15
Spent $1200 on a fancy signal analyzer and I kinda regret it
I know everyone says you need a high-end portable analyzer for troubleshooting comms issues, but I'm not convinced. I bought the RigExpert AA-6500 about eight months ago, thinking it would save me hours chasing down intermittent VHF glitches. It's a great unit, don't get me wrong, but for 90% of the problems I see on the GA fleet at our local field, my old trusty multimeter and a known-good comm box for swapping does the job just as fast. The analyzer is super precise and shows you pretty graphs, but by the time I've set it up and interpreted the readings, I could have already isolated the fault the old-fashioned way. It feels like overkill unless you're working on glass cockpit stuff every single day. Has anyone else found that simpler methods are often faster for basic line maintenance?
3 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In3 Comments
thea2462mo ago
Ever think about how much you actually use the graphs versus just needing a simple go/no-go check? I bet a cheaper unit that just shows pass/fail would cover most of those cases without the setup time.
3
evannelson2mo ago
Right, because the one thing I love is less information when something breaks. Just give me a mystery box that says "bad" and let the fun begin. My boss would totally go for that when the line goes down at 2 AM. It's like choosing a car with no speedometer, just a light that says "you're probably speeding.
5
Our shop's AA-6500 paid for itself finding a corroded BNC connector on a nav antenna. The SWR sweep showed a weird spike a simple continuity check would miss. Sometimes the pretty graph is the fastest path to the actual fault.
3