MTBF of a KG-102 v. SG-102

[peter-h]

My KG-102 is fine at 1000hrs and while I have heard of them failing, I don't know of anybody personally whose KG-102 has packed up.

The SG-102 is very rare so it is hard to judge but it does not take long to find reports of failures on the internet. OK, that is unsuprising (people don't write about stuff that just works) but one chap wrote about two failures in a row. This is happening with Aspen products at present, with people I know personally.

The only reason to go for the SG-102, apart from a hypothetical reliability increase, is to get the Sandel 3500 reversionary feature where it becomes an AI.

Would a KG-102 life be affected by whether the aircraft is hangared or not? It seems to be a sealed unit.

 

[SCCutler]

...

Would a KG-102 life be affected by whether the aircraft is hangared or not? It seems to be a sealed unit.

Peter, I would expect that hangaring the aircraft would help in any event, sealed or not, simply because of (1) the less-severe range of temperature variations (perhaps less an issue for you in Old Blighty than here in Texas, but still...), and (2) less exposure of elements external to the sealed unit (principally connectors, I'd think) to corrosion and moisture.

But, since I seem to recall that you are an electrical engineer of some sort, I suspect I am telling you nothing you have not already thought of.

 

[peter-h]

I have just heard that the SG-102 cannot restart in flight. If you turn off the power, you have NO GYRO until you land.

This was definitely the case with some previous AHRS products (don't recall which - Avidyne?) and seems a "bit of a problem"