Return-Path: Received: from imo17.mx.aol.com ([198.81.17.7]) by truman.olsusa.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.1 release 219 ID# 0-52269U2500L250S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Wed, 24 Feb 1999 10:16:23 -0500 Received: from IKOR1@aol.com by imo17.mx.aol.com (IMOv18.1) id IDVLa03212 for ; Wed, 24 Feb 1999 10:04:41 -0500 (EST) From: IKOR1@aol.com Message-ID: <3fe956b0.36d41509@aol.com> Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 10:04:41 EST To: lancair.list@olsusa.com Subject: Autopilot vs Wing-leveler X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com Mime-Version: 1.0 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> << Lancair Builders' Mail List >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> This is my first contribution/question to this forum so I hope I am using the correct address and format. My concern is that in most of the planes that I have flown the autopilot regardless of cost was little more than a wing leveler. It constantly searched for the course and hunted left or right with little systematic purpose. I am told that if there is an HSI that is coupled between the GPS and the auto pilot that my expectations of a precise course can be flown. Does anyone have an autopilot system that really holds the course and flight plan that is error sourced to the GPS? Most seem to work well when holding a course set by the DG, so maybe an HSI is an integral part. Appreciate your comments and suggestions. Lancair IV, Walters Turbine 651