|
|
Agree, Jeff. That's why I reluctantly pass on the MGL solution. Good news, maybe, comes from Fred Moreno. Maybe can fix the current ones by resealing the cases at the glass face. Will give this a try. I am in Brent's camp on this. I would use mechanical backups for an EFIS system. An electrical failure would probably leave you without main or backup instruments unless you have true electrical redundancy. Good question, Jeff. Some more naturally follow: 1. Are you stating my backup instruments are unreliable? 2. If so, what do you find unreliable about them? 3. Assuming they are unreliable, what would you replace them with? I guess the real question is what instrument that gives airspeed or altitude will never fail to provide needed information under any circumstance? From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Jeff Edwards
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 6:30 AM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: MGL back up instrumentr Why have unreliable backups? Jeff Edwards Infinity line MGL instruments – they are intriguing as back up gauges. Looks like the altimeter is Baro sensitive for input but needs electrons for output. I spoke with Matt at their US distributor center and learned that it uses pitot static inputs to pressure sensors that generate output data for microprocessor to turn into altitude readout. Without electricity the gauge does not function, losing the microprocessing component as well as the LCD display output. Does this mean that in order to have good backup one would need to have a totally mechanical altimeter? Have found that two of my cheap 2.25” gauges are failed with case leaks. Have had them awhile but as far as I know they haven’t been mishandled. I know the airspeed gauge is UMA. I suspect the altimeter is the same brand. These are the two failed instruments. Advice welcome. John Barrett Regards, John Barrett, CEO Leading Edge Composites PO Box 428 Port Hadlock, WA 98339 www.carbinge.com
|
|