bigrenna wrote:Yesterday I started the discussion with Trevor at Avion about the panel design for the C180. The goal for this project will be to have the most simple, light, and elegant panel possible while still having a modern sophisticated aircraft.

The question came up about just what we could omit in the new panel by using an engine analyzers/systems monitor. Neither Trevor and I were sure, (yes I know JPI does the same thing, but I am an E.I. fan so) I spent some time on the phone today with the Tech over at E.I.

Of course there is the age old fear (and I dont think we need to debate the obvious) of a catastrophic failure of a single piece of equipment. I think for me, the allure of the simplicity, precision, and weight savings overshadows the fear of a catastrophic failure.

One could wax poetic on the prestige of analogue or the desire for redundancy, but that's prob a discussion for another thread.

Regardless, here is what I found...

By installing the MVP-50 I can loose pretty much everything:

RPM
Ammeter
Voltmeter
Oil Temp
Oil Pressure
Manif Pressure
OAT
Clock
Gryo Vac
Fuel Level

I can also have a whole host of other info... AND it only weights 1.9lbs. There is also $300 rebate now till Dec 31st. Hmmmmm.......

Here is my thoughts on it, being an Avionics Tech in the navy, when it comes to black boxes, yes they fail, screens go bad, internals go bad, often times though when they go bad, they only part way stop working.

When we are talking a prop driven piston bird, it is not going to fall out of the sky if the thing quits completely on you. Since this is your aircraft and you are the one who is going to be flying it, you "know" your aircraft, and not having a MP or RPM isn't going to keep you from getting it back on the ground safely or cause you to mess up your engine if you are careful and thoughtful about what you are doing if the thing goes out.

I say run it and enjoy it, and have a failure plan figured out in the back of your head just in case.

Hope I didn't make a mistake, I have the jpi 830 but not installed yet. What do you have against JPI? Or better yet why are you an EI fan?

Bkn

I have never researched many E.I. products, but I will have to check this one out. I'm wondering why you can eliminate the gyro vac system?

David

I am a big fan of JP Instruments stuff, but to each his own. Frankly, I think they both work well and are similar enough that either would be just fine. Here's a link to the JPI machine that's comparable, and approved for primary: http://www.jpinstruments.com/shop/edm-900-2/

I have had JPI 700 series instruments in several airplanes, including the one I own now, and a couple of those instruments had over a couple thousand trouble free hours on those gauges. I have had one failure of a JPI instrument, and they turned it around, repaired it, updated the software and replaced the screen, in other words a new unit, for $200 bucks and change. Can't beat that.

I flew a couple Huskys with the Vision Microsystems VM 1000 system, whcih is similar to these all in one units. They worked fine, even in very cold temps. Only thing I didn't like about the VM 1000 was it wasn't very viewable, with LCD displays. JPI bought Vision out and the 900 is based on the VM, I believe.

You won't go wrong with one of these all in one displays.

Avion makes a quality instrument panel. Are you also getting the later model Y type control column from them so you can build a center stack for radios? Do they have an STC for that mod these days, or are they doing it per the TC?

You'll love these engine instruments.

MTV

Excellent!  I fully support the move to glass.  The MVP-50 is a major install and will take a significant amount of labor (money) to put it in.

I recently did a panel upgrade and focused more on the primary flight instruments.  I figured I would just put the EI round digital gauges in and wait until another time in the future to install a MVP-50.  Mistake.  In retrospect, I should have done it all at the same time.  I guess I'm saying this because if you are ever considering a primary flight display overhaul like a G500 or Aspen, maybe think about doing it together with the MVP.

At any rate, looking forward to hearing the Pirep about the MVP if you decide to install it.

Avion does good work but I think your going to pay for it. If I remember correctly it was not cheap so I did it myself. Ended up changing so that I could have the center stack and kept it as light as possible. My old ADF alone was the weight of a bowling ball. Keep it simple.





I have always thought that glass is cool but I sure like my steam gauges in the 53. If I were flying a new 206 or Caravan I would have the glass of course but "for me" it just doesn't look correct in the backcountry aircraft. I sure do like the Aspen instruments. There is also a little part of me (maybe big part) that just does not trust having all my instruments in one spot. I know its the future and all but heck, what do I know...

AKT

Hay Kevin, your v-brace is the tube style like the late model 180/185. In the early models the insterment panel is not strucural, thus I installed the wire style brace that attaches to the top
engine mount bolts. Is your 53 different or did you change somthing in the panel? What is it bolted to on the panel?
46tcrft

A1Skinner wrote:I'm wondering why you can eliminate the gyro vac system?

David

Dave,

It doesn't eliminate the vac system, but eliminates the suction gauge.

The idea is I can eliminate a bunch of the individual gauges required in the Type Data Sheet with one single 1.9lb instrument. It will also free up TONS of crap behind the panel as it has one wire bundle bundle that goes thru the firewall. The OEM fuel gauges (that suck) will be pretty damn acurate now (with new McFarlane sending uints) The oil temp and pressure will show useful, quantifiable data rather than "sorta close." I cant even guess at the weight savings, but I bet it will be substantial.

There will also be all the lean/rich of peak data along with proper fuel flow and usage data. Pretty damn cool I think.

RE: why I like E.I.? I guess no real reason. I met both the E.I. people and JPI folks at Osh this and last year. I was impressed with E.I. It's probably a Ford/Chevy thing, but aesthetics are important to me and I find the interface, form factor, and design much sexier with the E.I. line.

They also have a decent rebate now, but again, meeting their prez and engineers locked it in for me. The 35 min conversation that the tech was glad to have with me and my ignorant questions further sealed it for me.

RE: the center stack... My C180 is an H model, so I already have the center stack. Trevor also says we dont need to modify the control yokes at all, so the job should be pretty easy.

RE: All glass... Im keeping the standard 6 pack. The only "glass" I will install will be the MVP-50. This will be for the weight savings and simplicity. I'm with you Kevin. An airplane just doesnt look right with the glass display in front of the pilot.

I guess I could just look it up myself (but I'm too lazy). Does this thing record data to download and review later?? Like many I'm resistant to glass but really for no good reason. This display is more readable than some I've seen. One thing I really can't stand is touch screens for data entry while flying. It's way too hard to hit the right spot when the airplane is jumping around in turbulence. Gimme knobs.

EB

Emory Bored wrote: One thing I really can't stand is touch screens for data entry while flying. It's way too hard to hit the right spot when the airplane is jumping around in turbulence. Gimme knobs.

EB

I'm with you on that, EB. Especially because I have sausage fingers.

It's interesting to hear the excitement for the cool features of an engine analyzer but resistance to the absolutely mind-blowing technology available to the pilot for the flight control of the airplane. The G500 is by far the coolest part of my plane. Granted, it is really amazing/invaluable for IFR flight, but I must say that even for VFR flight it is incredible. Cannot even begin to compare the G500 to a six pack of instruments............but the price is a reality check . I wouldn't be surprised if you are in 15 grand after the MVP is installed and the new panel is cut.

As far as the touch screen units are concerned, my Garmin GTN GPS/Nav/Com has knobs for data selection if you prefer not to touch it.

The features of the MVP can be had with multiple individual digital instruments, but the G500 or Aspen info cannot be had any other way......just saying

Anyway, the plane is looking great. Looking forward to hearing about all the future mods. Hopefully I will be inspired to take on another project of my own. Fun thread.

Go For It; you'll never look back! I went all digital with my panel and love it. Light weight, reliable, capable, and stuff talks to other stuff so a lot more information is available to the pilot. Plus it just looks better. Not that I mind round analog gauges, they look good too, but since you have a choice make the best of it.

Bkn4thr wrote:Hope I didn't make a mistake, I have the jpi 830 but not installed yet. What do you have against JPI? Or better yet why are you an EI fan?

Bkn

I have an 830 as well, and while I really Like it, there is one giant piece that favors the MVP. The MVP is certified as a primary instrument. The 830 is not, so if a gauge / indicator is required equipment on your airplane, the 830 is not a legal replacement. It was possible in the past to do with a f/a, but not likely today. So... The 830 makes a great addition, but you won't be losing any weight with that addition

The 830 makes a great addition, but you won't be losing any weight with that addition

I not really trying to lose wieght! The best place to lose weight is stn 36... The pilots seat...50 lbs could be shed with no cost at all.

Bkn

Rob wrote:

Bkn4thr wrote:Hope I didn't make a mistake, I have the jpi 830 but not installed yet. What do you have against JPI? Or better yet why are you an EI fan?

Bkn

I have an 830 as well, and while I really Like it, there is one giant piece that favors the MVP. The MVP is certified as a primary instrument. The 830 is not, so if a gauge / indicator is required equipment on your airplane, the 830 is not a legal replacement. It was possible in the past to do with a f/a, but not likely today. So... The 830 makes a great addition, but you won't be losing any weight with that addition

Rob,

You're right about the 830 as primary, but JPI does offer a unit that IS approved for primary information....see the link in my earlier post. This is something one needs to be careful about, no doubt.

MTV

Put the order in for the rest of the plexi today. The 4" bubbles are already installed, and ordered the sklyights the other day, which leaves the windshield, centers, and rears. For sides, I ordered all that in the darkest tint as well as the extra thick version. I'll be pimpin... The single piece windshield is in the new Cessna light grey tint.

With the V Brace that will be going in, I figured the center strip has to go. The replacement is covered under the Great Lake Aero STC SA471G which is included in the price of the windscreen. No weight or moment change. The existing windscreen BTW is a Cessna OEM part and is fairly new in great shape. If anyone is interested, it will be for sale.

Windscreen is P/N 2073W/G, Bubbles are P/N 2902-4W/G, Centers are 1012W/XT , Rears are P/N 1011W/XT, and Skylights are 1033W/XT. As mentioned before, for my 66H model, the skylights require an STC which is sold by Cubcrafters for $150. STC SA4379NM.

http://www.glapinc.com/Cessna/180/c-180d.htm

Good choice on the windows. You will like the single piece windscreen with the V-brace.

Great Lakes Aero is such a good company to work with. I've used them for 3 or 4 planes in the last few years and they are always great to deal with. I worked with John exclusively on some custom vented side windows on a Maule project... I sent the old ones in and he cut the holes and provided the approvals on the new ones... only later did I figure out he was the owner of the company.

Is the v-brace required with the one-piece windshield installation?

No, the v-brace is a separate STC.

What is the STC for the V brace? How hard is it to install?