Avidyne Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Avidyne General > IFD 5 Series & IFD 4 Series Touch Screen GPS/NAV/COM
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Garmin G5 and IFD 540
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Garmin G5 and IFD 540

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Message
compasst View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 22 Feb 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 97
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote compasst Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Nov 2017 at 12:00pm
Originally posted by Gring Gring wrote:

Quote I don’t yet have an auto pilot in my cardinal, but find my accuracy in flying has improved to less than 1/10 of a mile and less than 50 feet over several hours. This is totally because of the G5’s.

Can you explain this a little?  Improved over what?  DG and CDI?  Analog HSI?

I can tell you that my experience with the G5 is that the presentation (ie compass card) is significantly smaller than a King or Century HSI and harder to read.

Understanding that my experience is subjective, I find that hand flying the G5's that replaced the Cessna OEM AI and DG (no heading bug) is much easier - and results in the stated accuracy where my previous experience was easily drifting off course by several tenths of a mile and off altitude by a couple hundred feet on long cross-country flights. 

I fly a variety of aircraft that have any number of flight instrument types in them. I prefer hand flying to autopilot flying, and therefore have plenty of experience with all manner of presentations, including HSI's from a variety of manufacturers and electronic instrumentation from Aspen, Garmin, and Avidyne and others. Frankly, I find the G5 easy to read and very easy to interpret, therefore making it easier for me to hand fly. There are several pieces of data that are displayed on both instruments which helps significantly with scan. The HSI can be changed to be an EFIS if something happens to the G5 acting as EFIS.

To me, the Aspen display is not as easy to read or interpret, let alone the very frequent incidence of partial and total failures that I've experienced in half-a-dozen different aircraft equipped with Aspen - again, just my experience. You may find otherwise, but I'm well pleased with the G5 and particularly with the integration and information shared between the 540 and the G5's - bi-directionally. As mentioned elsewhere, the GAD29 is required to receive NAV data from the IFD 540, or the GNS 530, for that matter. GPS Navigator Data is passed over the CAN bus, which is handled by the GAD29.

Some of the neat things I've observed - Airspeed and altitude are passed to the 540 so that calculation of winds aloft can be done more easily; heading, track, desired track, target/selected altitude, and Vspeeds information is shown on the EFIS; both EFIS and HSI display vertical and horizontal deviation (course and GS/GP); HSI autoslews the GPS course pointer; MSG annunciation on the HSI; bearing to GPS/VOR can be shown on the HSI. One may wish to view the G5 Pilot Guide to see details and examples (google for G5 pilot guide).
Back to Top
jwjenks View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 28 Aug 2013
Location: N14 New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 49
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jwjenks Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Dec 2017 at 11:20am
I just installed a G5 in my C172 to replace my AI.  Actually just moved vacuum AI over to the copilot side.   It gets GPS data from my IFD550 by way of RS232.  Works perfectly.  4 wires;  RS232, equipment ground, airframe ground, and plus 14V.  $1500 installation cost.
At the same time put in a new Trio Autopilot.  Lateral good (just follows the magenta line!), debugging Vertical.
JWJ
Back to Top
TogaDriver View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2013
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 114
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TogaDriver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Dec 2017 at 11:12am
Hi AVI Folks,

In order to reclaim that extra ARINC 429 port, Garmin plans to combine their EFIS/AIRDATA and GAD42 outputs into one stream so their GAD29B will only require one 429-IN port instead of two to drive our legacy autopilots.

Does AVI have plans to create a similar concentrated ARINC output option for the IFDs?  Due to the compatible nature of the IFD series, you have the same 429 port limitations.  I understand the G5 is not your product but I think the G5/GAD29B may be causing customers to consider the GTN series over IFDs for just this feature, based on chatter I'm seeing on Beech and elsewhere.  Supporting this would maintain your argument of plug-n-play with the GNS series. 

Back to Top
jonesronc View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 31 May 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 18
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jonesronc Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2017 at 6:41pm
I'm considering going the dual G5 route with G29B to replace my vacuum AI/NSD-360 HSI/ wet pump, at least once the promised 10.2+ software upgrade goes thru. I have an IFD540 & Stec 55x.   But so far, I haven't seen any for sure evidence the G5 HSI provides glideslope/ vertical guidance. Does anybody know for sure it does? Thx!
Back to Top
oskrypuch View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Location: CYFD
Status: Offline
Points: 2211
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oskrypuch Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Dec 2017 at 9:25pm
Originally posted by jonesronc jonesronc wrote:

I'm considering going the dual G5 route with G29B to replace my vacuum AI/NSD-360 HSI/ wet pump, ...

I think you would be much better served going ASPEN Pro. The cost is not much more, but you get so much more, including first rate intercompatibility with your 55x, and the IFD.

The G5s are OK, if you want to replace either DG or AI, but if you are looking to replace both, it would be my advice to look elsewhere.

* Orest

Back to Top
jonesronc View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 31 May 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 18
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jonesronc Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2017 at 9:08am
The Aspen as I recall requires a backup AI, negating removal of the vacuum system. My older C180 doesn't have a std 6-pack configuration. Adopting same requires field approval/STC conversion to a U-Yoke from the T-yoke; major work/$. If I went Aspen as currenly configured, The Aspen would go where the ASI/TC is and the AI or AS would go way at the bottom. The dual G5 wouldn't require any of that and save weight/oil on the bottom of the plane.
Back to Top
khuffine View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 12 Dec 2015
Location: GSO
Status: Offline
Points: 58
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote khuffine Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2017 at 11:54pm
Just put dual G5 in my older Baron with century3. Even with gad29a had to keep old horizon for autopilot to use. Got rid of 106a and 3 pounds of cable to use Can bus and 429 port on the 440. Fly it tomorrow I and will let you know how it does but so far I like what I see. Flight plan in 440 sent info to both Dme indicators waiting to see how it flies. 9400$ out the door.
Khuffine
Back to Top
khuffine View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 12 Dec 2015
Location: GSO
Status: Offline
Points: 58
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote khuffine Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Dec 2017 at 11:58pm
Just put dual G5 in my older Baron with century3. Even with gad29a had to keep old horizon for autopilot to use. Got rid of 106a and 3 pounds of cable to use Can bus and 429 port on the 440. Fly it tomorrow I and will let you know how it doees but so far I like what I see. Flight plan in 440 sent info to both Dme indicators waiting to see how it flies. 9400$ out the door.
Khuffine
Back to Top
khuffine View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 12 Dec 2015
Location: GSO
Status: Offline
Points: 58
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote khuffine Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Dec 2017 at 10:57pm
Flew the baron today with my 440 as nav for dual G5’s. No problems at all having to turn down pressure pumps since DG was removed. Gpss steering was super with century 3.   and 440 acted like a perfect 430 and all is well in my hangar. Wonderful combination. Hope the do a SV some day. I am satisfied for the future.
Khuffine
Back to Top
pburger View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2013
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 315
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pburger Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Dec 2017 at 10:36pm
This thread was started on March 30, 2017, and here we are at the end of the year.  I'm glad to see reports that the IFDs are talking to the G5s.  That is indeed great news.  Now, AVIDYNE, how about working on this?  The G5s are getting a LOT of play from all quadrants.  I'm definitely leaning that way.  I would love to do a dual G5 installation early next year, but I don't want to get caught with an unairworthy installation due to a lack of an STC.  If Avidyne could list these babies in their manual similar to the Aspen, I assume the legal bar would be met.

Avidyne, what say you?
Back to Top
AviSimpson View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group


Joined: 31 Mar 2015
Location: Lincoln, MA
Status: Offline
Points: 760
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AviSimpson Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Dec 2017 at 9:26am
Originally posted by pburger pburger wrote:

This thread was started on March 30, 2017, and here we are at the end of the year.  I'm glad to see reports that the IFDs are talking to the G5s.  That is indeed great news.  Now, AVIDYNE, how about working on this?  The G5s are getting a LOT of play from all quadrants.  I'm definitely leaning that way.  I would love to do a dual G5 installation early next year, but I don't want to get caught with an unairworthy installation due to a lack of an STC.  If Avidyne could list these babies in their manual similar to the Aspen, I assume the legal bar would be met.

Avidyne, what say you?

Still this "No update to share. It appears that it will just be a documentation exercise as part of a major release (TSO impacting). We will still need to fly it in our test aircraft to confirm that everything is functional."
Simpson Bennett
Avidyne Corporation
Product Manager
Back to Top
Flying_Monkey View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 27 Mar 2017
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 27
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Flying_Monkey Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Dec 2017 at 8:36pm
Originally posted by AviSimpson AviSimpson wrote:

Originally posted by pburger pburger wrote:

This thread was started on March 30, 2017, and here we are at the end of the year.  I'm glad to see reports that the IFDs are talking to the G5s.  That is indeed great news.  Now, AVIDYNE, how about working on this?  The G5s are getting a LOT of play from all quadrants.  I'm definitely leaning that way.  I would love to do a dual G5 installation early next year, but I don't want to get caught with an unairworthy installation due to a lack of an STC.  If Avidyne could list these babies in their manual similar to the Aspen, I assume the legal bar would be met.

Avidyne, what say you?

Still this "No update to share. It appears that it will just be a documentation exercise as part of a major release (TSO impacting). We will still need to fly it in our test aircraft to confirm that everything is functional."

Thanks for the update.  It's frustrating that this is taking so long if it really is just a documentation thing, but I guess this is probably quick in the aviation world.  I recently installed a 540 as part of a PA32-300 renovation that started before the G5s were announced.  Would have liked to maybe do dual G5s at the same time as everything else but was left in limbo since there has been no real updates. I have thought many times since the purchase that maybe I should have gone the Garmin route for compatibility with G5 and now the GFC500.  I guess I'll hold off and maybe wait for Dynon's offering next year.  But I imagine Avidyne is probably losing some sales to folks figuring that they want G5s and the GFC500 and not wanting to wait to see if Avidyne will be compatible/legal...especially if it is going to be an extended wait like we are experiencing with the G5s.  Guess I'm just venting.  I'm sure Avidyne is feeling the pressure to get this sorted out.
Back to Top
M20J View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2015
Location: CZBA
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote M20J Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Dec 2017 at 8:48pm
Originally posted by Flying_Monkey Flying_Monkey wrote:

Originally posted by AviSimpson AviSimpson wrote:

Originally posted by pburger pburger wrote:

This thread was started on March 30, 2017, and here we are at the end of the year.  I'm glad to see reports that the IFDs are talking to the G5s.  That is indeed great news.  Now, AVIDYNE, how about working on this?  The G5s are getting a LOT of play from all quadrants.  I'm definitely leaning that way.  I would love to do a dual G5 installation early next year, but I don't want to get caught with an unairworthy installation due to a lack of an STC.  If Avidyne could list these babies in their manual similar to the Aspen, I assume the legal bar would be met.

Avidyne, what say you?

Still this "No update to share. It appears that it will just be a documentation exercise as part of a major release (TSO impacting). We will still need to fly it in our test aircraft to confirm that everything is functional."

Thanks for the update.  It's frustrating that this is taking so long if it really is just a documentation thing, but I guess this is probably quick in the aviation world.  I recently installed a 540 as part of a PA32-300 renovation that started before the G5s were announced.  Would have liked to maybe do dual G5s at the same time as everything else but was left in limbo since there has been no real updates. I have thought many times since the purchase that maybe I should have gone the Garmin route for compatibility with G5 and now the GFC500.  I guess I'll hold off and maybe wait for Dynon's offering next year.  But I imagine Avidyne is probably losing some sales to folks figuring that they want G5s and the GFC500 and not wanting to wait to see if Avidyne will be compatible/legal...especially if it is going to be an extended wait like we are experiencing with the G5s.  Guess I'm just venting.  I'm sure Avidyne is feeling the pressure to get this sorted out.

+1
Back to Top
DavidBunin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 May 2015
Location: Rockwall, TX
Status: Offline
Points: 717
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DavidBunin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Dec 2017 at 3:28pm
Originally posted by Flying_Monkey Flying_Monkey wrote:

Originally posted by AviSimpson AviSimpson wrote:

Originally posted by pburger pburger wrote:

I'm glad to see reports that the IFDs are talking to the G5s.  That is indeed great news.
It appears that it will just be a documentation exercise as part of a major release (TSO impacting). We will still need to fly it in our test aircraft to confirm that everything is functional.
 It's frustrating that this is taking so long if it really is just a documentation thing.


Just a documentation thing?  That's not what I understood there.  It is an extra layer of documentation that may come as part of a major release.  Those don't happen quickly.

Also, "still need to fly it" tells me that their test airplane is not yet flying with a G5 installed.  Not surprising since I doubt their test airplane spends as much time as most of ours do sitting idle in a hangar.  Test aircraft generally have busy flight schedules and rigid maintenance/modification schedules.  They can't just deck the plane for modification each time a competitor invents a new piece of equipment.

To quote Heinlein, "Waiting is."

Back to Top
Ibraham View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 21 May 2016
Location: KHWO
Status: Offline
Points: 156
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ibraham Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Dec 2017 at 5:49pm
Avidyne has been working for over 3 years on having the Avidyne MLB100 (Now Skytrax 100) display ADS-B traffic and weather on the the Avidyne EX5000 MFD. I hope they complete that project before they start working on some new non Avidyne competitor equipment.
Tired of "waiting"!
Back to Top
compasst View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 22 Feb 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 97
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote compasst Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Dec 2017 at 6:49am
On Dec 19, Garmin released new software (version 5) and installation documentation (version 11) for the G5 EFI. Included in this release is new software for the GMU 11 magnetometer (version 2) and the GAD 29 GPS/Navigation interface adapter (version 3). 
Back to Top
arkvet View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2017
Location: Arkansas
Status: Offline
Points: 83
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote arkvet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2018 at 9:18am
Originally posted by TogaDriver TogaDriver wrote:

Hi AVI Folks,

In order to reclaim that extra ARINC 429 port, Garmin plans to combine their EFIS/AIRDATA and GAD42 outputs into one stream so their GAD29B will only require one 429-IN port instead of two to drive our legacy autopilots.

Does AVI have plans to create a similar concentrated ARINC output option for the IFDs?  Due to the compatible nature of the IFD series, you have the same 429 port limitations.  I understand the G5 is not your product but I think the G5/GAD29B may be causing customers to consider the GTN series over IFDs for just this feature, based on chatter I'm seeing on Beech and elsewhere.  Supporting this would maintain your argument of plug-n-play with the GNS series. 



I wanted to bump the thread to generate some additional discussion.  My NSD-360a HSI is trying to die and rather than spend a bunch of $ overhauling it I am looking at a G5 HSI.  I actually already have a G5 in the panel (in the T/C slot) as a backup AI...  My thought was to move the G5 over into the HSI hole and add the necessary hardware to make it a fully functional HSI including GPSS!!!  What started out as disappointment to see a failing NSD-360 had turned to semi-excitement thinking about the upgrade the G5 HSI was going to provide with the added gpss and reliability of the solid state electronics.

My current G5 was installed prior to the IFD 550 therefor my shop has no issue with using the IFD as a position source regardless of any paperwork issues.  The issue my shop has at the moment is with available 429 ports.  Garmin has apparently fixed this limitation with the GNS series (mentioned in quote above).  I'm wondering about Avidyne's progress with the issue? 

The shop instructed me to go and check what my current 429 port usage was... They suggested it was probably being utilized by the skytrax 100.  One (pitiful) solution he mentioned was disconnecting the skytrax 100 to hook up the G5 (via GAD-29b I believe).  If /when Avidyne catches up with G it can be hooked back up and until that time I can get my ADS-B in on the Ipad via stratus 2.  I hate to think of the wasted and extra labor involved with that.

Anyway, I love my IFD 550 but am frustrated like several others.  My HSI is dying and I'm working towards and IFR check ride.  Poor timing.  
Brent

PA32-301
IFD550 / AXP322 / SkyTrax100
Back to Top
Ibraham View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 21 May 2016
Location: KHWO
Status: Offline
Points: 156
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Ibraham Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2018 at 9:38am
Revision 10.2 installation manual recommends using RS-232 to connect the Skytrax 100 for both traffic and weather, instead of ARINC 429

SkyTrax Trfc+Wx
Serial traffic and weather data information from the Avidyne Skytrax100/MLB100
Back to Top
arkvet View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2017
Location: Arkansas
Status: Offline
Points: 83
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote arkvet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2018 at 9:43am
Originally posted by Ibraham Ibraham wrote:

Revision 10.2 installation manual recommends using RS-232 to connect the Skytrax 100 for both traffic and weather, instead of ARINC 429

SkyTrax Trfc+Wx
Serial traffic and weather data information from the Avidyne Skytrax100/MLB100


funny, the shop just sent me an e-mail with a correction... describing exactly what you say.  I still need to go and document what ports are being used to determine if the G5 will work. 

thanks
Brent

PA32-301
IFD550 / AXP322 / SkyTrax100
Back to Top
jwjenks View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 28 Aug 2013
Location: N14 New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 49
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jwjenks Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2018 at 10:25am
My instructions from Avidyne were to use the P1050 Additional I/O connector to send the RS232 data to my G5 AI and my new TRIO Autopilot by way of pins #62 and #60 respectively.  And we are sending ARINC429 data to the Trio A/P by way of P1001 Main connector Pins #46 and #47 (ARINC429 A & B out).  Avidyne sent me the P1050 connector since it was not on the original tray.  Your shop should have the pin out labels in the 238pg install manual.
Works fine.
Not sure if this helps or not, since I'm not sure what other devices you have connected. 
JWJ
Back to Top
jwjenks View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 28 Aug 2013
Location: N14 New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 49
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jwjenks Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2018 at 10:28am
BTW:  the Avidyne install manual shows another ARINC429 A & B out on the 1050 connector. n not sure if that will work.

JWJ
Back to Top
TogaDriver View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2013
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 114
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TogaDriver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2018 at 11:14am
Unfortunately I only have an IFD440.  I also did not see a config option for that 2nd 429 output in the manual.

My work-around to the problem is to display my traffic elsewhere so I can preserve the 429 out for use with the G5.  Due to that limitation I chose not to go with the Avidyne ADSB-in. (edit: though, apparently I could have by using the 232-in. Oh well...)

(Yes, my picture has a 540 - I sold that plane).  ;-)


Edited by TogaDriver - 29 Jan 2018 at 11:26am
Back to Top
jwjenks View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 28 Aug 2013
Location: N14 New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 49
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jwjenks Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2018 at 11:32am
Rats, wish I could have helped.  But another reason to love my 550
JWJ
Back to Top
bneub111 View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 16 Feb 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 31
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bneub111 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Jan 2018 at 2:29pm
Originally posted by DavidBunin DavidBunin wrote:

Originally posted by Flying_Monkey Flying_Monkey wrote:

Originally posted by AviSimpson AviSimpson wrote:

Originally posted by pburger pburger wrote:

I'm glad to see reports that the IFDs are talking to the G5s.  That is indeed great news.
It appears that it will just be a documentation exercise as part of a major release (TSO impacting). We will still need to fly it in our test aircraft to confirm that everything is functional.
 It's frustrating that this is taking so long if it really is just a documentation thing.


Just a documentation thing?  That's not what I understood there.  It is an extra layer of documentation that may come as part of a major release.  Those don't happen quickly.

Also, "still need to fly it" tells me that their test airplane is not yet flying with a G5 installed.  Not surprising since I doubt their test airplane spends as much time as most of ours do sitting idle in a hangar.  Test aircraft generally have busy flight schedules and rigid maintenance/modification schedules.  They can't just deck the plane for modification each time a competitor invents a new piece of equipment.

To quote Heinlein, "Waiting is."



I would agree in most cases except I received a marketing email from Avidyne last week with a trade in promotion on 430/530 for the IFD series. It clearly stated that the 440/540 was a “slide-in replacement” for a 430/530. When you market your product that way, I believe your reputation is dependent upon staying current with that competitor.

I’m not aware of any downgrade in the G5 functionality with a 430/530 vs a 650/750. Therefore it seems that where a G5 is concerned, all functionality and wiring should remain the same.

I do realize that doesn’t change an obligation to comply with an STC or install manual.
Back to Top
chflyer View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2013
Location: LSZK
Status: Offline
Points: 531
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote chflyer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jan 2018 at 5:44am
The interpretation of "slide-in replacement" is a clear case of where customers interpretation of the marketing-speak can deviate dramatically from the reality.

Avidyne clearly means that one can physically slide the Garmin out and Avidyne in to the same tray. That's it. It is a good and strong selling point. 

Many customers seem to interpret it though to mean that the Avidyne is plug-compatible with the Garmin irregardless of the wiring and device interfacing behind the tray, which is definitely not true in many (most???) cases as is clear from all the forum threads related to interfacing the IFDs to other equipment.


Vince
Back to Top
brou0040 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 13 Dec 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 573
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote brou0040 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jan 2018 at 9:09am
It is very clear that Avidyne understands there is a easy misunderstanding regarding the plug and play slide-in replacement marketing yet they continue to market it that way.  Just because they have the legal fine print on their side doesn't mean they aren't continuing to knowingly misleading their customers.
Back to Top
chflyer View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2013
Location: LSZK
Status: Offline
Points: 531
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote chflyer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jan 2018 at 10:56am
Sure they do. Marketing often presents information in a way that is easily misunderstood and implies more than is what is delivered. Whether that is misleading or even constitutes misrepresentation is not a black and white area. While I agree that Avidyne could be more transparent with disclosure on the limitations of the slide-in marketing, I find that in general many consumers are far too "gullible" or maybe too naive and not sceptical enough when evaluating manufacturers' claims.

Anyone making a significant investment in any avionics needs to do their due diligence to ensure that what they buy meets their needs and expectations, as in buying an entire aircraft. As adults, this responsibility lies with the purchaser even though many people don't like that and/or won't accept it. After all, we need to live with the results of our decisions and disappointment after commitment takes away a lot of the satisfaction compared to a well thought through choice knowing and accepting the implications.

That doesn't remove the blame from Avidyne if they have made specific commitments, taken people's money, and not delivered. That is a different matter.
Vince
Back to Top
bneub111 View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 16 Feb 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 31
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bneub111 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jan 2018 at 2:11pm
It sounds like we are mostly in agreement that there might be a more accurate way to describe “plug and play” and “slide in replacement” vs “uses the same tray and connectors”.

The YouTube video on the trade in page says you can plug it in, easily configure it, and be off and running in 15-20 minutes.

Each business has to make their own decisions on what to represent to their customers. The issue becomes how the customer and the avionics shop feels after the sale. That feeling is what generally gets related to other potential customers and it becomes reputation. Right or wrong, if a customer feels like they weren’t given the whole truth or didn’t receive what they were promised, you may not get a second chance to fix it even if the customer or shop didn’t read all of the fine print.
Back to Top
brou0040 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 13 Dec 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 573
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote brou0040 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jan 2018 at 8:59pm
Originally posted by chflyer chflyer wrote:

That doesn't remove the blame from Avidyne if they have made specific commitments, taken people's money, and not delivered. That is a different matter.

Which Avidyne has done on multiple occasions.

I agree customers need to do their homework, but I also believe it is not acceptable for a company to knowingly mislead customers.  A company can only blame customers for so long before people realize what's going on and the company generates a poor reputation.  You'll have individual customers that lose big, but in the long run, the company will lose.
Back to Top
skitheo View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 02 Jan 2016
Location: 3S8
Status: Offline
Points: 62
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote skitheo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jan 2018 at 12:35am
Originally posted by brou0040 brou0040 wrote:

Originally posted by chflyer chflyer wrote:

That doesn't remove the blame from Avidyne if they have made specific commitments, taken people's money, and not delivered. That is a different matter.
Which Avidyne has done on multiple occasions.
8< snip >8


I would hope that you have specifics to back up that assertion. Otherwise, you're skating on thin ice.

Avidyne hasn't always delivered on what I hoped they would in the time frame suggested. From my observation they have met their legal obligation. Your assertion is that they have not.
Back to Top
LANCE View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 06 Dec 2014
Location: TEXAS
Status: Offline
Points: 207
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote LANCE Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jan 2018 at 10:17am
This is a challenge for Avidyne and every other avionics manufacturer. New products and software updates on existing products make compatibility a moving target. Avidyne's "slide in" replacement is exactly that - it is the same form factor and it is pin compatible with a Garmin 530/430 - therefore when you slide it in the existing tray it emulates everything you had at that moment. They have no way of knowing how the 100's if not 1000's of installers have wired everything and they don't have a crystal ball to know what future software updates there will be on all of your boxes. It seems wise before letting anyone update any software on your other boxes to make a call to Avidyne support to see if it's been tested yet. I have been very impressed by how well it has worked for so many people. It shows that if the original installs were done according to the install manuals between all of these devices the likelihood is high that they will all talk to each other after getting the settings right. For a few it may mean that a few wires need to be added and they may need software updates or temporary downgrades to keep everything talking to each other. The more complicated your installation the more homework needed.
Back to Top
arkvet View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2017
Location: Arkansas
Status: Offline
Points: 83
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote arkvet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jan 2018 at 10:38am
I guess I'm not seeing the harsh criticism as warranted.  I don't think "slide in compatible" is really misleading at all.  To think that this meant that over time as new products / software updates surfaced everything would remain in perfect working order is a little naive IMHO.  Regardless of your set-up (avidyne or not) there are going to be issues to solve as each mfg / piece of hardware evolves. 

It's one reason I'm anxious to see if Dynon can deliver on the Skyview HDX.  Combined with my IFD 550 that would be a dream and I would expect Dynon equipment to cooperate well with Dynon equipment and the IFD. 
Brent

PA32-301
IFD550 / AXP322 / SkyTrax100
Back to Top
oskrypuch View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Location: CYFD
Status: Offline
Points: 2211
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oskrypuch Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jan 2018 at 11:07am
Originally posted by arkvet arkvet wrote:

...
It's one reason I'm anxious to see if Dynon can deliver on the Skyview HDX.  Combined with my IFD 550 that would be a dream and I would expect Dynon equipment to cooperate well with Dynon equipment and the IFD. 

The principals of Dynon & Avidyne have a very good working relationship. In every promo shot of the Skyview Certified, there has been an IFD in the panel. All good signs.

* Orest

Back to Top
Gring View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 30 Dec 2011
Location: Kingston, NY
Status: Offline
Points: 464
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gring Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jan 2018 at 3:45pm
Yes, but I don’t think Dynon will support commonly installed autopilots like STEC, Bendix King, Century. That leaves autopilot compatibility uncovered. I’m not sure if I would install a Dynon autopilot. I’d have to do a lot of investigation. Part of the issue is servo quality. Look at a King or More recently a Garmin GFC600 servo. They are large, robust, rebuildable, and can be removed without disturbing the rigging and can still be flown. An S-TEC, and Garmin GFC500 and most of the experimental servos are small almost disposable units. They just aren’t the same.

If there was a good Servo option for the DFC90 AND Dynon control (digitally) then you’d really have something marketable in a wide range of airplanes.

I’m not sold on these part 23 rewrite devices. They do not have the same level of robustness as fully certified devices.
Back to Top
arkvet View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2017
Location: Arkansas
Status: Offline
Points: 83
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote arkvet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jan 2018 at 3:56pm
That's a point to look into regarding the Servo quality.  However, I can't for the life of me believe that Dynon servos manufactured today would be of lesser quality than my 40 year old Century Servos.  I know refrigerators of today aren't what they used to be but I just can't imagine that's the case with AP servos.

Of the thousands of Dynon AP installs are there cases of AP servo failures? 

It's definitely a point worth considering. 
Brent

PA32-301
IFD550 / AXP322 / SkyTrax100
Back to Top
skitheo View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 02 Jan 2016
Location: 3S8
Status: Offline
Points: 62
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote skitheo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jan 2018 at 4:39pm
Originally posted by Gring Gring wrote:

Yes, but I don’t think Dynon will support commonly installed autopilots like STEC, Bendix King, Century. That leaves autopilot compatibility uncovered. I’m not sure if I would install a Dynon autopilot. I’d have to do a lot of investigation. Part of the issue is servo quality. Look at a King or More recently a Garmin GFC600 servo. They are large, robust, rebuildable, and can be removed without disturbing the rigging and can still be flown. An S-TEC, and Garmin GFC500 and most of the experimental servos are small almost disposable units. They just aren’t the same.

If there was a good Servo option for the DFC90 AND Dynon control (digitally) then you’d really have something marketable in a wide range of airplanes.

I’m not sold on these part 23 rewrite devices. They do not have the same level of robustness as fully certified devices.
 

Heavy != quality or strength

Feel free to use only CRT displays in your home and work! After all, how good can those 4K LED/LCD displays be? The CRTs are "large, robust, (sort-of) rebuildable...". 

If you don't like the Part 23 devices, by all means, only buy the TSO devices. My Cherokee doesn't need the elevator [torque|force] that a Cheyenne does. I don't want to pay the weight nor price penalties. I don't think the target markets for the DFC90 and Skyview HDX have much intersection.
Back to Top
chflyer View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2013
Location: LSZK
Status: Offline
Points: 531
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote chflyer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jan 2018 at 6:06pm
Originally posted by skitheo skitheo wrote:


I would hope that you have specifics to back up that assertion. Otherwise, you're skating on thin ice.

Avidyne hasn't always delivered on what I hoped they would in the time frame suggested. From my observation they have met their legal obligation. Your assertion is that they have not.

Check the thread "OK, nearly end of summer".
Vince
Back to Top
chflyer View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 24 Jan 2013
Location: LSZK
Status: Offline
Points: 531
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote chflyer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jan 2018 at 6:12pm
Originally posted by bneub111 bneub111 wrote:

It sounds like we are mostly in agreement that there might be a more accurate way to describe “plug and play” and “slide in replacement” vs “uses the same tray and connectors”.

The YouTube video on the trade in page says you can plug it in, easily configure it, and be off and running in 15-20 minutes.

Each business has to make their own decisions on what to represent to their customers. The issue becomes how the customer and the avionics shop feels after the sale. That feeling is what generally gets related to other potential customers and it becomes reputation. Right or wrong, if a customer feels like they weren’t given the whole truth or didn’t receive what they were promised, you may not get a second chance to fix it even if the customer or shop didn’t read all of the fine print.

A video like that is a good value proposition and selling tool. What is needed is an attached list of qualifications that clearly indicate there are other elements that come into play. As Lance mentioned, there are many possible interconnections. It should be clearly stated as something that could and often does make replacement more complicated than the 30 minutes suggests. Even just a "your mileage may vary" type of statement would be a heads up to innocents.


Edited by chflyer - 31 Jan 2018 at 6:13pm
Vince
Back to Top
glassanza View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2013
Location: Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 97
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote glassanza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jan 2018 at 6:53pm
Maybe a much less complicated solution wound be for Avidyne to revise 440/540/550 marketing information to say "plug and play compatible for 2015" since their actual delivery dates have a reputation of sliding well past those conveyed to the media and on this forum. 
GDC25
Back to Top
brou0040 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 13 Dec 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 573
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote brou0040 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jan 2018 at 8:35pm
Originally posted by skitheo skitheo wrote:

Originally posted by brou0040 brou0040 wrote:

Originally posted by chflyer chflyer wrote:

That doesn't remove the blame from Avidyne if they have made specific commitments, taken people's money, and not delivered. That is a different matter.
Which Avidyne has done on multiple occasions.
8< snip >8


I would hope that you have specifics to back up that assertion. Otherwise, you're skating on thin ice.

Avidyne hasn't always delivered on what I hoped they would in the time frame suggested. From my observation they have met their legal obligation. Your assertion is that they have not.

Don't worry, the ice is frozen solid.  Those who have dealt with the issues are well aware, those who haven't don't know better than to question those who have...

Originally posted by arkvet arkvet wrote:

I guess I'm not seeing the harsh criticism as warranted.  I don't think "slide in compatible" is really misleading at all.  To think that this meant that over time as new products / software updates surfaced everything would remain in perfect working order is a little naive IMHO.  Regardless of your set-up (avidyne or not) there are going to be issues to solve as each mfg / piece of hardware evolves.  

It's one reason I'm anxious to see if Dynon can deliver on the Skyview HDX.  Combined with my IFD 550 that would be a dream and I would expect Dynon equipment to cooperate well with Dynon equipment and the IFD.  

The problem is that on the main landing page, it is marketed as a "Direct Replacement".  There are people suggesting more accurate terminology, but that is not what Avidyne is doing, they are using misleading advertisement.  All the reasons provided above about why it shouldn't be assumed that they are directly compatible is exactly why people are complaining the truth in advertising.

Directly from the website http://www.avidyne.com/products/ifd/index.html:
The IFDs are direct replacements for popular Garmin GNS Series Navigators. In most cases, the IFDs can utilize the existing tray and connectors, and are compatible with all the popular interface configurations, which can greatly minimize installation costs.

The statement that says most trays and connectors can be utilized is due to a hardware quality limitation that Avidyne ran into early on, it has nothing to do with functionality, pinout, or incompatibility.  They are still marketing this as a direct plug and play system - compatible with ALL popular interface configurations!  I believe the harsh criticism is spot on.



Edited by brou0040 - 31 Jan 2018 at 8:40pm
Back to Top
oskrypuch View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Location: CYFD
Status: Offline
Points: 2211
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote oskrypuch Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jan 2018 at 8:52pm
The natives are getting restless. ;-)

* Orest

Back to Top
Catani View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 21 Jan 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 180
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2018 at 1:14am
Originally posted by brou0040 brou0040 wrote:

...The problem is that on the main landing page, it is marketed as a "Direct Replacement".  There are people suggesting more accurate terminology, but that is not what Avidyne is doing, they are using misleading advertisement...

This may be a dumb question, but are there equipment combinations where a 430 or 530, working and compatible with all existing installed equipment, is plug 'n play replaced by an IFD440 or 540, and the IFD replacement was incompatible with that same installed equipment?  If so, what equipment is compatible with a swapped-out 430/530 but not a swapped-in IFD 440/540?
Back to Top
Gring View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 30 Dec 2011
Location: Kingston, NY
Status: Offline
Points: 464
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gring Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2018 at 8:08am
The G5 and IFD540 do work together and have been installed as a field approval.



Edited by Gring - 01 Feb 2018 at 9:44am
Back to Top
oskrypuch View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Location: CYFD
Status: Offline
Points: 2211
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oskrypuch Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2018 at 9:09am
Originally posted by Catani Catani wrote:

This may be a dumb question, but are there equipment combinations where a 430 or 530, working and compatible with all existing installed equipment, is plug 'n play replaced by an IFD440 or 540, and the IFD replacement was incompatible with that same installed equipment?  If so, what equipment is compatible with a swapped-out 430/530 but not a swapped-in IFD 440/540?

There are very few bits that won't work correctly.

The G5 used as AI works just fine. The G5 as HSI works electrically, but it needs paperwork to be legal. There are some G500 issues, the details of which I can't recall. Apparently both of these items are high on the priority list, so we may see these attended to in 10.2.1.

The very newest Sirius XM (69A) will not work fully, but the older 69s are fine.

The GDL-88 is not supported, it was to be supported with the rest of the Garmin ADS-B stuff, but didn't make 10.2. Perhaps 10.2.1.?

That is about it. In my view, it really is an amazing bit of reverse engineering. A call to tech support will ferret out any issues, for anyone considering.

I have an ASPEN, EDM830, TAS605, WX-500, STEC 55x, 796, all work 100% with the IFD540, for me. The IFD replaced a 430W in my panel, a few years ago.

* Orest





Edited by oskrypuch - 01 Feb 2018 at 9:30am
Back to Top
arkvet View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2017
Location: Arkansas
Status: Offline
Points: 83
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote arkvet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2018 at 3:11pm
So lets assume I did the dual G5 install which included the GAD29b and GMU-11.  It seems some dual G5 installations have the AI display glide slope / CDI / flight director bars, and some other helpful data that is pretty helpful for IFR approaches.  Is this additional info provided by the IFD via the GAD-29b / GMU-11 or is it dependent on the specific autopilot?  The AP will have to continue to be driven by the vacuum AI but I wonder if that will prohibit the additional info provided on the G5 AI screen.

Just some thoughts. I have a hard time wrapping my head around where all the information comes from.  I actually called garmin tech support today trying to get an answer to that question.  I never could get an answer and to some degree felt like I was annoying them. 
Brent

PA32-301
IFD550 / AXP322 / SkyTrax100
Back to Top
Catani View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 21 Jan 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 180
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2018 at 4:02pm
Originally posted by oskrypuch oskrypuch wrote:

Originally posted by Catani Catani wrote:

This may be a dumb question, but are there equipment combinations where a 430 or 530, working and compatible with all existing installed equipment, is plug 'n play replaced by an IFD440 or 540, and the IFD replacement was incompatible with that same installed equipment?  If so, what equipment is compatible with a swapped-out 430/530 but not a swapped-in IFD 440/540?

There are very few bits that won't work correctly.

Just to confirm, you are saying that the IFD 440/540 does not work (yet) with the G500, the GDL-69A, nor the GDL-88?  And to further confirm, you are also saying that (unlike the IFDs) a 430/530 will work just fine with those Garmin products?
Back to Top
Gring View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 30 Dec 2011
Location: Kingston, NY
Status: Offline
Points: 464
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Gring Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2018 at 4:27pm
Arkvet - The G5 available for certified aircraft will not provide attitude information to an autopilot and will not provide flight director information.

Catani - There was an issue with the 10.2.0.0 release that causes red Xs on a G500 at startup.  This was not a problem in prior releases and one can assume it would be fixed in the next release (10.2.1.0?).  Other than that, it was on the initial STC list and works properly.  The Avidyne test Cessna 182 had a G500 the entire time during flight certification testing, I've been in it.

The GDL69 and 69/A will work with the IFD540/550/440, I have one installed in my airplane (replaced the MLB700 a few months ago.)

The later GDL69 and 69/A that provides the newer SXM weather information does not fully work.  I think the weather may work but the satellite radio may not work correctly.

Yes, a Garmin 530//430 (with the proper release software, 5.x I think) will work with G500, GLD69/69A (both versions), and GDL88.


Edited by Gring - 01 Feb 2018 at 4:29pm
Back to Top
oskrypuch View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Location: CYFD
Status: Offline
Points: 2211
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oskrypuch Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Feb 2018 at 4:29pm
Originally posted by Catani Catani wrote:

Just to confirm, you are saying that the IFD 440/540 does not work (yet) with the G500, the GDL-69A, nor the GDL-88?  And to further confirm, you are also saying that (unlike the IFDs) a 430/530 will work just fine with those Garmin products?

No, not confirming anything about either, just recalling from threads here, I don't have any of those products so no first hand information. For definitive information call tech support.

From what I've read, the IFDs have always worked with the G500/600 PFD/MFDs, but there are some recent minor issues that a lot of folks are waiting to have fixed. I don't know the details. The GDL-88 is not listed as supported with 10.2. Support was slated for it, but it missed 10.2. The very latest GDL-69A has some sort of issue with the remote control and music selection, AFAIK. The older units do not.

Can't tell you anything about the GNS units.

The point I was making, is twofold. The vast majority of setups work just fine after you slide the unit in and set it up, but you always need to check to be sure. With all the new products coming out, and firmware updates, things can change. Reacting to these with an IFD update can take a while, not only from an engineering standpoint, but also the regulatory framework.

* Orest



Edited by oskrypuch - 01 Feb 2018 at 4:50pm
Back to Top
compasst View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 22 Feb 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 97
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote compasst Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2018 at 12:20pm
Originally posted by arkvet arkvet wrote:

So lets assume I did the dual G5 install which included the GAD29b and GMU-11.  It seems some dual G5 installations have the AI display glide slope / CDI / flight director bars, and some other helpful data that is pretty helpful for IFR approaches.  Is this additional info provided by the IFD via the GAD-29b / GMU-11 or is it dependent on the specific autopilot?  The AP will have to continue to be driven by the vacuum AI but I wonder if that will prohibit the additional info provided on the G5 AI screen.

Just some thoughts. I have a hard time wrapping my head around where all the information comes from.  I actually called garmin tech support today trying to get an answer to that question.  I never could get an answer and to some degree felt like I was annoying them. 

From the research I've done and from talking with both Avidyne and Garmin knowledgeable folks, here's what I understand.

The GMU 11 provides remote magnetic information to the G5s and to the IFD. All three show mag heading.

The GAD 29 provides the ARINC 429 conduit for navigation information (such as course deviation) between the IFD, the G5s, and to Garmin autopilots, and RS232 provides the one-way communications from the IFD to the G5s for things like GPS signal and track, eliminating the need to use the G5 internal GPS or adding external antennae for the G5s. By the way, if you don't use the IFD for GPS signal to the G5s, Garmin suggests first trying the G5 on its internal GPS and antenna before adding external antenna.

The GAD 29B does the same thing as the GAD 29 above, adding support for many 3rd party autopilots. 

Everything displays on a dual G5 setup that still retains a vacuum AI, such as needed for a Century III autopilot. As noted in another message above, Garmin is combining 429 ports to fix a problem with their GNS 530w talking to the G5. I witnessed this problem in an aircraft I was test flying following a dual G5 install - the G5 did NOT display the glideSLOPE on ILS but did display the glidePATH on LPV approachs. The IFD 540 in two other installs that I have flown did correctly communicate with the dual G5 installs in those planes. Those installs used the 429 configurations (two channels) shown in the G5 STC installation docs version 11 dated Dec 2017. In order for vertical guidance from the IFD to show on the G5, the setting for VNAV must be on ENABLE LABELS. This particular setting is VNAV ENABLED in the GNS 530 and G5 installation manuals. 

I do not yet know if a GAD 29 (pre-Dec 2017 production) can be updated to a GAD 29B. Garmin aviation tech support is closed today - Feb 2 - for training. I'll post an update once I find out.


Back to Top
compasst View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 22 Feb 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 97
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote compasst Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Feb 2018 at 12:29pm
Originally posted by Gring Gring wrote:

Arkvet - The G5 available for certified aircraft will not provide attitude information to an autopilot and will not provide flight director information.


The above is true at this time for non-Garmin autopilots.

From the Garmin 500 autopilot product info on Garmin website - 

  • Leverages certificated G5 electronic flight instrument1 for primary attitude reference — plus input and display of altitude preselect, heading, vertical speed, airspeed target and flight director cues
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.086 seconds.