Talos Avionics 50% off for Boxing Day!

[BJC]

Thanks, Matthew. Looks like some great deals.

Just noticed that the Pro versions have cooling fans. Does anyone know what about the Pro drives the need for forced cooling?


BJC

 

[rv7charlie]

The difference in the pro versions seems to be addition of ADSB-in. If they're using typical Stratux hardware/software for ADSB, that might explain it. The SDRs & Pi board in a typical Stratux build require a cooling fan.

 

[pylon500]

Well ****, I only come here every other day, so I missed boxing day
I've bought one unit already, got the 'Black Friday' special, but my current project is four aircraft, so I need three more.
Maybe I'll keep an eye out for a 'New Year's Day Special'?
I really must pull my finger out and get the project into the builder's log section...

 

[pfarber]

AoA via a chip? BULL CR*P

You put down flaps, the AoA will change. This unit might have a tilt sensor, that is NOT AoA

That's a serious lie they are telling, and would 100% disqualify them IMHO
Basically is nothing more than a $20 arduino with a $5 AHRS chip and 3rd party software that they don't tell you about the annual fee.

The Horizon software is not a sectional, and doens't appear to have any airport data, so you're going to have to have a copy of Foreflight/FlyQ/EFB and that's ANOTHER $60-100 a year... and those apps provide WAY BETTER moving map and synthetic vision capabilities.

HARD PASS.

 

[GregParker]

AoA via a chip? BULL CR*P

This is their sensorless AOA explanation. They lost me claiming a vane can’t detect a high g stall.

“the AoA is extrapolated with
prediction algorithms from the sensors readings. There is a state space model which comprises all readings, speeds, accelerations, rotations etc. and from
this model we estimate the AoA. A major advantage of this method is that
it can compute also the high g stall, which is not possible to be detected by vane or differential pressure.”

 

[Geraldc]

I would like to see full test results. And how it calculates for relative wind .

 

[cluttonfred]

Wow, those are some pretty strong reactions based an a web site produced by a Greek company (non-native English speakers) about a device for use on experimental aircraft. I am no expert on avionics and cannot answer your questions, but maybe a friendly email to the manufacturer with a few questions would be more productive than bashing a product you don't even own on a public forum?

 

[12notes]

AoA via a chip? BULL CR*P

You put down flaps, the AoA will change. This unit might have a tilt sensor, that is NOT AoA

That's a serious lie they are telling, and would 100% disqualify them IMHO
Basically is nothing more than a $20 arduino with a $5 AHRS chip and 3rd party software that they don't tell you about the annual fee.

The Horizon software is not a sectional, and doens't appear to have any airport data, so you're going to have to have a copy of Foreflight/FlyQ/EFB and that's ANOTHER $60-100 a year... and those apps provide WAY BETTER moving map and synthetic vision capabilities.

HARD PASS.

If you look at the website, you should notice that every unit has pitot and static ports. "Probeless" in this case, means there isn't a dedicated AOA probe, not that they have zero air data at all. If they couple the gyroscope data with the pitot/static data, this can give a good approximation of AOA.

UAvionix also uses the pitot/static data and gyroscope system to generate AOA with their AV-30 EFIS for certified aircraft, so the FAA is ok with this approach. An explanation of how it works is on uAvionix's FAQ at:

AV-30 - uAvionix

AV-30 EFIS Retrofit Your Cockpit with a Digital Upgrade Upgrade your legacy vacuum driven instruments to digital precision attitude and directional gyro customizable displays. Buy Now (EXP) Buy Now (Certified) Download the Simulator AV-30

uavionix.com

 

[Doran Jaffas]

AoA via a chip? BULL CR*P

You put down flaps, the AoA will change. This unit might have a tilt sensor, that is NOT AoA

That's a serious lie they are telling, and would 100% disqualify them IMHO
Basically is nothing more than a $20 arduino with a $5 AHRS chip and 3rd party software that they don't tell you about the annual fee.

The Horizon software is not a sectional, and doens't appear to have any airport data, so you're going to have to have a copy of Foreflight/FlyQ/EFB and that's ANOTHER $60-100 a year... and those apps provide WAY BETTER moving map and synthetic vision capabilities.

HARD PASS.

Avare...free GPS app with options available. I've used it for years.

 

[pfarber]

You cannot get the relative wind without pressure sensors. Anything else is simply a guess, or a glorified tilt sensor... why not just use a piece of string with a weight on the end of it?

With ever AC being different, you would have to test fly and adjust parameters that would be 'close'. Not accurate, but 'close'.

Yet these companies are selling an AoA indicator? They are not.

 

[cluttonfred]

Yet many other vendors are selling similar setups as "angle-of-attack" or "lift reserve" indicators...why are you venting on this one company? As for different aircraft requiring test flight and adjustment, there is such a procedure in the Talos manual if you'd care to take a look. https://talosavionics.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/FlySense AoA Installation.pdf

 

[12notes]

You cannot get the relative wind without pressure sensors. Anything else is simply a guess, or a glorified tilt sensor... why not just use a piece of string with a weight on the end of it?

With ever AC being different, you would have to test fly and adjust parameters that would be 'close'. Not accurate, but 'close'.

Yet these companies are selling an AoA indicator? They are not.

They have pressure sensors in the pitot and static. They have gyros to combine with this data to get the angle of attack. Just because you don't like it or understand how it works doesn't make it a "glorified tilt sensor" and certainly not a guess.

The FAA certified this method. These are angle of attack indicators. They may not be the type you would have designed, but that doesn't mean they aren't valid and functional angle of attack indicators.

 

[Jay Kempf]

We never had lift reserve sensors or AOA when I learned to fly. Is this a result of people loving the electronics on their dashboard and just wanting more. Or is this a result of the new crop of pilots that don't receive coordinated flight and spin training. They way they train Airbus pilots now is a bit like that. There can't be any feel so you just teach procedures and hope they learn the rest OJT.

 

[Vigilant1]

We never had lift reserve sensors or AOA when I learned to fly. Is this a result of people loving the electronics on their dashboard and just wanting more. Or is this a result of the new crop of pilots that don't receive coordinated flight and spin training. They way they train Airbus pilots now is a bit like that. There can't be any feel so you just teach procedures and hope they learn the rest OJT.

To the degree that pilots are now looking at an instrument (the ASI) to determine if stall is imminent, I'd much prefer that they were instead looking at an instrument that actually tells them that more accurately (an AoA gauge or lift reserve indicator). The idea that there is a "stall speed" has
undoubtedly killed a lot of pilots.

Sure, better to tell via other indications (buffet, control response, etc), but I will not argue against an instrument that tells a pilot something useful.

 

[Geraldc]

An AOA with an audible warning would certainly save lives.
It is not a real problem IMHO if it is calibrated on the side of caution.
Are aircraft with a stall horn safer statistically?

 

[Jay Kempf]

But we've had simple stall warnings for AGES!

 

[BJC]

Sure, better to tell via other indications (buffet, control response, etc), but I will not argue against an instrument that tells a pilot something useful.

Yup. Now all you need is a pilot who understands.


BJC

 

[BJC]

An AOA with an audible warning would certainly save lives.

It is difficult to protect idiots from themselves.


BJC

 

[pylon500]

If I wanted to spend $10~$20k on high end air data hardware/software for test flying a new plane to certification, I would go that way, but I'm just building a simple, day VFR, two seat ultralight that I'll spend most of my time flying by hand while looking outside, and maybe checking my instruments for reference now and then.
I think the Aeolus-Sense will suit my need a little better than sticking an iphone4 on the dash with a copy of iHud.