps this is different in the US? Anyone here close to ATC that could offer some input?

Cheers!

Cap
Click to expand...

From talking with two buddies that are ATC, they both said "y'all are flying in the same airmass, we don't adjust for wind so we give you a heading to follow and everyone slots in". That makes sense as different aircraft would need different correction angles based on their speeds and such. It's simpler to tell an aircraft in the same airmass to just fly a specific magnetic heading, and everyones "correction" is pretty much built in since we are all in the same air moving together with it.
 
That's kinda what I understood as well..

The headings they give us here are approximate, to the nearest 10 degrees.. A "track " still works as good as a "heading" , unless you are very slow, in a very strong 90 deg. crosswind and the new track is for a long time..

I have found that a long diversion, the heading just gets adjusted along the way anyway, as the whole picture ATC is watching is very dynamic anyway..

They (and we) just roll along with the ever changing picture...

Cap
 
Exactly. While ATC may treat it as people describe, the air mass is moving, but a moving air mass has a different effect on planes of different speeds and flying different directions. The picture that ATC has IS the ground track of all planes on their radar. They have a location and direction seen by a fixed point on the ground. The system in general assumes that more people can fly heading accurately than they can fly track. All planes have a compass, so that is true. What the system hasn’t updated to is that most planes now have a way to fly track.
 
Jesse Saint said:
Exactly. While ATC may treat it as people describe, the air mass is moving, but a moving air mass has a different effect on planes of different speeds and flying different directions. The picture that ATC has IS the ground track of all planes on their radar. They have a location and direction seen by a fixed point on the ground. The system in general assumes that more people can fly heading accurately than they can fly track. All planes have a compass, so that is true. What the system hasn’t updated to is that most planes now have a way to fly track.
Click to expand...


Agreed...

So... when asked to "fly a heading" I press the Mode button, enter Track mode, dial in the new heading / track with the Knob and let the AP do it's thing. (Above MA of course) I have yet to have ATC request an "adjustment " . Usually the request is active for 2 - 4 minutes, then I am cleared to resume course, so I tap the mode button and the AP turns on an intercept course and slides back "to and on" the original course line.

I monitor the process of course, ready to correct any gross error. But with reasonable SA, any drift (or lack of) issues should be anticipated..

cap
 
Can the Trutrak take commands from the VLOC side of the box or the SL30 Nav/Com?
 
No. It will only fly GPS Nav or GPS Steering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top