Accessories

Collecting, assimilating, and safely deciding what to do about weather is one of the hardest things we pilots do. But it seems like every computer platform to do this has a drawback. Weather terminals at FBOs are handy but require lots of clicks. I might drill down through many pages for METARs-a U.S. map, region map, and a state map-then scroll a long alphabetical list of stations. I go to more screens for TAFs, winds and temps, PIREPS, forecasts and satellite images. Then I try to picture the data on my route. For airport info, I pull out a book. Flight planning software puts all the weather around one route. But it requires a computer, software and, often, arduous setup and learning. Fine for home or office, but not ideal on the road. There are Web-based products to overlay METARs, TAFs, PIREPs and winds graphically on a route map. But evolution of cell phones into hand-held computers means there’s an even more convenient option. Here are the four leaders in cell phone weather. Note that your phone determines your choices or, perhaps, vice-versa.

Just about everybody has one or more budget headsets. Perhaps you purchased one as your primary headset when you couldnt afford anything fancier or youve bought them for passengers or as spares. Having reviewed ANR and pricier passive headsets in previous issues (see Aviation Consumer May and July 2007) were examining budget headsets in this report. As in earlier reports, all of the headsets weve evaluated are circumaural-they fit around your ear against the side of your head. At the budget end of the spectrum-in this case generally less than $150-the market leans towards house-branded headsets. In this case, Gulf Coast Avionics loaned us three of their house-branded headsets and we tested a LightSPEED QFR and the AVCOMM 200P. Pilot USA was unable to supply a headset in time for our testing. In our previous review of passive headsets, we tested the Flightcom Classic 4DLX in this price range so weve recapped those results. We measured the headsets in a professional audio lab, then subjected them to flight trials by a focus group. This has proven to be a successful way to evaluate headsets because in the end, how the headset sounds and its comfort level are what count most.

One thing from our survey was crystal clear: Most pilots love their current headset. An astounding 90 percent of the over 900 pilots who answered our survey considered their headset to be a good value after using it in the field for some time. Considering the majority of respondents had their headset for more than four years, thats saying something. When asked if, knowing what they know now, would they go out and buy the same headset again, 86 percent said they would. Several of the “no” votes were just because they wanted to upgrade to active noise reduction (ANR), Bluetooth or a cell phone interface. Such rosy-cheeked satisfaction isn’t what we usually see on these surveys. Does it mean you’ll be happy with whatever you buy? Hardly. Performance is largely in the eye of the beholder. If there’s one takeaway from this survey, its that the best headset for you depends on your mission, your wallet and, most importantly, your head.

Datalink weather from WSI (Weather Services International) or through XM-based WxWorx, are far more alike than different. Even the pricing is identical for the basic and second-tier service, at $29.99 and $49.99 a month respectively. But close examination reveals a few key differences. Remember that vendors, such as Avidyne or NavAero, decide how to display the data from either service in any manner they choose, and even what data to display. WSI (WSI InFlight) and WxWorx (WxWorx on Wings) both provide their own software that displays all of their broadcast products, so thats what we’ll use for our head-to-head comparison. Ground-based radar is the cash cow of both services. Its high glance-value is the reason why pilots justify the fixed $30 or $50 monthly subscription. There is no clear-cut winner since both vendors broadcast a nearly identical ground-based radar product thatll tell you where you are likely to spill your coffee.

Its no secret serious use of a personal airplane requires climbing far above pattern and practice altitudes where the air is thinner and true airspeeds peak. That, more than anything else, may explain the veritable explosion in complete, state-of-the-art portable oxygen systems and the accessories that go with them. If your airplane doesnt have built-in oxygen, and the time and money to add it isn’t in the cards, youre a prime candidate for a portable system. Total cost for a two-user system? Under $500. But if you usually carry more people or need a few bells and whistles, things start getting complicated: The choices available from some vendors can be almost as dizzying as five hours in the teens without O2. In the January 2008 issue, we examined in detail new accessories such as regulators and cannulas, but we skipped discussing full systems. So in this article, were considering the whole enchilada, so to speak-complete, in the box systems. Since we last examined this topic five years ago, the market has become more competitive and there are some excellent values out there.

Bose created the first aviation noise-canceling headset and has always held the title of “Best Performer.” Many manufacturers have challenged the champ, but nobody has equaled Bose performance and comfort, although some have improved the features and value. Now, LightSPEED, with a reputation for solid-performing economical headsets, has introduced the Zulu that, while not clearly superior, may we’ll be preferable to many buyers. LightSPEED has clearly targeted the Bose X with the Zulu. Sound quality is as good or better and the Zulu clearly surpasses the Bose with features. The Zulu is also in the Boses price stratum, although still about 15 percent less. They even look somewhat similar. Of note to some pilots is that the Zulus mic is not reversible – the mic is always on the left when youre properly wearing the headset. The Bose mic is reversible, but requires a screwdriver to do so. The Bose is a TSOd headset; the Zulu is not. But this is of little significance to the GA pilot.

You just got a new cellphone equipped with a slick Bluetooth headset. You love the wireless freedom and you idly wonder if the same technology could alleviate the tangle of wires from your portable cockpit gadgets. While you dream of this luxury, you realize that your cellphone headset doesnt always work quite right and you question if Bluetooth in the cockpit is the best idea. Youre right in both views. Bluetooth wireless is one of those great ideas that works we’ll most of the time and can be quite useful, especially with a hands-free cellphone headset. But its tender enough to cause frustration for some users, especially if the equipment isn’t we’ll designed or there’s electromagnetic interference where you happen to be. (These days, that can be everywhere.)

Not so long ago, when using oxygen in the cockpit graduated from being a nice-idea to the must-have phase, the equipment took a quantum leap forward. In case you havent looked recently-and we have-state-of-the-art oxygen gear is better than ever, so good, in fact, that it may be time to toss that converted medical junk and upgrade.But what to buy? To find out, we recently scanned some of the latest offerings from the top oxygen suppliers in general aviation. What we found was more choices in regulators, flowmeters, cannulas, masks, conservers and monitoring devices, all at competitive prices. In fact, since we last reviewed oxygen equipment in our August 2001 issue, the industry has almost reinvented itself, due in part to advances in the medical market.

If your older airplane is like ours, its powerplant and electrical system gauges resemble what was left behind on the factory floor when GM built its last 1937 Buick. Until recently, though, if we wanted to upgrade our factory instrumentation from what Beech or Cessna decided was adequate, we were stuck figuring out how to install round or square gauges from companies like UMA and Mitchell into rectangular holes. Those gauges are excellent products, but feature few bells or whistles. And few aftermarket engine monitors are equipped or approved for the primary-read “only”-display of information like oil pressure or how much fuel remains in the left tank.

For a couple of hundred bucks, a handheld VHF radio is cheap insurance against a comm failure and its useful for obtaining clearances on the ground or just monitoring ATC. As we reported in our October 2005 mega-review of VHF handhelds, the would-be buyer has plenty of options. In our previous wrap-up, we picked the Sportys SP-200 and ICOM IC-A6 as our top choices. Since then, Vertex Standard has introduced the VXA-710 Spirit and the VXA-220, touted as improved versions of the previous models. Are these good enough to knock Sportys and ICOM off the VHF pedestal? Unfortunately, we don’t think so. If anything, at least one of the models may be a step backward, in our estimation.

Following our report on active noise reduction headsets in the May issues, the e-mails trickled in. With all those expensive lab tests, why the heck didnt you guys publish good numbers on noise reduction values? a couple of readers asked. After all, manufacturers do this. Well concede the point, but its not as simple as that.

With the exception of GPS, hardly any segment of the GA gadget and accessories market lacks for competition. Thats especially true of headsets, where there are dozens of models to pick from in both active and passive noise reduction designs. There are so many, in fact, that its impractical to test them all. So for this article, we picked seven popular passive headsets and wrung them out, both in the audio laboratory and in an impartial, focus-group aircraft test.Interestingly, our lab findings and inflight results diverged dramatically on some of the headsets. It turns out that just because a headset has good lab numbers doesnt mean its a go-to model in the airplane. Comfort and perceived audio quality can and should rule the decision.