> As well as being the best product available, the Airmaster had the
> only controller that would have fitted into my crowded instrument
> panel at that time. This may be a consideration for those who are
> considering retrofitting. I haven't seen the Arplast controller yet
> but it is probably very similar.
The Arplast controller was designed to use the same amount of panel
space as the Rotax analogue tacho. One of my goals was to be able to
replace the Rotax unit. In my panel the tacho is closely surrounded
by other instruments so it was important that the thing did not
require more space. As the controller replaces the original Arplast
control box as well, quite a good saving in volume (as well as weight)
is achieved.
To go back to one of the questions in the original posting, I think
everyone who has a CS prop (whatever the make) and a 912 will agree
that the takeoff and climb performance achieved is really very good
given the relatively small engine size. As William Mills reported, you
can operate a 912 powered mono out of a small farm strip if you have a
VP (preferably as CS) prop (and the requisite skill/experience, of
course).
Mark
|