| Author | Post |
|---|
mschwerin
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 02:44 pm |
|
I am considering an upgrade for my Malibu to a Chelton system. I would appreciate comments from anyone with actual time behind the Chelton.
Thanks
|
Tyler Stanger
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 04:48 pm |
|
My name is Tyler Stanger. I have been teaching the Chelton Systems for the last two years. I have worked at Howard Aviation in Southern CA for many years and they were one of the first avionics shops to install the system. In short time I will be helping in outside sales for Chelton. Please call me at (909) 263.2894 so I can anwser any questions that you may have.
Tyler Stanger
|
mschwerin
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 06:18 pm |
|
Tyler,
Have you seen our thread today in the General Avionics forum re. non-certified installation of the Chelton system? Any thoughts on this or any insight to the suggestion (made to me by the Chelton rep at the MMOPA convention last fall in New London, CT) that the company plans to announce much lower pricing options for piston aircraft sometime this Spring? One of the potential advantages to me of Richard's suggetion of a removal Chelton box is the fact that I also own a helicopter and would love to find a way for the system to do double-duty (this might be asking too much, I realize).
Thanks
*** Moderator's note from Richard Kaplan -- the related thread about Chelton installations mentioned above may be found at:
http://flyimc.mywowbb.com/forum1/4.html
Last edited on Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 11:04 pm by rkaplan
|
BrianNC
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 9 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 06:28 pm |
|
Tyler, I would be interested in you posting an overview of what you think about the system here and answering some questions about it here. If it's all done in a phone call we don't get the benefit of it. After all, it is a forum. 
Thanks!
|
rkaplan
Administrator
|
Posted: Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 11:07 pm |
|
mschwerin wrote: One of the potential advantages to me of Richard's suggetion of a removal Chelton box is the fact that I also own a helicopter and would love to find a way for the system to do double-duty
Well assuming you could overcome the legal issues and installation challenges, you would need to reload the Chelton software each time you switch from helicopter to airplane or vice versa since the PFD display is different for airplane vs. helicopter. Given the way updates are done on the Chelton, you would probably have to start from a clean slate and reload everything each time you made the switch -- not impossible but then again not ideal for an avionics box you would like to use reliably in-flight.
____________________
Richard Kaplan, CFII
rkaplan@flyimc.com
http://www.flyimc.com
|
Marshall
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 24th, 2006 01:25 am |
|
I have about 50hrs on the two screen Chelton in a LIV-PT. All of this is VFR only. However, I am currently using the Chelton PC simulator at home and feel comfortable with it. Actual inflight will be different, however the simulator allows me to try out all of the page options and what they do before actual flight.
Given the above, my initial impressions are very favorable. It seems to be more intuitive and easier to program than the 530 which I also use. Some of the best features are the Victor/Jet routes for flight planning, vertical climb/descent depiction on the moving map, ease of specifying an approach/transition, roll steering in a hold or course reversal. I have not coupled the Chelton to my autopilot yet as I was in phase I of my flight test period, when I had to stop to get the plane painted. So I will give the results of that in the months to come.
I did fly into a VFR only airport and used the HITS to see how well it took me to the runway threshold. It was absolutely amazing. The airport depicted was not as geo-referenced as well as an IFR airport and yet when I flew over the threshold the Primary display showed me crossing the threshold at the same instance. If you have any specific questions I'll try answering them.
Marshall
|
rkaplan
Administrator
|
Posted: Tue Jan 24th, 2006 02:03 am |
|
Marshall wrote: I am currently using the Chelton PC simulator at home
Can you tell me more about this? I did not realize there exists a Chelton PC simulator. Where did you get it?
I did fly into a VFR only airport and used the HITS to see how well it took me to the runway threshold. It was absolutely amazing.
Indeed the situational awareness with the Chelton EFIS is incredible -- almost to the extent that you can be tempted to call "runway in sight" when it is only on the Chelton and not out your window! You can even use the Chelton in an emergency to do a 0/0 deadstick IFR landing --- just put the flight path predictor on the runway threshold.
____________________
Richard Kaplan, CFII
rkaplan@flyimc.com
http://www.flyimc.com
|
Marshall
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 24th, 2006 02:34 am |
|
I got the CD simulator from Chelton (Sierra Flight Systems). The first one was V4.0 and it worked great on Windows 98SE. The latest one is V5.0 They have had problems with it running on XP but my computer guy worked out the display bugs and it runs fine now. As you can imagine it is a great training tool. You can shoot any approach in the USA database using your Jepp charts to follow along. Then after you do that, start mixing it up with sudden clearance changes to a hold at a nearby fix or VOR. Then after a turn at the hold, change to another approach at the same destination airport or to another airport. The Chelton is very intuitive and I would assume that most pilots will be very capable with creating/activating a flight plan and then flying that plan. Where is gets more complicated is to do this on the fly with a sudden change in flight plan or approach clearance. Now image doing this in the airplane with turbulance, etc. This is what I'm trying to learn on the sim before I do it for real in the airplane.
Marshall
|
Lancair Driver
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 |
| Location: | Sedona, Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 4 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 24th, 2006 02:42 am |
|
Hi all,
I just registered and am willing answer any questions I can. I have a Lancair 4P with three screen Chelton and a G 480 with MX 20 and TruTrak autopilot. I have 370 hours of flight time with most in the Flight Levels. However, this is not an all weather airplane and I avoid hard IMC and no ICE.
In general I was one of the first to get the CFS and have been through many improvements. I still love the system a lot and is one major reason I wouldn't buy a Meridian or most VLJ's. I have the Ryan TCAD and WSI displayed on the EFIS screens and it is beyond me to think of any system that can even come close to doing what this one does and in a way that you don't have to get the book out to find your way around it. It definitely has extended my IFR flying career at least 10 yrs. I like computers and technology and there may be some out there that only want to stay with what they know. It is not hard to learn and really easy for just doing the basic flying.
You will get nothing but positive comments for me and I have been through most of there development and all the improvements have been just great.
Regard,
Jim Hergert
N6XE (An Sexy)
____________________
Jim Hergert
Lancair 4P
|
rkaplan
Administrator
|
Posted: Tue Jan 24th, 2006 02:47 am |
|
Marshall wrote: I got the CD simulator from Chelton (Sierra Flight Systems). The first one was V4.0 and it worked great on Windows 98SE. The latest one is V5.0 They have had problems with it running on XP but my computer guy worked out the display bugs and it runs fine now. As you can imagine it is a great training tool. You can
Thanks... do you know the details of how you worked out the bugs to get it working on XP? That could be very helpful to others.
____________________
Richard Kaplan, CFII
rkaplan@flyimc.com
http://www.flyimc.com
|
BrianNC
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 9 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 24th, 2006 02:50 am |
|
Forget about the Chelton. Tell me about the IVP.
Did you build it yourself? How about a sample cross country "testimony" with speeds, etc?
|
Marshall
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 24th, 2006 03:18 am |
|
rkaplan wrote: Thanks... do you know the details of how you worked out the bugs to get it working on XP? That could be very helpful to others.
Unfortunately I do not know what he did. I think he called Chelton and gave them a heads up to one of their tech people. Since Chelton is heavily commited to their cert products it is hard for them to justify fixing a CD sim display bug. OTOH, their DVD is also a good beginning for those who have not used the system, and it is available from Chelton.
|
Marshall
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 24th, 2006 03:43 am |
|
BrianNC wrote: Forget about the Chelton. Tell me about the IVP.
Did you build it yourself? How about a sample cross country "testimony" with speeds, etc?
Now that is a long story. I started in 1992 and with one other helper finished the airframe in 10 years (I had a slooooooowwwww build kit). Turbine was hung in 2003 and wiring/avionics in 2004. First flight in primer in Nov 2004.
Performance so far has been beyond my dreams when I first started this project. After 19 different panel designs I finally settled on the Chelton/Garmin/MX20 setup. That was one of the hardest choices to set in stone as advances are always coming. But at some point you have to freeze the panel and build the thing.
My flight experience has only been up to 17,500 ft. On that day we saw 284kts TAS. I believe that we should see at least 300kts or possibly 310 at 25,000 which would be just fine with me. Fuel flow at 17.5 and below is in the 39g/hr range. I have set up flight profiles with 44g/hr for the first hr and then 36g/hr thereafter. With 160 gal useable including 24 gal reserve I have more time than I or my wife desire in one leg. Figure 136 gal for flight planning and you get 3.5 hours of flight which is over 1000 nm. The controls are very solid and with the winglets the airlerons feel heavy (like a twin). Climb rate at 140kts is over 3000fpm at sea level. Rudder control is very senstive in cruise. You don't have to step on the ball, just think about it and let your foot think about it and it is done. It is good to have the rudder trim on the stick as each pitch/power change will throw the ball. I have TruTrak yaw damping but it is not set up correctly. Stalls dirty at 72kts and clean at 92kts. I did these stalls in ground effect on a long 11,000 ft runway. I do not plan to stall this plane at any time in the future unless the runway is within 6 inches. With reverse thrust, and with lots of practice I can land it predictably on 3000ft runways. Approaches with a light load can be done at 100kts and 90 over the fence. At full gross, use 105 to 110 on final and then 95 over the fence. I need more practice to get better numbers on gross weight conditions.
In summary, so far this plane has exceeded my expectations. On the one hand it is a handful of a plane, and I have a great deal of respect for the need to be trained and retrained especially for IFR flight. On the other, it handles cleanly, and if you stay way ahead of the plane it is then very sweet.
Marshall
|
BrianNC
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 9 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 24th, 2006 03:49 am |
|
I didn't realize you had the turbine. I was on Lancair's website last night looking at it (I can daydream can't I? ). 
If you're ever in Charlotte I'll let you take me for a ride.
|
BrianNC
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 9 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 24th, 2006 03:57 am |
|
| One other thing, the website says it should do 370 mph (320 kts) at 25,000 ft. But that just might be in a perfect marketing world. Last edited on Tue Jan 24th, 2006 03:58 am by BrianNC
|
Tyler Stanger
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jan 23rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 25th, 2006 04:17 am |
|
Richard is correect in the matter that interchanging is possible, but not practical in that situation (Helo/Aircraft). Another problem that you would run into is that anytime that a Chelton Display is removed from an aircraft an A&P (Should-not reality) make a log book entry. As you can see, that would be unrealastic. As for a price decrease on the certified Chelton System for General Aviation aircraft, I heard the same thing about three months ago. Contrarary to that there has been a price increase since that time. Hopefully in the next few weeks I will find more info. on the matter and can pass it on.
Tyler (A Day Latter)
|
Marc
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 26th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 15 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 27th, 2006 02:35 am |
|
Lancair Driver wrote:
have a Lancair 4P with three screen Chelton and a G 480 with MX 20
Why does it seem that everyone who installs a Chelton EFIS also installs a separate GPS (480, 530, 430)? Isn't the Chelton a full IFR GPS navigator? Doesn't the different programming of the units get in the way of smooth operation? I understand about the MX20, I think, but the Chelton can have weather and traffic, too. It almost doesn't seem worth installing the Chelton if you have to duplicate everything.
|
rkaplan
Administrator
|
Posted: Fri Jan 27th, 2006 12:16 pm |
|
Marc wrote:
Why does it seem that everyone who installs a Chelton EFIS also installs a separate GPS (480, 530, 430)? Isn't the Chelton a full IFR GPS navigator? Doesn't the different programming of the units get in the way of smooth operation? I understand about the MX20, I think, but the Chelton can have weather and traffic, too. It almost doesn't seem worth installing the Chelton if you have to duplicate everything.
I think there are a few reasons:
1. The Chelton is an incredible system but some pilots prefer a more conventoinal system as a backup during the transition phase to a glass cockpit.
2. You need to install some sort of external nav/com so some pilots feel why not go all the way and install a GPS/Nav/Com.
3. Although the Chelton skyboxes are astounding in terms of performance and the GPS is a WAAS GPS, the system has not been approved to Gamma 3 standards and thus technically is not approved for all of the approach types the Garmin 480 is approved for and which the 430/530 hopefully will soon be approved for.
____________________
Richard Kaplan, CFII
rkaplan@flyimc.com
http://www.flyimc.com
|
Marc
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 26th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 15 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 27th, 2006 04:51 pm |
|
Although the Chelton skyboxes are astounding in terms of performance and the GPS is a WAAS GPS, the system has not been approved to Gamma 3 standards and thus technically is not approved for all of the approach types the Garmin 480 is approved for and which the 430/530 hopefully will soon[sic] be approved for.
The Chelton does have Baro-VNAV, however. Which LNAV/VNAV approaches can't be flown with Baro-VNAV? On the other foot, can a 480 drive the HITS display?
|
rkaplan
Administrator
|
Posted: Fri Jan 27th, 2006 06:29 pm |
|
Marc wrote: The Chelton does have Baro-VNAV, however. Which LNAV/VNAV approaches can't be flown with Baro-VNAV? On the other foot, can a 480 drive the HITS display?
Is Baro-VNAV typically installed and approved on Chelton installations in the AFM Supplement? Perhaps that is just on higher-end aircraft?
Don't get me wrong -- I would take a Chelton anyday over the 480, a 430/530, a G1000, an Entegra, or anything else... it is the only avionics system that literally navigates in 3D, not 2D, and that should be something the aviation media brag about to all ends of the earth. I am quite disappointed that the clear advantages of the Chelton system do not seem to have been recognized by the aviation media anywhere near the extent that is deserves.
____________________
Richard Kaplan, CFII
rkaplan@flyimc.com
http://www.flyimc.com
|
Current time is 06:04 am | Page: 1 2 3   |
|
