ClearVav vs. LXNav

On Tuesday, January 30, 2018 at 7:11:39 AM UTC-8, 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?

One consideration is screen size. As eyes age, big is better. the LX9070 has a 7 inch screen.

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

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.

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

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.

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

On Thursday, February 1, 2018 at 11:06:00 PM UTC-5, 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 :-)).

best,
Evan Ludeman / T8

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 :-)

With that in mind and what Rex posted, I think it's a tough call on which is "better".

5Z

Does anyone have any idea what the number of installations is for each brand worldwide and / or in the US?

Just curious.

Lou