A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

ClearVav vs. LXNav



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old February 3rd 18, 05:35 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tango Eight
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 636
Default ClearVav vs. LXNav

On Friday, February 2, 2018 at 7:58:41 PM UTC-5, RW wrote:
On Thursday, February 1, 2018 at 11:31:15 PM UTC-5, 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We are working on cleaning up ClearNav marketing and improving the outdated website.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


LX continues software upgrades to older models,
ClearNav seemed to left owners of CN1 forgotten.
If someone spends over $2000 for CN2 now, and you develop CN3 next year.....

Ryszard


Ryszard... you left out the fact that at CN2 intro, everyone with a CN1 was offered the chance to upgrade their existing CN to CN2 for $1000. New processor, new screen, new software, new baro calibration and a new 2 year warranty. It's true, they didn't send a white gloved tech in a Bentley out to your airport to service it in your glider while you waited, but come on...

The truth is, software development ended on CN1 because CN1 hardware could not support what needed doing.

best regards,
Evan Ludeman
Ads
  #22  
Old February 3rd 18, 08:05 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,780
Default ClearVav vs. LXNav

On Friday, February 2, 2018 at 11:35:33 PM UTC-5, Tango Eight wrote:
On Friday, February 2, 2018 at 7:58:41 PM UTC-5, RW wrote:
On Thursday, February 1, 2018 at 11:31:15 PM UTC-5, 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.

  #23  
Old February 4th 18, 02:02 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Jonathan St. Cloud
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,039
Default 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?


Wonder if anyone using a LX Navigation computer care to comment?
  #24  
Old February 4th 18, 05:26 PM
RickH RickH is offline
Junior Member
 
First recorded activity by AviationBanter: Feb 2016
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan St. Cloud View Post
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?


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
  #25  
Old February 5th 18, 08:14 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
RW[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 50
Default ClearVav vs. LXNav

On Saturday, February 3, 2018 at 2:05:48 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Friday, February 2, 2018 at 11:35:33 PM UTC-5, Tango Eight wrote:
On Friday, February 2, 2018 at 7:58:41 PM UTC-5, RW wrote:
On Thursday, February 1, 2018 at 11:31:15 PM UTC-5, 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

LX continues software upgrades to older models,
ClearNav seemed to left owners of CN1 forgotten.
If someone spends over $2000 for CN2 now, and you develop CN3 next year....

Ryszard


Ryszard... you left out the fact that at CN2 intro, everyone with a CN1 was offered the chance to upgrade their existing CN to CN2 for $1000. New processor, new screen, new software, new baro calibration and a new 2 year warranty. It's true, they didn't send a white gloved tech in a Bentley out to your airport to service it in your glider while you waited, but come on...

The truth is, software development ended on CN1 because CN1 hardware could not support what needed doing.

best regards,
Evan Ludeman


AAAAnd
ClearNav 1 works very well. It is just slow when integrated with Flarm.
UH


Just for the record, I flew little with LX9000, a lot with CN2(2.5 years) and a lot my favorite CN1(7.5 years).I don't see speed difference between CN1 and CN2 connected to PowerFlarm or FlarmMouse.
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
  #26  
Old February 5th 18, 10:28 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,780
Default ClearVav vs. LXNav

On Monday, February 5, 2018 at 2:14:04 PM UTC-5, RW wrote:
On Saturday, February 3, 2018 at 2:05:48 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Friday, February 2, 2018 at 11:35:33 PM UTC-5, Tango Eight wrote:
On Friday, February 2, 2018 at 7:58:41 PM UTC-5, RW wrote:
On Thursday, February 1, 2018 at 11:31:15 PM UTC-5, 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

LX continues software upgrades to older models,
ClearNav seemed to left owners of CN1 forgotten.
If someone spends over $2000 for CN2 now, and you develop CN3 next year....

Ryszard

Ryszard... you left out the fact that at CN2 intro, everyone with a CN1 was offered the chance to upgrade their existing CN to CN2 for $1000. New processor, new screen, new software, new baro calibration and a new 2 year warranty. It's true, they didn't send a white gloved tech in a Bentley out to your airport to service it in your glider while you waited, but come on...

The truth is, software development ended on CN1 because CN1 hardware could not support what needed doing.

best regards,
Evan Ludeman


AAAAnd
ClearNav 1 works very well. It is just slow when integrated with Flarm.
UH


Just for the record, I flew little with LX9000, a lot with CN2(2.5 years) and a lot my favorite CN1(7.5 years).I don't see speed difference between CN1 and CN2 connected to PowerFlarm or FlarmMouse.
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


My experiences are a little different.
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
  #27  
Old February 6th 18, 03:07 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
RW[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 50
Default ClearVav vs. LXNav

On Monday, February 5, 2018 at 4:28:06 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Monday, February 5, 2018 at 2:14:04 PM UTC-5, RW wrote:
On Saturday, February 3, 2018 at 2:05:48 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Friday, February 2, 2018 at 11:35:33 PM UTC-5, Tango Eight wrote:
On Friday, February 2, 2018 at 7:58:41 PM UTC-5, RW wrote:
On Thursday, February 1, 2018 at 11:31:15 PM UTC-5, 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

LX continues software upgrades to older models,
ClearNav seemed to left owners of CN1 forgotten.
If someone spends over $2000 for CN2 now, and you develop CN3 next year....

Ryszard

Ryszard... you left out the fact that at CN2 intro, everyone with a CN1 was offered the chance to upgrade their existing CN to CN2 for $1000. New processor, new screen, new software, new baro calibration and a new 2 year warranty. It's true, they didn't send a white gloved tech in a Bentley out to your airport to service it in your glider while you waited, but come on...

The truth is, software development ended on CN1 because CN1 hardware could not support what needed doing.

best regards,
Evan Ludeman

AAAAnd
ClearNav 1 works very well. It is just slow when integrated with Flarm.
UH


Just for the record, I flew little with LX9000, a lot with CN2(2.5 years) and a lot my favorite CN1(7.5 years).I don't see speed difference between CN1 and CN2 connected to PowerFlarm or FlarmMouse.
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


My experiences are a little different.
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


6 competitions we compare CN1 with CN2, all identical settings.
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
  #28  
Old February 6th 18, 02:07 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tango Eight
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 636
Default ClearVav vs. LXNav

On Monday, February 5, 2018 at 9:08:00 PM UTC-5, RW wrote:
On Monday, February 5, 2018 at 4:28:06 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Monday, February 5, 2018 at 2:14:04 PM UTC-5, RW wrote:
On Saturday, February 3, 2018 at 2:05:48 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Friday, February 2, 2018 at 11:35:33 PM UTC-5, Tango Eight wrote:
On Friday, February 2, 2018 at 7:58:41 PM UTC-5, RW wrote:
On Thursday, February 1, 2018 at 11:31:15 PM UTC-5, 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

LX continues software upgrades to older models,
ClearNav seemed to left owners of CN1 forgotten.
If someone spends over $2000 for CN2 now, and you develop CN3 next year....

Ryszard

Ryszard... you left out the fact that at CN2 intro, everyone with a CN1 was offered the chance to upgrade their existing CN to CN2 for $1000.. New processor, new screen, new software, new baro calibration and a new 2 year warranty. It's true, they didn't send a white gloved tech in a Bentley out to your airport to service it in your glider while you waited, but come on...

The truth is, software development ended on CN1 because CN1 hardware could not support what needed doing.

best regards,
Evan Ludeman

AAAAnd
ClearNav 1 works very well. It is just slow when integrated with Flarm.
UH

Just for the record, I flew little with LX9000, a lot with CN2(2.5 years) and a lot my favorite CN1(7.5 years).I don't see speed difference between CN1 and CN2 connected to PowerFlarm or FlarmMouse.
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


My experiences are a little different.
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


6 competitions we compare CN1 with CN2, all identical settings.
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


Yeah, but in the personal computer, PDA and cell phone biz things are a little different, no? Still reading r.a.s. on a Win 98 system with a US Robotics modem running at 56K. Still got that metro-sexy Motorola flip phone on your belt? Didn't think so. I still cut my grass and blow snow with a 1968 Gravely walk behind tractor. Works great. Throws snow over the power lines (yes, really). Great fun. I still think of the engine as "new" (I replaced it in June 2000). Different technology stream, not relevant.

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

  #29  
Old February 6th 18, 06:58 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Gerry Simpson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default ClearVav vs. LXNav

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.
  #30  
Old February 6th 18, 10:25 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Charlie M. (UH & 002 owner/pilot)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,035
Default ClearVav vs. LXNav

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.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New LXNAV Wi-Fi Module Paul Remde Soaring 13 February 28th 18 04:34 AM
LXNAV V7 and WinPilot Pro [email protected] Soaring 6 November 14th 13 04:35 PM
F.S. LxNav V3 variometer Nick Kennedy Soaring 1 November 13th 13 06:00 AM
LXNAV Flarmview [email protected] Soaring 2 September 29th 13 01:47 AM
LXNAV V7 Paul Remde Soaring 2 November 2nd 11 01:31 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.