The DME issue is one of compatibility it is my understanding that the DME data from a KN62a can be displayed on the Aspen…… Is this true ?
It can be connected, dedicated pinning is available, however this is a function which is not implemented in the software yet, so at this time it won’t work.
The ASPEN is a basically “EHSI+EFIS”. There is no GPS
This is not completly true. Aspens RSM which is part of the EFD1000 has an internal GPS receiver. However it is not used as FMS but as a moving map. I case you have a total electrical failure, such as descriped in the Battery load test post, your navigators will like switch off as most don’t have an internal battery.
The EFD1000 has an internal battery, so it stays on, using it’s own GPS as backup for the moving map.
I think the Sandel could be a good to upgrade an excisting KCS-55 system, The EFD1000 would be a good alternative as well. For new installation the favour would be on the Aspen.
The EFD1000 Pro has some benefits over the SN3500 + SG102 + MT102
The (non) support of DME on the Aspen is a disadvantage that should be solved in a future software rease. The Sandal does offer this as standard.
Aspens RSM which is part of the EFD1000 has an internal GPS receiver. However it is not used as FMS but as a moving map.
Are you sure the moving map is running from the internal GPS and not from the data from the external GPS? If so I bet not many owners know that…
I know they have a GPS in the RSM but I thought that was required for the background erection for their AHRS – they use constant-track and constant-GPS-altitude to indicate a level flight condition.
The Sandel is a very nice bit of kit, of a quality well above the GA avionics average, but it is difficult to recommend it because it is pricey ($15k or so for the SN3500+SG102, discount from USA) and doesn’t replace the KI256. Yes it shows the DME. There is some logic involved to inhibit the DME indication if you have say the DME set to DME1 but the NAV set to NAV2 – a common mistake otherwise.
Are you sure the moving map is running from the internal GPS and not from the data from the external GPS? If so I bet not many owners know that…
Yes I am sure, see section 6.6 GPS failures and RSM emergency GPS use in the pilots guide. Do note, that this is not the case in the entry model EFD1000 Pilot.
http://www.aspenavionics.com/pdfs/091-00005-001%20E%20EFD1k%20PFD%20Plts%20Guide%20for%20Web.pdf
It uses a GPS with digital output (ARINC) to display the flight plan and other enhanced features. When combined with an older GPS which has only analog output (left / right) this is only used for CDI purpose.
Aspen for sure has put time in clever design. Such as with the mounting which saves labour, the interfaces between almost all avionics, even old ARC stuff if you would wan’t that.
The redudancy features are also quite clever.
Peter,
The ASPEN is a basically “EHSI+EFIS”. There is no GPS. It doesn’t tick any boxes for regulatory / equipment carriage compliance.
Actually, the Aspen has an internal GPS, which will keep the data display going even if you loose all other avionics via the backup battery. Of course it is not intended for primary navigation.
There is no requirement for an autopilot or even a HSI (told you to not laugh)
Um, I am told by the resident experts and CAA here that you can´t have your plane IFR certified unless it has a slaved compass system, which in todays day and age would be a HSI. Likewise, they do require a 2 axis AP with at least ALT HOLD on the 2nd axis. (And there is a new requirement in the woods which would specify full approach coupling, that is lateral AND horizontal).
The Aspen in my view is a solution which is economical, ticks a lot of headscratchers at once (such as where to put the 2nd altimeter and does it´s own GPSS which will save $$$ when you want to couple it to an AP. For me, for starters, it is the ONLY way I can hope to achieve IFR certification in my cramped cockpit.
Mooney Driver,
your ‘IFR certification’ requirements seem a bit OTT, unless these are HB-specific.
There are now very few countries in EASA land where you have a specific ‘IFR’ certification. In the past, for example the French had a ‘Classe VFR, Classe VFR de Nuit, and Classe IFR’ CofA and some of the aeroclub bores still refer to that, hence the confusion. In reality there is a list of equipment mandated by EASA to be carried for IFR flight, and private category ops are much less stringent than some of the commercial ops requirements. There is no such thing as an IFR Airworthiness Review Certificate for example.
The autopilot requirement you mention is for example for commercial ops and for aircraft first certified after the mid 70s I think.
I don’t have the list to hand but I think you will find that the requirements for IFR flight in Europe while not as easy going as the FAA is quite achievable with most aircraft that have a half decent panel. The issues are more with the avionics: FM immunity and soon 8.33 are some of the bugbears though, as well as BRNAV in practice.
but yes, the Aspen is a great piece of kit! I wish I had one!
edited to add: the EASA requirements for Part NCO ‘Non Commercial Operations’ are to be found here:
NCO.IDE.A.105 Minimum equipment for flight
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:227:0001:0074:EN:PDF
NCO.IDE.A.125 Operations under IFR — flight and navigational instruments and associated equipment
Aeroplanes operated under IFR shall be equipped with:
(a) a means of measuring and displaying the following:
(1) magnetic heading;
(2) time in hours, minutes and seconds;
(3) pressure altitude;
(4) indicated airspeed;
(5) vertical speed;
(6) turn and slip;
(7) attitude;
(8) stabilised heading;
(9) outside air temperature; and
(10) Mach number, whenever speed limitations are expressed in terms of Mach number;
(b) a means of indicating when the supply of power to the gyroscopic instruments is not adequate; and
(c) a means of preventing malfunction of the airspeed indicating system required in (a)(4) due to condensation or icing.
The autopilot requirement only appears with reference to single pilot COMMERCIAL ops
NCC.IDE.A.130 Additional equipment for single-pilot operations under IFR
Aeroplanes operated under IFR with a single pilot shall be equipped with an autopilot with at least altitude hold and
heading mode.
Mooney Driver lives in Switzerland, which is non-EU so can pick and choose which EASA directives to implement.
We could argue that an AP and an HSI are most sensible for any serious IFR, but it would be bad to mandate them because it would make IFR in VMC (or other good wx conditions) impossible for all the simpler types.
However Germany still operates the “IFR certificate” scam which has the owner over a barrel on various equipment, and provides an almost unlimited opportunity to gold plate EASA regs.
However Germany still operates the “IFR certificate” scam which has the owner over a barrel on various equipment, and provides an almost unlimited opportunity to gold plate EASA regs.
So does Switzerland for that matter. In our CofA you get the cathegory marked which you may operate in, VFR Day, VFR Night, IFR CAT I e.t.c. And in order to get that, you need to fulfil the equipment list plus other stuff. If my plane was N-Reg today, But that is OT here, sorry for bringing it up, my point was not really the certification issues.
What I did want to express is that particularly in cramped cockpits and where you have the requirement to fit a certain assortment of instrumentation in order to be legal, the Aspen does a lot of good or actually can be the only viable solution to space problems.
- In the space of 2 instruments (Attitude/Gyro) it will provide the whole sixpack. Granted, you still need backup instruments in some countries (Horizon and 2nd Altimeter normally) but it can help.
- The Aspen is significantly cheaper to be had (new) but particularly to be installed as opposed to a normal HSI. I got offers of both. Clearly, used HSI’s are available today at a fairly low price, but installation cost is pretty steep.
So given the requirements I face, the Aspen is actually the only way to get there.
The big problem with the Aspen appears if you have an aircraft which does not appear on the STC list. Aspen are not interested in supporting additional types and for one aircraft the cost is prohibitive. I looked into it for my T67.
