New to G1000, help wanted

If you have solid knowledge and experience using other semi-modern IFR navigators the G1000 isn't that much different. There isn't much that you shouldn't be able to figure out after a couple of "flights" that are spent looking at and trying different features. Sitting down with an instructor might help, but only if they have the knowledge to speed up the process that you can do on your own.
That might be true for VFR, but I found it necessary to attend a couple of seminars, take an online course, and fill in some gaps with Trescott's book in order to become sufficiently competent on the G1000 for IFR.

I agree that it's necessary for an instructor to know the equipment well.
 
Not sure about the trainer he's using, but the PFC G1000 ground trainers combine X-Plane with the Garmin trainer software and a physical replica of the G1000 panels to produce a faithful representation of G1000 operation. (Still no go-around button, though. :()
I have one in X-Plane. Sort of. I'm pretty basic - no hardware additions so I use the X-Key add-in, moistly to make it easier to put in numbers. But one of the side benefits was being able to set up a button to turn on TOGA.
 
That might be true for VFR, but I found it necessary to attend a couple of seminars, take an online course, and fill in some gaps with Trescott's book in order to become sufficiently competent on the G1000 for IFR.

I agree that it's necessary for an instructor to know the equipment well.

I had a sufficient amount of experience flying IFR and giving enough instrument instruction with the 430/530 and older GPS units that I didn’t find that much coaching necessary. The G1000 isn’t anything special, it’s just the same instruments and procedures condensed into one box that previously took several. After a couple of trips where boredom set in and I started scrolling through the features combined with a little instrument practice, I had most of the stuff figured out. Id think a simulator would be relatively easy since you don’t have to burn hours worth of gas to expose yourself to the same number of things.

Of course, this all assumes that the knowledge level at the start of the endeavor is adequate. If the individual is only able to keep up or only using basic features of the more simple navigators and autopilots then they might not know that a feature is there to go looking for it. But that’s also part of the learning process and progression.
 
had a sufficient amount of experience flying IFR and giving enough instrument instruction with the 430/530 and older GPS units that I didn’t find that much coaching necessary.
This is a really "different strokes" type of thing. It's like computers in general. We know people who can hop around from Windows to Mac to iOS to Android to Linux without much thought. And others who, after years of using a single operating system, still haven't figured out how the menus work. I see the same thing with avionics all the time. Nothing to do with intelligence or ability. I once mentioned to a very smart, accomplished, high time pilot and instructor that all the Garmin GPS units, going back to at least the 196 handheld, followed the same basic flow, so moving to something new should not be difficult. He just couldn't see it.
 
This is a really "different strokes" type of thing. It's like computers in general. We know people who can hop around from Windows to Mac to iOS to Android to Linux without much thought. And others who, after years of using a single operating system, still haven't figured out how the menus work. I see the same thing with avionics all the time. Nothing to do with intelligence or ability. I once mentioned to a very smart, accomplished, high time pilot and instructor that all the Garmin GPS units, going back to at least the 196 handheld, followed the same basic flow, so moving to something new should not be difficult. He just couldn't see it.

me neither, but I feel like I am going backward.
My real plane had garmin 175 GPS and a trutrak AP.
Minimal time in sim with a 430, CFII handled that part.

Since it is my SIM, I feel like I should get instructor level proficient with it.
 
This is a really "different strokes" type of thing. It's like computers in general. We know people who can hop around from Windows to Mac to iOS to Android to Linux without much thought. And others who, after years of using a single operating system, still haven't figured out how the menus work. I see the same thing with avionics all the time. Nothing to do with intelligence or ability. I once mentioned to a very smart, accomplished, high time pilot and instructor that all the Garmin GPS units, going back to at least the 196 handheld, followed the same basic flow, so moving to something new should not be difficult. He just couldn't see it.

Indeed this is true. To me, the commonality between the user interfaces makes it fairly easy.

My general point was that all the newer autopilots and navigators use the same procedures and functions to get the job done. For example, if you’re going to fly an approach it needs to be loaded and activated. The way you get that accomplished might change a bit but the necessity to do so doesn’t. When one thinks along those lines it makes a transition easier.
 
Indeed this is true. To me, the commonality between the user interfaces makes it fairly easy.

My general point was that all the newer autopilots and navigators use the same procedures and functions to get the job done. For example, if you’re going to fly an approach it needs to be loaded and activated. The way you get that accomplished might change a bit but the necessity to do so doesn’t. When one thinks along those lines it makes a transition easier.

This is what messed me up for a while. In the 1000 with the GFC 700 the sequence is load, then activate in the gps when appropriate, which could mean activate the approach from the menus, navigating you to the first waypoint in the approach, or, if cleared to an IF, doing direct to that IF via the FPL, which made the approach "active". From there you need to activate the approach mode in the GFC 700 at the correct time. Meanwhile you need to confirm, hopefully at the proper times, that the cdi is set correctly. Miss one and you get surprised at the most in opportune moments. The terminology contributed to my confusion, as in being told to load and "activate" the approach, then for the flight director (GFC 700) you need to "activate" the approach, in this case the approach mode. Once it clicked, and it took me a bit, I felt a little dumb because it was so easy.
 
After reading and doing the King's course, nothing wrong doing a few hours with a CFI in actual flight.

What is a cd-rom?

I think its a silver shiny mini frisbee thing that is sitting in a box next to a black rectangular thing with two wheels inside with brown looking tape wound around them. The label on this mysterious artifact says "Caddy Shack".
 
One key lesson I learned was that if you follow the stored flight plan all the way to whichever IAF you chose, then you don't need to activate it; the approach will become active on its own. All the activate feature really does is take you from your present position to the IAF. (I'm not sure exactly what it does if you choose VTF instead of an IAF.)

One time, before I understood this, I tried to reactivate the approach after I had passed the IAF, and it tried to take me back to the IAF!

As far as the APR button on the GFC 700 is concerned, that arms the glide path on an LPV or ILS approach. (I think it also enables the unit to automatically switch the CDI to the localizer at the appropriate time if you loaded a localizer or ILS approach.)
 
How are missed approaches activated? How does one tell the AP to fly them?
I’m guessing suspend, take apr off. Menu, activate missed. Bug alt, nav mode? Make sure it climbs and turns?

I swear I just finished two hr vid and this was not covered
 
Indeed this is true. To me, the commonality between the user interfaces makes it fairly easy.

My general point was that all the newer autopilots and navigators use the same procedures and functions to get the job done. For example, if you’re going to fly an approach it needs to be loaded and activated. The way you get that accomplished might change a bit but the necessity to do so doesn’t. When one thinks along those lines it makes a transition easier.
I agree for the most part My first G1000 experience was as a safety pilot. The pilot flying asked me to load the approach, saying it was the same as with a 430. It was. OTOH, some of the differences between the Garmin and Avidyne flow suggest the need for at least some instruction when moving from one to the other.

(Side story: he asked me to load VTF and it was also when I learned about not doing that to start. Sure enough, after giving us vectors for a while, ATC gave us direct to a fix on the approach, which necessitated re-loading. This was several years before the AIM recommendation.)
 
How are missed approaches activated? How does one tell the AP to fly them?
I’m guessing suspend, take apr off. Menu, activate missed. Bug alt, nav mode? Make sure it climbs and turns?

I swear I just finished two hr vid and this was not covered
Some of that depends on the G1000 vintage and whether the G1000 us WAAS or not. But the basic sequence is, the unit suspends automatic sequencing at the MAP. After all, you might land, you might fly the published missed, or you might fly an ATC directed missed. To fly the published missed, you need to unsuspend at the appropriate point. Single button, no need for the menu.
 
How are missed approaches activated? How does one tell the AP to fly them?
I’m guessing suspend, take apr off. Menu, activate missed. Bug alt, nav mode? Make sure it climbs and turns?

I swear I just finished two hr vid and this was not covered

I'm a bit surprised there is no TOGA button with this setup simulating a G1000 and GFC700. All of those that I've seen in real life had the button. Anyway, it's been a while but when you reach the MAP the flight plan sequence should suspend. There should be a soft key that allows you to sequence to the missed approach, similar to what you'd see on a Garmin 430 or the newer navigators. You'll have to see what happens with the autopilot. In the airplanes with a GFC700 and a TOGA switch it will do what PaulS has already mentioned - change autopilot modes to level the wings and pitch up. Generally speaking, I don't like what happens with the autopilot so I usually click it off at the missed, get established on the missed approach then re-engage it.


I agree for the most part My first G1000 experience was as a safety pilot. The pilot flying asked me to load the approach, saying it was the same as with a 430. It was. OTOH, some of the differences between the Garmin and Avidyne flow suggest the need for at least some instruction when moving from one to the other.

(Side story: he asked me to load VTF and it was also when I learned about not doing that to start. Sure enough, after giving us vectors for a while, ATC gave us direct to a fix on the approach, which necessitated re-loading. This was several years before the AIM recommendation.)

I'd agree that I wouldn't be surprised if most people need some coaching while transitioning from a Garmin navigator to an Avidyne. The Avidyne glass is reasonably intuitive but the user interface for the navigator leaves a lot to be desired. The information and procedures are there but it is just odd enough that it takes a bit of time and work to figure it out. I felt Martin Pauly's Avidyne videos were helpful to provide a crash course on how to do the basics with an Avidyne navigator if someone should find a need to do so.
 
Argh!
So, just noted that the missed approach for an ILS at my home airport (the one I have flown over and over in the sim trying to figure this out) takes you to the wrong damn point in space for a hold! So I will stop beating myself up over THIS one issue...and investigate chart updates

Yeah!
I have found the xplane G1000 manual: https://x-plane.com/manuals/G1000_Manual.pdf
And the video course for the product:
 
How are missed approaches activated? How does one tell the AP to fly them?
I’m guessing suspend, take apr off. Menu, activate missed. Bug alt, nav mode? Make sure it climbs and turns?

I swear I just finished two hr vid and this was not covered
Since your BATD doesn't have a go-around button, the first thing you're going to have to do is turn off the autopilot. At the same time, you will of course need to push in the throttle and pitch to a climb attitude. I've noticed that the unit may not go into suspend mode right away, in which case you will have to wait for it to do so and then unsuspend it. And as Trescott points out, if you were flying something other than a GPS approach, you will need to switch the CDI back to GPS. What you do next will depend on whether the missed approach starts with a heading leg or a defined course. In any case, once you have the course and target altitude appropriately defined, you can re-engage the autopilot and put it in the proper mode.
 
Last edited:
Since your BATD doesn't have a go-around button, the first thing you're going to have to do is turn off the autopilot. At the same time, you will of course need to push in the throttle and pitch to a climb attitude. I've noticed that the unit may not go into suspend mode right away, in which case you will have to wait for it to do so and then unsuspend it. And as Trescott points out, if you were flying something other than a GPS approach, you will need to switch the CDI back to GPS. What you do next will depend on whether the missed approach starts with a heading leg or a defined course. In any case, once you have the course and target altitude appropriately defined, you can re-engage the autopilot and put it in the proper mode.
Good description and subject to differences within systems. For example, while TOGA switches off the autopilot in some, it doesn't in others. Same for whether (and when) the CDI switches back and forth from GPS to VLOC and back.

Since I fly with and teach in so many different systems and try to keep SOPs as consistent as I can, it becomes an interesting challenge. The one fairly universal thing I found was that APs engage in some variation of roll/pitch capture, so that has become my constant for both takeoff and missed.

But it's interesting how many questions in this thread would be answered in a session with an instructor.
 
Good description and subject to differences within systems. For example, while TOGA switches off the autopilot in some, it doesn't in others. Same for whether (and when) the CDI switches back and forth from GPS to VLOC and back.

Since I fly with and teach in so many different systems and try to keep SOPs as consistent as I can, it becomes an interesting challenge. The one fairly universal thing I found was that APs engage in some variation of roll/pitch capture, so that has become my constant for both takeoff and missed.

But it's interesting how many questions in this thread would be answered in a session with an instructor.
I practice at least one go around per month on my club's PFC AATDs.

CAP had a fatal accident where a pilot botched a missed approach in a G1000-equipped airplane, and their response was to adopt regulations that raised forecast minimums above the FAA's, which I don't particularly mind, but also restricted the pilot's options when the weather unexpectedly goes down.:rolleyes1: I think they would have been better off requiring recurrent training and testing on missed approach procedures.
 
A CFI I know just started a new venture teaching avionics on demand, and the first courses are G1000 specific. I did some recurrent training with him recently...he is a good guy. His new website is:

https://aviatorsacademy.com/
 
A CFI I know just started a new venture teaching avionics on demand, and the first courses are G1000 specific. I did some recurrent training with him recently...he is a good guy. His new website is:

https://aviatorsacademy.com/
Gary Reeves has made a career and national presence doing this. And avionics transitions is a lot of what I do with aircraft owners too, but on a much smaller scale.
 
One key lesson I learned was that if you follow the stored flight plan all the way to whichever IAF you chose, then you don't need to activate it; the approach will become active on its own. All the activate feature really does is take you from your present position to the IAF. (I'm not sure exactly what it does if you choose VTF instead of an IAF.)

One time, before I understood this, I tried to reactivate the approach after I had passed the IAF, and it tried to take me back to the IAF!

As far as the APR button on the GFC 700 is concerned, that arms the glide path on an LPV or ILS approach. (I think it also enables the unit to automatically switch the CDI to the localizer at the appropriate time if you loaded a localizer or ILS approach.)
I can't think of a situation in which it is necessary to use the "activate approach" command instead of D→ to an approach waypoint or activating a leg.
 
I can't think of a situation in which it is necessary to use the "activate approach" command instead of D→ to an approach waypoint or activating a leg.
I don't remember why I felt it necessary to reactivate the approach after passing the IAF on the final approach course, but something must not have been going right. I found out later that "activate" means something totally different than it did on the early non-Garmin IFR GPS receivers.
 
I don't remember why I felt it necessary to reactivate the approach after passing the IAF on the final approach course, but something must not have been going right. I found out later that "activate" means something totally different than it did on the early non-Garmin IFR GPS receivers.
The standard in the Garmins is, "Activate Approach" means "go direct to the transition you selected and begin sequencing for the approach there."
 
I have a toga button, which allows the gps to keep sequencing and, I believe, unsuspends the gps.
I don't remember why I felt it necessary to reactivate the approach after passing the IAF on the final approach course, but something must not have been going right. I found out later that "activate" means something totally different than it did on the early non-Garmin IFR GPS receivers.

"Activate" the approach was a stumbling point for me as I mentioned above. I wonder if when you were issued direct to the IAF, you typed the waypoint and hit direct enter, enter, rather than pointing to it in the approach string and pushing enter there. Entering it in would create another waypoint on the flight plan outside of the approach. So when you reached the IAF you needed to get inside the approach. Once the active waypoint is inside the approach then it is "activated".
 
I have a toga button, which allows the gps to keep sequencing and, I believe, unsuspends the gps.


"Activate" the approach was a stumbling point for me as I mentioned above. I wonder if when you were issued direct to the IAF, you typed the waypoint and hit direct enter, enter, rather than pointing to it in the approach string and pushing enter there. Entering it in would create another waypoint on the flight plan outside of the approach. So when you reached the IAF you needed to get inside the approach. Once the active waypoint is inside the approach then it is "activated".
It was probably five years ago, and the only thing I remember is the thing telling me to do a 180 on final! Fortunately, I was only flying approaches in good VFR weather until I got a better understanding of the equipment.
 
I can't think of a situation in which it is necessary to use the "activate approach" command instead of D→ to an approach waypoint or activating a leg.

The standard in the Garmins is, "Activate Approach" means "go direct to the transition you selected and begin sequencing for the approach there."

I think the way to do this is to open the flightplan, highlight the approach segment you are flying to (waypoint) and activate that leg. If one activates the "ILS 02 Y" it just follows the directions and goes to the IAF selected. I only know this because I just did it on the sim after going missed, and did an abbreviated approach to land.
 
I can't think of a situation in which it is necessary to use the "activate approach" command instead of D→ to an approach waypoint or activating a leg.

A handful of people here commenting about load/activate/direct to
I recently took a Garmin class, guy said not to direct to or activate approach.
Notes I took and left here on this are as follows

Approaches

Load IAF that makes sense, not vectors. Tough to change otherwise.

Almost never hit activate approach

Create a direct to an approach fix

Activate a leg-to fix where you will be going to
 
I think the way to do this is to open the flightplan, highlight the approach segment you are flying to (waypoint) and activate that leg. If one activates the "ILS 02 Y" it just follows the directions and goes to the IAF selected. I only know this because I just did it on the sim after going missed, and did an abbreviated approach to land.
It's all contextual. The downside of using a sim by yourself is the absence of ATC. In the real world, if ATC gives you an instruction to go direct to a fix on the loaded approach, you do direct to it and you're fine. If they give you a vector to intercept a leg, you activate that leg.
 
A handful of people here commenting about load/activate/direct to
I recently took a Garmin class, guy said not to direct to or activate approach.
Notes I took and left here on this are as follows

Approaches

Load IAF that makes sense, not vectors. Tough to change otherwise.

Almost never hit activate approach

Create a direct to an approach fix

Activate a leg-to fix where you will be going to
Yep.
 
I think the way to do this is to open the flightplan, highlight the approach segment you are flying to (waypoint) and activate that leg. If one activates the "ILS 02 Y" it just follows the directions and goes to the IAF selected. I only know this because I just did it on the sim after going missed, and did an abbreviated approach to land.

It is easier to go direct to a fix on the approach. That activates the approach.

And this is why you always load the approach with a transition, not vectors. That way all the fixes are loaded and you can pick them to go direct to.
 
It is easier to go direct to a fix on the approach. That activates the approach.

And this is why you always load the approach with a transition, not vectors. That way all the fixes are loaded and you can pick them to go direct to.

Direct to a fix, using the direct to button, might not set things up properly when the fix in question is the FAF.
discussion of such is about 23 minutes in:
 
Direct to a fix, using the direct to button, might not set things up properly when the fix in question is the FAF.
discussion of such is about 23 minutes in:
ATC is not supposed to give you direct to the FAF. Direct to an IF or IAF is OK.
 
Back
Top