Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
ClearVav vs. LXNav
5,598 views
Skip to first unread message
Gerry Simpson
Jan 30, 2018, 10:11:39 AM1/30/18
to
New glider on the way. Would like objective opinions from pilots who have flown with both ClearNav and LXNav and spent enough time to make an honest, educated evaluation. Let me preface this with the information that I have flown with ClearNav since being an early adopter. Both appear to have advantages. Are there enough with LXVav (9000, 9070, 9050) to warrant going through the learning curve for a new system?
garyae...@gmail.com
Jan 31, 2018, 3:19:38 PM1/31/18
to
The bigger elephant in the room is the somewhat recent sale of the CN business. Will the CN products continue to see steady development? The additional baggage is that Cambridge folded some years ago and there is some shared lineage.
I know of several people who are opting for LX as they see a CN install being more risky when it comes to a future resell of the glider or if CN eventually closes up shop.
CN can undo this perception, but it’s going to take a regular effort to show a steady stream of updates and being receptive to ideas submitted by the users for future product enhancements that are rapidly pushed out in said updates.
I know of several people who are opting for LX as they see a CN install being more risky when it comes to a future resell of the glider or if CN eventually closes up shop.
CN can undo this perception, but it’s going to take a regular effort to show a steady stream of updates and being receptive to ideas submitted by the users for future product enhancements that are rapidly pushed out in said updates.
Roy B.
Jan 31, 2018, 3:35:27 PM1/31/18
to
Hi Gerry:
I am currently using a ClearNav computer (but not the CN vario) in my US glider and an LX9000 in my South African glider, and have lots of hours and kilometers with both. So I can comment on them and the differences. A lot depends on your personal inclinations and desire/willingness to adjust, tinker and customize.
The LX units (the 8000, 9000 and 9070 are all using the same software system) are infinitely adjustable and customizable - almost to a maddening degree. You can adjust almost everything from volume of the voice warnings, type of vario audio lift & sink tones, width of lines on map, color saturation, etc. etc. etc. You can write your own checklists that will appear on the screen when you want. You can also do all of that on your own computer using the LX Styler program and then program the unit(or any other LX 8000 series unit) with the SD card. You can download your flights (or upload to OLC) by wireless transmission to a wireless internet connection or to your personal phone hotspot. The LX AHRS option (it's in the machine but you pay for the code to use it) is really cool but I doubt your could use it in the US ( we can do a little cloud flying in South Africa).
The ClearNav is a much simpler machine and more "set it and forget it" kind of device. It's much less adjustable/customizable - but to some that's a good thing. The ClearNav Area Task program (which scribes a blue arc line on where to turn to get back at minimum time)is pretty useful in competition. The first time I used it I won the day. The CN uses a ribbon menu that pops up when needed and disappears when you don't want it.
The 2 machines use a different presentation approach. The LX9000 uses 3 different screens to show task, airports, and waypoints. Each of those screens can be customized as to what you want shown or not shown - and each pagecan have subsidiary pages if you want. The CN puts everything on one screen in a simpler presentation - so your task, waypoints, and airports are all right there on one screen. CN uses a "glide amoeba" to circle the airports that you can reach. LX lights up the ones you can reach with a green highlight. The CN screen can get a little crowded sometimes - but changing pages in the LX can be a pain sometimes, too. Both machines give you a current OLC optimzation score - LX does it in realtime while CN takes a few seconds to figure it out.
Task loading is easier/quicker with the LX - especially if your waypoint file is large. It sorts the file any number of different ways. CN customer support is super - if Gary can't fix it & return it overnight they give you a loaner unit. I have a non scientific sense that the LX is more of a power hog than the CN. You have to tell the LX whether you are using SLA or LiPe batteries. I don't think the CN cares.
Bottom line:if you like to adjust, customize and tinker with a computer and don't mind changing pages in flight you will like the LX units. If you want something more simple that is mostly set up for you already, and puts it all on one screen - you will like the ClearNav. For both units I recommend the stick grip controller.
Lastly - I suggest that you go to the convention in Reno, talk to the dealers and play with both units. I'd be happy to talk more with you there if you would like.
ROY
I am currently using a ClearNav computer (but not the CN vario) in my US glider and an LX9000 in my South African glider, and have lots of hours and kilometers with both. So I can comment on them and the differences. A lot depends on your personal inclinations and desire/willingness to adjust, tinker and customize.
The LX units (the 8000, 9000 and 9070 are all using the same software system) are infinitely adjustable and customizable - almost to a maddening degree. You can adjust almost everything from volume of the voice warnings, type of vario audio lift & sink tones, width of lines on map, color saturation, etc. etc. etc. You can write your own checklists that will appear on the screen when you want. You can also do all of that on your own computer using the LX Styler program and then program the unit(or any other LX 8000 series unit) with the SD card. You can download your flights (or upload to OLC) by wireless transmission to a wireless internet connection or to your personal phone hotspot. The LX AHRS option (it's in the machine but you pay for the code to use it) is really cool but I doubt your could use it in the US ( we can do a little cloud flying in South Africa).
The ClearNav is a much simpler machine and more "set it and forget it" kind of device. It's much less adjustable/customizable - but to some that's a good thing. The ClearNav Area Task program (which scribes a blue arc line on where to turn to get back at minimum time)is pretty useful in competition. The first time I used it I won the day. The CN uses a ribbon menu that pops up when needed and disappears when you don't want it.
The 2 machines use a different presentation approach. The LX9000 uses 3 different screens to show task, airports, and waypoints. Each of those screens can be customized as to what you want shown or not shown - and each pagecan have subsidiary pages if you want. The CN puts everything on one screen in a simpler presentation - so your task, waypoints, and airports are all right there on one screen. CN uses a "glide amoeba" to circle the airports that you can reach. LX lights up the ones you can reach with a green highlight. The CN screen can get a little crowded sometimes - but changing pages in the LX can be a pain sometimes, too. Both machines give you a current OLC optimzation score - LX does it in realtime while CN takes a few seconds to figure it out.
Task loading is easier/quicker with the LX - especially if your waypoint file is large. It sorts the file any number of different ways. CN customer support is super - if Gary can't fix it & return it overnight they give you a loaner unit. I have a non scientific sense that the LX is more of a power hog than the CN. You have to tell the LX whether you are using SLA or LiPe batteries. I don't think the CN cares.
Bottom line:if you like to adjust, customize and tinker with a computer and don't mind changing pages in flight you will like the LX units. If you want something more simple that is mostly set up for you already, and puts it all on one screen - you will like the ClearNav. For both units I recommend the stick grip controller.
Lastly - I suggest that you go to the convention in Reno, talk to the dealers and play with both units. I'd be happy to talk more with you there if you would like.
ROY
Dave Springford
Jan 31, 2018, 9:07:50 PM1/31/18
to
As an LX dealer - I'll comment on a couple of the LX features as I have limited experience with ClearNav. To me the difference is the same as Windows vs Mac, some people just like one better than the other although they both do the same thing.
"glide amoeba" - the LX computers also have this feature, but I find that it overly clutters the screen so I don't use it. Instead, much like SeeYou Mobile the LX system colourizes the labels for landable points within glide. Green label if you can get there with your current MacCready setting, yellow if you can get there at MC 0 and no colour if you can't get there. (all of this taking into account your pre-programmed reserve altitude)
AAT calculations - the LX has two features to help with AAT decisions. The first is a set of isospeed lines inside the AAT zone (lines of constant task speed) If you fly parallel to these lines you are not gaining extra speed, you need to fly perpendicular to them. This helps you decide which direction to fly inside the zone The second is an undertime/overtime colouring of the zone. There is a red section and a blue section inside the zone. If you turn while in the blue you will be undertime based on the currently estimated task speed. If you turn in the red area you will be overtime. If you turn at the dividing line between the two colours you will be "on time".
Thomas Van de Velde
Feb 1, 2018, 1:27:26 AM2/1/18
to
Get an S100 and hook it up to an Android tablet with XCSoar over Bluetooth. No need to spend several thousands of dollars on sub-optimal software.
joesimmers
Feb 1, 2018, 6:59:36 AM2/1/18
to
I am a big fan of the simplicity of the clearnav.
I work a lot so when I can finally take a day off to
go flying, I do not want to have to relearn a flight computer,
I believe the clearnav is the most simplistic instrument that
gives me all the info I need.
I work a lot so when I can finally take a day off to
go flying, I do not want to have to relearn a flight computer,
I believe the clearnav is the most simplistic instrument that
gives me all the info I need.
jpg...@gmail.com
Feb 1, 2018, 9:27:48 AM2/1/18
to
For me, with an LX 9000, effectively having 3 glide computers in the one instrument is a very major plus point that I had not appreciated before I got it. I have one navigating the task, the airfield one normally set for the home airfeld but I may switch to other another airfield from the LX Nav database if appropriate in flight, and the waypoint navigation page I sometimes use as a "what if" or use it to navigate towards a waypoint that steers me to avoid airspace.
As for complexity, I have long established preferences about what information I want to see on a page and how I want it displayed so after a few "fun" hours using LX Styler at home I have a profile which for me is completely simple to use yet flexible when needed.
As for complexity, I have long established preferences about what information I want to see on a page and how I want it displayed so after a few "fun" hours using LX Styler at home I have a profile which for me is completely simple to use yet flexible when needed.
Message has been deleted
John Cochrane
Feb 1, 2018, 3:26:36 PM2/1/18
to
I have flown with both. My (DB) glider came with LX nav and I took it out and after 2 seasons put in a clearnav II with vario.
The LX is a much more expensive computer. The hardware, screen resolution, etc. is fancier. It's very impressive. As others have commented, it's infinitely customizable. And you have to infinitely customize it.
Why did I rip it out and sell at considerable loss? I found myself always confused. Yes, if one spends a few nights rereading and practicing, one can get the hang of the thing each spring. But I'm lazy and I found myself constantly forgetting how to do basic stuff. The CN is instantly self explanatory.
I found two big problems with the LX. The guidance for finishing a turn area task is very complex. Running off the end of a mountain at Minden nationals, I needed to know in the next 30 seconds whether to make the next transition or turn for home. I spent 30 seconds totally heads down (:( ) on this task trying to guess when I'd get home. When the decision needed to be made I went. I ended up something like 15 minutes early, dooming my speed for the day. The clearnav ellipse and time to finish display just shows up automatically and does an amazingly good job.
I also hated the speed to fly vario. The sensitivity d noise / d lift is at least 5 times greater in speed mode than in vario mode, so it's always screaming up or down. You enter lift, it screams up, you turn... it switches to climb mode and you're only going 2 knots. I am pretty religious -- I want a speed to fly audio in cruise mode, which I use to listen to the air as I fly relatively constant speed. A netto leads to flying too slow, and a TE vario is always screaming down. After many emails to LX I couldn't get them to fix it (i.e. to see it my way). The STF audio is calibrated to horizontal knots, i.e. "you're flying 10 knots too slow" and thus has a different scale than the other audios. The STF audio should be vertical knots "the air is going up 2 knots faster than it should be for the speed you are currently flying." The CNV does that.
The CN thermal centerer is an unexpected bonus. It really works. I can usually do better mentally if I'm paying attention. But if I get distracted for a bit and lose the thermal, going the way it tells me to go works more often than not.
I prefer the amoeba to the colored airports. Among other things it quickly lets you know if you can make it over a pass, like in to truckee over lake tahoe. but this isn't that big a deal.
I buy instruments NOT to look at them or fuss with them. Turn the CN on, it shows what you want quickly, and look back outside with no fussing through screens
I call it 9000 numbers you don't need. If you want all those numbers, flight statistics, L/D to this and that, you want the 9000
Both excellent instruments however. Really just a question of matching the instrument with your philosophy.
John Cochrane
The LX is a much more expensive computer. The hardware, screen resolution, etc. is fancier. It's very impressive. As others have commented, it's infinitely customizable. And you have to infinitely customize it.
Why did I rip it out and sell at considerable loss? I found myself always confused. Yes, if one spends a few nights rereading and practicing, one can get the hang of the thing each spring. But I'm lazy and I found myself constantly forgetting how to do basic stuff. The CN is instantly self explanatory.
I found two big problems with the LX. The guidance for finishing a turn area task is very complex. Running off the end of a mountain at Minden nationals, I needed to know in the next 30 seconds whether to make the next transition or turn for home. I spent 30 seconds totally heads down (:( ) on this task trying to guess when I'd get home. When the decision needed to be made I went. I ended up something like 15 minutes early, dooming my speed for the day. The clearnav ellipse and time to finish display just shows up automatically and does an amazingly good job.
I also hated the speed to fly vario. The sensitivity d noise / d lift is at least 5 times greater in speed mode than in vario mode, so it's always screaming up or down. You enter lift, it screams up, you turn... it switches to climb mode and you're only going 2 knots. I am pretty religious -- I want a speed to fly audio in cruise mode, which I use to listen to the air as I fly relatively constant speed. A netto leads to flying too slow, and a TE vario is always screaming down. After many emails to LX I couldn't get them to fix it (i.e. to see it my way). The STF audio is calibrated to horizontal knots, i.e. "you're flying 10 knots too slow" and thus has a different scale than the other audios. The STF audio should be vertical knots "the air is going up 2 knots faster than it should be for the speed you are currently flying." The CNV does that.
The CN thermal centerer is an unexpected bonus. It really works. I can usually do better mentally if I'm paying attention. But if I get distracted for a bit and lose the thermal, going the way it tells me to go works more often than not.
I prefer the amoeba to the colored airports. Among other things it quickly lets you know if you can make it over a pass, like in to truckee over lake tahoe. but this isn't that big a deal.
I buy instruments NOT to look at them or fuss with them. Turn the CN on, it shows what you want quickly, and look back outside with no fussing through screens
I call it 9000 numbers you don't need. If you want all those numbers, flight statistics, L/D to this and that, you want the 9000
Both excellent instruments however. Really just a question of matching the instrument with your philosophy.
John Cochrane
Papa3
Feb 1, 2018, 4:41:16 PM2/1/18
to
On Thursday, February 1, 2018 at 3:26:36 PM UTC-5, John Cochrane wrote:
>
> Why did I rip it out and sell at considerable loss? I found myself always confused. Yes, if one spends a few nights rereading and practicing, one can get the hang of the thing each spring. But I'm lazy and I found myself constantly forgetting how to do basic stuff. The CN is instantly self explanatory.
>
To echo John's comments, the design goal for the Clearnav was "single screen, set and forget." The ONLY control I ever use on the Clearnav display once I'm out on course is zoom in/out. Stone axe simple. Also, I LOVE the way the glide amoeba(e) are presented. The inner ring tells me what I can reach with my defined AGL margin; the outer ring tells me what hard things I'm going to run into. Very useful when trying to make transitions in ridge country for example.
>
> Why did I rip it out and sell at considerable loss? I found myself always confused. Yes, if one spends a few nights rereading and practicing, one can get the hang of the thing each spring. But I'm lazy and I found myself constantly forgetting how to do basic stuff. The CN is instantly self explanatory.
>
I also agree that the LX9000 is cool and super feature-rich. I only have one actual flight with one plus about 30 minutes sitting on the ground with it. I wasn't comfortable that I understood how to make it work (but I've never been accused of being especially bright).
P3
t...@serkowski.com
Feb 1, 2018, 11:06:00 PM2/1/18
to
I flew with a ClearNAV for the last few years I owned my previous glider and loved it. I fell in love with it when it first came out and convinced a friend to install it in his glider.
BUT.... From day one I asked for FAI task support. When planning to buy my new glider in early 2016, i had decided that it will have a LX9000 after talking to Chip about the lack of this feature and not getting a good feeling that it would happen. Apparently, it is now a feature??
The issue is that when flying a FAI task, the finish altitude is determined at time of crossing the start line. With the CN, I had to watch the screen and make an immediate mental note of the altitude as I crossed the line. After starting, then computer only provided a time, not altitude.
The LX has a glide amoeba, but just one, not the much more useful two of the CN. On the LX instead of a line, it shades the unreachable area using a configurable color.
The LX does real time OLC distance calculation, but doesn't do a FAI triangle - it just finds the biggest triangle regardless it's dimensions.
Overall, the LX9000 is not as user friendly as the CN, which really is a set and forget instrument. But in the end, the LX has fewer negatives, and I feel they will address user issues.
The ClearNAV has a user forum which is lacking for the LX, but it was very frustrating that there really wasn't a two-way dialog between users and developers. Evan did a great job moderating and responding, but he's just the messenger and it never seemed like the developers got involved. His typical response was "that's a good idea, I'll pass it on", but nothing ever happened.
BUT.... From day one I asked for FAI task support. When planning to buy my new glider in early 2016, i had decided that it will have a LX9000 after talking to Chip about the lack of this feature and not getting a good feeling that it would happen. Apparently, it is now a feature??
The issue is that when flying a FAI task, the finish altitude is determined at time of crossing the start line. With the CN, I had to watch the screen and make an immediate mental note of the altitude as I crossed the line. After starting, then computer only provided a time, not altitude.
The LX has a glide amoeba, but just one, not the much more useful two of the CN. On the LX instead of a line, it shades the unreachable area using a configurable color.
The LX does real time OLC distance calculation, but doesn't do a FAI triangle - it just finds the biggest triangle regardless it's dimensions.
Overall, the LX9000 is not as user friendly as the CN, which really is a set and forget instrument. But in the end, the LX has fewer negatives, and I feel they will address user issues.
The ClearNAV has a user forum which is lacking for the LX, but it was very frustrating that there really wasn't a two-way dialog between users and developers. Evan did a great job moderating and responding, but he's just the messenger and it never seemed like the developers got involved. His typical response was "that's a good idea, I'll pass it on", but nothing ever happened.
t...@serkowski.com
Feb 1, 2018, 11:12:30 PM2/1/18
to
Oh, forgot to mention that the glider I ended up buying had a LX9000, so it my my decision for me.
Since then I've added a Butterfly vario which is my primary vario. The wind information it presents is amazing and extremely useful in the mountains. You wouldn't believe how much direction and velocity changes over small distances.
5Z
Since then I've added a Butterfly vario which is my primary vario. The wind information it presents is amazing and extremely useful in the mountains. You wouldn't believe how much direction and velocity changes over small distances.
5Z
r...@williamssoaring.com
Feb 1, 2018, 11:31:15 PM2/1/18
to
Gary is absolutely correct. The proof is in seeing progress and there has not been much for people outside of our team working at ClearNav to see, but we have been working busily, and over the next few months you'll start to see more things happening. We've have not done the best job at communicating what is going on, so to give some idea what we have been up to, we have...
Moved final assembly manufacturing to Williams, California, including training manufacturing staff
Shipping new products and conducting repairs/service for current customers
Made multiple changes to improve manufacturability
Recently manufactured a production run of ClearNav Air Data Computers for our variometers and a new run of nexus boards came out of manufacturing last week
Purchased and installed a new laser cutter and 3D printer to improve manufacturing (and packaging and prototyping)
3D scanned parts, producing 3D CAD models and test pieces
And of course software is the heart of everything, and we have rejuvenated that work, there is ongoing software development happening:
ClearNav Variometer software development by David Masson
ClearNav Navigator software development by Chip Garner and Andy Hogben.
We are working on cleaning up ClearNav marketing and improving the outdated website.
We've done a lot of work to understand the glider computer business. The most important thing that we can do is make sure ClearNav is successful so it is around for many years to come. We are well aware of the history with Cambridge Aero, and being a pioneer, even one as good as Cambridge is not enough. We are proud to be associated with the legacy of Cambridge Aero Instruments. We purchased ClearNav exactly because we believe in the products and their design philosophy want to see them have a long successful future.
We are especially proud of our loyal customer base. It is heartening to know that at least 7 of the top ten contestants of the US 18m nationals choose to fly with Clear Nav .
We do enjoy user feedback, please post on the ClearNav forum at ClearNav.net your suggestions.
Please come and talk with us at our booth at the SSA Convention in Reno.
Rex Mayes
ClearNav
Tango Eight
Feb 2, 2018, 6:20:02 AM2/2/18
to
On Thursday, February 1, 2018 at 11:06:00 PM UTC-5, t...@serkowski.com wrote:
> BUT.... From day one I asked for FAI task support. When planning to buy my new glider in early 2016, i had decided that it will have a LX9000 after talking to Chip about the lack of this feature and not getting a good feeling that it would happen. Apparently, it is now a feature??
The FAI task support in CN2 is among the best features of the software now. IMO, this was done "just right". That was brought out in early 2016. I flew it for the first time on a 1000K diplome attempt and had no issues (either with the software or the 1000K :-)).
> BUT.... From day one I asked for FAI task support. When planning to buy my new glider in early 2016, i had decided that it will have a LX9000 after talking to Chip about the lack of this feature and not getting a good feeling that it would happen. Apparently, it is now a feature??
best,
Evan Ludeman / T8
t...@serkowski.com
Feb 2, 2018, 1:58:12 PM2/2/18
to
On Friday, February 2, 2018 at 3:20:02 AM UTC-8, Tango Eight wrote:
> The FAI task support in CN2 is among the best features of the software now.
> IMO, this was done "just right". That was brought out in early 2016.
> I flew it for the first time on a 1000K diplome attempt and had no issues
> (either with the software or the 1000K :-)).
I had a long talk with Chip about that around March 2016, so he probably implemented some of the stuff we talked about :-)
> The FAI task support in CN2 is among the best features of the software now.
> IMO, this was done "just right". That was brought out in early 2016.
> I flew it for the first time on a 1000K diplome attempt and had no issues
> (either with the software or the 1000K :-)).
With that in mind and what Rex posted, I think it's a tough call on which is "better".
5Z
MNLou
Feb 2, 2018, 5:07:41 PM2/2/18
to
Does anyone have any idea what the number of installations is for each brand worldwide and / or in the US?
Just curious.
Lou
Just curious.
Lou
Dave Springford
Feb 2, 2018, 5:22:58 PM2/2/18
to
I have brand new, delivered two weeks ago, serial number 10497 sitting in the office, so that would be "1500" LX 9000's and then one would need to add all the 9050's, 9070's, 8000's and 8080's that all run the same software too.
chuck
Feb 2, 2018, 5:29:37 PM2/2/18
to
How many sold?
From the LX Nav website:
Lx8000. 1450 sold
Lx8080. 1350 sold
Lx9000. 1800 sold
Lx9050. 750 sold
Lx9070. 650 sold.
FWIW.
From the LX Nav website:
Lx8000. 1450 sold
Lx8080. 1350 sold
Lx9000. 1800 sold
Lx9050. 750 sold
Lx9070. 650 sold.
FWIW.
RW
Feb 2, 2018, 7:58:41 PM2/2/18
to
ClearNav seemed to left owners of CN1 forgotten.
If someone spends over $2000 for CN2 now, and you develop CN3 next year....
Ryszard
drli...@gmail.com
Feb 2, 2018, 11:19:38 PM2/2/18
to
I have owned the ClearNav in a Ventus 2C and currently LX-8000 in my JS-1.
Until the recent software upgrade to Version 6, I would have said hands-down the ClearNav was the best.
The ClearNav simplicity and intuitive display is very attractive.
The LXNav Version 6 of the software has introduced a number of features which are pretty cool:
1. Bridge between Becker radio (AR6201). Selecting "Near" airport puts the radio on standby frequency for that airport.
2. Iso lines for AAT optimization are a big improvement, but not as intuitive as the ClearNav.
3. Support for USB downloads/uploads, instead of only SD cards.
4. Flap indicator.
Things that need improving on the LX-8/9000
1. AAT speed achieved seems to be consistently off by a couple of MPH. May be an end-user error (help anyone?)
2. Thermal assistant is not adjusted for wind, so after a few turns, the track is just a smear on the screen (ClearNav/XCSoar is better here).
3. Manuals need an upgrade (ClearNav hardly needs one).
4. Amoeba with lines rather than shading.
I think the comparison of Windows (LXNav) vs Mac (ClearNav) is accurate.
Both are great units, with the new features tipping the scales slightly toward LXNav.
We need an LXNav forum!
David
FC
Until the recent software upgrade to Version 6, I would have said hands-down the ClearNav was the best.
The ClearNav simplicity and intuitive display is very attractive.
The LXNav Version 6 of the software has introduced a number of features which are pretty cool:
1. Bridge between Becker radio (AR6201). Selecting "Near" airport puts the radio on standby frequency for that airport.
2. Iso lines for AAT optimization are a big improvement, but not as intuitive as the ClearNav.
3. Support for USB downloads/uploads, instead of only SD cards.
4. Flap indicator.
Things that need improving on the LX-8/9000
1. AAT speed achieved seems to be consistently off by a couple of MPH. May be an end-user error (help anyone?)
2. Thermal assistant is not adjusted for wind, so after a few turns, the track is just a smear on the screen (ClearNav/XCSoar is better here).
3. Manuals need an upgrade (ClearNav hardly needs one).
4. Amoeba with lines rather than shading.
I think the comparison of Windows (LXNav) vs Mac (ClearNav) is accurate.
Both are great units, with the new features tipping the scales slightly toward LXNav.
We need an LXNav forum!
David
FC
Tango Eight
Feb 2, 2018, 11:35:33 PM2/2/18
to
The truth is, software development ended on CN1 because CN1 hardware could not support what needed doing.
best regards,
Evan Ludeman
uncl...@ix.netcom.com
Feb 3, 2018, 2:05:48 PM2/3/18
to
ClearNav 1 works very well. It is just slow when integrated with Flarm.
UH
Message has been deleted
RickH
Feb 4, 2018, 2:43:07 PM2/4/18
to
Jonathan St. Cloud;964481 Wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 30, 2018 at 7:11:39 AM UTC-8, Gerry Simpson wrote:-
>
> Wonder if anyone using a LX Navigation computer care to comment?
I flew the CN I computer and pointer vario for several years and liked
it. However it was slow and prone to lockups. I loved the crawling
amoeba indications of glide range and the recommended turn arc in a TP
area. The remote stick was very efficient and allowed full independence
of operation. I can only imagine that a faster and more stable computer
would make the system only better. For my first flight computer I
thought it was very intuitive and just what I needed. When I ordered my
JS1C I struggled with the avionics selection but finally decided upon
the LX 9070, V8, and AIR Glide S varios. The 9070 and the ability to
customize just about everything is very handy. Screen is bright with
great resolution. Individual Nav pages for Tasks, Airports, Waypoints,
allow you to have access to all the information you could want without
the clutter of a single page source. Defining a task is easy and quick
but I still like the recommended TP turn display and crawling amoeba of
the CN better. I do like the LX voice alarms. They can be a little
annoying at times but you can cancel them very easily if you’re tired of
hearing about airspace issues while you thermal at the edge of a control
zone. I like the functionality of the CN remote stick controller better
than the LX remote stick controller as you still find yourself turning
knobs and fiddling with the computer controls during flight. I also
like the fact that I have an artificial horizon (3 in my setup) for
those really hazy late afternoon returns into the sun! I have thousands
of hours of familiarity with FMS’s from my day job, but still found the
LX to have a slower learning curve than the CN. The CN was practically
plug-and-play while the LX is a work in progress for me. I’ve only
flown it for half of a season, but for the long-haul, I think the LX
provides a more robust solution. The support seems very responsive as
well. If you like avionics- the LX is the way to go, if you like to
look out of the window and relax for OLC flights, the CN may be your
better choice. Just my 2-cents.
Rick H
NR
--
RickH
RW
Feb 5, 2018, 2:14:04 PM2/5/18
to
When you have to switch battery power on task CN1 restarts and remembers everything and you still have one flight in a logger.
If same with CN2 , for fast switch it stays on(big capacitor in the regulator), but if few seconds , you loose previous part of the flight, you dont have a start and logger has 2 flights.
My CN1 never freezes,but back seat of my friends Arcus, CN2 freezes , you have to restart, then you loose all previous flight.
Having all the same inputs in front CN2 like back CN1, 25 miles out on final,
they differ 1200 ft arrival altitude, and this continues till 2 miles out,
when CN2 rapidly changes its over optimistic mind and starts to agree with CN1.
Final glide algorithm of CN1 is main reason, it is my favorite.
This could be only unit specific feeling.
If one has problem with CN in US ,it can be repaired in 3 days(over night shipping).
If one has problem with LX9000 in US , will have to wait 1 month.
If one is new to CN in US, will have min. 5 pilots at the field to help.
If one is new to LX9000 in US, will not find anybody at the field to help.
Its opposite in Europe.
Ryszard
uncl...@ix.netcom.com
Feb 5, 2018, 4:28:06 PM2/5/18
to
Had a few freezes with CN1 and none with CN2.
I would guess maybe settings somewhere were different leading to different final glide info.
CN1, when tested with Flarm on and off, showed quicker screen changes and such when Flarm was not consuming processor power. One of the reasons I changed my second after testing first.
I agree that it does not take long for a newbie to get the hang of it.
UH
RW
Feb 5, 2018, 9:08:00 PM2/5/18
to
CN2 disagrees on long final with CN1 more if speed on final is higher,
and less if is lower.
It feels like only because we go over 100kts CN2 thinks we should pull up,
just 2 miles before finish to gain extra 1200ft. witch is forbidden and very dangerous for other finishers.
In less than 2 miles to finish CN2 gives up
with its crazy idea and perfectly matches CN1 calculations.
Evan, if you would believe me , would you still upgrade, would you look for white glove tech in Bentley ?:)
I know, not everything could be matched in both CNs, but doing zero means CN1
its forgotten. Same excuse will work when next year CN3 shows up.
Telling customers publicly, 3 years old ,over $2000 equipment is garbage is not good for future sells. LX understands this, keeps writing upgrades 3 generations back.Maybe limited software upgrades, but it feels good.
Tesla electric cars go even further back, keeping up with very first models also maybe limited upgrades. Thousands of people prepay for their model 3.
People vote with their monies.
I'm in petroleum equipment business.
There is 3 times more profit in repairs and upgrades than in sales of new equipment. 20 years old stuff still gets software upgrades in my world.
Ryszard
Tango Eight
Feb 6, 2018, 8:07:15 AM2/6/18
to
CN2 kicks ass. If any particular CN2 doesn't, it's due to some combination of setup problem, failure to update the software (there were some regrettable buggy early releases) or a much less likely hardware problem that really ought to be fixed. 2 year warranty and all that.
The final glide algorithm was not changed between CN1 and CN2. This is user setup.
There *are* some things in CN2 and CNv that beg for further development. Happily, Rex seems to be moving in the direction of taking this on.
best,
Evan Ludeman
Gerry Simpson
Feb 6, 2018, 12:58:10 PM2/6/18
to
I agree with Evan, from my experience the final glide algorithm in CN1 works exactly the same in CN2. It has gotten me to my destination within 50-75 feet of its prediction without fail.
I want to thank everyone for their lively discussion and request that anyone who can make additional points or criticisms continue to do so. It would seem that the choice is between simplicity with pertinent information for someone who wants to fly and compete without a lot of extraneous distractions, and complexity with the ability for massive customization for someone who wants it all and may have a little “geekiness” in their inclinations- not that this is bad- we all have our preferred ways to fly. We all know of pilots who like to work on their aircraft more than they actually want to fly it, and this is often unconscious in their approach to flying.
I want to thank everyone for their lively discussion and request that anyone who can make additional points or criticisms continue to do so. It would seem that the choice is between simplicity with pertinent information for someone who wants to fly and compete without a lot of extraneous distractions, and complexity with the ability for massive customization for someone who wants it all and may have a little “geekiness” in their inclinations- not that this is bad- we all have our preferred ways to fly. We all know of pilots who like to work on their aircraft more than they actually want to fly it, and this is often unconscious in their approach to flying.
Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)
Feb 6, 2018, 4:26:03 PM2/6/18
to
Sorta like someone that may complain about Windoz, but it works and you get support....or, pick a flavor of Linux to, "do your own thang" but more limited support.
Neither is great, neither is bad. How much do you want (does it do what you perceive you need....usually does) vs. "I want control of almost everything (fine, unless you walk into a corner and need help getting back out).
I have no issues with ClearNav, but the last few years, I haven't flown enough to be solid on what it can do. I have been dealing with "Cambridge" since Raouf was the main driver, so yes, I have a bias.
Current systems sorta allow me to "drop in, figure it out, I'm my own worst enemy in soaring.....". The device won't suddenly make me better, a lot more hours in the air will make a huge dent in that.
As to which is better.........well.......how many local peeps use the same/similar? If a lot, they may do a 10 minute walk through on a good Soaring day and off you go.
If nobody, how good is your Internet connection on the field and how much day do you want to blow resolving a potentially minor setting issue?
Just something to consider.
Neither is great, neither is bad. How much do you want (does it do what you perceive you need....usually does) vs. "I want control of almost everything (fine, unless you walk into a corner and need help getting back out).
I have no issues with ClearNav, but the last few years, I haven't flown enough to be solid on what it can do. I have been dealing with "Cambridge" since Raouf was the main driver, so yes, I have a bias.
Current systems sorta allow me to "drop in, figure it out, I'm my own worst enemy in soaring.....". The device won't suddenly make me better, a lot more hours in the air will make a huge dent in that.
As to which is better.........well.......how many local peeps use the same/similar? If a lot, they may do a 10 minute walk through on a good Soaring day and off you go.
If nobody, how good is your Internet connection on the field and how much day do you want to blow resolving a potentially minor setting issue?
Just something to consider.
RW
Feb 11, 2018, 12:06:04 AM2/11/18
to
If yes,why sells declined ?
Maybe Rex knows why and knows how fix it ?
Maybe was silly politics with the previous generation CN ?
We dont like high air pressure, we like it rising.
We dont like pure oxygen, we like % of O2 rising.
We are not forever happy with a lot of money , we happy when we make little more, time after time.
We are not forever happy with perfect at the time instrument, we like it get improved from time to time.We get used to.We became loyal.
CN2 is maybe 3 years around.
Throwing CN1 owners under the bus will not make them loyal CN customers.
I know few.
They think now :TopHat or XC, because they are not trained by previous hands to be loyal.
CN2 owners learn from CN1 experience.
Maybe this was only previous hands mistake ?
I don't know the answers.Here is little lesson.
The most popular gas station tank monitor TLS350 was build in 1984, keeps getting improvements.You can use your candy crusher/smart phone and watch your tank inventory and sensors, sitting in the dentist waiting room on other side of the globe.Because of loyal customers, Veeder Root is the richest in this industry in the world and purchased biggest dispenser manufacturers in the world, biggest STP turbine manufacturers in the world, and on and on.
Ryszard , yes,flip phone user, choosing professional knife over Swiss army knife in my kitchen, dont have to play crashing candies, or take a picture of my meal for FB before I start eating.
jfitch
Feb 11, 2018, 4:56:03 PM2/11/18
to
RW
Feb 11, 2018, 9:29:57 PM2/11/18
to
I'm just a little pilot, hoping one day, to be good as you .
Oops, I didn't catch your name ?
Ryszard Krolikowski from little state of New Jersey
Blake Seese 3Y
Feb 11, 2018, 9:33:45 PM2/11/18
to
Hi Gerry,
Full disclosure, I have not flown with either system. I'm flying with an Oudie hooked to a 302 right now, so pretty outdated. A very good soaring pilot and good friend told me years ago to get a system developed by people who speak your native language because it makes the learning curve much easier. I have found that to be very true. I would just go through the setup a little bit on both and see which one is more intuitive for you, since both systems are technically very good.
Full disclosure, I have not flown with either system. I'm flying with an Oudie hooked to a 302 right now, so pretty outdated. A very good soaring pilot and good friend told me years ago to get a system developed by people who speak your native language because it makes the learning curve much easier. I have found that to be very true. I would just go through the setup a little bit on both and see which one is more intuitive for you, since both systems are technically very good.
krasw
Feb 12, 2018, 7:00:10 AM2/12/18
to
maanantai 12. helmikuuta 2018 4.33.45 UTC+2 Blake Seese 3Y kirjoitti:
> Hi Gerry,
> Full disclosure, I have not flown with either system. I'm flying with an Oudie hooked to a 302 right now, so pretty outdated. A very good soaring pilot and good friend told me years ago to get a system developed by people who speak your native language because it makes the learning curve much easier.
Well that's great news for Slovenian gliderpilot population out there!
> Hi Gerry,
> Full disclosure, I have not flown with either system. I'm flying with an Oudie hooked to a 302 right now, so pretty outdated. A very good soaring pilot and good friend told me years ago to get a system developed by people who speak your native language because it makes the learning curve much easier.
Don Grillo
Feb 12, 2018, 9:00:09 AM2/12/18
to
Hi Gerry,
I can give you a perspective on LX support. I purchased and installed a LX9050 two seasons ago. Last summer I developed a screen issue where the colors would change in flight, stay screwed up for 15 minutes or so then go back to normal. I contacted LXnav and they said to send them the unit and they would repair it free of charge. I sent them the unit in early December and I had it back in 30 days. Not bad considering the holiday break.
I will say that the 9000 series does take some time to learn because of all the features it has. But once you get it setup the way you like, its works great. I would suggest getting the biggest screen that will fit in your new ship.
See you in Albert Lea.
Don
I can give you a perspective on LX support. I purchased and installed a LX9050 two seasons ago. Last summer I developed a screen issue where the colors would change in flight, stay screwed up for 15 minutes or so then go back to normal. I contacted LXnav and they said to send them the unit and they would repair it free of charge. I sent them the unit in early December and I had it back in 30 days. Not bad considering the holiday break.
I will say that the 9000 series does take some time to learn because of all the features it has. But once you get it setup the way you like, its works great. I would suggest getting the biggest screen that will fit in your new ship.
See you in Albert Lea.
Don
Roy B.
Feb 12, 2018, 11:11:30 AM2/12/18
to
As noted in an earlier post - I have flown extensively with both the CN and LX units. In response to Blake's comment about "native language" I think that this was very true about 10 or so years ago - and particularly a problem with the LX 7000 and 7007 IGC Pro series machines. But the problem was largely resolved with the new 8000 and 9000 series - which are much better programs and intuitive regardless of user's language . The CN program was developed by people with a strong background in the Cambridge Aero computers and seemed very intuitive by pilots with that background.
It really seems that CN is becoming the standard for US gliding and LX for European gliding. That may be a factor in where you want to eventually sell your glider. It's not surprising that customer support is good on the continents where the machines are built. In my experience both are good machines - but they take a different approach and serve a different set of pilot expectations.
ROY
It really seems that CN is becoming the standard for US gliding and LX for European gliding. That may be a factor in where you want to eventually sell your glider. It's not surprising that customer support is good on the continents where the machines are built. In my experience both are good machines - but they take a different approach and serve a different set of pilot expectations.
ROY
WB
Feb 12, 2018, 12:02:39 PM2/12/18
to
Tango Eight
Feb 12, 2018, 3:11:15 PM2/12/18
to
When CN2 was released, CN offered to replace -- at no charge -- any CN1 bought in previous year with a brand new CN2 with a new 2 year warranty. All other CN1 owners got a great upgrade deal, regardless of whether they were the original purchaser. That upgrade deal put a solid floor under the price of a used CN1.
Who else does this?
But go right ahead and pile on.
Evan Ludeman / T8
Andrzej Kobus
Feb 12, 2018, 6:53:37 PM2/12/18
to
raxy...@gmail.com
Feb 12, 2018, 7:14:08 PM2/12/18
to
Regarding native language: I use a LXNav 8080, and my comment is that the instrument itself is good, but the User Manual is deficient, for four reasons: First, the 8080 is a complex instrument with lots of user options 2) the manual is a single document covering all the various different LXNav modules, and its a maze to extract the parts relevant to any one instrument 3) the manual is written in 'odd English' ie odd choices of words and odd phrasing, that makes it hard to understand 4) it's only provided as an electronic document, and it would be a major job for my home printer to print it, which was what I would prefer.
markm...@gmail.com
Feb 12, 2018, 7:45:55 PM2/12/18
to
"it's only provided as an electronic document, and it would be a major job for my home printer to print it, which was what I would prefer."
I agree on the LXNav manuals- especially how far out of date they can be. On the S80, firmware version 6.1 was out and the manual was still v5.46. (Recently updated to 6.02) Also, the manual combines the S80 and S100 instruments. The biggest hassle is that you pretty much have to print the entire manual with each update. It would be nice if you could just print the sections that changed instead of the whole thing.
Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)
Feb 12, 2018, 7:58:14 PM2/12/18
to
Can't you read it electronically and then only print the pages you want a hard copy of? Should be pretty easy to do that n the "print box", at least in Windows.....
raxy...@gmail.com
Feb 12, 2018, 8:35:22 PM2/12/18
to
On Monday, February 12, 2018 at 4:58:14 PM UTC-8, Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot) wrote:
> Can't you read it electronically and then only print the pages you want a hard copy of? Should be pretty easy to do that n the "print box", at least in Windows.....
Charlie, that sounds reasonable, but look at the Manual and you'll see how difficult that would be.
> Can't you read it electronically and then only print the pages you want a hard copy of? Should be pretty easy to do that n the "print box", at least in Windows.....
t...@serkowski.com
Feb 12, 2018, 8:39:19 PM2/12/18
to
A typical FAX/Copy store also does printing. You can usually email them a PDF, or bring in a thumb drive with the file on it.
5Z
5Z
raxy...@gmail.com
Feb 12, 2018, 8:51:46 PM2/12/18
to
Richard Pfiffner
Feb 12, 2018, 9:21:34 PM2/12/18
to
Richard
www.craggyaero.com
Andrzej Kobus
Feb 12, 2018, 9:24:41 PM2/12/18
to
raxy...@gmail.com
Feb 12, 2018, 9:33:39 PM2/12/18
to
index?
Andrzej Kobus
Feb 12, 2018, 9:46:35 PM2/12/18
to
On Monday, February 12, 2018 at 9:33:39 PM UTC-5, raxy...@gmail.com wrote:
> index?
> >
> > You can also search them for a keyword. You can't do that with a paper manual.
You are kidding aren't you? The most index will tell you is a page number. With search you can quickly get to the exact place you want without flipping pages and reading a bunch of staff you don't need to read. You can also search for a phrase.
> index?
> >
> > You can also search them for a keyword. You can't do that with a paper manual.
raxy...@gmail.com
Feb 12, 2018, 10:04:07 PM2/12/18
to
MNLou
Feb 12, 2018, 10:14:39 PM2/12/18
to
FWIW - I have used both the LX9000 manual and the S8 manual with no prior knowledge of the instrument.
I haven't had any problems getting the info I need from the PDF version. For those things I wanted to have available going forward, I printed out those few sections. I do use the search function extensively.
I agree that the S8 manuals can be a bit behind. New software / firmware added functionality that wasn't reflected in the manuals until a later time.
However, I found the internal menus on the instrument itself enough to figure out what I needed.
YMMV -
Lou
I haven't had any problems getting the info I need from the PDF version. For those things I wanted to have available going forward, I printed out those few sections. I do use the search function extensively.
I agree that the S8 manuals can be a bit behind. New software / firmware added functionality that wasn't reflected in the manuals until a later time.
However, I found the internal menus on the instrument itself enough to figure out what I needed.
YMMV -
Lou
SoaringXCellence
Feb 13, 2018, 12:32:41 AM2/13/18
to
Just a bit of confusion here. LXNav doesn't make the LX9xxx flight computer. That is made by LX Navigation. Formally one company now two and they don't share the same products (nor manuals).
Paul Remde
Feb 13, 2018, 1:32:47 AM2/13/18
to
Hi,
LXNAV does make the LX90x0 and LX80x0. LX Navigation makes the Zeus and Era and Colibri products.
Best Regards,
Paul Remde
Cumulus Soaring, Inc.
_______________________________
LXNAV does make the LX90x0 and LX80x0. LX Navigation makes the Zeus and Era and Colibri products.
Best Regards,
Paul Remde
Cumulus Soaring, Inc.
_______________________________
jpg...@gmail.com
Feb 13, 2018, 3:15:12 AM2/13/18
to
I don't find the LX 8/9000 manual confusing and why on earth print it out? I have it on my laptop, my phone and on my LX9000 SD card - although the latter is a last resort as the 9000 pdf reader is slow.
Andrzej Kobus
Feb 13, 2018, 8:00:19 AM2/13/18
to
On Tuesday, February 13, 2018 at 3:15:12 AM UTC-5, jpg...@gmail.com wrote:
> I don't find the LX 8/9000 manual confusing and why on earth print it out? I have it on my laptop, my phone and on my LX9000 SD card - although the latter is a last resort as the 9000 pdf reader is slow.
I find the manual very comprehensive. Over the last 5 years or so I had to ask LXNav 2 questions, the rest was in the manual. I actually find LXNav easy to use, not as easy as ClearNav but I hardly need a manual. Even the most complex functions like configuring the flap position sensor I was able to figure out without any issues. Maybe I have an easier time because I work in IT.
> I don't find the LX 8/9000 manual confusing and why on earth print it out? I have it on my laptop, my phone and on my LX9000 SD card - although the latter is a last resort as the 9000 pdf reader is slow.
Andrzej
ka7...@gmail.com
Feb 22, 2018, 11:30:08 AM2/22/18
to
On Thursday, February 1, 2018 at 9:31:15 PM UTC-7, r...@williamssoaring.com wrote:
> Gary is absolutely correct. The proof is in seeing progress and there has not been much for people outside of our team working at ClearNav to see, but we have been working busily, and over the next few months you'll start to see more things happening. We've have not done the best job at communicating what is going on, so to give some idea what we have been up to, we have...
>
> Moved final assembly manufacturing to Williams, California, including training manufacturing staff
> Shipping new products and conducting repairs/service for current customers
> Made multiple changes to improve manufacturability
> Recently manufactured a production run of ClearNav Air Data Computers for our variometers and a new run of nexus boards came out of manufacturing last week
> Purchased and installed a new laser cutter and 3D printer to improve manufacturing (and packaging and prototyping)
> 3D scanned parts, producing 3D CAD models and test pieces
>
> And of course software is the heart of everything, and we have rejuvenated that work, there is ongoing software development happening:
> ClearNav Variometer software development by David Masson
> ClearNav Navigator software development by Chip Garner and Andy Hogben.
>
> We are working on cleaning up ClearNav marketing and improving the outdated website.
>
> We've done a lot of work to understand the glider computer business. The most important thing that we can do is make sure ClearNav is successful so it is around for many years to come. We are well aware of the history with Cambridge Aero, and being a pioneer, even one as good as Cambridge is not enough. We are proud to be associated with the legacy of Cambridge Aero Instruments. We purchased ClearNav exactly because we believe in the products and their design philosophy want to see them have a long successful future.
>
> We are especially proud of our loyal customer base. It is heartening to know that at least 7 of the top ten contestants of the US 18m nationals choose to fly with Clear Nav .
>
> We do enjoy user feedback, please post on the ClearNav forum at ClearNav.net your suggestions.
>
> Please come and talk with us at our booth at the SSA Convention in Reno.
>
>
> Rex Mayes
> ClearNav
Something that would make the CN totally Kickass would be a touch screen. To my knowledge Air Avionics is the only panel mount computer to utilize this. Has Touch Screen been considered for the CN?
> Gary is absolutely correct. The proof is in seeing progress and there has not been much for people outside of our team working at ClearNav to see, but we have been working busily, and over the next few months you'll start to see more things happening. We've have not done the best job at communicating what is going on, so to give some idea what we have been up to, we have...
>
> Moved final assembly manufacturing to Williams, California, including training manufacturing staff
> Shipping new products and conducting repairs/service for current customers
> Made multiple changes to improve manufacturability
> Recently manufactured a production run of ClearNav Air Data Computers for our variometers and a new run of nexus boards came out of manufacturing last week
> Purchased and installed a new laser cutter and 3D printer to improve manufacturing (and packaging and prototyping)
> 3D scanned parts, producing 3D CAD models and test pieces
>
> And of course software is the heart of everything, and we have rejuvenated that work, there is ongoing software development happening:
> ClearNav Variometer software development by David Masson
> ClearNav Navigator software development by Chip Garner and Andy Hogben.
>
> We are working on cleaning up ClearNav marketing and improving the outdated website.
>
> We've done a lot of work to understand the glider computer business. The most important thing that we can do is make sure ClearNav is successful so it is around for many years to come. We are well aware of the history with Cambridge Aero, and being a pioneer, even one as good as Cambridge is not enough. We are proud to be associated with the legacy of Cambridge Aero Instruments. We purchased ClearNav exactly because we believe in the products and their design philosophy want to see them have a long successful future.
>
> We are especially proud of our loyal customer base. It is heartening to know that at least 7 of the top ten contestants of the US 18m nationals choose to fly with Clear Nav .
>
> We do enjoy user feedback, please post on the ClearNav forum at ClearNav.net your suggestions.
>
> Please come and talk with us at our booth at the SSA Convention in Reno.
>
>
> Rex Mayes
> ClearNav
Kirk
Dan Marotta
Feb 22, 2018, 11:37:29 AM2/22/18
to
As I recall, touch screen was considered by ClearNav and rejected due to
the sometimes difficulty of hitting a target with your finger in
turbulence. The remote which comes as part of the kit works extremely
well. The stick grip with buttons is even better, but pricey. Try it,
you'll like it!
--
Dan, 5J
the sometimes difficulty of hitting a target with your finger in
turbulence. The remote which comes as part of the kit works extremely
well. The stick grip with buttons is even better, but pricey. Try it,
you'll like it!
Dan, 5J
markde...@gmail.com
Feb 22, 2018, 11:47:50 AM2/22/18
to
Something that would be fantastic for a CN2 would be the ability to toggle back and forth from the Clearnav software and ForeFlight...
Message has been deleted
Papa3
Feb 22, 2018, 2:17:37 PM2/22/18
to
On Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 11:30:08 AM UTC-5, ka7...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> Something that would make the CN totally Kickass would be a touch screen. To my knowledge Air Avionics is the only panel mount computer to utilize this. Has Touch Screen been considered for the CN?
> Kirk
Having been present during one of the flights that actually started the ball rolling on ClearNav (i.e. attempts to poke at a touchscreen while cruising along at 110kts on a rough ridge), I can say the that the "philosophy" of CN was clearly to leverage a pointing device.
>
>
> Something that would make the CN totally Kickass would be a touch screen. To my knowledge Air Avionics is the only panel mount computer to utilize this. Has Touch Screen been considered for the CN?
> Kirk
FWIW, I've also flown with Tophat on various e-readers and other android devices, and while I really like it, the touchscreen isn't optimal in some situations. In addition to the turbulence issue, I find it takes more "head down" time when a gesture goes bad. In other words, it's easier to accidently zoom or re-center. Fixing that can be tricky.
Anyway, I'm very happy that my CN uses a stick-mounted controller.
Erik Mann (P3)
ka7...@gmail.com
Feb 22, 2018, 4:01:44 PM2/22/18
to
On Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 9:30:08 AM UTC-7, ka7...@gmail.com wrote:
> Something that would make the CN totally Kickass would be a touch screen. To my knowledge Air Avionics is the only panel mount computer to utilize this. Has Touch Screen been considered for the CN?
> Kirk
Thanks for the responses guys! Let me clarify, I have never flown a stick controller but I am sure I would like it (Always wanted to try one, maybe my next ship). I have a buddy with a Ball Mouse who swears by that type of controller, I guess it may depend on what one is accustomed to.
> Something that would make the CN totally Kickass would be a touch screen. To my knowledge Air Avionics is the only panel mount computer to utilize this. Has Touch Screen been considered for the CN?
> Kirk
I have years behind an Oudie (Running SYM) and I have grown accustomed to the touchscreen. It is especially handy while loading tasks and programming and I have found inflight usage to be easy. properly set up it only takes a few taps here and there in flight and in the bumps I use the stylus.
Everything these days is touchscreen (Phones, computers, many car stereos, etc). I run a Dynon Skyview Touch in my powered airplane which gives the option of touchscreen or buttons or a combination. Why not the same feature for a glide computer?
Kirk
JS
Feb 22, 2018, 4:56:50 PM2/22/18
to
Having flown with a CN and stick controller for a number of years, going back to touch screen seems silly... You have to look at it while touching. If you touch the wrong place or don't touch the right amount or drag your finger in turbulence, all bets are off.
Presently flying with an Oudie. A lesson in how much a stick controller improves usability.
Only a little time on the LX90x0 stuff, it's very good but personally prefer the simplicity of the CN. The CN is also easier to build TFR airspace files for, which is necessary where I fly.
Jim
Presently flying with an Oudie. A lesson in how much a stick controller improves usability.
Only a little time on the LX90x0 stuff, it's very good but personally prefer the simplicity of the CN. The CN is also easier to build TFR airspace files for, which is necessary where I fly.
Jim
ka7...@gmail.com
Feb 22, 2018, 6:27:23 PM2/22/18
to
Kirk
Darryl Ramm
Feb 23, 2018, 12:05:54 AM2/23/18
to
On Thursday, February 22, 2018 at 8:47:50 AM UTC-8, Mark Zivley wrote:
> Something that would be fantastic for a CN2 would be the ability to toggle back and forth from the Clearnav software and ForeFlight...
A ClearNav runs on Windows CE and has a cursor pointing device. ForeFlight runs on iOS with a much high resolution display and capacitive touch screen. There is zero chances of them every being combined, even if somebody could work out what that even would be like.
> Something that would be fantastic for a CN2 would be the ability to toggle back and forth from the Clearnav software and ForeFlight...
jfitch
Feb 23, 2018, 2:12:03 AM2/23/18
to
Richard Pfiffner
Feb 23, 2018, 12:41:59 PM2/23/18
to
http://www.craggyaero.com/ultimates.htm
It is not affected by turbulence and gives all the advantages of a touch screen.
Richard
www.craggyaero.com
ka7...@gmail.com
Feb 23, 2018, 1:07:15 PM2/23/18
to
On Friday, February 23, 2018 at 10:41:59 AM UTC-7, Richard Pfiffner wrote:
Richard,
Thanks. I may have to fly B4's ship and try this out. Another HUGE advantage the Ultimate has over the CN and LX is the ability to run your favorite software. The OP in this thread should have included the Ultimate in his original post.
Kirk
See you guys next week!
Richard,
Thanks. I may have to fly B4's ship and try this out. Another HUGE advantage the Ultimate has over the CN and LX is the ability to run your favorite software. The OP in this thread should have included the Ultimate in his original post.
Kirk
See you guys next week!
Eric Greenwell
Feb 23, 2018, 8:09:39 PM2/23/18
to
his TFR files on my CN1 (in my Phoenix) and on my iPhone 6 running iGlide (in my
ASH 26 E) last year, and plan to do so again this year.
Thanks again, Lynn!
--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorgliders/publications/download-the-guide-1
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Dec 2014a" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm
http://soaringsafety.org/prevention/Guide-to-transponders-in-sailplanes-2014A.pdf
Message has been deleted
ka7...@gmail.com
Feb 23, 2018, 8:31:06 PM2/23/18
to
On Friday, February 23, 2018 at 6:22:45 PM UTC-7, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
>
> Have you a URL for said site?
http://www.soaringdata.info/aviation/airportsTab.html
>
> Have you a URL for said site?
http://www.soaringdata.info/aviation/airportsTab.html
Ramy
Feb 23, 2018, 10:15:39 PM2/23/18
to
Unfortunately you still need to convert the TFR files to cub file to use them with LXNAV. You can use SeeYou desktop to do the conversion.
Ramy
Ramy
Jonathan St. Cloud
Feb 24, 2018, 10:39:07 AM2/24/18
to
I wish on the LXNav, one could switch from the high def maps to a sectional and back just by moving to another screen, and not having to go to map settings to do so. It is for this reason I fly with an iPad mini, just for the sectionals. I rarely use it as the maps on the LX are very good, but sometimes one just needs, or at lest feels like one needs, to reference a current sectional. Flying with the sectional loaded onto the map page with all the other data I have just too cluttered on the screen.
Dan Marotta
Feb 24, 2018, 10:44:54 AM2/24/18
to
These things are pretty simple to make using a text editor and data
from the FAA. Here's an example of a SUA file I used last year in
my CNII. It's simply a text file with the extension changed to .sua
after creation:
### Dog Head TFR, NM ### INCLUDE=YES TITLE=Dog Head TFR ABQ Approach 123.9 TYPE=DANGER BASE=SFC TOPS=12500 POINT=N345759 W1062705 POINT=N345759 W1060534 POINT=N344515 W1060430 POINT=N344515 W1062845 POINT=N345759 W1062705 # ### McClure Fire TFR Radius - 5 NM ### INCLUDE=YES TITLE=MCCLURE FIRE TFR. TYPE=DANGER BASE=SFC TOPS=15000ALT CIRCLE RADIUS=5.00 CENTRE=N354259 W1054746 #Then load it to your device per the operating manual. Note the same format worked for XCSoar and will probably work for LK8000.
On 2/23/2018 8:15 PM, Ramy wrote:
Unfortunately you still need to convert the TFR files to cub file to use them with LXNAV. You can use SeeYou desktop to do the conversion. Ramy
--
Dan, 5J
Dan, 5J
benso...@gmail.com
Mar 7, 2018, 10:57:57 PM3/7/18
to
On Tuesday, January 30, 2018 at 10:11:39 AM UTC-5, Gerry Simpson wrote:
> New glider on the way. Would like objective opinions from pilots who have flown with both ClearNav and LXNav and spent enough time to make an honest, educated evaluation. Let me preface this with the information that I have flown with ClearNav since being an early adopter. Both appear to have advantages. Are there enough with LXVav (9000, 9070, 9050) to warrant going through the learning curve for a new system?
Regarding the ClearNav, there are a few issues which have not been addressed. If you are dealing with smaller panels, more consideration and planning are required with the ClearNav.
The ClearNav unit is an asymmetrical "box"; it's left border is wider than the right border. If you chose through panel, behind panel, or tunnel mount (which is most popular) and you want the screen on panel center-line there will be less room for instruments on the left side of the panel than the right side.
Unfortunately, ClearNav website does not provide "footprint" dimensional drawings so you can't determine just how close you can locate other instruments. Other instrument placement also differs between through panel/behind panel and tunnel mount.The tunnel mount helps alleviate horizontal closeness but you need to have all the stuff in hand so you can measure components to eliminate interference. Surely Williams could correct this with little effort. Note to Rex - hunt and peck doesn't cut it.
With the ClearNav tunnel mount, mounting is a "stack" affair. There is a 2" tunnel, 1.25" computer, a back plate, then the Nexus box. It's a clunky affair with multiple sets of screws and spacers. The tabs on the back plate can also interfere with tangent instruments. When assembled, it takes up at least twice the cubic area than the LXNAX 9000.
Additional panel space is required for the ClearNav on/off switch as well as the CAN/USB extension. The LXNAV incorporates an on/off button in its button set.
On the other hand, mounting the LXNAV is a breeze. It's symmetrical, total size is 114 mm wide x 145 mm high x 38 mm deep exclusive connectors.
So you's pays your money and you's take your choice.
> New glider on the way. Would like objective opinions from pilots who have flown with both ClearNav and LXNav and spent enough time to make an honest, educated evaluation. Let me preface this with the information that I have flown with ClearNav since being an early adopter. Both appear to have advantages. Are there enough with LXVav (9000, 9070, 9050) to warrant going through the learning curve for a new system?
Regarding the ClearNav, there are a few issues which have not been addressed. If you are dealing with smaller panels, more consideration and planning are required with the ClearNav.
The ClearNav unit is an asymmetrical "box"; it's left border is wider than the right border. If you chose through panel, behind panel, or tunnel mount (which is most popular) and you want the screen on panel center-line there will be less room for instruments on the left side of the panel than the right side.
Unfortunately, ClearNav website does not provide "footprint" dimensional drawings so you can't determine just how close you can locate other instruments. Other instrument placement also differs between through panel/behind panel and tunnel mount.The tunnel mount helps alleviate horizontal closeness but you need to have all the stuff in hand so you can measure components to eliminate interference. Surely Williams could correct this with little effort. Note to Rex - hunt and peck doesn't cut it.
With the ClearNav tunnel mount, mounting is a "stack" affair. There is a 2" tunnel, 1.25" computer, a back plate, then the Nexus box. It's a clunky affair with multiple sets of screws and spacers. The tabs on the back plate can also interfere with tangent instruments. When assembled, it takes up at least twice the cubic area than the LXNAX 9000.
Additional panel space is required for the ClearNav on/off switch as well as the CAN/USB extension. The LXNAV incorporates an on/off button in its button set.
On the other hand, mounting the LXNAV is a breeze. It's symmetrical, total size is 114 mm wide x 145 mm high x 38 mm deep exclusive connectors.
So you's pays your money and you's take your choice.
ka7...@gmail.com
Mar 8, 2018, 8:33:27 AM3/8/18
to
On Tuesday, January 30, 2018 at 8:11:39 AM UTC-7, Gerry Simpson wrote:
> New glider on the way. Would like objective opinions from pilots who have flown with both ClearNav and LXNav and spent enough time to make an honest, educated evaluation. Let me preface this with the information that I have flown with ClearNav since being an early adopter. Both appear to have advantages. Are there enough with LXVav (9000, 9070, 9050) to warrant going through the learning curve for a new system?
Like many on RAS I just came from the convention in Reno. The reps where there from CL, LXNav, and LXNavigation. I sat in on a seminar presented by the LXNavigation rep and was truly impressed. The rep described the work that went into the UI and even touchscreen advances (Currently the Colibri is touchscreen and the Zeus is not). Their goal was to make a navigation system easy enough to be able to use without reading the manual. After seeing the screen shots at the presentation and looking at the instruments at the booth later, I would say they have succeeded.
> New glider on the way. Would like objective opinions from pilots who have flown with both ClearNav and LXNav and spent enough time to make an honest, educated evaluation. Let me preface this with the information that I have flown with ClearNav since being an early adopter. Both appear to have advantages. Are there enough with LXVav (9000, 9070, 9050) to warrant going through the learning curve for a new system?
I don't own any LXNavigation instruments and I am certainly not telling you what to buy but if you have not made the decision yet, take a look at the Zeus and some of the other stuff from these guys.
Best wishes with the new ship.
Dan Marotta
Mar 8, 2018, 10:27:12 AM3/8/18
to
Ben, if you prefer the LX unit, why not simply say so?
My ClearNav is mounted to the side of the panel using Ram mounts,
leaving the rest of the panel for whatever you want. No need for a
power switch, simply connect the power line to the avionics bus (with a
fuse, of course) and it powers on/off with the ship's master switch. If
anyone wants measurements, you can probably get them from Rex, but,
since my ship is down right now, I have mine at home and can measure it
for you, but only to the 1/16". If you use the CN stick grip with
installed buttons, you don't need the CAN/USB panel connector since all
the control buttons are run through the stick and there's a USB jack on
the back of the CN computer.
--
Dan, 5J
My ClearNav is mounted to the side of the panel using Ram mounts,
leaving the rest of the panel for whatever you want. No need for a
power switch, simply connect the power line to the avionics bus (with a
fuse, of course) and it powers on/off with the ship's master switch. If
anyone wants measurements, you can probably get them from Rex, but,
since my ship is down right now, I have mine at home and can measure it
for you, but only to the 1/16". If you use the CN stick grip with
installed buttons, you don't need the CAN/USB panel connector since all
the control buttons are run through the stick and there's a USB jack on
the back of the CN computer.
Dan, 5J
jfitch
Mar 8, 2018, 1:14:36 PM3/8/18
to
ka7...@gmail.com
Mar 8, 2018, 2:05:31 PM3/8/18
to
> With 7 buttons, two knobs, and a 114 page manual I'm not sure Zeus has broken any new man-machine interface barriers. Imagine if Google maps on your cell phone came with a 114 page manual.
If Google Maps could do what my glide computer could I would expect a 114 page manual.FWIW my S100 manual is 105 pages and still leaves a bit uncovered. When you consider the capability and versatility of these things 114 pages is nothing. Even for people like me with short attention spans.
Message has been deleted
jfitch
Mar 8, 2018, 6:35:28 PM3/8/18
to
But my point was really UI. There are a couple of modern attempts at flight computers on cell phones: iGlide and WinPilot live. Both have a UI and presentation about 2 decades ahead of LX, LXNav, SYM, etc. Google and Apple have both sunk hundreds of millions of dollars into developing the UI and graphic engines, you cannot expect specialty OS and hardware to keep up in a very small market. The ClearNav have done a better job than most at modernization but is still suffers from the same market realities.
A good gage of UI is "modalism", experts (including the FAA) consider modes generally bad in UI. As a rough gage, the 114 page manual for Zeus mentions "mode" 77 times. The iGlide 16 page manual mentions "mode" twice, both referring to the simulator mode which is not used in setup or flight.
Dan Daly
Mar 8, 2018, 7:12:48 PM3/8/18
to
Andrzej Kobus
Mar 8, 2018, 8:36:08 PM3/8/18
to
On Thursday, March 8, 2018 at 6:35:28 PM UTC-5, jfitch wrote:
Dan Marotta
Mar 8, 2018, 8:47:23 PM3/8/18
to
I don't disagree with what you said about software, but I haven't seen a
cell phone which comes close to a ClearNav for direct sunlight
readability. Admittedly, I haven't seen all of them, but those
presented on this forum with grand claims of brightness fall short, IMO.
--
Dan, 5J
cell phone which comes close to a ClearNav for direct sunlight
readability. Admittedly, I haven't seen all of them, but those
presented on this forum with grand claims of brightness fall short, IMO.
Dan, 5J
Darryl Ramm
Mar 8, 2018, 9:09:18 PM3/8/18
to
Luke Szczepaniak
Mar 9, 2018, 9:09:24 AM3/9/18
to
"The ClearNav have done a better job than most at modernization"
This statement literally made me blow coffee out my nose.
I have flown with XCSoar, LXNav, LXNavigation and ClearNav systems, each has advantages and disadvantages. The CN system is "simple" to use and the vario coupled with the square display is superb, probably the best I have flown with so far. To call it modern however, is a far stretch. The user interface is straight out of a 1980's video game console as are the CGA graphics. ClearNav is essentially Glide Navigator II - Colour with updated tasking support.
Luke Szczepaniak
Roy B.
Mar 9, 2018, 9:14:52 AM3/9/18
to
This statement literally made me blow coffee out my nose.
Thanks for that image, Luke. You actually made me laugh out loud.
Roy
cliff...@gmail.com
Mar 9, 2018, 10:20:08 AM3/9/18
to
I agree with Darryl, I absoulutly love foreflight and they have added a glide amoeba which in the 170 I fly in it with, is one step closer to making it something I would put in my 27. I admittedly have only a garmin 196 and a SN10B for my 27 now and have not flown with a clearnav or lxnav. I have flown with xc soar on a android But I would replace my 196 with a Ipad mini running foreflight now if I had the room.
jfitch
Mar 9, 2018, 11:35:02 AM3/9/18
to
jfitch
Mar 9, 2018, 11:44:01 AM3/9/18
to
The main thing I find missing from iGlide is the ability to do a MAT task in any reasonable way. To compare screen visibility you need to look at an OLED cell phone - the last generation LED where as you say not bad but not as bright as LX/CN/etc.
Dan Marotta
Mar 9, 2018, 12:36:00 PM3/9/18
to
Cliff,
Think outside of the panel. My LAK-17a had a very small panel so, to mount my Dell Streak 5" display, I used two Adel clamps in line attached to the side of the panel and a flex mount to hold the mini tablet. I placed it on the left side, angled so that it was perfectly visible but didn't block any instruments.
HERE is a picture of my installation. Something like this might work for you.
Think outside of the panel. My LAK-17a had a very small panel so, to mount my Dell Streak 5" display, I used two Adel clamps in line attached to the side of the panel and a flex mount to hold the mini tablet. I placed it on the left side, angled so that it was perfectly visible but didn't block any instruments.
HERE is a picture of my installation. Something like this might work for you.
On 3/9/2018 8:20 AM,
cliff...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree with Darryl, I absoulutly love foreflight and they have added a glide amoeba which in the 170 I fly in it with, is one step closer to making it something I would put in my 27. I admittedly have only a garmin 196 and a SN10B for my 27 now and have not flown with a clearnav or lxnav. I have flown with xc soar on a android But I would replace my 196 with a Ipad mini running foreflight now if I had the room.
--
Dan, 5J
Dan, 5J
Dan Marotta
Mar 9, 2018, 12:36:43 PM3/9/18
to
And I prefer redheads, but that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with
blondes...
--
Dan, 5J
blondes...
Dan, 5J
waremark
Mar 10, 2018, 7:28:48 AM3/10/18
to
For someone who doesn't enjoy playing with these things, the most important advice is to choose the one your friends have, and study it on the ground.
cliff...@gmail.com
Mar 10, 2018, 9:11:04 PM3/10/18
to
Hi Dan yes my 27 panel is full and I have the 196 on a ram mount of of the panel kinda the same as yours :)
raxy...@gmail.com
Mar 11, 2018, 12:31:37 AM3/11/18
to
After suffering for many years with Microsoft, I am now a Mac person, but keep my ancient Vista PC running since glider companies seem to only offer PC software. I wish they would offer Mac versions. I do like LXNav hardware, but their user manual is appalling, since it tries to combine all their many products into one document, and is written by someone who thinks they can speak english, but actually can't.
jfitch
Mar 11, 2018, 1:32:31 AM3/11/18
to
On Saturday, March 10, 2018 at 9:31:37 PM UTC-8, raxy...@gmail.com wrote:
> After suffering for many years with Microsoft, I am now a Mac person, but keep my ancient Vista PC running since glider companies seem to only offer PC software. I wish they would offer Mac versions. I do like LXNav hardware, but their user manual is appalling, since it tries to combine all their many products into one document, and is written by someone who thinks they can speak english, but actually can't.
You can always run VMWare or Parallels, for those rare moments when you need to run corrupt and adulterate your computer to run a Windoz program.
> After suffering for many years with Microsoft, I am now a Mac person, but keep my ancient Vista PC running since glider companies seem to only offer PC software. I wish they would offer Mac versions. I do like LXNav hardware, but their user manual is appalling, since it tries to combine all their many products into one document, and is written by someone who thinks they can speak english, but actually can't.
Jonathan St. Cloud
Mar 11, 2018, 10:58:54 AM3/11/18
to
On Saturday, March 10, 2018 at 9:31:37 PM UTC-8, raxy...@gmail.com wrote:
> After suffering for many years with Microsoft, I am now a Mac person, but keep my ancient Vista PC running since glider companies seem to only offer PC software. I wish they would offer Mac versions. I do like LXNav hardware, but their user manual is appalling, since it tries to combine all their many products into one document, and is written by someone who thinks they can speak english, but actually can't.
Why don't you download the manual for your device. I have never seen a LXNav manual is for more than one device. For the LX9070 the manual is very good as it is for the S3, the ACL and remote stick.
raxy...@gmail.com
Mar 11, 2018, 11:05:03 PM3/11/18
to
can you send me the link to the LX8080 user manual (English) please? On the LXNav website, I can only see a single user manual that covers all the 80xx and 90xx models.
thanks
Message has been deleted
Hal
Mar 12, 2018, 2:22:50 PM3/12/18
to
Keep the CN user interphase the way it is. Have you tried to manipulate a touch screen while bouncing in turbulence?
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages