I’ll probably die alone on this hill but a few weeks ago I was flying West into the sunset behind a Rosen, with sunglasses on, and still shielding my face with my hand. I am wondering why is this Rosen sunvisor translucent? It is not clear in a car and it is not like you could spot an airplane through it. My Rosens were both cracked, scratched, the screws have fallen out a few times. I am not heavy handed with equipment. They are a pain to work around the V-brace. They look tidy and professional new but it might be a case where one assumes just because it is expensive, it must be good. After that, I found a set of original Cessna sun visors and haven’t looked back, or forward into the sun any more. The Cessna visors look great just a little short. I grew up baking in the back of a cherokee and bonanza with doubled up slap on shades from Sportys. Is there a competing product that is a little longer and actually blocks the sun?

For what it’s worth the Rosen’s that where installed in my bird before I become it’s caretaker remain “up & stowed”. They are a great place to hang a sectional chart over when there is a need to create a sun shield.

Depends

Best visors are rosens with a rubber band on them, toss on a checklist when it’s too bright

If you’re southern use jet shades and rosens

My own plane I just have cessan, but it’s a plane I fly for fun, if I worked her it would have rosens, but she’s up at most 100hrs a year, not 100+ per month

I bought a "slap on" tinted plastic shade online somewhere, works great.
It sticks onto the windscreen via nervous tension, you just put it wherever you want it.

Don't remember if this is the same brand I got, but they're similar at least.

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/ ... ardbig.php

Way overpriced, too narrow and the mounting bracket is a very poor design. There was a thread on here a few years ago where someone modified the bracket to eliminate that horizontal flange.

I use the ARFC sunvisors. I purchased them from the guy who originally was making them and I understand he passed away a number of years ago, but he had sold the product to Planeplastics or someone.

https://www.wagaero.com/model-specific- ... -arfc.html

Why I like Rosen visors; two experiences.

Whenever I fly, as passenger or pilot, my eyes are outside. I love looking at the sky, the clouds, the earth below, the mountains above. So I was a little disappointed that I didn't get to enjoy blue skies and unlimited visibility until the last of my five legs west to Montana. However, when I turned final for runway 26 in Winifred in the late afternoon I realized, that clear of clouds is not always the preferred scenario: I was looking straight into the sun.

Decades ago, I found myself under similar conditions in a much more demanding situation. The sun was lower, the runway had a downslope and I was trying to flare a PA-28 while fiddling with its small sunshades. No matter how I adjusted them they either blocked the blinding light of the sun and my view of the runway or they let me see everything, and that was a windshield full of brightness. Somehow I managed to land and stop. I breathed a big sigh of relief and vowed to include runway heading and position of the sun at ETA in my pre-flight briefing from then on.

At Winifred I didn’t have to resort to the briefed alternatives, because my bird has Rosen visors installed. They are bigger, they stay in position no matter how I adjust them, and most importantly they are translucent. They don’t block the view of the runway or its surroundings. They are just like helmet visors. Of course I wear sunglasses but together with the Rosen’s I can control the glare from direct sunlight so that I can see all I need for a safe landing, or any other maneuver. As expected, I landed without any visibility issues.

I really like those Rosen visors.

C180_guy wrote:Way overpriced, too narrow and the mounting bracket is a very poor design. There was a thread on here a few years ago where someone modified the bracket to eliminate that horizontal flange.

I use the ARFC sunvisors. I purchased them from the guy who originally was making them and I understand he passed away a number of years ago, but he had sold the product to Planeplastics or someone.

https://www.wagaero.com/model-specific- ... -arfc.html

Was not familiar with these but look good and seems like they slot into the Cessna brackets. Backordered...

People seem to really like the Rosens, and I just don't understand why. Every plane that I've flown with them has convinced me that I'll never buy them. The seem flimsy and get in the way, and the value for the price just does not seem to be there. My plan is to do some sort of leather cover over my originals, or fabricate something that can be easily replaced with the janky original come annual time. It absolutely stuns me that I have to have an STC to replace sun visors in a Cessna. Oh well.

soyAnarchisto wrote:People seem to really like the Rosens, and I just don't understand why. Every plane that I've flown with them has convinced me that I'll never buy them. The seem flimsy and get in the way, and the value for the price just does not seem to be there. My plan is to do some sort of leather cover over my originals, or fabricate something that can be easily replaced with the janky original come annual time. It absolutely stuns me that I have to have an STC to replace sun visors in a Cessna. Oh well.

I agree! No, you do not need an STC to replace your sunvisors. It is a minor alteration. Rosen determined that providing an STC somehow made their life easier in terms of manufacturing paperwork or something.

I had Rosens in my 180 about 20 years ago. I liked them but agree it had limitations. Currently, my 185 has Rosens with the 3rd axis adapter and the new 3rd axis lenses. I really like this improved setup. I don’t look at Rosens as a substitute for sunglasses but for blocking the direct sun. For that, I don’t think there is a substitute. They’re stupid expensive and the STC is a perfect example of how ridiculous FAA oversight is.

Holding an STC for something that can be accomplished through a simpler process is just a money grab.

Mapleflt wrote:Holding an STC for something that can be accomplished through a simpler process is just a money grab.

They are also factory on lots of turbines, not sure if that’s a requirement to get folks like Pilatus to install on all their ships