Gx-50?

2

2002 Harv

Pre-Flight
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
44
Location
Willoughby Ohio
Display Name
Display name:
John
Anyone run an Apolo GX-50 IFR aproach GPS?
I have a 618 Boat anchr and want to replace it the cheep way.

John
 
Just so's you know, the approach-certified GX-50 is not a slide-in replacement for the Apollo LORAN. The GX-55R is, but when it's done on a slide-in basis, it's not even enroute/terminal certified -- it's VFR only unless more equipment is installed and paperwork done (and that means more money). Make sure you talk carefully with your avionics shop about what you're getting (or not getting) on an installation of a GX-series GPS in an Apollo LORAN hole, and what it will cost to get the GPS capability you want.
 
...but while on the topic, is the GX50 a decent box (assuming it's properly installed and certified)?

There is a plane at which I have looked which is so-equipped, and while I prefer the GNS430/530 boxen, an operational and paid-for GX50 might make sense for a while- could add an MX20 now, upgrade to a GNS480 later...
 
SCCutler said:
...but while on the topic, is the GX50 a decent box (assuming it's properly installed and certified)?
Click to expand...
I like it, especially for the price. We've got GX60s in both of our club aircraft (just an added COM transmitter). Apollo menu logic is more button pushing (soft and hard keys) than the knob twisting found in the Garmin products. The map stays relatively uncluttered and the amber LCD is easy to see day and night. Also has some cool features like arc assist (fly an arc around any waypoint/navaid). The one thing it doesn't have is SIDs/STARs.
 
I like my GX-60, because it came with the plane when I bought it .:)

As with any device, the more you use it, the better you are at it. Garmin still supports it. I had to send it back last year because the display died and they fixed it for a flat $400 and brought it up to the latest spec (some mods & firmware update). They also sent back a 4MB data card. I originally had a 2MB when I bought the plane, and Jepp started having problems fitting the whole IFR database in there, so they had to do some splitting. Everything (United States) fits in 4MB.

As far as the install, part of the issue is the annunciation of certain modes. I have a Midcontinent MD40 in my panel, which has all the lights inside of the CDI (it's the one on the lower right of the first page of this PDF).


-Rich
 
SCCutler said:
...but while on the topic, is the GX50 a decent box (assuming it's properly installed and certified)?
Click to expand...

I fly behind a GX55 in an Archer when the 182 and its 430W are away. It's a decent box (enroute/terminal), but it shore ain't no 430. Kinda like comparing a Hyundai to a Lexus (or for you, Spike, I guess that'd be a Caddy. :D)
 
flyingcheesehead said:
I fly behind a GX55 in an Archer when the 182 and its 430W are away. It's a decent box (enroute/terminal), but it shore ain't no 430. Kinda like comparing a Hyundai to a Lexus (or for you, Spike, I guess that'd be a Caddy. :D)
Click to expand...

How dare you insult a Cadillac by even comparing it to a Lexus? :eek:

===

Basic question: is IFR operation with a GX50 reasonably intuitive?
 
rpadula said:
As far as the install, part of the issue is the annunciation of certain modes. I have a Midcontinent MD40 in my panel, which has all the lights inside of the CDI (it's the one on the lower right of the first page of this PDF).


-Rich
Click to expand...

That's a neat way of annunciating the modes... what's the "PTK" for? I'm either tired or slow... don't recognize that one.
 
Parallel Track Offset (see pg 29)
 
SCCutler said:
Basic question: is IFR operation with a GX50 reasonably intuitive?
Click to expand...

Well sort of, if you read and practiced on the simulator enough.

We have 2 in our club planes and a 430 and a 530W in others. I prefer the 430/530 by a long shot, especially considering it wasn't my money to install them.

I learned to fly IFR approaches with the GX50 years ago, then forgot and learned again when I started teaching IFR in those planes.

Best I can describe it is even having known it once, I couldn't fumble my way through the menus without reading the book (again).

Joe
 
Not intuitive for me, either. I've flown with the GX-series, the Garmin 430/530, 480, and 300XL, the Northstar M-whatever, the KLN 89/90/94, and the old Trimble 2000T. For intuitiveness, I'd have to rate the 430/530 as the hands-down winner, the KLN-94 a distant second, the 480 a close third, and the rest were left at the starting gate.
 
The GX50 software is kinda derived from the old GNC 300. Kinda like having a reverse polish notation calculator. I was always lookin in the book....
 
bbchien said:
The GX50 software is kinda derived from the old GNC 300. Kinda like having a reverse polish notation calculator. I was always lookin in the book....
Click to expand...
Guess that explains why this EE doesn't mind the GX-- then. HP rulez! (well, their calculators anyway) :rofl:

-Rich
 
Thanks so much for all the input.
I talked to a local Avionics shop (G-Force in KCAK) and they are working on a quote.
The thing is, if I can get something to fit in the same location as the Apolo 618 (tray change or not) then I wouldn't have to move everything in the stack. My stack is a little strange. Top to bottom, PS intercom, transponder, 618, audio panel, nav, nav, com, com. So, if I can just replace the 618, I would save a bunch of money and could get other things like a D'Shanon baffle kit, Gamies, EI engine monitor.
Well, you guys know how it goes.....

John
 
2002 Harv said:
The thing is, if I can get something to fit in the same location as the Apolo 618 (tray change or not) then I wouldn't have to move everything in the stack.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure a KLN-94 will fit easily into the same space as an Apollo LORAN, and it's easier to use with a much nicer display than the GX-50. Ask your shop to quote you one of those, too, and see if it isn't right in the same ball park as an approach-certified GX-50 installation.
 
I had a GX-60 in my old plane for several years and earned my instrument rating with it. There is no question that it'll get the job done, and I found it's itty bitty map a huge help compared to none at all. As others have said I found it's programming baffling. I got to the point where I could program in a flight plan, but never was able to successfully ammend it "on the fly", so I didn't use the flight plan feature much. Fortunately it has a mode which allows you to enter just the next waypoint past the one you're currently heading for - I used that feature a lot. It allows you to keep ahead of the box. Approaches with the GX-60 were straightforward.

I've no experience at all with BK's GPS's so I can't offer comparative advice. But I think I'd listen to Ron's advice and at least investigate the alternate. Also, I'd see if I could get my hands on simulators for both and take the software out for a spin before spending real money on an installation.

Regards,
Joe
 
Thanks Ron and Jo.
I have experience with the 90B so the 94 shouldn't be much of a strech.

While we are at it.... 155 (or300)XL anyone?

John
 
2002 Harv said:
I have experience with the 90B so the 94 shouldn't be much of a strech.
Click to expand...
If you can use the 90B, the 94 is a piece of cake -- they took the 89B and 90B and fixed all the stuff about which the users complained.
While we are at it.... 155 (or300)XL anyone?
Click to expand...
Did a 10-day IR course in a 180 Cherokee with a 300XL -- wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. Non-intuitive, complicated, and limited screen.
 
I flew down to AKR today and talked to the friendly folks at Steiner Avionics. They came out and looked over the panel, and made some notes. I told them what I was after. They said they had a used GX-50 there.....
So now with some of the comments about it's non ease of use, I'm not sure it's the one I want. I'm starting to think 94B. The above comments about the 300XL are the first I've heard. They said they will come up with a bunch of options. I guess I'll find out.

John
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top