Tl 3000 & Garmin G3X = Fully Automated Landing Approach

[IFlyRC]

Interesting video of a landing totally by the new G3X. (http://youtu.be/hhEuAXRuL-Y) The music is a little disconcerting, but it's fascinating to see the advancements with the avionics.

[Merlinspop]

Those control yokes take up a lot of space in a cramped cockpit. Certainly makes you understand why almost all similar aircraft have sticks.

I'm not sure I would want to have the autopilot fly all the way down to the flair like that. Seems like that leaves the pilot with a lot to do in a short time and no margins. I do see the value in having an emergency tool that can get a pilot who was having a very bad situational awareness day get down through a cloud layer to short final (having hopefully broken out with time for the pilot to 'regroup').

[IFlyRC]

I concur. A software bug or weather variables that fall out of the scope of the software would be worrisome to say the least. I read about other Garmin examples for automated landing on certified aircraft, but I'm not sure if it was ever implemented. The whole thing is reminiscent of the avionics in the airliners. Albeit on a much smaller scale.

[Jack Tyler]

The TL3000 comes with either yoke or stick, so SportUSA claims.


My AP/IA built and flies a RV-8 with a TruTrak system that performs like a CAT III rated a/c. Very impressive. And yes, this kind of capability looks like another one of these doodad features that buyers put on their LSA a/c when, in reality, their flying is unlikely to truly need it. However, for the RV-8 I mentioned, it's appropriate equipment because Lloyd flies it single pilot IFR on a somewhat tight schedule. A coupled approach - at least down to the published minimums - would help him monitor all aspects of the approach better, not distract him. And help on the missed, as well.

But I believe it was the TL3000 that I saw at Sun 'n Fun which was only capable of carrying one person with full fuel, which takes right to the other active thread about the practicality of heavily equipped LSA a/c. And they claim 108 kts at 75% power, even when stripped to its minimum weight, so not exactly the cross-country capable a/c that it's equipped to be.

[MrMorden]

LOL...let's buy a very expensive airplane so that we can...*not* fly it.

I like my autopilot, but I don't use it that much and I surely don't want the airplane to completely fly itself all the time. That is not the joy of flight, that is the boredom of automation.

[Merlinspop]

LOL...let's buy a very expensive airplane so that we can...*not* fly it.

I like my autopilot, but I don't use it that much and I surely don't want the airplane to completely fly itself all the time. That is not the joy of flight, that is the boredom of automation.

Autopilots are very useful when one needs to refill a Gatorade bottle, wrestle with an antique sectional, or to impress passengers that you have an autopilot.

[MrMorden]

LOL...let's buy a very expensive airplane so that we can...*not* fly it.

I like my autopilot, but I don't use it that much and I surely don't want the airplane to completely fly itself all the time. That is not the joy of flight, that is the boredom of automation.

Autopilots are very useful when one needs to refill a Gatorade bottle, wrestle with an antique sectional, or to impress passengers that you have an autopilot.

Agreed! They also fly better in turbulence than I do.

[CTLSi]

......

[MovingOn]

.......

[Merlinspop]

... but there is no such thing as a fully automatic landing mode. There are such systems being early tested at big airports like Heathrow for the large commercial jets...

If by "early tested" you mean "Certified and in use every day by airliners all over the globe"... then yes. And some bizjets.

Always a joy to watch resistance to new tech.

Or lack of knowledge of established tech.

[MrMorden]

Always a joy to watch resistance to new tech.

No resistance, simply not seeing the point in an LSA. Auto approach and auto land systems are useful in IFR aircraft who might have to make zero visibility approaches to very low altitudes. For a day VFR LSA, the utility is questionable. It might have some utility in an emergency, but just setting up the system to do that kind of approach would take practice.

Many of us fly small airplanes for the physical and technical challenge it provides, and enjoying the sensation of flight. The systems management task of pushing buttons and then watching the airplane land itself does not appeal to me; I'm not resistant, I just don't want it.

The medical technology exists to make me a woman, but I don't want that either.

[CTLSi]

......

[MrMorden]

I have an autopilot. I use it to fly cruise on long flights. The ability to lighten that tedious load more than pays for the weight and cost of the equipment.

We can also fly with no instruments at all saving weight, cost and distraction referring to them. But why?

An autopilot in cruise is not the same as a system that lands the airplane. Approach and landing is a critical phase of flight and the one requiring the most skill. Having to land the airplane builds and reinforcing that critical skill set. How will one land an airplane with a failed engine if the airplane has made the previous 200 landings itself? Not well I'd wager.

Why fly with no instruments? Because it's fun! One of the most fun flights I ever took was in a friend's Kolb Firestar II. There was no windscreen and I had to wear goggles, and the only instrument was a small airspeed indicator. 200 feet and 40 mph, super fun stuff.

[IFlyRC]

Would the G3X enable a passenger to land the aircraft if a pilot is incapacitated?

[CTLSi]

......