v14.xxx Request

[shenweas]

On your next build I am requesting that you include the Baro altimeter setting in the RS232 output stream.

Also still requesting a configurable simulated "glide slope" into any way point in the database including user way points.

Looking at the other manufactures and becoming a little jealous here...... :-/

 

[William_Ince]

On your next build I am requesting that you include the Baro altimeter setting in the RS232 output stream.
Also still requesting a configurable simulated "glide slope" into any way point in the database including user way points.
Looking at the other manufactures and becoming a little jealous here...... :-/

With all due respect, your request should be posted under the "Suggestions" topic.

 

[preid]

Also still requesting a configurable simulated "glide slope" into any way point in the database including user way points.

One can sort of do this now. Fine so its not the line on the HSI, I would love that as well, but there is the blue line by the VSI tape that tells you at the rate on the line you will be certain feet over the area, usually the traffic pattern, or in my case 1000 feet AGL (you set this in setup screen), but there is also the blue arc that tells you when you will reach the point on the MAP at the desired "ALT" setting you program.
I think the line on the HSI would be a great future feature, be nice to be able to move that blue line and or Arc to be a line over the HSI and hence not need a MAP on approaches into the sunset (my airport faces straight into the sun at certain times of the afternoon and I need to go instruments to make what others cant see out the window)

 

[swatson999]

Also still requesting a configurable simulated "glide slope" into any way point in the database including user way points.

One can sort of do this now. Fine so its not the line on the HSI, I would love that as well, but there is the blue line by the VSI tape  that tells you at the rate on the line you will be certain feet over the area, usually the traffic pattern, or in my case 1000 feet AGL (you set this in setup screen), but there is also the blue arc that tells you when you will reach the point on the MAP at the desired "ALT" setting you program.
I think the line on the HSI would be a great future feature, be nice to be able to move that blue line and or Arc to be a line over the HSI and hence not need a MAP on approaches into the sunset (my airport faces straight into the sun at certain times of the afternoon and I need to go instruments to make what others cant see out the window)

ummmm...Isn't that "flight by reference to instruments", i.e., IFR?

 

[dynonsupport]

As mentioned in the other thread, BARO is already in the serial stream.

Can you describe your use case for this simulated glide slope some more? What would you use it for, and what features would you like to see it have? Do you expect it to provide terrain clearance? Do you want it to take you all the way down to the runway? What minimums do you expect it to provide? Do you want the AP to couple to it? Do you expect it to provide lateral guidance on a specific course? Is the glide slope programmable per point, or globally, or in flight?

 

[preid]

Steve- I have to laugh, yes, it is totally reference to instruments, but certainly not IFR. There are minimums that fall into IFR but reference to instruments is part of the VFR check ride for the reason I use it for, when seeing outside is difficult use instruments to keep one safe. My airport is class D, Im controlled by a tower and cleared for landing, I am not worried about traffic, otherwise I would agree not something one would do at non towered airports where one has to look for others.
Dynon- my choice
I almost think the question are IFR WAAS certified capabilities. I would not expect a precision glideslope here, but rather another reference, easier to see in bumpy landings that could also be done manually via either a set altitude; using manual vsi input that could be used for a descent to reach a point at a altitude, currently referenced via altitude arc
My example- I am flying a visual VFR conditions and using a published RNAV. i would like to use the three points along the way as points to reach a certain altitude 2700/2000/900 and finally if desired, the runway. As mentioned previously I do this today and it works, it is not IFR and I would not expect that from a non WAAS certified GPS, but I sure would like to have that line reference on my HSI that makes it so much easier to look at the screen as if flying a virtual glideslope.
Everything I would want is already in place today, I just would like the glideslope line in additional to the arc on the MAP, by having this I can see the location on the MAP I want to reach at a certain altitude, can program that VSI than remove the MAP screen to allow for reaching the current arc point without a need for a MAP to be displayed to see if I remain on target.

 

[swatson999]

Steve- I have to laugh, yes, it is totally reference to instruments, but certainly not IFR. There are minimums that fall into IFR but reference to instruments is part of the VFR check ride for the reason I use it for, when seeing outside is difficult use instruments to keep one safe. My airport is class D, Im controlled by a tower and cleared for landing, I am not worried about traffic, otherwise I would agree not something one would do at non towered airports where one has to look for others.

Laugh if you want, but if the visibility is less than VFR minima, regardless of *why*, then you should be flying under IFR (or using Special VFR).

Tower has no idea if you're on instruments and not looking outside or not...that's not their job if you're not IFR.

Sounds like you're trying to cobble together your own sort of "instrument" approach...

ETA:  It's disconcerting to read this..."at nontowered airports where one has to look for others". 

When you're VFR, or even IFR in VFR conditions, you *have to look for others*.  Thinking the tower is doing it for you is incorrect.  They *might*, but YOU are responsible for separating yourself from other aircraft by LOOKING.  And if you can't see, you can't do that...you may have no idea what other traffic is around, because a) you can't see them due to haze, and b) you have your head down looking at your screen when you should be looking outside.

Anyway...if you can't see at least the VFR minima ahead, then you should be on an IFR flight plan (or going Special VFR inside the Class D or C).

 

[gtae07]

I could see a couple legitimate uses for the "synthetic approach" like that offered by GRT and AFS. I've flown on hazy days where visibility is VFR but (especially with the sun right in your face) you can't see the runway from further out. If you're heading straight in, it would be a nice confirmation that you're still where you want to be.

It might also be a way for a non-pilot passenger to get down through an overcast in a bad situation--"just fly through the boxes and put the airplane symbol on the little runway until you can see the runway itself".

As it is now, there's nothing stopping someone from using the synthetic vision from flying an "approach" in IMC.

 

[swatson999]

As it is now, there's nothing stopping someone from using the synthetic vision from flying an "approach" in IMC. 

Other than it being illegal and perhaps dangerous, I guess not. (I'm assuming the situation as above, VFR flight, not IFR).

I don't fly with people who break the rules like that.

 

[preid]

gtae07- nicely covered.

 

[dynonsupport]

I could see a couple legitimate uses for the "synthetic approach" like that offered by GRT and AFS.  I've flown on hazy days where visibility is VFR but (especially with the sun right in your face) you can't see the runway from further out.  If you're heading straight in, it would be a nice confirmation that you're still where you want to be.

It might also be a way for a non-pilot passenger to get down through an overcast in a bad situation--"just fly through the boxes and put the airplane symbol on the little runway until you can see the runway itself".

Synthetic approach is not the same as Highway in the Sky (the boxes). Just to make sure we are clear on what people want.

If the use case is a non-pilot being able to use it, then is the request for a very easy to way to make it work to the closest airport? The original request was to a user waypoint. It almost seems that if you want this for emergency use, it needs to be a single, automatic, simple button.

 

[dynonsupport]

It might also be a way for a non-pilot passenger to get down through an overcast in a bad situation--"just fly through the boxes and put the airplane symbol on the little runway until you can see the runway itself".

Synthetic approach is not the same as Highway in the Sky (the boxes). Just to make sure we are clear on what people want.

If the use case is a non-pilot being able to use it, then is the request for a very easy to way to make it work to the closest airport? The original request was to a user waypoint. It almost seems that if you want this for emergency use, it needs to be a single, automatic, simple button.

 

[dynonsupport]

My example- I am flying a visual VFR conditions and using a published RNAV. i would like to use the three points along the way as points to reach a certain altitude 2700/2000/900 and finally if desired, the runway. As mentioned previously I do this today and it works, it is not IFR and I would not expect that from a non WAAS certified GPS, but I sure would like to have that line reference on my HSI that makes it so much easier to look at the screen as if flying a virtual glideslope.
Everything I would want is already in place today, I just would like the glideslope line in additional to the arc on the MAP, by having this I can see the location on the MAP I want to reach at a certain altitude, can program that VSI than remove the MAP screen to allow for reaching the current arc point without a need for a MAP to be displayed to see if I remain on target.

There is a huge difference between a line on the glideslope, which indicates if you are above or below a virtual line in the sky which is at a specific angle out of the runway touchdown point, which does not move as the airplane moves, and a VSI command which takes where you are right now and tells you how fast to descend to be somewhere, but does not define any specific path in the air.

We already have VSR (vertical speed required). Give SkyView a flight plan to an airport, and look on your VSI bar. There's a pink line, which is the speed you need to descend at to be 1,000' above the airport 1NM before it. You can adjust the height and distance in setup. This will take you from wherever you are to that point and adjust for your ground speed as it changes.

Of course, this guidance shuts off when you get 1,000' above the airport, well within VFR minimums, but not quite useful for IFR.

If you want a non-precision step- down, what do you expect the guidance to be in-between points? For it to build a line between the altitude points and drive the HSI to this? Or to drive some VSI indicator at the VSR between points? What do you expect it to do at the last point to the runway? If you want guidance from the last point to the runway, isn't that a precision approach?

When people say "Synthetic Approach", generically I think:

1) Horizontal guidance on runway course out from the runway (like a Localizer), which can drive the CDI on the HSI.
2) Vertical guidance out of the touchdown point on the runway (not the runway end) at a specific angle that provides terrain and obstacle clearance. This can drive the GS needle on the HSI. This guidance stays active until the plane touches the ground. Exactly like a glideslope.
3) A method to build this out of any point in the world as defined by the user, not just for built-in airports.
4) A UI to activate and terminate this guidance

 

[preid]

We already have VSR (vertical speed required). Give SkyView a flight plan to an airport, and look on your VSI bar. There's a pink line, which is the speed you need to descend at to be 1,000' above the airport 1NM before it. You can adjust the height and distance in setup. This will take you from wherever you are to that point and adjust for your ground speed as it changes.

A line on the HSI that does the same thing as the current Pink line is all I want. Easier to see on the display than a small pink line, especially on a 7" screen.
Thanks!

 

[dynonsupport]

A line on the HSI that does the same thing as the current Pink line is all I want. Easier to see on the display than a small pink line, especially on a 7" screen.
Thanks!

The issue is that a line on the GS is a specific path through the sky, while a target VSI is totally different. If the GS is showing one ball deflection up, how much do you change your vertical speed to center it? You have to fly it differently than any other GS/GP/Vertical guidance..

 

[gtae07]

As it is now, there's nothing stopping someone from using the synthetic vision from flying an "approach" in IMC. 

Other than it being illegal and perhaps dangerous, I guess not. (I'm assuming the situation as above, VFR flight, not IFR).

I don't fly with people who break the rules like that.

I meant that it's possible, not that it's a good idea or legal.  Adding HITS boxes on a set glideslope to a runway isn't going to change that. 

That said, if I'm VFR and get stuck on top with nowhere to go (no, it shouldn't happen; no, it hasn't happened to me; but it still does happen in the real world no matter how much we say it shouldn't), or I have oil covering the windscreen and I can't see out front, you bet I'm going to use every other tool I have--including synthetic vision.  I know of two specific instances where synthetic vision and the runway presentation assisted the pilot in making the runway safely after a partial engine failure--one night IMC, the other with oil coating the windscreen.

Synthetic approach is not the same as Highway in the Sky (the boxes). Just to make sure we are clear on what people want.

If the use case is a non-pilot being able to use it, then is the request for a very easy to way to make it work to the closest airport? The original request was to a user waypoint. It almost seems that if you want this for emergency use, it needs to be a single, automatic, simple button.

I was thinking this:

When people say "Synthetic Approach", generically I think:

1) Horizontal guidance on runway course out from the runway (like a Localizer), which can drive the CDI on the HSI.
2) Vertical guidance out of the touchdown point on the runway (not the runway end) at a specific angle that provides terrain and obstacle clearance. This can drive the GS needle on the HSI. This guidance stays active until the plane touches the ground. Exactly like a glideslope.
3) A method to build this out of any point in the world as defined by the user, not just for built-in airports.
4) A UI to activate and terminate this guidance

Except putting HITS boxes along that "localizer"/"glideslope" right on the PFD.  A one-touch "panic" button would be neat, but not necessarily required.  But that's starting to get into Xavion/VP-400 territory--neat, but expensive and probably out of scope.

 

[rlmarshall]

It sure would be nice to have Vertical Speed Required for waypoint airports on my flight plan not just the final destination. Why can we only get destination VSR--for intermediate fuel/pit stops it seems just as important. I tried to just go direct to that intermediate airport, but still only get the final destination VSR. Perhaps I am missing something in the instructions. If not, then this would be a very nice addition to the already great list of features.
thanks

 

[jc2da]

Interesting. I usually flight plan from takeoff to landing. Thus, the fuel stop would be my final destination. Once i takeoff, i would FPL the new fuel stop or destination.

I think this is the same model used by Garmin. IE, not even Garmin would do what you want, i dont think.

It sure would be nice to have Vertical Speed Required for waypoint airports on my flight plan not just the final destination.  Why can we only get destination VSR--for intermediate fuel/pit stops it seems just as important.  I tried to just go direct to that intermediate airport, but still only get the final destination VSR.  Perhaps I am missing something in the instructions.  If not, then this would be a very nice addition to the already great list of features.
thanks

 

[preid]

I see Bobs point, I work it by putting the ALT to the waypoint airport +XXX feet, than I get a blue arc that tells me when I'll be over that destination.
the other option is you "clear flight plan" and D-> to waypoint airport, that will get you VSR, albeit with 4-5 steps. When you go to take off, you reload flight plan and direct to the next waypoint of original flight plan.
Arc works easiest for me, with less steps required.

 

[dynonsupport]

The issue with an arc that doesn't take the last airport in your flight plan is that it can easily block the one you want.

Say I plan from KAAA to KBBB to KCCC. KBBB and KCCC are 20 miles apart.

If I'm at 10,000' before I get to KBBB, the system will give me VSR to KBBB, which you will ignore because you are going to KCCC. However, once you cross over KBBB, the VSR will switch to KCCC and will suddenly be 1,200 FPM.

So the issue is that the system doesn't know where you are planning on landing unless it's the last leg in a flight plan, and giving data for intermediate points means it will easily block for the point you want. At 10,000 above and 150 knots, you have to be almost 50 NM away.