ClearVav vs. LXNav

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.

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.Â* 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.Â* 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".Â* 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.



On 3/7/2018 8:57 PM, wrote:
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.


--
Dan, 5J

On Thursday, March 8, 2018 at 10:27:12 AM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
Ben, if you prefer the LX unit, why not simply say so?


Nope, wrong assumption.

I'm just pointing out the CN MFD requires extra planning and is more trouble to mount. ClearNav complicates the fit/no fit decision by not readily providing "should not have to request" dimensional data.

The ClearNav II is a fine navigational computer and is especially good when combined with the XC CNv digital display. I believe David Masson is responsible for it's current software and it is outstanding.