X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:16:32 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.122] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.12) with ESMTP id 3511664 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:56:50 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=75.180.132.122; envelope-from=super_chipmunk@roadrunner.com Received: from Laptop ([74.75.176.139]) by cdptpa-omta06.mail.rr.com with SMTP id <20090223145610.TXZZ28844.cdptpa-omta06.mail.rr.com@Laptop> for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 14:56:10 +0000 X-Original-Message-ID: <4E31E7642E2943FE9D1CBCE339A54034@Laptop> From: "Bill Wade" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Ryan 9900B X-Original-Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 09:56:11 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00B9_01C9959C.F53703F0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6001.18000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6001.18049 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00B9_01C9959C.F53703F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm currently using a Garmin GTX330 transponder with a 530W and I = sometimes get false positives. Out of nowhere the unit calls "Traffic", = shows me right on top of something and I figure I'm about to die- it = seems to occur in certain locations. One is a spot in the middle of = Penobscot Bay. The TIS display helps to alert me to nearby traffic but = even with the position, vector and relative alititude displayed on the = 530 it's often difficult to actually see the other plane. In many areas = TIS isn't available and I hear the FAA may eliminate it at some point = anyway. Considering the closure rate on a IV I'd like to install a better = system when the time comes. At the rate I'm building ADS-B would = probably be obsolete but... Would the Ryan be an improvement? What other = options would there be? Thanks- Bill Wade ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Sky2high@aol.com=20 To: lml@lancaironline.net=20 Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 5:36 PM Subject: [LML] Re: Ryan 9900B Angier, This could be the start of an interesting discussion. If one primarily flies VFR, TCAS is perhaps more valuable than WAAS = (in an FAA approved IFR approach and sole-source navigation box). If one flies more than occasionally under IFR, the WAAS equipment = ranks at the top of the list. "Why?" You might ask. Well....... 1. Sole source navigation devices are usable in non-radar environments = - such as during terrain challenged aviating above piles of granite. = This also pertains to IFR flights in VFR conditions. 2. There are more GPS approaches with vertical guidance than ILS = approaches here in the US and with minimums almost as good as ILS. This = virtually eliminates the need to perform risky circle-to-land = procedures. It also opens up more airports (GPS only) to choose from in = nasty weather flying (more and better located alternates). There are = more GPS approaches added continuously at no cost to the Stimulus Plan = nor added jobs.=20 3. TCAS is less valuable because of ATC traffic separation when flying = under IFR rules (or even flight following, conditions permitting). You would have to pry my WAAS device (in my case, a 430W) from my cold = dead hands before I would give it up. GPSS navigation (laterally = coupled to auto pilot) and approach vertical guidance is a beautiful = thing to behold. In general, GPS approaches consist of three = 5-mile-long legs (most often in a T configuration). IAF to AF =3D get to = correct altitude and approach speed. AF to FAF =3D Stabilize approach, = check everything twice, hand hovering on gear switch. FAF to RWY (or = missed) =3D descend on VNAV glide slope, shut off AP at DA, make perfect = landing. OR, one button-push for guidance thru missed approach = procedure. The GPS approaches are so similar that even minimal practice = raises one's confidence in a successful outcome during their use, = personal limitations, lack of ice build up and all other things = considered. However, my cheap Monroy traffic alerter (TCAS like, approximate = distance and altitude difference, no azimuth) usually wakes me up once = or twice on long VFR trips (no flight plan or following) with a = screaming TRAFFIC NEARBY! and it has saved me from one sure midair, if = not more (details released upon any request). You are right to consider disabling TCAS in an airport environment as = it can be most distracting (unless is has non-critical traffic = suppression). Scott Krueger AKA Grayhawk Lancair N92EX IO320 SB 89/96 Aurora, IL (KARR) Pilot not TSO'd, Certificated score only > 70%. ------=_NextPart_000_00B9_01C9959C.F53703F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
  I'm currently using a Garmin GTX330 transponder with a 530W=20 and I sometimes get false positives. Out of nowhere the=20 unit calls "Traffic", shows me right on top of something and I = figure I'm about to die- it seems to occur in certain=20 locations. One is a spot in the middle of Penobscot = Bay. The TIS=20 display helps to alert me to nearby traffic but even with the = position,=20 vector and relative alititude displayed on the 530 it's often = difficult to=20 actually see the other plane. In many areas TIS isn't available and = I hear=20 the FAA may eliminate it at some point anyway.
 
  Considering the closure rate on a IV I'd like to install a = better=20 system when the time comes. At the rate I'm building ADS-B = would=20 probably be obsolete but... Would the Ryan be an improvement? What other = options=20 would there be? Thanks-  Bill Wade
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Sky2high@aol.com=20
Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 = 5:36=20 PM
Subject: [LML] Re: Ryan = 9900B

Angier,
 
This could be the start of an interesting discussion.
 
If one primarily flies VFR, TCAS is perhaps more valuable than = WAAS (in=20 an FAA approved IFR approach and sole-source navigation = box).
 
If one flies more than occasionally under IFR, the WAAS equipment = ranks=20 at the top of the list. "Why?" You might ask.  Well.......
 
1. Sole source navigation devices are usable in non-radar = environments -=20 such as during terrain challenged aviating above piles of = granite.  This=20 also pertains to IFR flights in VFR conditions.
2. There are more GPS approaches with vertical guidance than = ILS=20 approaches here in the US and with minimums almost as good as = ILS. =20 This virtually eliminates the need to perform risky = circle-to-land=20 procedures.  It also opens up more airports (GPS only) to choose = from in=20 nasty weather flying (more and better located alternates).  There = are=20 more GPS approaches added continuously at no cost to the Stimulus Plan = nor=20 added jobs. 
3. TCAS is less valuable because of ATC traffic separation when=20 flying under IFR rules (or even flight following, conditions=20 permitting).
 
You would have to pry my WAAS device (in my case, a 430W) from my = cold=20 dead hands before I would give it up.  GPSS navigation (laterally = coupled=20 to auto pilot) and approach vertical guidance is a beautiful = thing to=20 behold.  In general, GPS approaches consist of three = 5-mile-long=20 legs (most often in a T configuration). IAF to AF =3D get to correct = altitude=20 and approach speed.  AF to FAF =3D Stabilize approach, check = everything twice, hand hovering on gear switch.  FAF to RWY (or = missed) =3D=20 descend on VNAV glide slope, shut off AP at DA, make perfect = landing. =20 OR, one button-push for guidance thru missed approach procedure.  = The GPS=20 approaches are so similar that even minimal practice raises one's = confidence=20 in a successful outcome during their use, personal limitations, lack = of ice=20 build up and all other things considered.
 
However, my cheap Monroy traffic alerter (TCAS like, approximate = distance=20 and altitude difference, no azimuth) usually wakes me up once or = twice on=20 long VFR trips (no flight plan or following) with a=20 screaming TRAFFIC NEARBY!  and it has saved me from one=20 sure midair, if not more (details released upon any = request).
 
You are right to consider disabling TCAS in an airport=20 environment as it can be most distracting (unless is has non-critical = traffic=20 suppression).
 
Scott=20 Krueger AKA Grayhawk
Lancair N92EX IO320 SB 89/96
Aurora, IL=20 (KARR)

Pilot not TSO'd, Certificated score only >=20 70%.
 
 
 ------=_NextPart_000_00B9_01C9959C.F53703F0--