Do you have an autopilot

Do you have an autopilot

  • Yes

    Votes: 46 67.6%

  • No

    Votes: 22 32.4%
  • Total voters
    68
  • Poll closed .
J

JustinPinnix

Pre-Flight
Joined
Oct 28, 2006
Messages
85
Location
Raleigh, NC
Display Name
Display name:
Justin
Does at least one of the planes you fly IFR regularly have a working autopilot? This might put the results of the previous poll into perspective.
 
one of our 172s has an STEC that holds altitude and heading pretty well. its NAV tracking sucks so I dont use it. The 421 I fly with my boss occasionally as a good autopilot, but i rarely use it. Our other 4 172s are autopilot-less but it doesnt stop me from flying IFR in them.
 
DigiTrak Heading Hold/Nav Track & AlTrak Altitude Hold in the RV.
 
tonycondon said:
one of our 172s has an STEC that holds altitude and heading pretty well. its NAV tracking sucks so I dont use it. The 421 I fly with my boss occasionally as a good autopilot, but i rarely use it. Our other 4 172s are autopilot-less but it doesnt stop me from flying IFR in them.
Click to expand...
The R182 I fly has an S-TEC 5500. The nav/heading modes are great. The altitude hold/alert bites. The KAP-140 in all the Skyhawks works beautifully. I'll take it any day over the S-TEC.
 
KennyFlys said:
The R182 I fly has an S-TEC 5500. The nav/heading modes are great. The altitude hold/alert bites. The KAP-140 in all the Skyhawks works beautifully. I'll take it any day over the S-TEC.
Click to expand...

oh yea, i forgot about the 182RG, it has an STEC 50 in it as well. Speaking of, it gets ran up tomorrow, painted, and its ready to fly!
 
I have the Piper Autopilot (3C I think) and it track the nav or holds heading. It tracks very well to eitehr a VOR or the GPS but does not have GPS steerring.
 
A/P:

The Archer III has S-Tec 55x with alititude pre-select, but no GPSS. Flies great coupled approaches.

The 182 has the King KAP-140 with altitude pre-select, and works very well as well. I think I like the King a little better, it flies smoother coupled approaches and the operation is somewhat intuitive. The S-Tec altitude pre-select procedure (with that seperate annunciator/selector) is in NO WAY intuitive, and the ONLY way to learn how to pre-select is to RTFM.

Our soon to be picked up Mooney has the King KFC-200, and I hear that it is a good unit.
 
I have an STEC 20, single-axis only autopilot. While I would LOVE an ALT hold, I will take what I can get.
 
Some of the planes I rent have an AP. Ironically the one time I was in any IMC for an extended period of time the plane of course did not have an AP.
 
I decided I would give the Autopilot a shot in the C172 I flew back to Albuquerque.

I can now say that I still despise Autopilots and will never use one. This POS didn't do altitude holds, which made flying the plane nearly impossible because everytime the plane turned, there was the normal loss of lift, but if I tried to pull back on the yoke, I was fighting the turn of the autopilot.

The autopilot did not coordinate any turns either. Nothing better than having an autopilot turn to intercept a course while you watch the ball go all the way to the other side of the SI.

The only positive thing I can say about the autopilot is that if I were already on course (and by that, I mean dead on course, not a foot to the left or right) and the plane was already trimmed for level flight and there were no turns coming up anytime soon, it would be good to keep the plane from the graveyard spriral while I turn around to pet my dog or something.

No thank you.
 
SkyHog said:
I decided I would give the Autopilot a shot in the C172 I flew back to Albuquerque.

I can now say that I still despise Autopilots and will never use one. This POS didn't do altitude holds, which made flying the plane nearly impossible because everytime the plane turned, there was the normal loss of lift, but if I tried to pull back on the yoke, I was fighting the turn of the autopilot.

The autopilot did not coordinate any turns either. Nothing better than having an autopilot turn to intercept a course while you watch the ball go all the way to the other side of the SI.

The only positive thing I can say about the autopilot is that if I were already on course (and by that, I mean dead on course, not a foot to the left or right) and the plane was already trimmed for level flight and there were no turns coming up anytime soon, it would be good to keep the plane from the graveyard spriral while I turn around to pet my dog or something.

No thank you.
Click to expand...

So you've had a few bad experiences with crappy autopilots. That doesn't mean they are all like that. I've flown planes with autopilots I wouldn't ever touch and some with autopilots that are very handy.

Most of the time an autopilot isn't of any use to me. If I am flying a long XC and the plane has a good autopilot that can hold course and altitude I am a happy camper. I've flown some planes where you select the altitude and turn on the autopilot. It climbs to that altitude and turns on course without missing a beat.

I'm willing to bet that a good autopilot is a valuable tool in IMC.
 
Geez, Nick. You have to understand the limitations of the equipment you fly with.

SkyHog said:
I can now say that I still despise Autopilots and will never use one. This POS didn't do altitude holds, which made flying the plane nearly impossible because everytime the plane turned, there was the normal loss of lift, but if I tried to pull back on the yoke, I was fighting the turn of the autopilot.
Click to expand...

So you had a single axis autopilot. It was never meant to hold altitude. And I don't understand the fighting the turn thing to hold altitude. There should have been no resistance in pitch. No servo there. If the autopilot had an altitude hold feature it would have been a two axis autopilot.

The autopilot did not coordinate any turns either. Nothing better than having an autopilot turn to intercept a course while you watch the ball go all the way to the other side of the SI.
Click to expand...

Different animal. That would have been a YAW DAMPER. And very few single engine airplanes would have that.

The only positive thing I can say about the autopilot is that if I were already on course (and by that, I mean dead on course, not a foot to the left or right) and the plane was already trimmed for level flight and there were no turns coming up anytime soon, it would be good to keep the plane from the graveyard spriral while I turn around to pet my dog or something.

No thank you.
Click to expand...

Look, Nick. You are painting with an awfully broad brush. You obviously do not understand the limitations of the equipment you were flying with. If you would take the time to understand it, maybe have an instructor familiar with that model fly with you for a bit, maybe you could see it as a useful tool.
 
jesse said:
So you've had a few bad experiences with crappy autopilots.
Click to expand...

I am willing to bet there wasn't anything wrong with the autopilot. I think it is a basic lack of understanding how it works and what its limitations are.

I'm willing to bet that a good autopilot is a valuable tool in IMC.[/QUOTE]

You have no idea. :yes: Even a simple wing leveler is a HUGE help in IMC.
 
Having said all that, the airplanes I fly at work all have about as good an autopilot as you can get. :D And they get used extensively.

If I were to have a serious traveling machine, and was doing serious IFR work with it, I would spend the money and put a good two axis autopilot in it. They make an OUTSTANDING copilot if you learn how to use them.
 
Nah, I understand the limitations, Greg, but how are you supposed to keep the plane coordinated in IMC when it decides to turn? You'd practically have to fixate on the TC to make sure that the ball was centered the entire time.

The resistance was not in the pitch, it was that by pulling back on the yoke, the AP was unable to continue the bank, because my hand was on the yoke, pulling back.

I think that a wing leveler would be a much better choice than a 1 axis autopilot.

I am not saying that those of you that use Autopilots are insane or doing something wrong, I'm just saying that autopilots are not for me. I gave in, and decided to try one to see if I was missing something. I wasn't.

And I can certainly say that I would not count on a 1 axis autopilot in IMC.
 
Current autopilot -- Piper Autocontrol -- will get ripped out as soon as I figure out what to do with the panel. Not a great autopilot to begin with, this one has some problems with the coupler that has my autopilot guru friend stumped. The STec altitude hold module works great.

Maybe someone has an idea. Flies the heading bug fine. Couple it to a nav -- either GPS or VOR -- and it banks hard left. Turn the bank knob to the right to compensate and the course line on the HSI/CDI moves instead.

Sacrifice some live chickens, maybe?
 
Ahh, and Jesse's right, this AP was screwy anyways (we talked about it in chat, that's how he knew). It wouldn't hold course. Kept going back and forth across the course, essentially doing really wide s-turns.
 
SkyHog said:
Nah, I understand the limitations, Greg, but how are you supposed to keep the plane coordinated in IMC when it decides to turn? You'd practically have to fixate on the TC to make sure that the ball was centered the entire time.
Click to expand...

With your feet? :yes: Seriously. Just like if you were making the turn yourself. At standard rate turns, in a Hawk for instance, if you didn't do anything, I doubt the yaw would be that noticeable.

The resistance was not in the pitch, it was that by pulling back on the yoke, the AP was unable to continue the bank, because my hand was on the yoke, pulling back.
Click to expand...

In that case you need to learn to relax a bit. You can hold backpressure without interfering with the bank. It isn't that hard.

I think that a wing leveler would be a much better choice than a 1 axis autopilot.
Click to expand...

A wing leveler is the SAME THING as a single axis autopilot.

I am not saying that those of you that use Autopilots are insane or doing something wrong, I'm just saying that autopilots are not for me. I gave in, and decided to try one to see if I was missing something. I wasn't.

And I can certainly say that I would not count on a 1 axis autopilot in IMC.
Click to expand...

Wait until you start doing actual IMC after you get your ticket before you stand behind that statement. :yes:
 
Ken Ibold said:
Current autopilot -- Piper Autocontrol -- will get ripped out as soon as I figure out what to do with the panel. Not a great autopilot to begin with, this one has some problems with the coupler that has my autopilot guru friend stumped. The STec altitude hold module works great.

Maybe someone has an idea. Flies the heading bug fine. Couple it to a nav -- either GPS or VOR -- and it banks hard left. Turn the bank knob to the right to compensate and the course line on the HSI/CDI moves instead.

Sacrifice some live chickens, maybe?
Click to expand...

Get the S-Tec, Ken. :D :yes:
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Get the S-Tec, Ken. :D :yes:
Click to expand...
No doubt, Greg. I can get a great deal on an STec. But I don't want to do that work until I figure out what to do about the KLN90B that now serves as the primary GPS, and then do it all at once.

Maybe a 530W. Maybe a 430W and an MFD. I have to price all this stuff someday.
 
Archer 41E has the Piper II wing leveler. I've never touched it, since I fly this bird VFR only. (One Narco + One King = bad combination IFR/IMC)

Archer 83F has a Piper autopilot that I only use for tracking the heading bug 'cuz that's the only mode that I'm sure works reliably.

The 182 has an S-TEC 50 with altitude hold, GPSS coupled to the 430, all the bells and whistles. It works freakin' great. If I'm on a "fun flight" where I'm just boppin' around the local area or doing practice pattern work or airwork, it stays off. If I'm going on a shorter cross country, I might leave it off too.

Long cross countries and hard IMC, you bet I'm using it. Fatigue is a very real factor, even when you don't feel tired, that will increase the chances of making a mistake. Anything I can do to stay fresh, I'll do. That 430/S-TEC combo is a most excellent tool when you need it, and has proven to be very reliable in the 182.
 
SkyHog said:
Nah, I understand the limitations, Greg, but how are you supposed to keep the plane coordinated in IMC when it decides to turn?
Click to expand...

Most of the small GA birds we fly don't have much adverse yaw (with the Citabria being a notable exception), and most of our autopilots have a very low roll rate. Those two, in combination, should result in a turn that's VERY close to being coordinated, assuming you're flying a properly rigged airplane.

The resistance was not in the pitch, it was that by pulling back on the yoke, the AP was unable to continue the bank, because my hand was on the yoke, pulling back.
Click to expand...

Don't grab the yoke with your whole hand and yank it. Just put your fingers behind the yoke, preferably under the middle rather than on one of the horns, and do not wrap your fingers around it. Pull gently (all you should need). You won't interfere with the bank, and the banking autopilot won't interfere with you.

The other option is to give it a single swipe of nose-up trim in the turn and don't touch the yoke at all.

I'm just saying that autopilots are not for me. I gave in, and decided to try one to see if I was missing something. I wasn't.
Click to expand...

VFR, you weren't. I have used an autopilot VFR on a long cross country just to take a break, take pictures, etc. I don't use the autopilot much at all VFR. But, IFR/IMC it makes a HUGE difference. When the winds change and ATC puts you on a different approach when you're already down low in the clag, it's a very big help.
 
I'll have to admit that for a long time I felt the same way as Nick about autopilots. This was partly due to the fact that most of the airplanes I had flown at that time either had no autopilot or a poorly maintained one. I recall one that would hold altitude OK but heading not so much so, and there's no way it would track a course. Besides, one of the things I enjoyed about flying was actually manipulating the airplane.

Nowadays I have seen the light. However it took flying an airplane with a decent autopilot to convince me, not to mention that I had to pass a checkride demonstrating my proficiency with one.
 
I don't fly in IMC (yet) but my 172 has a STEC 40 with HB, coupled to the VOR and Loran. If I have the plane trimmed right, it will fly a perfectly straight course, straighter than I can fly it. If you turn the heading bug it will start to loose a little altitude, but if you take one finger and add a little back pressure in the middle of the yoke, it flys a perfect turn with no ruddler needed. The one Nick is having trouble with must be out of rigging, if this is the case it will not hold course and wonders back and forth. The STEC 40 or any single axes AP will not intercept a VOR /ILS course, it will only hold and track the course once you are on it
 
Dean said:
The STEC 40 or any single axes AP will not intercept a VOR /ILS course, it will only hold and track the course once you are on it
Click to expand...

I don't think this is quite correct. A single-axis autopilot can control the airplane in one axis - typically roll. Adding a second axis gives you pitch (and possibly electric trim to further enhance it), and a third axis gives you yaw damping.

Many single axis autopilots have the ability to follow a heading and then intercept and track a VOR or GPS course. Add roll steering/GPSS and you get a unit that can even fly a holding pattern!

If I recall correctly, the STEC 30 series will do LVL/HDG/NAV in a single axis package.
 
I'm a big fan of the KAP 140 that is on the 172 and 182 I've been flying.
The rate based input is a real plus to me. I figure that it could take some of the work out of partial panel work if you have a rate driven AP that can hold the wings level.

You want to be careful with an autopilot on approach. We had a fatal at my airport last month, where it looked like the pilot allowed his autopilot to hold an altitude until the Bonanza stalled and crashed on the LOC. Really underscores the need to have a good scan even on AP.
 
infotango said:
You want to be careful with an autopilot on approach. We had a fatal at my airport last month, where it looked like the pilot allowed his autopilot to hold an altitude until the Bonanza stalled and crashed on the LOC. Really underscores the need to have a good scan even on AP.
Click to expand...

Also underscores the fact that most autopilots will stall the plane if given the opportunity.

The new Garmin GFC700 autopilot (finally!) has a mode called "flight level change" that will not stall the plane. That's the advantage of the integrated system, I doubt any of the other autopilots we fly with has any airspeed input.
 
SkyHog said:
Ahh, and Jesse's right, this AP was screwy anyways (we talked about it in chat, that's how he knew). It wouldn't hold course. Kept going back and forth across the course, essentially doing really wide s-turns.
Click to expand...

Right, as we said, reserve judgement until you fly a plane with a good functioning autopilot. A good unit will amaze you with how well it will do.
 
TMetzinger said:
I don't think this is quite correct. A single-axis autopilot can control the airplane in one axis - typically roll. Adding a second axis gives you pitch (and possibly electric trim to further enhance it), and a third axis gives you yaw damping.

Many single axis autopilots have the ability to follow a heading and then intercept and track a VOR or GPS course. Add roll steering/GPSS and you get a unit that can even fly a holding pattern!

If I recall correctly, the STEC 30 series will do LVL/HDG/NAV in a single axis package.
Click to expand...

I have the STEC 40 and it states in the owners manual that it will not intercept a course, you can go to STEC's website and read the manual there.
4-4 2nd Ed: October 25, 2002
System 40/50 POH
4.2 System 40 In-Flight Procedures
1. A/P Master Switch ON; RDY light illuminates.
2. Trim aircraft to desired flight conditions. Maintain yaw trim during all autopilot
operations.
3. Center Turn Knob, press and release ON/OFF Switch.
4. Set Turn Knob to level or turning flight, as desired.
5. Set HDG bug (if installed) to a desired heading, press and release the Turn
Knob to engage HDG Mode.
4.3 VOR Tracking and VOR Approach
NOTE: The System 40/50 does not provide intercept capability but will
accurately track a reliable navigation signal when following
one of the procedures listed.
1. Tune the NAV receiver, verify a valid NAV Signal, and then select a Radial.
2. Maneuver aircraft to the selected radial within +/- one needle width and
within 10 degrees of the course heading.
3. Press and release NAV Mode for VOR cross-country tracking.
4. Press and release APR Mode for VOR approaches and more sensitive
tracking, such as LORAN/GPS tracking.
NOTE: Approach Mode may be used to track VOR radials cross-country
if desired. Use of APR Mode for cross country tracking may
result in some course scalloping if the VOR signal is weak
or otherwise "noisy". In areas of poor signal quality, NAV
Mode may provide more accurate tracking even with reduced
gain.
 
JustinPinnix said:
Does at least one of the planes you fly IFR regularly have a working autopilot? This might put the results of the previous poll into perspective.
Click to expand...

Well, I just took a trip out west and back with Bob Gerace in his 310, and it was the first time I had flown with an autopilot, and I must admit, it was nice.
 
Dean said:
I have the STEC 40 and it states in the owners manual that it will not intercept a course, you can go to STEC's website and read the manual there..
Click to expand...

Dean, I agree about the STEC 40 - but what you said was "The STEC 40 or any single axes AP will not intercept a VOR /ILS course, it will only hold and track the course once you are on it".

You're right about the STEC 40, you're incorrect about any single axis autopilot.
 
TMetzinger said:
Dean, I agree about the STEC 40 - but what you said was "The STEC 40 or any single axes AP will not intercept a VOR /ILS course, it will only hold and track the course once you are on it".

You're right about the STEC 40, you're incorrect about any single axis autopilot.
Click to expand...

Gottcha, my apology for the misunderstanding.
 
Ken Ibold said:
Current autopilot -- Piper Autocontrol -- will get ripped out as soon as I figure out what to do with the panel. Not a great autopilot to begin with, this one has some problems with the coupler that has my autopilot guru friend stumped. The STec altitude hold module works great.

Maybe someone has an idea. Flies the heading bug fine. Couple it to a nav -- either GPS or VOR -- and it banks hard left. Turn the bank knob to the right to compensate and the course line on the HSI/CDI moves instead.

Sacrifice some live chickens, maybe?
Click to expand...
Those Piper rigs are kind of notorious for going south in unpredictable ways, particularly in Nav mode. A good avionics shop may be able to resurrect it, but an STec or a new Century would be a better investment.

Jay
 
The Twinkie has a Century 2000 with altitude hold. It holds altitude within 10 feet, heading within a couple of degrees and is absolutely rock solid in approach mode. In fact the first time I flew a coupled approach I thought something was wrong because the needles were so solidly centered.

An good autopilot is one of the most sophisticated and powerful pieces of equipment in an airplane, and unfortunately it's proper use is usually treated as an afterthought. If you fight it, it can literally kill you by trimming the airplane against your control inputs. The keys are to understand exactly how your unit operates, to pre-flight it correctly, and if it is not working to get it fixed.

I like the Century, it's attitude based system is more solid in bumps than the rate based STec, but if I was putting a unit in an airplane with one vacuum system I'd buy an STec to back me up in case of vacuum loss.

Jay
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top