VPS and PPS in new RV-10 build

[Setthrust]

I searched first and did not find a conversation regarding this topic.

i am at the panel/ wiring phase of my RV10 build and am seriously considering the VPX and PPS systems to simplify the install. There are others on the Vans board that are completely against this type of set up, while others praise the system.
I have researched greatly the systems and their faults as well as their positive aspects ( which IMHO greatly outweigh the negatives).
I value others experience and opinions and thought i would ask here if anyone has experience and or comments regarding the system.

my panel plan as of now is
2 10” D1000 screens
Garmin 175
2 Dynon comms panel mount
Dynon Transponder remote mount
Pma audio panel
Dynon AP panel Mount with knob control
2 Kanardia Horis standby (horizon and HSI)


thanks for any opinions or tips anyone might have or suggest.

 

[Carl_Froehlich]

Assuming you are building an IFR bird, if you really must use a VPX then use two; one for each SkyView and comm. If you don’t use two VPX units, then follow the guidelines to have power route around them for at least one SkyView and comm so you don’t loose the world when the VPX fails.

Point being if you mitigate the risk of running a single VPX you tend to increase cost and complexity (the things VPX says are it’s selling points). In other words, the negative aspects of a single VPX, IMHO, greatly outweigh the positives. Same goes for PPS.

I find standard breakers much cheaper and easier to design power distribution schemes to avoid single point failure risks.

BTW - do not forget the SkyView ARINC and ADS-B receiver.

Carl

 

[Marc_J._Zeitlin]

I'm with Carl, particularly with respect to system failure mode issues. I've installed VPX's in customer's planes, and I've installed many non-VPX systems. For a day VFR plane, the VPX is nice and has some cool features (but it's a very expensive way to get those features).

If you NEED the reliability/redundancy of your electrical system for IFR work, using fuses or CB's (I like ATO fuse buses and fuses rather than CB's, but that's another religious argument) rather than a VPX gives you a VERY reliable system that's easy to maintain and is not dependent upon a single vendor. Bob Nuckolls Aeroelectric connection book has many schematic templates to use for building such a system. Way cheaper than the VPX, far more redundancy, with little, if any reduction in capability. If you design your system correctly, the features that the VPX provides are almost completely unnecessary.

If a fuse blows, it will take me 2 minutes to replace it. If a fuse BUS dies, it will take me 1/2 hour to replace it. If a VPX dies, my airplane is down until it's replaced and it will take a couple of weeks to spin it for repairs, assuming that Vertical Power, owned by Astronics, is still in business and/or supporting their products. Fuses and fuse buses are available from multiple vendors all over the place (as are CB's).

Other than the "cool" factor, I just don't see it.

With respect to the PPS, same comments - the Aeroelectric connection shows how to create simple, cheap, reliable, easily available systems that don't require single source electronics. While it (and the VPX) does simplify installation complexity (a bit - not nearly as much as they imply) you do that once. Downstream reliability, maintenance, debugging and modifications are to me, more important.

IMO.

 

[kellym]

I'm with Carl, particularly with respect to system failure mode issues. I've installed VPX's in customer's planes, and I've installed many non-VPX systems. For a day VFR plane, the VPX is nice and has some cool features (but it's a very expensive way to get those features).

If you NEED the reliability/redundancy of your electrical system for IFR work, using fuses or CB's (I like ATO fuse buses and fuses rather than CB's, but that's another religious argument) rather than a VPX gives you a VERY reliable system that's easy to maintain and is not dependent upon a single vendor. Bob Nuckolls Aeroelectric connection book has many schematic templates to use for building such a system. Way cheaper than the VPX, far more redundancy, with little, if any reduction in capability. If you design your system correctly, the features that the VPX provides are almost completely unnecessary.

If a fuse blows, it will take me 2 minutes to replace it. If a fuse BUS dies, it will take me 1/2 hour to replace it. If a VPX dies, my airplane is down until it's replaced and it will take a couple of weeks to spin it for repairs, assuming that Vertical Power, owned by Astronics, is still in business and/or supporting their products. Fuses and fuse buses are available from multiple vendors all over the place (as are CB's).

Other than the "cool" factor, I just don't see it.

With respect to the PPS, same comments - the Aeroelectric connection shows how to create simple, cheap, reliable, easily available systems that don't require single source electronics. While it (and the VPX) does simplify installation complexity (a bit - not nearly as much as they imply) you do that once. Downstream reliability, maintenance, debugging and modifications are to me, more important.

IMO.

Well, I guess I will agree to disagree. I have been flying my RV-10 with VPX for years, and would not hesitate to fly it IFR. I have back-up batteries for each Dynon screen if the highly unlikely event that the VPX fails to provide power. Early on, until I got circuit breaker values set right, I had a few nuisance trips for individual pieces of equipment. Never had a hint of VPX not operating correctly. Also have a standby EFIS with its own 4 hour battery. As long as you have means to keep dirty side down, not turning and a battery powered means of navigation, the VPX is not a single point of failure.

 

[Raymo]

I'm a fan of fuses for most things and a few breakers for things you want direct control (P-Mags, flaps, AP, etc.).

 

[Dynon]

Shameless soft sell.... Another option in the same ballpark: https://www.advancedflightsystems.com/advanced-panels.php

Advanced (part of Dynon) can also make them in a "panel-less panel" variety, where you get the ACM (with the electronic circuit breakers), switches, all of the harnesses, everything preconfigured, etc, but without the actual panel. Give our Advanced team a shout if you want to learn more. They can also help compare/contrast it against other options for you. And yes, they can be built with either SkyView of AF-5000 series displays.

 

[Setthrust]

Shameless soft sell.... Another option in the same ballpark: https://www.advancedflightsystems.com/advanced-panels.php

Advanced (part of Dynon) can also make them in a "panel-less panel" variety, where you get the ACM (with the electronic circuit breakers), switches, all of the harnesses, everything preconfigured, etc, but without the actual panel. Give our Advanced team a shout if you want to learn more. They can also help compare/contrast it against other options for you. And yes, they can be built with either SkyView of AF-5000 series displays.

Thanks already have that quote