Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Avionics and Upgrades' started by MickYoumans, Jan 31, 2018.
Which ever one you already have installed.
Mechanical gyros are great, its the stupid dry vacuum pumps that really were a terrible idea. Electric driven mechanical gyros aren't much better.
Absolute best, digital primary and mechanical standby.
I prefer to fly with one digital AI and at least 3 separate mechanical AIs.
Narco is better
I thought that’s an older firmware issue and has been solved.
Updating the firmware was definitely mentioned in the thread. The original poster had it installed 2 months ago, so I would assume the firmware was fairly up to date (although the impacted owners haven't replied back with the software version this occurred on).
Here's a response from a Garmin employee in the thread: "...in most of these cases after getting the data from these units that are having problems we can usually verify that most problems are vibration or not calibrated correctly. but the first thing I'd verify is if the units are at the latest software levels."
Yes, that's been resolved for quite some time now. A software revision fixed the problem, which only affected a handful of users.
Eh, I'd go with two (independent) electronic ADIs over an EADI + mechanical ADI. Solid state beats gimbals every time.
Solid state is pretty good.
But mechanical vac is pretty simple and has been working for quite a while with a little Mx and care.
let's be clear, not all solid state is created equal.
Not to belabor the point, but the same holds true for mechanical instruments as well.
I just looked at the configuration page of the PFD and HSI and as per the STC, internal GPS is disabled. So the idea about external GPS failing , pitot static failing and still getting airspeed is not going to happen. The system is capable, per STC it shud be disabled
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think you’re right.
I'm still considering the best way to ditch my vacuum system when (not if) my gyro instruments fail next, if not sooner. The Aspen E5 and dual Garmin G5s look to be very similar in features and cost, with a few differences which may or may not be important compared to what I am flying now (dumb, poorly lit vacuum gyros). Both will work with the typical autopilots in FLIBs (I have an STEC-20), and include GPSS with the ACU units, which is a little extra. Both will play nice with IFR GPS units, including the 430W.
Here is what caught my eye:
The Aspen has one screen. If it, or its controller goes, you lose BOTH your AI and DG. With dual G5s, a circuit board failure is limited to one instrument, and the remaining one can revert to an AI if needed. The redundancy of two G5s is very comforting, especially IFR/IMC.
If I understand the specs correctly, the Aspen has a 30 minute backup battery, while each G5 has 4 HOURS of backup power. That is REALLY comforting. I'm not sure I need 4 hours to get out of an emergency situation, but batteries lose performance over time, and even at 50% capacity, that is plenty of time to extricate yourself from a mess. A measly 30 minutes of backup power could be interesting in an emergency, especially if 30 minutes is really only 15-20 minutes. Yes, you may have aircraft battery power if it's the alternator that fails, but it has to run a lot of stuff, too like ADS-B, turn gyro, and GPS. Am I missing something here? I would have expected more backup power time for the Aspen or any critical electric instrument.
The Aspen has some nice features and is potentially upgradeable, but I'm not sure how terribly important that will be for a plane like mine. Interestingly, the Grumman community appears to be overwhelmingly G5s, although that product did have a release lead. But I haven't seen a rush to install Aspens instead of G5s. But really, any kind of EFIS system is a huge upgrade over vacuum instruments.
If you put enough mechanical AIs in your panel, the plane will be resistant to turns.
https://aspenavionics.com/documents/E5 vs G5 specifications and functions.pdf
Also, the Lithium Ion battery is listed as 2 hours of backup for the Aspen E5 on their site
S-Tec autopilots, yes... But there are many attitude-based autopilots out there, and the G5 does not yet have the ability to feed attitude to an autopilot. So, for many of us, the G5 is not an option to replace our attitude indicators.
Aspen's EA100 converter box allows them to do it.
You can still replace it, then relegate the old AI to backup position.
One thing to note is that if the G5 HSI is running from its internal battery because of a TOTAL electrical system outage there will be NO heading information displayed because the GDU-11 magnetometer is NOT powered by the G5 HSI.
Yeah, but that kinda defeats the purpose of the G5 upgrade, for me - To get rid of a dying, expensive-to-overhaul gyro and ditch the vacuum system.
That seems like a big miss???
You may still be able to get GPS track from the internal GPS of the G5 (assuming it can get a signal). However, this is one of the reasons that I was glad to have gone with the ESI-500 as my backup to the G500 TXi, as the ESI-500's MAG-500 _is_ powered by the backup battery.
Yea, cause it’s not like we have a way of getting that information some other way....like a compass?!
Internal GPS is disabled at install time in certificated world. It might be a good idea to pull the GMU 11 breaker and the gps breaker and see what G5 will actually do
That's true, if you are using a WAAS GPS to provide position source to the G5, which is not all certificated installs (for example, installing with a VHF navigator and using an antenna for the GPS is perfectly acceptable per the STC). However, your point is valid, in that if you are interfaced to a WAAS GPS, you likely wouldn't get anything with a total electrical failure.
I dug out the Schematic on the Aspen..
The RSM is powered from the E5 and gets picked up by the battery in case of ship's power failure... The magnetometer is in the RSM...
If your G5 is connected to an external roof mounted GPS antenna you will have GPS track (not magnetic heading) if the GMU11 drops offline (including electrical power failure) assuming the G5 has been installed with the standby battery.
Recent informative vids on the E5 in flight:
Any idea if there will be a box that will allow a G5 to drive an autopilot like a KFC200?
While I guess it wouldn’t completely shock me if they did, I’m guessing that their GFC-500/600 certification efforts are much higher priority for them. The G5’s are selling very well, if Aspen was eating their lunch in that market segment, then I imagine it’d be something they’d probably put the effort in to.
Word on the street is that we can expect "something" around the time frame of AEA or Sun 'n' Fun. It might be a box that allows the G5 to drive an attitude-based autopilot, or it might be something G5-like only by a different name.
It will certainly be more expensive than a G5. Aspen's EA100 autopilot adapter lists for $2795, Garmin's GAD43e for $4995. King's KI-300 AI, which is a G5-like replacement for the KI-256, plus their KA-310 autopilot adapter, will supposedly go for $5300 if they ever get the KA-310 certified.
I would expect a price for a display including the autopilot adapter to be in the $5000 range.
Isn’t the 29b just a strip down 43e?
OK. With the amount of airplanes out there with the KFC-200 alone, you'd think they would want to pursue that market. And who knows when the KI300 and KI310 are going to be ready to go.
No, the 43e is more of a analog to ARINC 429 converter and handles DME channeling, marker beacons, analog radar altimeter, ADF, analog NAV, and autopilot attitude reference signals (and a few other things). The 29b is more of a ARINC 429 to CANBUS converter, and provides the ARINC 429 NAV inputs, ARCINC 429 EFIS output and HSI autopilot outputs (heading and course error). There really isn't anything obvious in common between them.
I wonder if they might just make it so the GAD43e can talk to the GAD29b vs an entirely new device. That could get the ability to get older NAV radios to interface with the G5 ecosystem then as well as the autopilot support.
If it really would take both devices to do the trick, I would think they would come up with a new device, just because a GAD 29b + GAD 43e + G5 would likely be more expensive than I think they'll need to be to clobber the market the way they want to. All of the extra stuff that goes through the 43e (nav radios, etc) really isn't needed for the G5-type solution.
Well, if you've already got 2 FAA approved devices, getting the software approved to talk between them might be easier than approving an entirely new piece of hardware and its software. They also had (not sure if still selling new) the GAD43, which came out before the 43e and was just the autopilot portion. I could see some folks being interested in the legacy nav support to get those signals on to the G5 without having to upgrade radios, but at the current cost of a 43e, it'd be cheaper to buy a new radio if that's all you needed, if they didn't come out with a cheaper adaptor.