Message-ID: <3CB34A5B.70009@nidlink.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 13:08:59 -0700
From: Hamid Wasti <hwasti@nidlink.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lancair.list@olsusa.com
Subject: Re: Ritchie Electronic Compass
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: lancair.list@olsusa.com

          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>
          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>

Matt,

Since you did not seem to get the core point I was making, let me 
explain it again.  The point was not to say that ancient technology is 
the only way to go.  To the contrary, it was an endorsement for cutting 
edge technology; but for real cutting edge technology, not for wannabes, 
posing as such.  Many people have pointed out that you can get a 2G 
Pentium-IV computer from Dell for under $1000.  They ask, then why 
should one pay well over 10 times that for what is essentially a 
computer from SFS or a host of other manufacturers that have custom 
designed such systems for aircraft use.  Many such people take one of 
many available commercial  or even industrial computers, write some 
software and sell it for a budget price, calling it the latest 
technology.  They are right, it is the "latest" technology, but it is 
not designed for or suitable for the cockpit environment.  Will you take 
the latest technology house paint that is guaranteed to keep your house 
looking like it was painted yesterday and paint your plane with it?  It 
is the latest technology paint afterall and paint is just paint.

I really like your Lexus versus Lincoln example about using latest 
technology to lower cost and increase performance.  Sierra Flight System 
versus Honeywell would be a comparable analogy.  Like Lexus, SFS 
designed a product from the ground up for the target market, 
incorporating the latest technology as well as the 
safety/performance/environmental requirements for the aviation 
environment.  Like Lexus, they have come up with a product that is lower 
cost & superior to the old technology Lincoln (Honeywell & other "high 
end" EFIS systems).  That is the way to do it.  But then there is a 3rd 
player in this car market.  The kid down the street that has just bought 
his first used Civic.  He has put in a new engine with the "latest" chip 
to improve the performance.  He has put in reduced diameter tires, 
bypassed the catalytic converter and added a nitrous oxide system to 
boost the performance even more and now he has a car that he believes he 
can drag race against any Lincoln or Lexus and attract more 18-22 year 
old women than ever set foot in any Lincoln or Lexus.  This kid is 
convinced that he as the latest technology car at a fraction of the 
price of the Lexus and he has the women and the skid marks to prove it. 
 What do you think?  Would you trade in your Lexus for his latest 
technology Civic?

Anyone's marketing literature can beat anyone else's existing product 
100% of the time.  The proof is in the pudding.  Jim reported that he 
tried the "latest technology" product and found it to not work in real 
life. To address the issue of the compass specifically, do I believe 
that the technology exists that can provide a solid state electronic 
replacement for the gyro based heading indicator?  Absolutely.  Can 
something that can do what a mechanical HI does under most conditions in 
most installations, be manufactured and sold for under $250. 
 Absolutely.  Can something that can do the job reliably under all 
conditions and all types of installations be sold for $250. No way. 
 Just the parts will cost you a lot more than $250. And if you are 
thinking that 95% performance is good enough, then think about this. 
 Would you accept a system that does not work when you are banking more 
then 45 degrees or keying the mike?  Most pilots would not.  But since 
you are talking and steep banking for only a couple of percent of the 
time you are in the air, the system does exceed the 95% performance 
requirement.

That, Matt, is the whole issue.  You can have low cost or you can have 
high quality, but not both.  This is dictated by laws of physics & 
economics, not by me.  If you do not believe me, it is no skin off my 
nose.  You can try and jump in the arena and battle the laws of physics 
and economics.  Just because no one has won yet does not mean you are 
doomed to loose.

Hamid

 >Please don't be so naive as to think that just because something costs
 >less it isn't as good. When Acura and Lexus introduced cars,
 <SNIP>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
LML website:   http://members.olsusa.com/mkaye/maillist.html
LML Builders' Bookstore:   http://www.buildersbooks.com/lancair
Please remember that purchases from the Builders' Bookstore
assist with the management of the LML.

Please send your photos and drawings to marvkaye@olsusa.com.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>