Cost justification for panel mount avionics

  • Thread starter Thread starter NavByte
  • Start date Start date
N

NavByte

Guest
It keeps bothering me how to justify the costs of a panel mount GTN 750 (~17K) or other similar equipments such as Avidyne IDF 540 (~14k) or Bendix-King KSN 770 (~12k) when you can have the same features on Foreflight and their Stratus 2 WAAS receiver (< 2k).

Could anyone with hands on experience or enough knowledge about their features justify such a big price difference (other than the nice panel look and of course the IFR certification)?


p.s. I did the online training of KSN 770 and absolutely love it. But still the >10k price difference doesn't really make sense to me.
 
well, obviously for me it's the ability to fly rnav approaches and file GPS direct.
 
PeeGee said:
well, obviously for me it's the ability to fly rnav approaches and file GPS direct.
Click to expand...

Yep, that is the only reason...

I've got an RV-9A with a Garmin G3X twin panel in it. Incredible setup, does everything a G1000 does and more, except it isn't a legal GPS position source.

So, I'm adding a GTN650. Costs more than the entire G3X Touch setup, but it makes me legal to file /G.

-Dan
 
There is some really cool stuff out there, but unless you need certified IFR equipment, it seems insane to pay for the panel mount avionics. I'm installing a Garmin 696 in an Airgizmos panel mount in the 182. I will have a nice big display with nearly all the capability of the certified units, including weather and traffic (with the right antenna), and will look nice mounted in the panel. I will run a permanent power cable for mine. I got a gently used unit for $860 and the panel mount for $175. An antenna for XM weather and radio can be had for around $250, I think, and an antenna that does weather, radio, and ads-b is something like $800. Anywho, In my opinion, unless you really need a certified unit, I don't see the upside to spending all that cashola.
 
Last edited:
With the advent of foreflight and Ipad and the stratus,you realy don't need an elaborate state of the art panel mount. To stay legal put in a used Garmin 430.
 
for VFR flight an iPad + WAAS GPS receiver has more functionality than the panel mount GPS. If reliability worries you, buy two. It will still be orders of magnitude cheaper.
 
NavByte said:
It keeps bothering me how to justify the costs of a panel mount GTN 750 (~17K) or other similar equipments such as Avidyne IDF 540 (~14k) or Bendix-King KSN 770 (~12k) when you can have the same features on Foreflight and their Stratus 2 WAAS receiver (< 2k).

Could anyone with hands on experience or enough knowledge about their features justify such a big price difference (other than the nice panel look and of course the IFR certification)?


p.s. I did the online training of KSN 770 and absolutely love it. But still the >10k price difference doesn't really make sense to me.
Click to expand...

All of these radios have mega interfaces and options you will never use.

I don't care the GTN750 will run a TCAS, remote audio panel, remote transponder, an on board radar, shadin fuel flow, on board autopilot, receive XM radio blah blah blah. None of that stuff will EVER be installed in my airplane.

All NEW panel mount radios are that way. It is borderline insanity. I saw a TCAS service bulletin that was to add wiring so the TCAS computer can activate /flash all external lights during a collision threat!
 
Last edited:
PeeGee said:
well, obviously for me it's the ability to fly rnav approaches and file GPS direct.
Click to expand...

this. Even on IFR flights, I refer to my ipad for most of my information. The larger screen and ability to touch screen puts it light years ahead of my GNS430W. Of course, guys with the 750 may not complain as much as me about the GPS since it is considerably larger and has touch screen.
 
In 10 years you won't be able do much IFR without a WAAS GPS IMHO.
 
Well my delorean is in the shop right now, so I havent been to the future, however I'd imagine you'll be able to find your way for a VERY long time with VORs and the ability to shoot a VOR,LOC,ILS, albeit you'll be taking the long way around.

That said you don't need the latest WAAS GPS to do 95% of the stuff, my 430/530 will do 99% of everything the GTNs will do, and if you're a good shopper haggler you can get a sweet deal on one. FYI they both shoot the same approaches, are both /G and both will shoot a aoproach to the same mins.

Same deal with having a glass AI or a mechanical one, both do the same thing, one is WAY less money, and a overhaul on a mechanical will run you a little over $300 bucks if needed.

You can get a King HSI setup for VERY little now too.

As yourself, is this a cosmetic mod or a functionality mod?


Now of you're VFR, yeah, just use a ipad and have the bare legal VFR panel, no biggie.
 
Last edited:
I find the ipad and stratus to be more accurate than flying the needles, and with a lot less play. Ive never had an ipad failure but I have had a panel mounted gps failure before. Now im sure it will fail on the next flight! hahaha
 
The price difference is due to the immense cost of certification divided by the relatively small number of units which will be produced.
 
rbridges said:
this. Even on IFR flights, I refer to my ipad for most of my information. The larger screen and ability to touch screen puts it light years ahead of my GNS430W. Of course, guys with the 750 may not complain as much as me about the GPS since it is considerably larger and has touch screen.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%
 
Ron Levy said:
The price difference is due to the immense cost of certification divided by the relatively small number of units which will be produced.
Click to expand...

That's right. That's why the used market for these devices is very hot. The certification process is causing the major price increase, and is mandatory.
 
Ron Levy said:
The price difference is due to the immense cost of certification divided by the relatively small number of units which will be produced.
Click to expand...

Experimental aircraft are so much more fun and affordable to equip with the latest techno gadgets :yes:
 
Some of the options are nice to have. Like coupling the autopilot to the GPS, or connecting the fuel flow to your FMS. I know we can have all these options on smaller GPSs, PCAS, etc. But it's nice to be integrated. I remember the days we had a portable mp3 player, a cell phone, a portable radio, and a small pocket camera. But now they are all integrated into a smart phone.
 
if the new is too expensive, buy old

/G for ~2K including the indicator and annunciator. It's not waas, all that means is no vnav. Doesn't bother me. You can file /G and fly gps approaches with this cheap gear just as well as the new stuff, and the database is still supported. If you want to see the little airplane moving on a map, just wire it to cross fill to a 396 etc.
 

Attachments

  • panel photo May2012 sm.JPG
    panel photo May2012 sm.JPG
    91.3 KB · Views: 73
JHW said:
if the new is too expensive, buy old

/G for ~2K including the indicator and annunciator. It's not waas, all that means is no vnav. Doesn't bother me. You can file /G and fly gps approaches with this cheap gear just as well as the new stuff, and the database is still supported. If you want to see the little airplane moving on a map, just wire it to cross fill to a 396 etc.
Click to expand...

I've seen those guys on barnstormers and eBay for not much, great buy, add the ability to shoot a ILS and for a occasional IFR type person you're set for not much :yes:
 
James331 said:
I've seen those guys on barnstormers and eBay for not much, great buy, add the ability to shoot a ILS and for a occasional IFR type person you're set for not much :yes:
Click to expand...
Your constant condescending attitude is tiresome for all. What do you mean by occasional? It wasn't that long ago we were in fat city flying IFR every night with a pair of KX175's. Heck I'd draw the short straw and get an old twin cessna with coffee grinders many nights, and it didn't merit any more than a shrug and an eye roll. ANY ifr gps is a quantum leap from that. The next increment between my ancient GNC300 and the newest GTN, isn't nearly as much as the change from the KX's to the first gps.

yes, newbies like yourself think that a "professional" needs a color screen to follow. And these days, maybe that's true.
 
JHW said:
Your constant condescending attitude is tiresome for all. What do you mean by occasional? It wasn't that long ago we were in fat city flying IFR every night with a pair of KX175's. Heck I'd draw the short straw and get an old twin cessna with coffee grinders many nights, and it didn't merit any more than a shrug and an eye roll. ANY ifr gps is a quantum leap from that. The next increment between my ancient GNC300 and the newest GTN, isn't nearly as much as the change from the KX's to the first gps.

yes, newbies like yourself think that a "professional" needs a color screen to follow. And these days, maybe that's true.
Click to expand...

WTF are you going off about??

Simply put people who fly heavy IMC IFR tend to have a better equipped panel, a HSI and a WAAS box and basic AP at least.

I realize you don't live in the US, but being able to shoot a WAAS down to ILS mins comes in handy quite often, having complementary VNAV does too, as does a better display, as does a HSI, as does a autopilot. Need I go on.

There is a difference between a getting through a marine layer, or IFR in VMC flying and hard IMC flying.
 
Last edited:
James331 said:
WTF are you going off about??

Simply put people who fly heavy IMC IFR tend to have a better equipped panel, a HSI and a WAAS box and basic AP at least.

I realize you don't live in the US, but being able to shoot a WAAS down to ILS mins comes in handy quite often, having complementary VNAV does too, as does a better display, as does a HSI, as does a autopilot. Need I go on.

There is a difference between a getting through a marine layer, or IFR in VMC flying and hard IMC flying.
Click to expand...

I think this is an example of where your reputation precedes you. I get what you were trying to say, but you come off as such an expert all the time I tune you out.

BTW, Jeff is from Illinois. He's working overseas...

I have "all the goodies" but the day I "require" the little pink line is the day I stop flying IFR. If anyone "needs" the little pink line, I feel sorry for you, you are flirting with a very bad day at some point in the future that might not end well. Get some instruction and fix that problem, TODAY, while you still can.
 
retailguy said:
I think this is an example of where your reputation precedes you. I get what you were trying to say, but you come off as such an expert all the time I tune you out.

BTW, Jeff is from Illinois. He's working overseas...

I have "all the goodies" but the day I "require" the little pink line is the day I stop flying IFR. If anyone "needs" the little pink line, I feel sorry for you, you are flirting with a very bad day at some point in the future that might not end well. Get some instruction and fix that problem, TODAY, while you still can.
Click to expand...


Honestly I have zero idea why you two are having a conception fit over nothing.

As for IFR it's really requires a GPS, a WAAS box if you are going up in sub 5-600' ceilings often as not every airport has a ILS or PAR. Flying IFR without any GPS is a pain at most small airport, not due to the lack of the magenta line, but due to the lack of anything other than a GPS approach at most of the small airports.


Sorry if it sound like I know what I'm talking about, I agree that my knowledge is a great reason to "tune me out" :goofy:
 
If I could offer skin graft replacements here I'd be a millionaire.
 
JHW said:
Your constant condescending attitude is tiresome for all. What do you mean by occasional? It wasn't that long ago we were in fat city flying IFR every night with a pair of KX175's. Heck I'd draw the short straw and get an old twin cessna with coffee grinders many nights, and it didn't merit any more than a shrug and an eye roll. ANY ifr gps is a quantum leap from that. The next increment between my ancient GNC300 and the newest GTN, isn't nearly as much as the change from the KX's to the first gps.

yes, newbies like yourself think that a "professional" needs a color screen to follow. And these days, maybe that's true.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? James was essentially supporting your opinion in that you don't need fancy touch screen glass to have a safe, capable IFR platform. At least that's what I got out of it. How you could confuse his post to something it wasn't is beyond me. :dunno:
 
If the Part-23 re-write happens, will we be allowed to use systems such as the G3X as an approved GPS position source in order to file /G?
 
BTW, you know you guys IFR without a /g could indeed ask atc for a radar vector direct wherever, and if that vector happens to be off a little and you tracked your vfr GPS no one would care....as long as you're above the MVA
 
There are differences. The biggest being reliability. Consumer level electronics do occasionally fail. This is why panel mount avionics are more robust and require certification.

The real question is do you need this level of reliability?

FWIW, my MD-80 has no approach GPS in it and I seem to make it OK. However, more and more GA airports only have GPS approaches.
 
Last edited:
LevelWing said:
If the Part-23 re-write happens, will we be allowed to use systems such as the G3X as an approved GPS position source in order to file /G?
Click to expand...

I don't believe so. If experimental aircraft are required to have "certified" GPS units in order to file /G, so are certified aircraft working under the re-written part 23 system (which is effectively allowing certain certified aircraft to operate under EXP-AB rules).
 
jonnyjetprop said:
The real question is do you need this level of reliability?
Click to expand...

That's right, in a good IMC condition, reliability is the holy grail.
Depending on where your base is, IMC may be prevalent for a good part of the year. Around where I am, the weather is pretty much IMC in fall and often in spring.
Thanks John and Walboy for sharing your experience/thought about reliability. I'm hearing more and more about this side of the story.
And am still listening.
 
Plenty of anecdotes of Aspens and G1000 units clunking off in-flight to convince me the cost of certified avionics is due to low volume, not certification robustness. A fool and their money....
 
I used to have a Garmin iQue 3600a that I liked a lot. It was a Palm-based unit with touch screen, WAAS, Jepps, log book, basemaps for use in a car as well as an aircraft, turn-by-turn in auto mode, and a lot of other features, in addition to doing anything that a Palm would do. I bought it about 10 years ago and used it until it got damaged somehow or another (I forget exactly how, but I think I dropped it) :( .

I think I paid $1,300.00 for it including the car kit, which was a pretty darn good price when you consider that even entry-level auto GPS units were going for about $600.00 - $700.00 back then. The basic package came with the yoke mount, external antenna, and other assorted paraphernalia; the car mount was extra. I don't remember the battery life when running on batteries, but it was at least several hours.

I think it's still supported for downloads and updates, but it's no longer manufactured. I wouldn't bother with it today because the only kind of flying I actually want to do nowadays doesn't require it. Also, I get enough of electronics on the ground. But I did like it a lot when I had it.

Rich
 
PeeGee said:
BTW, you know you guys IFR without a /g could indeed ask atc for a radar vector direct wherever, and if that vector happens to be off a little and you tracked your vfr GPS no one would care....as long as you're above the MVA
Click to expand...
ATC may go along with that, but it's still a violation of 91.205(d). If you can't directly navigate to the place where ATC has cleared you even if ATC loses its radar, you cannot legally accept vectors to that place. So, without a "Suitable RNAV system", you can accept a vector to join V123, but you cannot legally accept a vector direct to BUNGO intersection on V123. That may seem a small semantical parsing, but it's what you need on tape to cover you if something goes awry. Note that penalties for this sort of violation of 91.205 have ranged up to 180 days suspension.
 
Ron Levy said:
ATC may go along with that, but it's still a violation of 91.205(d). If you can't directly navigate to the place where ATC has cleared you even if ATC loses its radar, you cannot legally accept vectors to that place. So, without a "Suitable RNAV system", you can accept a vector to join V123, but you cannot legally accept a vector direct to BUNGO intersection on V123. That may seem a small semantical parsing, but it's what you need on tape to cover you if something goes awry. Note that penalties for this sort of violation of 91.205 have ranged up to 180 days suspension.
Click to expand...

ATC would not vector you to an intersection /a /w, it would really have to be a navaid that you could navigate to, and the vector would be a heading until receiving that navaid (fly heading 090, vector xyz vortac. report receiving xyz vortac). The heading just might be incredibly accurate. If you went nonradar they would put you on nonradar routes regardless of being /g or not.

This is the same thing as your example of a vector to intercept the airway.
It's done quite regularly.
 
Last edited:
jonnyjetprop said:
There are differences. The biggest being reliability. Consumer level electronics do occasionally fail. This is why panel mount avionics are more robust and require certification.
Click to expand...


Or just make it law to bring two of the damned things along.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top