Equipment Installation Manual, GDC31 Roll Steering Converter RECORD OF REVISIONS REV DESCRIPTION DATE APPROVED IR INITIAL RELEASE E266 4-5-04 LW A Correct P/N of mating connector E269 4/8/04 L Wootton. 4 FOREWORD The Century Flight Systems Century 41 Autopilot is an advances General Aviation Flight control System utilizing “State of the Art” electronic techniques. In this handbook we have detailed the features, functions, and general operating instructions of the Century 41 System. May we suggest that you do two things: 1.

Everything You NEED TO KNOW about Piper “Legacy” Autopilots By Bob Hart –If you’ve been following my articles, you know that I believe an autopilot (even a basic wing-leveler) belongs in any aircraft that intends to spend time in the clouds in IFR flight. The less time a pilot has spent in IFR conditions (e.g. A low time pilot with a fresh IFR ticket), the more an autopilot is needed.After World War II and the Korean Conflict came to an end, the U.S. Economy moved in a very positive –UP! The General Aviation industry, primed by the economy and pilots with wartime flying experience, grew quickly with Cessna, Piper, and Beechcraft taking the lead in small aircraft sales. Increased sales spawned innovation, not only in aircraft design, but also in avionics. By the late ‘50s, several companies, including ARC (for Cessna), Tactair, Lear, Sperry, Brittain, and Mitchell were also developing autopilots.Don Mitchell designed his first autopilot and installed it in a Beechcraft in the early ‘50s.

By 1961, Mitchell/Edo Aire had six models of autopilot available, ranging from the basic Co-pilot, a single-axis wing-leveler with heading lock to the Commander, a fully automatic, two-axis system with features way beyond its day. This became the foundation for Piper Autopilots and later, in 1983, Mitchell/Edo Aire became Century Flight Systems who continue to make autopilots for Piper Aircraft.Early Piper Autopilots were made by Mitchell and labeled as Piper Autopilots until Century Flight Systems was established and, at that point, autopilots found in Piper aircraft were labeled Century models. Piper first offered a factory installed autopilot in 1958, though it was an option even on the relatively basic Tripacer. The Aztec was the workhorse of the Piper fleet at the time, and autopilots were a popular option even then. Now, let’s look at some autopilot basics and then we’ll take a look at the legacy autopilots that were available from the Piper factory starting with the earliest versions.First, autopilots are available in single-axis (roll) or two-axis (roll and pitch).NOTE: Some autpilots offer a third-axis or yaw damper option (or separate yaw damper) which is designed to compensate for excessive adverse yaw caused by aircraft design (as in the case of the V-tail Bonanza) or excessive turbulence. These are most often found in twins and charter aircraft to dampen yaw and make the flight more comfortable for passengers.Autopilots are also available as either r ate-based (where the turn coordinator is the primary sensing device) or a ttitude/position-based (where the artificial horizon serves as the sensor for roll and pitch.

There are pros and cons to both types. Turn coordinators are electric and are considerably more reliable than a vacuum-based artificial horizon. Plus, a vacuum pump failure is more likely to occur vs. A total electrical failure. In short, an all-electric, rate-based autopilot has less pathways to an inflight failure. Today, all STEC autopilots are rate-based.

On the other hand, attitude/position-based autopilots are reported as “smoother” and better able to handle turbulence.Single axis (roll only) autopilots keep the wings level and most can track an omni, GPS or localizer. Some, when interfaced to a directional gyro with autopilot interface (heading “bug”) or HSI can track a heading. This is a real nice feature if you spend a lot of time in controlled airspace where vectoring is frequent. Roll-only autopilots have no way to sense or control altitude.Conversely, two-axis autopilots provide full roll control (as above), can maintain a heading (with DG/HSI option) and can hold an altitude.

In fact, better two-axis autopilots can add additional altitude features like altitude pre-select and vertical speed control. Some even have glidescope tracking capability and, frequently, automatic trim—or at the least an “out of trim” warning. It should be fairly obvious that the more sophisticated the aircraft, the more sophisticated the autopilot.Here’s a look at the legacy autopilots that were available from Piper starting with the early days.AutoFliteBased on Mitchell’s basic model, the Piper AutoFlite was a simple, remote-mounted wing leveler.

It consisted of a remote-mounted rate gyro, a servo, and a panel-mounted switch. Turn it on, and the wings would (or should) remain level. An optional tracker was available which allowed the unit to track a VOR bearing. It worked, but reliability was an issue.As more capable autopilots were developed using vacuum gyros, the all-electric AutoFlite was sometimes installed as a backup to the system in the event of a failure of the primary autopilot.

The original AutoFlite is not a viable unit today, and it’s rare to find one installed—much less one that’s installed AND still functioning.AutoFlite IIThe AutoFlite II was an upgrade to the original model with a panel-mounted turn-coordinator (rate gyro), which also served as the controller and a servo. Omni tracking was built-in. It was an all-electric, rate-based wing-leveler with tracking, but had no ability to maintain a heading. This unit went through a few modifications over the years and later became known as the Century I, which is still being marketed by Century today.AutoControl IThis was the earliest version of a Piper attitude/position-based autopilot. Back then, Mitchell was also making gyros, and the AutoControl I was a single-axis autopilot that used a 4-inch attitude gyro as the roll sensor. Nav tracking was not available.

This system is not viable today.Altimatic IIPrior to 1965, Piper had introduced their first attempt at a two-axis, attitude-based autopilot in the Altimatic II. It had some unique features like dial-up altitude and autotrim (back then, the need to re-trim was sensed by cable tension). Today, an Altimatic II is not a viable system and maintenance is a poor investment. One issue with early autopilots was the use/limitations of germanium transistors. However, silicon-based transistors became available in the mid-‘60s and brought with them a significant improvement in autopilot reliability.AutoControl III/IIIBIntroduced around 1965, the Piper Autocontrol III is a attitude-based, single-axis autopilot with full roll control including nav, localizer and (today) GPS tracking. It also introduced heading hold with the addition of an autopilot directional gyro or HIS, and an optional radio coupler was available that allowed the pilot to chose between multiple nav sources or heading hold. The AutoControl III was a step up in capability and reliability; and, asside from most units being very “tired,” it’s still considered a viable autopilot today.

Around 1973, Piper introduced the AutoControl IIIB with a redesigned controller and improved design and electronics, thus moving reliability up yet another notch.One weakness in these systems is servo failure, which can sometimes lead to an electrical failure. Nonetheless, these autopilots are worth maintaining. Frankly, most need a complete rebuild, but you should be able to completely overhaul an AutoControl III or IIIB for 1/3 to 1/2 the cost of a new, comparable STEC autopilot—and some go so far as to suggest that the AutoControl III/IIIB, as an attitude-based autopilot, can actually fly the aircraft better!

A completely overhauled and aligned AutoControl III/IIIB should provide you with a reliable and safe autopilot for many years.Altimatic III/IIIB/IIICAround the same time the new AutoControl III was being introduced, Piper introduced the Altimatic III. This was a full-featured two-axis autopilot with all the capability of the AutoControls in roll-axis, but with the addition of altitude hold and autotrim was standard. Plus, an optional radio coupler allowed access to multiple nav sources.

Glideslope coupling and altitude pre-select were also optional.Note that the early versions had issues with altitude pre-select, and the altitude bellows were prone to failure. As a result, Piper introduced the IIIB around 1971 and the IIIB-1 a few years later, and each offered some improvements. The IIIB-1 added a better altitude control sensor and pitch wheel oeration.Reliability improved with each model. The Altimatic IIIC was the final stage in the growth of the Piper two-axis autopilots and actually came from the Century III (described below) with a different controller and faceplate.

At this point, you have a relatively modern, full-featured two-axis autopilot with autotrim, altitude hold, and glideslope coupling. The IIIC is very capable and reliable as long as it remains healthy. Again, all of these units are worth supporting, but many have been in the field for up to 50 years. I’m inclined to suggest that the IIIB through the IIIC are your better bet and, as I mentioned before, you should be able to completely overhaul and align one of these autopilots for 1/3 to 1/2 the cost of a new comparable model.AltimaticV/XPiper also offered two high-end autopilots designed specifically for their heavy metal aircraft. The Altimatic V was actually a Bendix FCS810 autopilot with Piper markings. The Altimatic X (10) was actually a Century IV with a different faceplate. Both are complex, high-end, full-featured autopilots with Flight Directors designed for the needs of pilots flying Navajos and other heavy twins.

We only mention them here to note that if you’re seeking service on one of these units, you really need a shop that knows them!In 1983, as mentioned, Edo Aire/Mitchell became Century Flight Systems and for me things got a little confusing. It’s important, when you talk about these autopilots, that you know whether they are Century or Edo Aire/Mitchell.

Here’s an example: a Piper Autocontrol IIIB is a single-axis roll only autopilot by Edo Aire, while a Century III is a two-axis, full-featured autopilot with altitude hold and all the bells and whistles.Here’s what we saw from Century after the change:Century Flight SystemsOnce the handle on these autopilots changed from Edo Aire/Mitchell to Century Flight Systems, model names changed as well. The Piper AutoFlite II became the Century 1. This is the only dedicated. single-axis, rate-based autopilot still available from Century and it maintains the same capability—it offers roll axis only with tracking, but no heading hold. The lack of heading hold makes this a less desirable option, unless you never find yourself being vectored in controlled airspace. But let’s face it, heading hold is a big plus when the FAA is telling you what to do!.

The modern Century 2000 can be ordered as single-axis.The Piper AutoControl III and IIIB became the Century II and IIB. These are single-axis autopilots with tracking and heading control either through a DG or HSI.

These are very common in Piper legacy aircraft like the Cherokee line. I had a IIB in my Cherokee Six. It was simple and very reliable!The Piper Altimatic III, IIIB, and IIIC became the Century III. These are two-axis, full-featured autopilots with most of the bells and whistles, including altitude hold and glideslope coupling. These are common in Piper performance singles and light twins.The Piper Altimatic X (10) became the Century IV and filled the role of a full-featured autopilot with Flight Director for the heavier Piper twins.Century Flight Systems went on to produce the Century 21, 31, 41, and later, the Century 2000 and Trident models. You can sometimes find these retrofitted in later Piper models.This should give you a decent overview of the Piper and Century Autopilot models and their capability.

HP DVD1040 DRIVERS FOR MAC - The Virtual Agent is currently unavailable. Disconnect the device from your computer. Have one to sell? Ultra Slim USB 3. Windows 10, Windows 8. Download the latest drivers, firmware, and software for your.This is HP’s official website that will help automatically detect and download the correct drivers free of cost for your HP Computing and Printing products for Windows and Mac operating system. Dvd1040 driver for mac Posted on July 23, 2018 by admin If the hard drive on any Unix-based computer fills up completely, the computer will stop booting except in single-user mode, and freeing enough disk space to continue normally while in the single-user Unix command line interface is a non-trivial process indeed. Hp dvd1040 driver for mac. HP DVD1040E DVD WRITER DRIVER FOR WINDOWS MAC - This gives you unprecedented power in creating your discs in a small and inexpensive package. Support Forum Join the conversation! Please make sure that you are posting in the form of a question.

So, let’s talk about other things you need to know about your autopilot!No matter what autopilot you have, whether Edo Aire or Century, it’s important that you know everyting about it—and know it well. This may seem obvious, but it’s not. Your aircraft has a flight manual that should include everything you need to know about your autopilot.

However, many shops that work on autopilots shockingly report that many aircraft owners have actually never read the Flight Manual Supplement for their autopilot!When things go wrong with your autopilot or your electric trim system, you need to know what to do—you need to know its components; you need to know its features; and, perhaps most importantly, you need to know how to disengage it!When things are not going well, immediately disengaging the autopilot should be an oavious response—especially in IFR conditions. Generally speaking, there are three ways to do this:. Most autopilots have (or should have) a disconnect switch on the yoke.

Things can go sour quickly and this is the quickest way to sotp your autopilot from causing it. Be sure to test this switch regularly to make sure it works. The on/off switch on the autopilot’s controller. Pulling the circuit breaker should render the autopilot null. I recommend markig or otherwise identifying the autopilot’s circuit breaker so that you can find it quickly. Also make sure that your circuit breaker can be pulled—some of the early ones can’t.Initially, you will try to “fight” with the autopilot and, fortunately, most autopilots must be able to be overpowered in order to get certified.

But mechanical systems can fail, so you’ll want to minimize the time you fight with the autopilot and they quickest way is to disengage it.All airplanes have trim systems. Two-axis autopilots with altitude features (hold or whatever) typically have an electric trim system. Many have autotrim which automatically trims the aircraft to minimize extra forces on the elevator or trim tab from “out of trim” conditions. Electric trim systems (without autotrim) have a feature called trim prompting. A sensor in either the trim servo or cable system detects excess pressure and “prompts” the pilot (with a annunciator light) to re-trim. Even manual electric trim systems can fail, but a failure in an autotrim system creates real problems and often leads to accidents.The following is an example of just the type of scenario that you must avoid. Again, the message here is to always disengage first!The autopilot suddenly goes into a nose down situation.

The autopilot and autotrim are engaged and the pilot reacts by applying backpressure. Unless the pilot immediately disconnects the autopilot, autotrim does its job by further applying down trim.

As you can imagine, things can get ugly fast, especially at low altitude.And, don’t just use your autopilot in IFR conditions. Use it frequently and respond if you see any anomalies in the autopilot or trim system by communicating these to your aircraft and autopilot mechanic.

This is not the place to try to save money.We talked about rate-based vs. Attitude/position-based autopilots. Rate-based systems use the turn coordinator, which is electric in all modern aircraft and is considerably more reliable than the gyros used on attitude/position-based units. A total electrical failure, even in a single engine aircraft is not very common, and you get many more hours of service from a turn coordinator than you do from attitude gyros—either vacuum (as most are) or electric.When you first turn on your master switch, the spooling up sound that you hear (before engine start) is your turn coordinator. Frankly, when they’re on the way out, they’ll “scream” at you. You’ll want to get that taken care of, especially if you spend time in IFR and depend on your rate based autopilot.Conversely, vacuum gyros used in attitude/position-based autopilots are not so quick to inform you of their pending failure. First of all, you’ve started your engine and it’s much harder to hear your vacuum gyros.

Secondly, by nature, a vacuum attitude gyro is not only vulnerable to its own condition, but it’s vulnerable to the condition of your vacuum pump and filter; and a failure of either will render all of your vacuum instruments inoperable, including your autopilot.Moreover, attitude gyros are subject to bearing wear as well. Generally, as they slow down they will start to tilt and your attitude-based autopilot will follow. You vacuum gauge will not reflect this so you must pay attention. Modern autopilots will normally disengage, but the older ones may not.

We all understand the benefits of wings level in IFR cruise, we also understand the dangers of thinking your level when, in fact, you’re not!This is a good time to mention my “mentor” on this article. Bob Ferguson of Autopilot Central in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

I have a C41. It was inop when I bought the aircraft (porpoising, would track off to the left). I had the computer sent to autopilots central, it was fixed, and the autopilot has been working perfectly ever since. Total cost was somewhere between 500-800 dollars. The MSC that I had remove the computer and send it off said I was throwing good money after bad and suggested I install an STEC55.

The bill on that would have been $15,000+! I'm very happy with my C41 and have had no further problems in the four years I've owned the plane. I no longer use that MSC, by the way.

Just my thoughts. C-41 and KFC/KAP 200 compare head to head. I believe one is probably modeled after the other (C-41 designed to compete with K-200).

The KAP-150 is a more modern autopilot than the 200 or the 41. Probably the better comparision to KAP/KFC-150 is the Century 2000. You don't see many 2000's, but they are pretty good autopilots.From a value standpoint, the Century is a smidge less, just because it says Century on the face and not King. From a function standpoint, I think about identical.Agree on A/P Central in Tulsa.

They can fix just about anything. As long as you don't need it this month. I have a Century 31 AP and from my understanding the only difference between the 41 and the 31 is that the 41 can drive a flight director. My AP works great and I have no issues with it. It will fly the ILS, track a VOR, hold heading, fly a back course, climb, descend, and hold altitude even on bumpy days.When I first purchased my airplane the AP would not track a VOR or ILS and the previous owner did not know what was wrong with it.

He also said it was the only problem he has ever had with the system and he owned the airplane since 1983. Five minutes on the phone with Autopilots Central and they diagnosed the problem. Sent my HSI into them and when we put it back in the AP worked perfect and has been perfect ever since!I would have no hesitations buying another aircraft with the Century AP system in it. Just my thoughts.

However, the real fun begins when the other player joins the party. You and your friend can compete to find out who is a better fighter or unite and fight together with enemy teams controlled by computer AI.Anime crossover projects are always a feast for real fans, because almost everyone who loves these anime series, at least once wondered who would win the fight between such legends as Goku, Ichigo, Naruto or Luffy. Thanks to this, the whole game is consistent and provides even more fun.Just like in almost every game based on Mugen engine, you can play in a variety of modes, from standard Arcade or VS to numerous 2-versus-2 challenges or 1-versus-2 if you're a really hardcore player. Each of the game modes will test your fighting skills and experience. Animes All Stars uses characters created with sprites from Jump Ultimate Stars (JUS) and other works modeled on this style. Capcom fighting all stars mugen download.

C-41 and KFC/KAP 200 compare head to head. I believe one is probably modeled after the other (C-41 designed to compete with K-200). The KAP-150 is a more modern autopilot than the 200 or the 41. Probably the better comparision to KAP/KFC-150 is the Century 2000. You don't see many 2000's, but they are pretty good autopilots.From a value standpoint, the Century is a smidge less, just because it says Century on the face and not King.

From a function standpoint, I think about identical.Agree on A/P Central in Tulsa. They can fix just about anything. As long as you don't need it this month.I've only seen Century 2000s in the lean machines from the late 80s that didn't come from the factory with an autopilot.

I'm sure there are a few replacements where the King system was removed and the Century installed, but I don't think the Century 2000 was ever installed by Mooney (not that it matters). I have no experience with the King autopilots, but there is no comparison between a Century 41/31 and one of the STEC boxes. The Century autopilots are both rate based and attitude based and will fly the airplane in turbulence far better than the STEC.

I have been very happy with my Century 41. It has been reliable and the only problem I have had in the past ten years was fixed with a small screw driver on the front control panel.

The Century 41 can be bought new but is intended for larger airplanes. They are quite expensive (new) and heavier than an STEC but they are excellent autopilots. The factory in Mineral Wells, TX provides excellent service on this autopilot.

Over the years I have owned aircraft with King (KAP150, KFC200), STEC (30 and 40), and a TruTrac in my LSA, autopilots, as well as a fair amount of time in Pipers with various Century models, and Cessna's ARC autopilots. My favorite: the KAP150, even though I am currently having LAC Avionics and Honeywell run down a minor up and down nose bobbing. Honeywell is supporting the Bendix King/Allied/Honeywell product line. The best of all is probably the new Garmin autopilots integrated with their 1000.2000.3000 series of glass panels, but that will have to wait until I win the lottery. I am using an Icarus SAM (as are several Mooney owners on this forum) between the GTN 750 and the KAP150. The combination is amazing on the intercepts, and changes in headings following flight plans. Very smooth transitions.

I currently have both, have flow 700+ hrs with the Century 41 in my Saratoga and only 10 hrs with the KAP 150 in my Mooney Rocket. I have had both sent in for repairs! I will say the service I received from Century (Matt whom is the service manager at Century) was outstanding. The 150 is due back Monday from a AP shop in the Midwest my Avionics shop sent it to, we will see how it works out.

When both are working correctly in my opinion both perform very close to the same, I like the panel features and the self test of the Century 41 more than I do the KAP. Both are more than acquitted autopilots, especially in IMC where to me they really count. I have spend a fair amount of time in IMC lately where I fully enjoy the benefits and safety of a correctly functioning autopilot!I hope to pick up my Mooney this next week with the new avionics panel and correctly working autopilot, Ill let you know how it all works out.

To add to this thread- my 'new' missile has a KFC150. After about 250 hours using the C41 vs 20 using the KFC150, I think the C41 is a better autopilot, despite the lack of a flight director. It flew the plane better on approaches, coupled better in nav mode, and didn't have to hunt as much to figure out wind corrections. With the KFC150- I fly in the approach mode any time I couple to the GPS (so far); it's the only way it tracks as well as the C41 tracked in the nav mode. Could just be my A/P. But I'm about 95% sure it's functioning correctly: just a more 'budget' system.Edit: my C41 didn't have a flight director, but you can get the C41 with one.