RivetBangers.com

Hey All,

After seeing Spike's panel thread and how interesting it was, I got to wondering what everyone's collective idea was with panels.

Now, I understand there is ALOT that goes into what you think is important in a panel and just because it has a bunch of expensive doo dads... doesn't make it a good panel in your eyes. The K.I.S.S. strategy often applies here!

Unless you author a thread, you cannot make a "Poll" on it, so I made this new one so we can vote for our favorite.

Here are some panels. I have placed them in no particular order. You may recognize them from the other thread(s), or you may not. I have also included my theoretical panel for the fun of it all.

Cast your vote and let us know what you panel preference is!

This should be fun! Here goes...

Panel "A:



Panel "B"



Panel "C"



Panel "D"



Cast your vote NOW!

CJ

one thing they all have in common, LOTSABUCKS!!!
Dan

Dan!

You didn't even vote!!!

PICK ONE!

CJ

If I had to put a panel together today I would probably end up with something most closely resembling "D"

I voted for panel D over my own panel. If those switches were moved to a subpanel it would be perfect. But I can't afford all the toys in that panel. I went with what I could afford.

Chad, our panels haven't even got one vote. What's up with that?

What are you all using to make these cool panels up? Is there a site or some panel software out there?

Sho' nuff. http://www.epanelbuilder.com/
In free mode you can design and save but not recall the panel. I design the panel and then do a print screen and then past it into mspaint.

Run by RV builder and all around nice guy Bill Von Dane. He also does CreativAir.com.

Not sure why no one likes ours Scott???

I voted for "D" as well...only because I can't afford it. That center radio stack alone would run $20K!

D for me!

cjensen wrote:I voted for "D" as well...only because I can't afford it.

???

I can't afford it, but it's my preference. That's why I voted D.

Spike, I have been looking at this panel which you created:



I really like it as a simple, cost effective alternative!

CJ

THAT'S what you consider cost effective??? That's almost a 25-grand panel!

It's no Avidyne Entegra...

CJ

No, not by far. But, my panel plan/budget is not going to run more than $10k. That's cost effective!

For the vote, I picked the big bux panel "A". What's not to like? It has all the goodies, and it's well arranged.

For the panel I get to sign the check for, it will be a bit lighter. I did a little paintshop panel design, it looks like this ...

Thanx CJ, I did it just for you actually.

- John

D then A. I am going for an IFR panel with redundancy, so I am already reconciled to forking out some cash. My life and that of my passenger are worth the money.

That said I don't think I will be going as far as the D panel. I may opt for a 430 rather than a 530 and I will not do such a fancy engine monitor if I go with the Advanced Flight Systems EFIS. Also the audio panel and transponder are higher end than I want.

I definitely don't want any vacuum components.

Antony

aparchment wrote:D then A. I am going for an IFR panel with redundancy, so I am already reconciled to forking out some cash. My life and that of my passenger are worth the money. <snip>Antony

Now now Antony...I think we ALL would agree that our lives and those we fly with are worth the money. For me, and this is my opinion only, I'm not going to put my life and that of my passenger on the line for ANY experimental piece of equipment for IFR flight. Sometimes I find it hard to believe I do IFR flying in the DA40/G1000, even though they are solid state, and more reliable than the typical vacuum/pitot-static gauges they replace. They are electrically dependant though. That's the part that worries me. If you lose electricity, you also lose your autopilot, and your back up electric gauges (unless you have a vacuum system, obviously). Hand flying an RV in IMC is not on my list of fun things to do...

Harold, that is a nice light (on the pocketbook too) panel!

Chad, Now don't be too rough on Antony now. I agree that safety and dollars spent are NOT directly proportional HOWEVER, just because it is experimental doesn't mean it isn't safe to use for IFR (or VFR) flight.

After all, Dynons are being installed in certified ships now. Those new cubs have them!

I dare say that if the EFIS in my plane has been working well consistently (with no hiccups) for a period which I feel that it is worthy for a trip through a layer, I will run it!

If the equipment (EFIS, Aircraft, radios... EVERYTHING!) continues to work reliably and as expected, why WOULDN'T you expect it to do the same for the near future?

That being said, I would install all the typical backups we find in a modern glass, IFR ship such as dual alternators, essential bus, BACKUP INSTRUMENTS and dual GPS's (and more)!

Yes, it runs into money, but it will be a fraction of the cost compared to if it were certified.

Tell me, what makes a certified EFIS BETTER than one that is not?

AFS is using a Certified AHRS. That has GOTTA make one feel all warm and fuzzy, doesn't it?

CJ

I wasn't trying to be rough on Antony, and meant absolutely no disrespect for anyone flying RV's IFR...it just isn't for me. Sorry Antony if I pushed any buttons...

Dynon's installed in the light sport stuff is strickly VFR. Certified VFR, yes.

I agree that any instrument working properly, should be expected to keep working properly in the near future. And I also agree that the necessary backups be in place, but that adds weight. There's no right or wrong answer here, just my opinion.

They are a fraction of the cost, and makes them very attractive. But they are inexpensive because they do not go thru the rigorous testing that the certy'd units go thru.

There is no garauntee on any EFIS, certy'd or not, so I can't say one is better than the other. I've seen several of the experimental EFIS' fail or do some funky things, and that does NOT give me the warm and fuzzy's.

Oh, AFS is using certified AHRS, which is why they are more expensive than the others. Not so much more to take them out of the running for most, but they are higher.