Don't buy those G5's

Discussion in 'Avionics and Upgrades' started by Cruzinchris, Mar 27, 2018.

  1. arkvet

    arkvet Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2016
    Messages:
    776
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Brent
    I actually agree with Tom 100%. He’s not talking absolutes here on which AP is the best fit and I think associating each AP with a plane value may be slightly off but mostly correct.

    For example I used to own a PA28-180 that would fall right there in line with the $30k plane mentioned. It had an ancient wing leveler that I’m convinced was actually programmed to teach people barrel rolls. So essentially zero AP. As basic of a panel as you could get. Narco radio with CDI / glide slope

    The Trutrack would have been an awesome addition to this plane. It’s not really a traveling plane but that AP would be viewed by the vast majority of pilots as a high end upgrade for a plane with those capabilities.

    Currently I own a Saratoga that’s not far from the $150k plane that is the other example. I’ve got dual G5’s and an IFD 550. Currently good functioning century 41 AP with auto trim. The G5’s provide gpss to the AP and it’s a beautiful thing.

    If my Century 41 went Tango Uniform would you suggest that the Trutrack or the GFC 500 would be a more appropriate replacement, all things considered?

    Maybe the thing that struck a nerve with you was applying these AP’s based on plane $ value rather than capability and expected use. However, considering those factors often have a direct relationship I still see his points as very valid for the majority of pilots.

    Nothing against the Trutrack. It’s got its place and from what I understand fills a niche that needed filling.
     
  2. Unit74

    Unit74 Ejection Handle Pulled

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2014
    Messages:
    5,760
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Unit74
    Depends on what you want to do with the AP. Spending almost $3k more for no more functionality is dumb. Insinuating a $250k must have a $20k AP or it’s worthless is just plain ignorant. It’s about on par with trying to say a Rolex can tell time better than a Timex. But I guess on the ramp you can tell your buds all about how much you spent which equals swagger I guess.

    Cost is proportional to functionality. Paying a higher cost for the same service defies logic. But a fool and his money are soon parted as they say. Is a three servo GFC500 better than a TT? You bet. Not considering the G5 or E5 arguement, Is a two servo GFC better than a two servo Trutrak? Not really.
     
  3. MooneyDriver78

    MooneyDriver78 Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2013
    Messages:
    2,256
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Tom
    Yes, really, I articulated some of the functionality benefits in an earlier post.
    The only ignorance is in your posts. I mention the GFC 600 as desirable because of it’s additional functionality would be desirable in many $250K planes, especially the more robust servos and no dependence on G5s.
     
    Katamarino likes this.
  4. Unit74

    Unit74 Ejection Handle Pulled

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2014
    Messages:
    5,760
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Unit74

    You are absolute right..... in fact, I now agree with you that we should in fact, dump all these petty systems that are children’s toys really, and I won’t even look at anything unless it has a Honeywell Primus or better because it does so much more. I now think discussion about any airplane sub-$10 mil should be discontinued as those guys are just out of touch, and bottoms dwellers for that matter.
     
  5. C177B Flyer

    C177B Flyer Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2019
    Messages:
    4
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    C177B Flyer
    Why doesn’t it work with the track function? Seems like roll steering would be the same as with other legacy analog autopilots. If to the right of the heading bug/gps line, energize the one side, left energize the other side. According to the docs, it can follow VOR/LOC outputs, although mine is not wired up for that apparently.

    I’m asking the same questions with my Cardinal. The AI is getting sluggish, and I would rather spend repair money toward a G5, but I also need an IFR GPS/NAV/COMM. Thinking of going GNS650 and two G5’s, which is painful enough to the wallet without buying a new autopilot. It would be nice if the C1 could at least follow the heading.
     
    Last edited: Mar 10, 2019
  6. zaitcev

    zaitcev En-Route

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2010
    Messages:
    3,055
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Pete Zaitcev
    Well, I have flown a couple, about 50 or 70 hours. Both Aspens were not reliable enough for my taste. {Or, let me rephrase: the are reliable, but their failure mode is abysmal.}

    Problem is, Aspen just looooves going totally belly up at a drop of a hat. If anything is not up to snuff, or anything happens to GPS reception, Aspen displays a BIG RED X and that's it. In one airplane, it was easy to cause by giving it too much rudder (although that Aspen recovered in 30 seconds once coordinated flight resumed). In other airplane, it didn't work on the ground, because apparently GPS speed wasn't within parameters. So I had to take off with Aspen in RED X and hope it comes back alive in the air.

    So what happens is that Aspen's main program checks data it receives from the AHARS for sanity, and raises a flag when something is out of whack: too much slip reported, GPS velocity vector is too much away from integrated speed from gyros and accelerometers. I commend them for doing that instead of trusting bogus data blindly.

    But their reaction to the failure of these checks is just absurd -- why can't that junk display the godd**n airspeed and altitude?! That's all I need! I don't have experience with G5, so maybe it's worse than Aspen, but for sure I'm not installing Aspen in my airplane.

    P.S. Aspen also goes into RED X if it loses GPS signal for extended periods. Fly through a GPS jamming excercise and you lose everything (ASI, AI, even compass!).

    P.P.S. In one of the aforementioned airplanes the ball was removed and only the little bar under the compass on top of Aspen was used. Well, I don't think I'm going to spin in from a standard rate turn just because Aspen goes RED X on me, but jeez.
     
    Last edited: Mar 10, 2019
    Velocity173, Ryan F. and murphey like this.
  7. Kenny Phillips

    Kenny Phillips Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2018
    Messages:
    1,867
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Kenny Phillips
    Doesn't your entire interior get pulled once a year anyway?
     
  8. Jesse Saint

    Jesse Saint Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2018
    Messages:
    210
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Jesse Saint
    This makes for a great Cardinal Panel (sorry for the bad contrast from my iPhone). 168C1FDE-C407-4650-A357-EFC8147BA656.jpeg
     
    Velocity173 likes this.
  9. eman1200

    eman1200 Touchdown! Greaser! PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2013
    Messages:
    11,178
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    eman1200

    ok the dude in the lower right corner freaked me out a lil bit, I'm not gonna lie...……….
     
    Timbeck2 and 455 Bravo Uniform like this.
  10. Stingray Don

    Stingray Don En-Route

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,562
    Location:
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Stingray Don
    Wow, I didn’t even notice that until you pointed it out
     
  11. murphey

    murphey Final Approach PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2008
    Messages:
    8,342
    Location:
    Colorado
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    murphey
    The ultimate flight manager? or autopilot?
     
  12. Jesse Saint

    Jesse Saint Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2018
    Messages:
    210
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Jesse Saint
    Both of those guys were tying up wires. They don’t come with the panel.
     
    WannFly and flyingcheesehead like this.
  13. MooneyDriver78

    MooneyDriver78 Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2013
    Messages:
    2,256
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Tom
    Nope, why would it?


    Tom
     
  14. flyingcheesehead

    flyingcheesehead Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    22,215
    Location:
    UQACY, WI
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    iMooniac
    An attitude-based autopilot uses a compatible attitude indicator to tell the autopilot what attitude it's in... And the G5 doesn't do that. At least, not yet - I've heard that they'll release something around Sun-n-Fun enabling this.

    Do you also have a Century I, or something else?
     
  15. C177B Flyer

    C177B Flyer Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2019
    Messages:
    4
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    C177B Flyer
    Yes, it’s a Century I. Just seems odd that we have a ‘Track’ control that doesn’t track something, and according to Century “VOR/LOC radio signal tracking is standard.“ on the C1. How does it follow a VOR or localizer, and why is that different from any other left/right/+/- system? Is it technically able to steer but was never approved?
     
  16. flyingcheesehead

    flyingcheesehead Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    22,215
    Location:
    UQACY, WI
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    iMooniac
    I'm not sure what you're asking, but the reason that it doesn't work is that it isn't just using the VOR or Localizer - It has to have a connection to the attitude indicator so it knows what wings level is first, and then the nav signal is a secondary input. Without the attitude input, it wouldn't know when to stop turning and would probably roll you upside down if you got off course. :hairraise:
     
  17. C177B Flyer

    C177B Flyer Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2019
    Messages:
    4
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    C177B Flyer
    Curious. It doesn’t seem to have any connection to an AI on the wiring diagram. The wings level function appears to be solely internal to the device’s turn coordinator function. Century’s page on it states that a vacuum failure will not affect the operation of it, so I don’t think there is any tie to the AI. The only external input option seems to be radio left and right. “150 millivolts full scale + left and +right”. Perhaps that isn’t standard? I’ll dig up some diagrams on the more advanced-but-still-legacy AP’s.
     
  18. flyingcheesehead

    flyingcheesehead Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    22,215
    Location:
    UQACY, WI
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    iMooniac
    Ah OK, it may be that the CI is a rate-based autopilot (like S-TEC), in which case it should work fine with the G5.

    So now I'm confused. What is it you think the G5 won't do? And what G5 configuration? Does your autopilot have a heading mode? Because if you have the G5 HSI, and a rate-based autopilot with a heading mode, it should follow the heading bug... You need the GAD 29B adapter connected between the HSI and the autopilot, and you need the GMU 11 magnetometer (which comes with the HSI version of the G5, which is one reason why it's more expensive than the AI version of the G5).

    If you put in a G5 as the AI, you won't have the magnetometer... Maybe that is what you're referring to?
     
  19. asicer

    asicer En-Route

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,595
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    asicer
    The fundamental problem is that the Century I (combination T&B + rate-based AP all-in-one unit) can take VOR/LOC input and nothing else.

    More info here:
    https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/com...pilot-and-replacing-loran.82633/#post-1791850
     
  20. C177B Flyer

    C177B Flyer Filing Flight Plan

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2019
    Messages:
    4
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    C177B Flyer
    I read that too. Pretty much the CDI sends output to the C1, which it can follow in track mode. Can a gps course show on a CDI so that the CDI can tell the C1 to turn?

    Kent, I asked because it seems like it should work as you say, but people tell me it can’t fly a heading even though it’s supposed to follow a VOR. My question was “Why not?” If there are left and right inputs, I should be able to provide that from an analog source. All that the autopilot knows is that it’s being told to turn right or left.

    Regardless of the C1’s abilities, I’m thinking of going with a pair of G5’s, one for AI and one for DG, with all of the stuff needed for the DG. It would just be great if the G5’s course deflections could be used for the AP on long trips. I may be able to send it through this old MC-60 “nav converter” for translation to the AP. I’ll dig into that a bit.
     
  21. flyingcheesehead

    flyingcheesehead Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    22,215
    Location:
    UQACY, WI
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    iMooniac
    Ah. So the Century I never had a heading mode in the first place. Nothing the G5 can do about that... Except make it easy for you to install a GFC 500. ;)

    Sorry for my confusion, the rest of the Century line is attitude-based, I didn't realize the I was rate-based. Kinda like King, almost all of their stuff is attitude-based but the KAP 140 is rate-based.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2019
  22. asicer

    asicer En-Route

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,595
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    asicer
    Well a Century-I can share a servo and serve as a backup to a IIb, III or IV. But if a GFC500 is on the table... why?;)

    And yet the 140 has a heading mode...:dunno:
     
  23. flyingcheesehead

    flyingcheesehead Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    22,215
    Location:
    UQACY, WI
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    iMooniac
    It's amazing how much the new crop of lower-priced autopilots has changed everything. Two years ago, if you had a dead Piper/Century/Cessna autopilot that was old and difficult to overhaul, you still did it because the best option you had for a new retrofit was the S-TEC 30, which was well into 5-figure territory plus installation, so most of the way to $20K by the time all was said and done... And it only had altitude hold for the pitch axis. Now, you can put in an entire dual G5 + GFC500 system in for less than that and have IAS mode, VS, altitude preselect, GPSS, etc. It's really changed the game.

    Yeah, nothing about rate-based vs. attitude-based really affects what features are made available. Having a nav tracking mode but no heading mode is... Unusual, to say the least.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2019
  24. Morgan3820

    Morgan3820 Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2013
    Messages:
    1,422
    Location:
    New Bern, NC
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Reno
    How is that New Years resolution going?
     
  25. asicer

    asicer En-Route

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,595
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    asicer
    :dunno:
    I believe so.

    Maybe because it's based on a T&B instead of a TC? I have flown a Century-I that had a switch that was supposed to allow it to follow the heading bug. It didn't work. I don't know if it was a maintenance issue or if it just never worked to begin with (I didn't ask). I do know that when switched to tracking a VOR it was, to be generous, a bit wobbly. Perhaps tracking a heading bug is even worse to the point of being worthless? :dunno:

    Do you really want to output the GPS to both the G5 HSI and the MC60 CDI at the same time? Is that even legal?