Seneca Autopilot

[SenecaManica]

Hello folks....

So, I am looking for info from Seneca pilots about the Autopilot.

I'm flabbergasted that Dynon would bring a brand new Autopilot to the table for the Seneca, but only with 2-Axis

I want to ditch my steam gauges and go glass, and love the idea of a Dynon Setup! Cost and functionality are the selling points for me.

My Seneca currently has its original KFC 200 with Yaw Damper (Yaw added in 1993).

I contacted Dynon, and got a very business-ish answer. "We aren't currently looking into it, but never say never. It may happen, but don't expect it"

I have comments on other threads that made mention of Senecas. Does anyone have information on how the Dynon Autopilot handles the Seneca in winds and turbulence? Anything you'd change? Shortcomings? (Besides only 2-axis lol)

Thanks for your time and information.

Cheers

 

[Pfactor]

Morning ,
I recently completed a senneca 2 installation . I was along a a few test flights with the owner and found the autopilot did a fine jobs in mild to moderate bumps . I did not feel the yaw tendency was as pronounced as a Beechcraft would be . I would suggest a few trips with your yaw damper disengaged and see if your passengers notice or say anything . You should be able to cruise high enough to get clear of the bumps on most flights anyway .

 

[LTLong]

We installed Dynon displays and autopilot in our Seneca II about a year ago. At the time, my biggest complaint was that the autopilot was not self trimming. When I enquired about that being corrected, I got an answer quite similar to the response you received regarding the yaw damper. Early this year, they added a trim amp servo that allows the autopilot to trim in pitch.

We’re very pleased with the Dynon operation and the autopilot has worked very well. The ride has been great and we haven’t experienced any issues with Dutch roll.

All that said, we’d like to see Dynon make this autopilot as fully capable as anything on the market. If and when they get a yaw damper, we’ll be at the front of the line to buy it, just as we were with the auto trim capability.

 

[SenecaManica]

We installed Dynon displays and autopilot in our Seneca II about a year ago. At the time, my biggest complaint was that the autopilot was not self trimming. When I enquired about that being corrected, I got an answer quite similar to the response you received regarding the yaw damper. Early this year, they added a trim amp servo that allows the autopilot to trim in pitch.

We’re very pleased with the Dynon operation and the autopilot has worked very well. The ride has been great and we haven’t experienced any issues with Dutch roll.

All that said, we’d like to see Dynon make this autopilot as fully capable as anything on the market. If and when they get a yaw damper, we’ll be at the front of the line to buy it, just as we were with the auto trim capability.
View attachment 6225

Thank you so much for the reply! Very nice panel. Would you mind answering a few questions for me?

1. Is there a reason you are using the CGR-30P engine monitors as opposed to the Dynon? I'm guessing you already had them installed before the Dynon.

2. Can you confirm for me, the autopilot only captures the GS from below?

I'm about 98.8% sure I'm going with Dynon, especially after the EYE WATERING quotes from Brand G with the GFC 500

Thanks again! Seems more and more Seneca drivers are going Dynon!

 

[LTLong]

The aircraft came with the CGR-30 setup and the Garmin radio stack (350 audio, dual GTN-650s, and a 345R transponder w/ADS-B in/out).

All that was working great and we elected to keep that equipment. It all works very seamlessly with the Dynon panel and auto pilot. Obviously the CGR-30s are stand alone and do not display on the HDX, but I prefer it that way.

The Dynon Pilot’s User Guide states that the autopilot only captures the glide slope from below. I’ve never attempted to test that, but I have no reason to doubt that.

I’m very comfortable flying approaches to minimums with the autopilot coupled and clicking it off when we break out. Likewise, hitting the UP button gets a miss started nicely.

If you do choose Dynon, I think you’ll be very pleased with the results.

Good luck!

 

[JohnAJohnson]

I don't know much about these things, but is there any autopilot that'll capture the glideslope from above? Are there any approaches where this is even acceptable? Seems you'd always have to fly into it to capture it if ILS, since there shouldn't even be a signal present when above it, and if RNAV, if above, you'd have to dive [much] greater than 3 degrees to get on the beam, followed by a pull up when arriving at the center of the beam. Not conducive to a stable approach and putting a lot of trust in an autopilot that close to the ground.

 

[SenecaManica]

I don't know much about these things, but is there any autopilot that'll capture the glideslope from above? Are there any approaches where this is even acceptable? Seems you'd always have to fly into it to capture it if ILS, since there shouldn't even be a signal present when above it, and if RNAV, if above, you'd have to dive [much] greater than 3 degrees to get on the beam, followed by a pull up when arriving at the center of the beam. Not conducive to a stable approach and putting a lot of trust in an autopilot that close to the ground.

The GFC500/600 captures from above. As does the old KFC 200 currently in my Seneca.

Capturing "above" is only really useful if ATC keeps you high for whatever reason.

Not a problem for me anyways, just something Dynon points out in the book.

 

[CanardMulti]

Capturing a glideslope from above is within the ability of the majority of modern transport category aircraft. In the REAL world, more often than would be commonly expected, commercial flights have to deal with what in turn ATC controllers have to deal with re the realities of too many airplanes and not enough runways when weather gets low. Getting slam dunked onto the GS from above is a fact of life. Pros learn to deal with it.

Now if Skyview pilots want their avionics to capture the GS from above too, no problem, Just be ready to pay 10X (20X ???) for the privilege.

Just keep in mind: The safest approach is a STABILIZED approach. Capturing the GS from below is one major part of making a stabilized approach happen.

 

[Danerazz]

Just because the “can” capture from above doesn’t mean one “should.”

Many transport category will NOT, and in general you should not attempt to to capture from above. Your autopilot may even restrict (or at least instruct you not to) you from it. Even if they will, there is no guarantee it will not be a false slope if you are not on an appropriate altitude for your position.

If you are in that position, you are already behind the curve. The biggest threat is capturing a false glideslope due to the shape/position of the lobes from the GS transmitter, which are cut off below by the ground, so there is no “low” false GS. A WAAS GP does not have such issues.

The system in my work airplane (Honeywell) will not capture a GS from above for this reason, but it will capture a GP from above.

You SHOULD be at a published or lower altitude outside the FAF and capture an ILS GS from below. If you are diving onto a GS you already have a problem.

This is not an autopilot issue, it is a radio signal issue that used to be taught.

The “pros” deal with it by getting down to a published altitude on the approach quickly, verifying a proper altitude for the approach segment, or via a GPS VNAV to get them on the right glide path coincident with the ILS GS then arming the ILS approach.

Understanding ILS

Everything you need to know about Instrument Landing System (ILS) components and basic operation.

www.pilotscafe.com

Lining Up with the Correct Glide Slope | Safety First

The Instrument Landing System (ILS) is accurate and reliable, but the ILS antenna design today causes secondary glide slopes to appear above the primary glide slope. Flight crews must be aware of this phenomenon to prevent unwanted aircraft behavior during an ILS glide slope capture.This article...

safetyfirst.airbus.com

Spectre of false glideslope emerges in Bishkek 747 crash

Preliminary information about the Boeing 747-400F crash at Bishkek appears to indicate that the aircraft encountered a false glideslope before initiating its fatal descent, and that the crew attempted a go-around.

www.flightglobal.com

 

[SenecaManica]

Every IFR pilot knows the above info.....

 

[Danerazz]

Every IFR pilot knows the above info.....

Apparently not, or I could t have posted the links…

And statements above seem to refute this.

 

[SenecaManica]

Apparently not, or I could t have posted the links…

And statements above seem to refute this.

You're judging someone you don't know, on a world wide forum, over a question of an Autopilots capabilities........

Don't get too bunched up over something typed out, but not necessarily used in the real world. All approaches must be stable.