Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
Redundant glass
- Thread starter Dreamin9
- Start date
Carl Froehlich
Well Known Member
hawkeyestof
Well Known Member
Ditto Carl - Dual SV, dual b/u batts and two ADAHRS - nearly 500 hours and works great. J
FORANE
Well Known Member
This basic question - regarding the backups appropriate for flight has been discussed in many threads. The setup you describe certainly appears to be reliable based on the above replies as well as reports in other threads.
However, if you intend to fly in IMC, you may want to add a small EFIS possibly from a different company as an additional redundant instrument. As one who has experienced an EFIS roll inverted on takeoff just 50 AGL in IMC, I would not fly in IMC with the setup proposed by the OP.
However, if you intend to fly in IMC, you may want to add a small EFIS possibly from a different company as an additional redundant instrument. As one who has experienced an EFIS roll inverted on takeoff just 50 AGL in IMC, I would not fly in IMC with the setup proposed by the OP.
hawkeyestof
Well Known Member
How many redundant systems do I need?
Only you can answer that question for yourself, since what you are asking is, "What is my tolerance for risk?". However, dual, interconnected systems from the same manufacturer, designed to work together, do have the risk that if the software is faulty on one, it may be faulty on both. I have not heard of this happening for quite some time, but, it has happened in the past. (IIRC the pilot entered an airport identifier into one box, that it could not understand. It was passed over to the second box, and both crashed.). Some people suggest updating software only one box at a time, to try to mitigate some of this risk.
hawkeyestof
Well Known Member
Carl, Bob, Forane and all. See if I can put some of this to rest by functionally describing the operation of system I designed, and which I regularly fly in IMC.
I have two 10" SV's, two back up batteries and two ADAHRS. Each SV has it's own, dedicated, not connected to anything else, back up battery which will power all functions in it's SV for an hour. The two SV's share one of the ADAHRS during normal operation. I can, manually select which ADAHRS the SV's will share, or allow the system to choose. OR, I can manually select which ADAHRS will power either of the SV's (and the other ADAHRS for the other SV, naturally). When self checks detect abnormal operation in either ADAHRS (which has never happened), the other (aka back up) assumes the lead.
Please, no speculation of my system operation if you don't have the details. (Only two others have that information.)
Guess if you don't have guts enough to fly with this system, perhaps model airplanes would be a better choice.
I have two 10" SV's, two back up batteries and two ADAHRS. Each SV has it's own, dedicated, not connected to anything else, back up battery which will power all functions in it's SV for an hour. The two SV's share one of the ADAHRS during normal operation. I can, manually select which ADAHRS the SV's will share, or allow the system to choose. OR, I can manually select which ADAHRS will power either of the SV's (and the other ADAHRS for the other SV, naturally). When self checks detect abnormal operation in either ADAHRS (which has never happened), the other (aka back up) assumes the lead.
Please, no speculation of my system operation if you don't have the details. (Only two others have that information.)
Guess if you don't have guts enough to fly with this system, perhaps model airplanes would be a better choice.
Carl Froehlich
Well Known Member
Reality check
My dual SkyView setup uses no SkyView backup batteries - I have redundant and split dedicated feeds for each side of the panel that eliminates the need for backup batteries.
Now the center issue - is this safe?
Nothing is safe. We just have different levels of risk. I offer some thoughts:
- I do not recommend launching into bare minimum IMC conditions with a system that you do not have serveral hours of time flying VFR to make sure it works.
- If we look back at the risk of legacy systems we flew with for years, we would not leave the ground. The old spinning iron gyros dependent on a known high failure component (the vacuum pump) are far more likely to crash than a redundant SkyView, Garmin, etc. install.
- While I understand the "backup from a different vendor' concept, I offer that the exceptionally low probability of a sleeping gremlin popping up is less an issue than adding complexity to the panel. I do however take precaution against update glitches. I enter them only when I know the next flight will be VFR so I know they will work in IMC.
At this point in my flying career (I'm an amateur pilot) I would not even consider IFR flight with just a six pack. Fully integrated systems like my SkyView install provide what I need for IFR flight. You decide what you need.
Carl
My dual SkyView setup uses no SkyView backup batteries - I have redundant and split dedicated feeds for each side of the panel that eliminates the need for backup batteries.
Now the center issue - is this safe?
Nothing is safe. We just have different levels of risk. I offer some thoughts:
- I do not recommend launching into bare minimum IMC conditions with a system that you do not have serveral hours of time flying VFR to make sure it works.
- If we look back at the risk of legacy systems we flew with for years, we would not leave the ground. The old spinning iron gyros dependent on a known high failure component (the vacuum pump) are far more likely to crash than a redundant SkyView, Garmin, etc. install.
- While I understand the "backup from a different vendor' concept, I offer that the exceptionally low probability of a sleeping gremlin popping up is less an issue than adding complexity to the panel. I do however take precaution against update glitches. I enter them only when I know the next flight will be VFR so I know they will work in IMC.
At this point in my flying career (I'm an amateur pilot) I would not even consider IFR flight with just a six pack. Fully integrated systems like my SkyView install provide what I need for IFR flight. You decide what you need.
Carl
FORANE
Well Known Member
Jerry
Hopefully your system will continue to provide the excellent service it has thus far. These systems have been evolving, adding features and improving which is a good thing for us all.
I do not criticize you or those who choose to fly in the soup with a 2 EFIS system such as the one you have. All I am saying is that I would want a setup where a single point failure cannot result in complete failure of all my instrumentation. Given my previously described EFIS failure incident, I think this sentiment should be understandable. My personal preference is for round instruments in addition to an EFIS.
Here is a clip of an email I received from another pilot with a current generation 2 EFIS, dual AHARS system:
My efis rolled over on me several times. Scary! Even had BOTH of them do it at the same time.
Hopefully your system will continue to provide the excellent service it has thus far. These systems have been evolving, adding features and improving which is a good thing for us all.
I do not criticize you or those who choose to fly in the soup with a 2 EFIS system such as the one you have. All I am saying is that I would want a setup where a single point failure cannot result in complete failure of all my instrumentation. Given my previously described EFIS failure incident, I think this sentiment should be understandable. My personal preference is for round instruments in addition to an EFIS.
Here is a clip of an email I received from another pilot with a current generation 2 EFIS, dual AHARS system:
My efis rolled over on me several times. Scary! Even had BOTH of them do it at the same time.
