Anyone have a 172M with dual G5’s?

Jdm

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Feb 18, 2020
Messages
888
Display Name

Display name:
Jdm
Apparently dual G5’s will not fit directly above the yoke if flush mounted. Must place off to the side or go with traditional non—flush mounting, and then the control lock won’t fit. Anyone run into this issue?
 
Not sure who told you this but it’s wrong. Dual G5’s can be mounted directly above each other and it will not interfere with the yoke at all, it’s pretty well standard. The 172 at the flight school just got dual G5’s mounted in this arrangement and it works perfectly!
 
Is your school plane an M model? Are they flush mounted? The M model is a tighter fit. The N model is no problem.
 
Last edited:
Is you school plane an M model? Are they flush mounted? The M model is a tighter fit. The N model is no problem.
Ah, my apologies, I overlooked that part. It is an N model. The M panel and yoke position is different. Disregard!
 
My friend just had dual G5, GNX375 and Garmin Audio panel put in his Skyhawk and I could tell his single biggest concern over the install was that he could not stack them and they had to be offset (one slightly left and one slightly right). I don't think they are flush mounted either. They seem high enough above the yoke that a gust lock isn't an issue. I bet he already has 40hrs on the setup and I haven't heard him say that he doesn't like it. Maybe that answers at least part of your question?
 
Ha, I didn’t exactly sign up for a staggered set. I’ve been flying a vertical glass stack in the jets for years. Was really hoping to keep that same layout with our G5s but it’s probably not going to happen now. Side by side or offset just looks weird. Hopefully the CNC guy can blueprint something reasonable. He’s supposed to send a PDF of a mock plain tomorrow. It’s going to be a one piece panel .090 thick.
 
Well It appears that the L model has the same panel limitations. Just found a pic of an L panel with similar equipment. It’s pretty close to what my CNC guy is working up. The layout actually looks much better than I expected. I can live with that!
 

Attachments

  • D53F30F3-08D9-414A-87C5-5809E50FA9FB.jpeg
    D53F30F3-08D9-414A-87C5-5809E50FA9FB.jpeg
    140 KB · Views: 102
Did you check to see if the Garmin GI 275s would fit instead?
 
Similar issues on a 182L. I really wanted it to match the 68 Cardinal, it just wasn't worth the headache, and opted to use what Cessna gave me to work with.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3497.JPG
    IMG_3497.JPG
    215.7 KB · Views: 77
  • IMG_3632.JPG
    IMG_3632.JPG
    189.3 KB · Views: 74
  • untitled2.png
    untitled2.png
    506.9 KB · Views: 70
  • untitled6.png
    untitled6.png
    397.5 KB · Views: 73
I agree, directly over the yoke is ideal. And it can be done, but not with flush mounting. I’m struggling with the decision myself. Thinking I prefer the looks of a flushed left offset vs a centered stick-out mount. Do you have yours flying yet? If so, what do you think about the lefty instrument scan?

GRG55: The GI275’s were not an option when we placed our original order. They are more expensive, and would still need to be offset to remain laterally symmetrical. At this point we are too deep to consider reverting. I think the G5’s are superior anyway. We actually just ordered a base model GI275 MFD to serve as a secondary CDI for both NAVs. Definitely a great standby instrument option, assuming works as advertised of course:)
 
Put them side by side.
 
directly over the yoke is ideal.
It’s really no different than the present position that the vacuum AI is placed in, so what’s the difference? Having them offset isn’t a big deal imo.
 
Offset to the left is where steam-gauge 182 AI & DG are. ALT & VSI are over the yoke.
 
Well you damn sure got me thinking about it now!
I wrote that idea off lone ago because I’m used to a vertical scan, and horizontal G5’s seem to be a non-normal. I found a nice pic of one tonight. I must admit, it looks pretty good.
 

Attachments

  • B0233F3A-31B9-42C6-BECD-68260B63BCC8.png
    B0233F3A-31B9-42C6-BECD-68260B63BCC8.png
    1,013.4 KB · Views: 46
It’s really no different than the present position that the vacuum AI is placed in, so what’s the difference? Having them offset isn’t a big deal imo.

Thanks Much! You’re right, it’s not much different than the old layout and not a problem.
That in itself does not mean it’s the best way. Manufacturers have spent decades studying advanced instrument layouts. The major ones that I’m familiar with have their instrument panels with the EADI above the EHSI and stacked directly in front of the pilot. It’s just an easier scan. My last 5,000 hours have been flying his way.
I’ve included a couple of pics of my two airplane types. Two different manufacturers. Both with very modern instrument panels and the same primary layout. Directly above or in front of the yoke. Pretty sure that’s the ideal location for a modern scan. It seems to me that everything else is a compromise, which is exactly why I’m soliciting feedback on this subject.
 

Attachments

  • 005B4CF9-6EED-42FB-830E-921B73BA3B6C.png
    005B4CF9-6EED-42FB-830E-921B73BA3B6C.png
    537.5 KB · Views: 33
  • 19EF516C-E914-4C7D-A2C9-A4C8DA9F82DB.png
    19EF516C-E914-4C7D-A2C9-A4C8DA9F82DB.png
    882.4 KB · Views: 30
Our club’s 172M has a pair of G5s offset just a bit to the left and they’re not flush (sorry for the crummy pic, but it’s the only one I have at the moment):

7EDADF43-5EDE-4BD1-BEA1-371AEF2FCDE3.jpeg

Honestly, I never even noticed the offset until you mentioned it in this thread.
 
Thanks for the pic! Yeah, that’s a typical offset to the left without flush kits. Are you doing a lot of IMC in that aircraft? If so, and you haven’t notice the offset, that’s good to know.
 
Well you damn sure got me thinking about it now!
I wrote that idea off lone ago because I’m used to a vertical scan, and horizontal G5’s seem to be a non-normal. I found a nice pic of one tonight. I must admit, it looks pretty good.

Glad to help. IMHO, looks good.
 
Back
Top