How long until glass panels cost $5 bucks?

[douglas393]

Actually, the software costs for man-rated avionics are not at all negligible. There are probably millions of lines of code, every last one of which must be covered by an approved test case (DO-178C, level A). This is a huge amount of work. It's not the same as toy development. People actually take it rather seriously that a bug can kill.

Not saying it is negligible. Should have said cheaper not cheap. I agree millions of line of code which needs to be tested and debugged is not inexpensive, but I still suspect that the majority of what I pay for with the G1000 is hardware, and insurance. I would suspect that the code for the G1000 was not written from scratch but utilized code from other Garmin products(both aviation and non-aviation) as a foundation and was built up from that. In addition, there is constant checking of the code and upgrading it as well, and I am sure the costs of that are not negligible either.

My point of my of my previous post is more about how a tablet based app is not the same as a G1000.

Doug

 

[ElPaso Pilot]

Interesting. I was just discussing this with Mary, and we realized that we use the aircraft airspeed indicator for just two things:

1. To avoid stalling. "Make sure that needle stays above THAT mark...".

2. To avoid overspeeding: "Make sure that needle stays below THAT mark..."

Otherwise, for all other aspects of flight, we use groundspeed.

Hmm....by factoring in the relative wind it should be possible to come up with a faux airspeed indicator. We need an app for that!

As for altimeter, someone said their phone had a barometer in it. I'll have to check the specs, to see if either the N7 or S3 has one. THAT would be slick!

hmmm...

Now, in the Mooney, I tend to use airspeed for a few more things.

Like,

• Rotate at this speed
• Climb out at this speed
• Raise the flaps by this speed
• Raise the gear by this speed
• In bumpy air, fly below this speed
• Drop the gear below this speed
• Lower the flaps below this speed
• Fly base and final at these speeds
• Cross the fence at this speed
• Land ONLY at this speed

I use GPS groundspeed only for amusement and fuel planning / monitoring purposes. If I were to climb out of or attempt to land at a high density or short airfield using GPS speeds and non-calm winds, I could be in a world of hurt.

Likewise, flying at GPS altitudes is not only asking for an airspace bust, but is also a safety hazard to the traffic around me, as I am very likely to be at the wrong altitude for my heading or for VFR/IFR traffic.

GPS headings are also different than instrument headings. ATC will ask you to fly a specific heading where they are compensating for wind to achieve a desired track. With this toy, you will not be flying the track they want to see, nor what everyone else is flying.

As was said earlier, the accelerometers in a phone will often not function as a gyroscope does. The algorithms and hardware will not compensate correctly for vibration, turbulence, and extended turns.

When you are likely to need the instrument the most, it will likely be wrong.

These are toys for amusement purposes... not for flying!!!

Just the fact that people believe they can fly safely with GPS speeds and altitudes has me scratching my head about either their training quality or recollection of that training.

 

[cowman]

It's worth knowing how smartphones and I assume tablets as well get a position fix on their gps apps.

They use, obviously, the gps signal. However, they also use cell tower signal strength and wifi and put all this data into an algorithm to "refine" the location data.

IF you're wondering, the way they use wifi is there's a database that all the devices out there report in to help build- basically it takes the mac address(sort of like a serial number) from the wifi hotspots and ties it to gps coordinates. Then wifi-only devices can use that to get a fix or your cellular device can use it to refine it's gps location.

Although, for aviation purposes I'm pretty sure the wifi fix is useless.

 

[TMetzinger]

The trick for these (and I agree they are impressive) will be to velcro them to the panel, cover up the primary instruments, put on a hood, and have a CFI give you unusual attitudes that you recover with using the phone/tablet "instruments".

If they can stand up to the gyrations that the CFI starts and let you recover, they're a useful tool. If they can't, then they're dangerous, because you WILL trust them more than your TC or other backup instruments without a lot of self-discipline, and they need to be of equal reliability and usefulness.

 

[TMetzinger]

I'd be willing to bet that one of our ancestors in aviation said pretty much the same thing about them new-fangled VOR thingies.

BTW: No one is suggesting flying the ILS to minimums using these things.

I'm gonna fly with two Nexus 7s and a Samsung Galaxy S3 later today. For VFR flight, I am prepared to bet money that the instrumentation provided by these devices will be superior to anything in the panel of my plane -- but you'll just have to await my report.

Sent from my Nexus 7

Jay, for VFR flight, ALL your GYROS, including the ones in the panel, have little value.

The only potential value for these things is to save your butt when you DON'T have a visible horizon out the window. If these apps can let you keep the airplane upright - great. Otherwise, they're just interesting toys that will be dangerous if you ever "need" that information.

 

[fgcason]

I wouldn't put much faith in the cheap gyro's in the mobile devices.

Are there really gyroscopes (solid state/whatever) in there or is it gravity direction detection stuff? 60deg bank level turn is force straight down in relation to the airplane, not the planet and if it's not a gyroscope, it's no more accurate than a pencil hanging on a string from the sun visor.

 

[douglas393]

Jay, for VFR flight, ALL your GYROS, including the ones in the panel, have little value.

The only potential value for these things is to save your butt when you DON'T have a visible horizon out the window. If these apps can let you keep the airplane upright - great. Otherwise, they're just interesting toys that will be dangerous if you ever "need" that information.

Tim,

It sometimes seems to me when reading these forums, a fair number of VFR flying is done by instruments. Hopefully, I am just ignorant and do not know what I am talking about.

Doug

 

[douglas393]

The trick for these (and I agree they are impressive) will be to velcro them to the panel, cover up the primary instruments, put on a hood, and have a CFI give you unusual attitudes that you recover with using the phone/tablet "instruments".

If they can stand up to the gyrations that the CFI starts and let you recover, they're a useful tool. If they can't, then they're dangerous, because you WILL trust them more than your TC or other backup instruments without a lot of self-discipline, and they need to be of equal reliability and usefulness.

I think you will need a lot of velcro to keep these things from falling. I use velcro to hold a timer on my yoke for approaches, and have to replace it at least every other month. Also, do not know about others but the only place I could velcro a tablet on my panel is on the far right hand side and if I am sitting in the left seat that is useless. I am not putting velcro on my G1000, nor if I had a six pack would velcro something over my perfectly functional primary and secondary instruments.

 

[bkspero]

I wouldn't put much faith in the cheap gyro's in the mobile devices. From what I understand, they develop error pretty quickly, especially under vibration. Very cool technology though.

I don't think the N7 has a barometer. My Nexus phone does, though, and I can't get a surprisingly accurate altimeter reading with it. You have to put in the altimeter setting manually, like normal, but it's pretty cool. Naviator supports it. I imagine someone could write an app that, when you have a data connection, constantly pulls altimeter setting from the web and keeps it calibrated during flight.

EDIT: "I can get a surprisingly accurate reading with it.

I think they recognize that the gyro needs some help. The developer says it gets updated using the compass. I suspect also the GPS (I suspect the gps because the app seems to work best when moving, although I don't know how they adjust for wind correction angle).

One modest shortcoming at least on my Samsung SIII phone is that the AI works backwards. It tilts the horizon in the direction of bank making the display backwards. There are settings for the gyro, but none of them corrects this behavior. don't know if it affects other devices. Simple fix, I suspect.

 

[denverpilot]

Jay, you start using any tablet as primary in IMC, you are an accident statistic waiting to happen.

 

[bqmassey]

Are there really gyroscopes (solid state/whatever) in there or is it gravity direction detection stuff? 60deg bank level turn is force straight down in relation to the airplane, not the planet and if it's not a gyroscope, it's no more accurate than a pencil hanging on a string from the sun visor.

Depends on the device. For instance, my phone, a Samsun Galaxy Nexus has a gyroscope, accelerometer, and barometer.

You're correct in that accelerometers are useless for flight. My concern with the gyro is that I think that gyro data is combined with accelerometer and compass data to maintain bearing over time. I think that, because those little gyros aren't that stable, they use accelerometers and compass to self correct and prevent run-away error. Just like a pilot might cage the AI and sync his DG to the compass every once in a while, I think the devices are doing it constantly, and obviously, you don't want that to happen when you're anything other than straight and level.

I'm sure the software developers have a way of pulling raw, unprocessed gyro data, but do they? I just don't expect those gyro's to give stable data. Gyro error is compounded over time, so while any gyro might be acceptably accurate after 20 seconds, after 10 minutes there will be a big difference between gyro's of different quality, especially if those 10 minutes haven't been straight and level.

 

[Velocity173]

I get all this information on my Garmin 296. While it's GPS derived it could still work in an emergency. Still wouldn't need it anyway since I have dual attitude/heading indicators. This Nexus/iPad stuff is good for cheap nav but I'd never use it for a substitute for panel mounted instruments.

 

[3393RP]

It's obvious (at least to me) Jay's posts are championing the incredible advances being made in tablet based avionics applications and he is excited about the functional and utilitarian possibilities just over the horizon:

Cool.

We are entering what is arguably the most exciting period of aircraft ownership in history -- thanks to the electronics revolution. Soon, thanks to ever-more-capable and affordable tablets, we will have the most amazing capabilities in our aircraft, all at an incredibly affordable price.

It's also apparent Jay is not advocating the complete abandonment of his aircraft's approved navigational devices and planning on flying hard IFR with a smartphone. His interest is apparently in exploring the ability of the tablet and phone to augment the VFR capabilities of his currently installed conventional instruments:

I'd be willing to bet that one of our ancestors in aviation said pretty much the same thing about them new-fangled VOR thingies.

BTW: No one is suggesting flying the ILS to minimums using these things.

I'm gonna fly with two Nexus 7s and a Samsung Galaxy S3 later today. For VFR flight, I am prepared to bet money that the instrumentation provided by these devices will be superior to anything in the panel of my plane -- but you'll just have to await my report.

Sent from my Nexus 7

Jay's comments about the tablet's abilities and future possibilities indicate he clearly more interested things to come and advances in the cockpit, rather than going out tomorrow and flying in the soup using his Nexus 7.

So comments such as this:

Jay, you start using any tablet as primary in IMC, you are an accident statistic waiting to happen.

are saying something which is obvious to the OP and everyone else participating in the thread.

The changes happening in avionics and the speed in which they are happening is fascinating.

 

[docmirror]

What he said. ^^^

 

[Jay Honeck]

Thank you. That is EXACTLY what I'm talking about, and those who have started waving their arms and shouting that I'm going to kill myself and others are being alarmist to the Nth degree.

This is just cool stuff, period. I'll post my flight review in a minute.

Sent from my Nexus 7

 

[Jay Honeck]

So, we flew two hours today with our faux glass cockpit. The players are:

1. A stock '74 Piper Pathfinder with steam gauges
2. Two Asus Nexus 7 tablets.
3. One Samsung Galaxy SIII.

I would have had three Nexus 7s ("Nexii"?), but my daughter insisted on using hers.

The intention of this mission was to Velcro the 7" tablets over the primary 6-pack of instruments on a VFR flight, in order to emulate the Aspen setup.

We immediately ran into unforeseen trouble -- all the stems and adjustment knobs that protrude from the panel make it impossible to Velcro a tablet flush to the panel. D'oh!

Our thoughts on this included crafting a flat piece of fiberboard, and then suction cupping this to the glass instruments -- and then velcroing the tablets to THAT. Basically a clipboard sans the metal clip would be perfect.

This experiment will have to wait for a future flight.

At first we just held the tablets in front of us. This quickly grew old, so we proceeded to Plan B -- put Velcro dots on the ends of the knobs, and stick the tablets to them.

This worked great on the VORs, which we seldom use. The knobs just happen to angle the tablet toward the pilot a smidge, which is perfect.

The other knobs proved to be simply too scattered, too small, and too variable in length to work safely, so doing the whole 6-pack instrumentation thing will have to wait till I craft the fiberboard backing plate.

Nonetheless, as the pictures show, below, the panel-mounted G1000-like clone worked extremely well.

Here's the whole panel:

Here's a closer view:

As you can see, the Nexus 7 perfectly covers my dual VORs without hiding anything else on the panel. The other Nexus 7 is yoke mounted and running Garmin Pilot software.

Here's an even closer view, just holding it near our hopelessly outclassed old 496:

Here's what the Samsung Galaxy SIII looked like, running the freebie app:

The smaller display makes it easier to Velcro mount, but less usable in flight.

In flight these faux instruments worked extremely well. Groundspeed, heading, and altitude were right on, although of course GPS altitude showed its usual error. This was less than 200', today.

The $4.99 app recommends stabilization on the ground before use, and I now know why. It worked nearly perfectly in flight, until we restarted the app in-flight. Then, although it worked, the artificial horizon became hinky, displaying all sorts of lag and errors.

Still for FIVE BUCKS, this experience has been nothing short of abso-freaking-amazing. In 2006-fish, I spent $3000 on the Garmin 496. Now, just six years later, for $199 (plus $5 for the app) I get a freaking glass panel emulator?

That, my friends, is incredible. The future of these things is unlimited.

Now, to find an old clipboard to cut up...
Sent from my Nexus 7

 

[Everskyward]

Here's a question. Do you like what is displayed on your tablet better than what is displayed on the conventional instruments? Do you prefer the airspeed and altitude tapes to round dials? Do you like the heading displayed like that?

 

[Henning]

Here's a question. Do you like what is displayed on your tablet better than what is displayed on the conventional instruments? Do you prefer the airspeed and altitude tapes to round dials? Do you like the heading displayed like that?

I prefer SVT and am setting up the full panel for it including primary.

 

[Jay Honeck]

Here's a question. Do you like what is displayed on your tablet better than what is displayed on the conventional instruments? Do you prefer the airspeed and altitude tapes to round dials? Do you like the heading displayed like that?

I had no troubled quickly adapting to the big artificial horizon and compass heading display. The tapes for airspeed and altitude take getting used to, but generally speaking I have to say that yes, the 7" display is superior to the steam gauges.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3...

 

[Henning]

I had no troubled quickly adapting to the big artificial horizon and compass heading display. The tapes for airspeed and altitude take getting used to, but generally speaking I have to say that yes, the 7" display is superior to the steam gauges.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S3...

Hell yes, imagine if you had an SVT view on there.

 

[TMetzinger]

Jay, I expect heading, speed and altitude to be reasonable - they're all derived from GPS. What I'm not seeing is how the attitude indicator works. In fact in one of your pictures you appear to be climbing a bit on your "real" instruments while your "samsung" instruments show you straight and level.

That's the scenario that scares me. Because I've seen what happens when an instrument lies to you. It's very hard to believe that your PFD is the one in error even when all the other instruments and standbys agree.

I've watched people trust and navigate with their iPad when the position on the iPad disagreed with the two(!) certified GPS's in the panel. They were over 1/2 mile right of their course when the iPad "corrected itself".

It's a psychology problem - and one of the reasons that position information is not permitted to be displayed on the portable EFBs that are allowed in 121 and 135 cockpits. I recommend AGAINST getting the geo-ref'ed approach charts on Foreflight/WingX/Pilot for the simple reason that when there's a disconnect between the raw data in your panel and the EFB, you're going to want to believe the EFB, even when the raw data is a G1000 Map!

I do make an exception for the SafeTaxi diagrams - that's helpful, and the speeds are low and you are on the ground, so the consequences of a position error are somewhat less.

 

[Everskyward]

I had no troubled quickly adapting to the big artificial horizon and compass heading display. The tapes for airspeed and altitude take getting used to, but generally speaking I have to say that yes, the 7" display is superior to the steam gauges.

To me, round dials for the altitude and airspeed have always seemed easier to interpret at a glance because you really only need to see the position of the needle instead of reading a number. Of course I've gotten used to the tapes but it did not seem natural at first and it would be easy to go back. I also don't see why anyone would need anything other than a standard attitude indicator, especially for flying VFR when you should be looking primarily outside.

 

[Velocity173]

The so called Aspen copy doesn't seem to be replicating your instruments. Your att shows a slight nose up with a VSI climb but the display shows level? Also it shows a 020 heading with your DG showing a 050 heading. Is that a track with a severe crosswind?

Jay I understand these things are cool. You compare the prices with IFR equipment and say these have unlimited potential but then you say well they aren't for flying on instruments. Which is it? If they aren't for instrument flight then what kind of potential? The FAA surely will never certify these for IFR flight so basically it comes down to a neat gadget. Your aircraft already has an AI and DG (as most VFR aircraft) so basically the Nexus comes down to the very rare chance you're in the clouds and your vacuum pump fails. Unless you fly a lot of IFR and want an emergency back-up, I don't see any use in them.

 

[douglas393]

I thonk they are neat add ons, but for my money I would depend more on my G1000, and baring that the extra money for the 796 or a 696 I think they provide me much more in a more rigid package than my IPAD. I certainly would not use them for IFR, and I see no need for them in VFR. I look in the cockpit during VFR every so often to make sure I am at altitude, check my engine health, and make sure I have not drifted off course. Your device will only help me with one of those, and personally I find my 10" screen easier to read.

I know enough about computers to know they will fail you when you need them the most, and I like using things for what they were designed for. My life and the life of my passengers are not worth the savings of a thousand dollars or two thousand dollars. So I would rather use my 796 for back up.

Things that are mounted on fiberboard and velcro have a tendency to fall off and I am a firm believer in Murphy's law.

I see your point, but it just not work for me yet...maybe in the future, who knows. I may be opinionated but I am also willing to change.

Doug

 

[Jay Honeck]

Guys, guys, GUYS! These things are in their absolute infancy. The Nexus 7 didn't even exist four months ago!

Okay, you young 'uns -- go sit down and let us old-timers talk amongst ourselves. Think back -- waaay back -- to when we only had paper sectionals, VORs and maybe LORAN.

Remember that first GPS flight?

There was no moving map. Hell, there was no map at all! Only lat/long coordinates, and a heading to fly. There was no on-board database of airports -- we had to find the lat/long in the (absolutely ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENT) AOPA directory -- the dog-eared paper version -- and we entered all the numbers into the unit.

Get one digit wrong, and you were flying to Cleveland instead of Sugarland. And this was awesome progress! You thought you were flying a freaking starship because you were using satellites to navigate!

Within just a few years, we were casually bitching about how hard it was to find the field elevation in the 496. Things changed INCREDIBLY quickly -- so you guys can just clam about how "limited" the capabilities of these tablets are today. In three years, you'll have them velcroed over your windshield, cuz their "reality" is better than "real reality"...

Sent from my Nexus 7

 

[docmirror]

Now - here's a critical question regarding use of these fancy systems. Think long and hard before answering.


Did - the - display - cause - you - to fly - into - the - ground - and - die?

 

[poadeleted21]

Guys, guys, GUYS! These things are in their absolute infancy. The Nexus 7 didn't even exist four months ago!

Okay, you young 'uns -- go sit down and let us old-timers talk amongst ourselves. Think back -- waaay back -- to when we only had paper sectionals, VORs and maybe LORAN.

Remember that first GPS flight?

There was no moving map. Hell, there was no map at all! Only lat/long coordinates, and a heading to fly. There was no on-board database of airports -- we had to find the lat/long in the (absolutely ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENT) AOPA directory -- the dog-eared paper version -- and we entered all the numbers into the unit.

Get one digit wrong, and you were flying to Cleveland instead of Sugarland. And this was awesome progress! You thought you were flying a freaking starship because you were using satellites to navigate!

Within just a few years, we were casually bitching about how hard it was to find the field elevation in the 496. Things changed INCREDIBLY quickly -- so you guys can just clam about how "limited" the capabilities of these tablets are today. In three years, you'll have them velcroed over your windshield, cuz their "reality" is better than "real reality"...

Sent from my Nexus 7

I fail to see how the market will turn towards needing pitot static inputs and gyroscopes to play angry birds. You need specialized hardware, and specialized hardware isn't for general consumer grade electronics. There's already 3rd party apparatuses that contain the specialized hardware, they're not cheap.

 

[ChrisK]

I fail to see how the market will turn towards needing pitot static inputs and gyroscopes to play angry birds. You need specialized hardware, and specialized hardware isn't for general consumer grade electronics. There's already 3rd party apparatuses that contain the specialized hardware, they're not cheap.

All you need is a common cockpit data format and a simple hardware converter hooked to a device optimized to kill green pigs.

 

[Everskyward]

If you think your avionics display is cooler than looking out the window then maybe you should stick to FlightSim. It's a lot cheaper!

 

[denverpilot]

If you think your avionics display is cooler than looking out the window then maybe you should stick to FlightSim. It's a lot cheaper!

 

[poadeleted21]

All you need is a common cockpit data format and a simple hardware converter hooked to a device optimized to kill green pigs.

Yeah, that's not going to be cheap. 18 wheelers have had this very thing for decades. I forget the protocol but it's just a simple serial port broadcasting information about the systems and you sample it whenever you want. A couple of years ago, I was whining about the lack of a standard for avionics when I had to order 3 cents worth of connectors for a KY197 that wound up costing me 1 week down time and about 100 bucks. Annunciators come to mind as something else that makes me scratch my head and wonder "Why does one need one built for EXACTLY the GPS they have?"

 

[Jay Honeck]

If you think your avionics display is cooler than looking out the window then maybe you should stick to FlightSim. It's a lot cheaper!

Sometimes it seems like that's the direction we're all heading, no? Heck, the military is already there...

Sent from my Nexus 7

 

[poadeleted21]

If you think your avionics display is cooler than looking out the window then maybe you should stick to FlightSim. It's a lot cheaper!

meh, my motivation for flying is to go somewhere. My attention span doesn't get me through the start up of a sim.

 

[Jay Honeck]

Now - here's a critical question regarding use of these fancy systems. Think long and hard before answering.


Did - the - display - cause - you - to fly - into - the - ground - and - die?

Yes. I was fixated by all the pretty moving colors. I nearly crashed on multiple occasions. Were it not for Mary, and the grace of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, I would be an ink blot on Matagorda Island.

Seriously, it was a lot of fun playing "let's upgrade the panel for five bucks".

Sent from my Nexus 7

 

[ChrisK]

Yeah, that's not going to be cheap. 18 wheelers have had this very thing for decades. I forget the protocol but it's just a simple serial port broadcasting information about the systems and you sample it whenever

Was it canbus?

 

[LDJones]

How long before we have relatively cheap airdata products that take pitot/static info, digitize it and provide it in a standard format to whatever cockpit devices want to make use of it?

I don't think Jay has advocated going out and flying hard IFR with a bunch of OTC tablets and smartphones velcro'd to your panel. What I think he IS saying is, look how far low-cost technology has taken us today....just think what it could be in five years!

And if everything in the cockpit goes TU on you, it might be handy to know there are some things that just MIGHT provide some form of backup.

 

[ClimbnSink]

Wow. Stone age apologists running rampant. Couple of things; for the velcro challenged find super velcro looks like plastic mushrooms same stuff that holds on easypass transponders. Phones are getting barometric sensors, paragliding pilots are eagerly.waiting so the phones can function as varios as well as flight computers. Bluetooth baro data solutions are also neing worked on.
Think of the vfr experimental options, plumb in regular airspeed and altimeter(if you want) add a.tablet and everything the big boys do for chump change.

 

[MAKG1]

You're proposing an ATTITUDE INDICATOR. It indicates the attitude of the phone, not the aircraft. Even if it were close to sensible accuracy (it isn't), Velcro simply is not a rigid, known datum for an attitude measurement. Full stop, end of story.

In moderate turbulence, the first thing to do is stabilize your attitude. Holding altitude is a mistake. Under that circumstance, this Velcro "mount" is going to flop in the breeze, and will read wildly different attitude from the aircraft.

And of course this all assumes you've thought this through far enough not to mount this thing to the yoke.

The "experiment" above is completely invalid. It tests only the nominal cases, purely qualitatively. Under perfect conditions, you don't need any of this instrumentation at all, and having all the loose items is a distraction (no Velcro, is not a secure mount). This is a BAD IDEA.

No amount of "technological advance" is going to keep people from doing stupid things.

 

[3393RP]

It won't be pitot/static info...the cost of an AHRS with integrated GPS is cheap and getting cheaper.

www.microstrain.com

 

[poadeleted21]

You're proposing an ATTITUDE INDICATOR. It indicates the attitude of the phone, not the aircraft. Even if it were close to sensible accuracy (it isn't), Velcro simply is not a rigid, known datum for an attitude measurement. Full stop, end of story.

In moderate turbulence, the first thing to do is stabilize your attitude. Holding altitude is a mistake. Under that circumstance, this Velcro "mount" is going to flop in the breeze, and will read wildly different attitude from the aircraft.

And of course this all assumes you've thought this through far enough not to mount this thing to the yoke.

The "experiment" above is completely invalid. It tests only the nominal cases, purely qualitatively. Under perfect conditions, you don't need any of this instrumentation at all, and having all the loose items is a distraction (no Velcro, is not a secure mount). This is a BAD IDEA.

You mount an external box to the airframe and relay the data via bluetooth. Already being done. http://www.aviation.levil.com/AHRS_mini.htm it's "airplane money" cheap but not 5 bucks.