G meter - anybody has one?

The MVP50(T) engine instrument can have one (or two or three), and since I had a free spot, I specified it for the MVP50T installation, for vertical acceleration only.

Hmmm, how hard it was? Assuming you had reset the max indicator prior to landing…at least mine which is a simple one, not so clever.
Perhaps the G3X takes into account the landing and reports it as such?

I have asked the authority more than once, that, considering that G loads in the airplane are limitations to be obeyed by the pilot, how does the pilot abide the G load limitations when a G meter is not specified as minimum equipment. ’Never go an answer…

The assumption is that one know how to control speed (ASI) and bank angle (AOB) very accurately, then they should be able to control G < max G limit

When one is not able to fly ASI or AOB accurately (say due to turbulence), they are expected to slowdown and fly VA such that the aircraft stalls before hitting max G limits

The MVP50(T) engine instrument can have one (or two or three), and since I had a free spot, I specified it for the MVP50T installation, for vertical acceleration only.

The one I posted previously was from MVP50

“Can anyone offer a view on what (if anything) of relevance a G meter reads after a heavy landing?”
For many GA, for landing, I think it is irrelevant. For wing supported operation it makes sense. But most larger aircraft have undercarriages for smooth runway use. Some GA undercarriages are intended for rough surfaces, and may survive higher G loads than in flight. And ab-initio trainer undercarriages??

IIRC there are accelerometer loggers around. If I’d rent my future plane (2 years delay since 2 years, don’t ask) out, I’m considering having one installed. So if there are uncalled for aerobatics or harsh landings and everyone is wondering where the cracks in the skin come from, you can check. But that’s probably personal data right about now, so full disclosure is neccessary.

@Inkognito those data loggers can give false positives. Someone once mis-transcribed the POH on a Zlin to a checklist where the G data logger was energised before engine start, instead of after engine start as called for by the POH. Either the surge from the starter or the shaky engine mounts would log a G incident event on engine start. The Zlin had an excellent nitrogen capsule wing spar G exceedance system which caused a warning to flash if the wing spar had been over stressed, this seems a system which all aerobatic aircraft should have adopted?

Very honest aircraft and I would venture a superior Czech version of the Bulldog.

A G meter is a requirement for aerobatics. Don’t know if it actually is a requirement in some actual EU regulations, but you won’t be allowed in any competitions without a G meter. You will not find a plane used for aerobatics training without a G meter.

It has two uses:

1. Together with ASI it’s the instrument to glance at to get the initial setting right. For instance in a loop, the speed has to be correct, and the initial G has to be correct for the loop to look right. Airspeed and G are the two most important “tactical” instruments.
2. To see if the aircraft has been overstressed (in unintentional happenings)

I don’t know if anybody here used to watch Red Bull Air Races. There the G meter was sent over telemetry to the TV screen. They regularly pulled 12+ g – and got disqualified It for sure was the reason most people got disqualified.

I don’t know what use it possibly could have in a “normal” GA aircraft. But, a typical carbon UL is usually only “rated” for +4 -2 G (or some similar “GA like” numbers). The actual load it can take (wing, fuselage etc) is much larger, often 10+ G. There it could make some sense perhaps, at least on the very fast ones.

I don’t recall having G-meters in aerobatic vintage wooden gliders (Annex12) but the fibergrass gliders had them (EASA)

We have a G-meter in our L-33 glider.