G5 HSI released!

[Bryan]

I am with you.  Picking up my M20K 231 in a couple of weeks.  It is in avionics right now getting a GTN 750 + GTX 345 install.  I wanted to pull the trigger on the Aspen Pro but hoping to see some more competition from these G5 units.  Sad that the newest HSI/CDI will not drive an autopilot.

[Godfather]

I thought the vfr unit was $5k?

[Browncbr1]

 In my opinion, no nav output renders this unit little more than eye candy.   disappointing. 

[Ron McBride]

 I am looking at this differently.  In my Vintage F, the effects to me are:  An HSI instead if a DG and VOR Head.   I instrument instead of 2.  I could get rid of my vacuum system with both G5's.    I have a GNS 430W with GPSS to drive my Stec 30 with Altitude hold.   I could gain space for an EDM 900 or 930, or mount a G796 in the panel.

The minus for me, is the my DG can drive the Stec 30 autopilot, and my vacuum pump has 15 hours on it.

Ron

[gsxrpilot]

You won't have a heading bug to drive the stec30 which can be damn useful at times.

[KSMooniac]

I'm not even sure you can hook up the STEC 30 without a DG input. And an autopilot without a heading bug is a bad idea.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

[jetdriven]

16 hours ago, Bryan said:

I am with you.  Picking up my M20K 231 in a couple of weeks.  It is in avionics right now getting a GTN 750 + GTX 345 install.  I wanted to pull the trigger on the Aspen Pro but hoping to see some more competition from these G5 units.  Sad that the newest HSI/CDI will not drive an autopilot.

Are you installing the GTx-345R remote transponder? 

[PTK]

On 3/29/2017 at 2:02 PM, Godfather said:

The 2.5 amu price comes with a magnetometer and it can drive an autopilot but Garmin has not certified that portion yet...next year at s&f???

However, IMO they will never port the GAD unit into these lesser cost systems.  I'm pretty sure they associate the higher end BK AP systems to individuals who have deeper pockets...might as well force them to the g500 type system. 

Agree. I would add they also associate those with IFR airplanes Mooneys, Barons etc. vs. VFR planes.

[jamesm]

Well I am going to play Devil's advocate ....

Since it has  Magnetometer I am hoping  I can  remove my  last vacuum drifting instrument  the  DG  and then only thing vacuum pump will being driving is the step  and vacuum gauge. Leaving with Me with no  failure pron  and high maintenance  mechanical / electrical gyro instruments. Still  while making more room behind the panel. while bring  me up new century of flight instruments.    So owning an airplane where  the value is  $40 k or less....    I think is really hard to justify  $18K  - 25K Garmin G500 or ASPEN Pro (or whatever it is) and then if  you don't  have  a Panel mounted GPS (like me) which probably another  $12k to $20K +.  It is my understanding that the Aspen VFR model  doesn't give you  G/S , LOC  CDI  which I suspect  the market  Garmin is targeting with the G5 HSI instrument .

As with most Mooney owners panel space is limited,  ( maybe just my Mooney)   So If I can combine  CDI and  DG  into one instrument  and bonus if it is a HSI  without  having to buy a separate  stupid mechanical  CDI  with  ILS capabilities which  is around $2,100 ( without installation charges)    so for  $1000 or more guess what I just freed up panel space and maybe even saved  a little weight  and added reliability. So to me  installing the solid state gyro G5 HSI instrument make sense to me. 

I will agree with you  it would if could be couple to an auto pilot .. That being said  my Brittan wing lever died on me last month after 50 years  to replace it  with another Brittan autopilot doesn't make sense. With the  possibility  of Trio and Tru-trak autopilots  entering the market  hopefully making  the autopilots cheaper for all of us certified guys.

I suspect this Garmin's approach is a bit like  getting Camel into the Tent (figurative speaking) you start with something  small  say with electronic  G5 ADI   then you get that through  FAA approval  process.  Then get the  DG in the form of HSI  then  pretty soon  you  have whole camel in the tent.    Whether it be G3 or who knows what else Garmin and others have up selves.  Hopefully  it will benefit all of us  by driving down unit cost and  saving us money. 

I find a bit humorous when someone who solely owns and  flies $90K - $100K +   airplane   has to  or feel the need to comment with a snide remark   on why  they wouldn't buying  an Instrument  that cost $2k $3k. Which  was probably wasn't targeted for them  initially anyway.   Same people probably have   at least one   Garmin  GTN 750 installed there main concern where can on the schedule to have another GTN 650/750 installed or autopilot or fancy /pricey instrument  without being phase but $20k +  price tag  not to mention the  installation cost.  Who knows once Garmin gets this  through the FAA's  approval process  then it maybe just a software load away becoming  something useful  for  even with  the guy $100K airplane. 

So If I haven't  alienated myself  yet....   :-O  

 

James '67C

 

 

Edited April 1, 2017 by jamesm

[Ron McBride]

Most vintage Mooneys probably have a PC system or less in them.  This would be a great improvement over vacuum driven old age instruments.

Ron

[jamesm]

I the case of my PC (positive control) wing leveler .... the turn coordinator had all the plumbing for the vacuum lines valves and etc. for the the Wing lever  After my Turn Coordinator failed  and I called and  ask out curiosity what it would cost put in heading hold (uses Vacuum driven DG) and altitude hold .   If I recall it was either $7k or maybe $9k install a fully functioning the autopilot. I understand there is wait list to get one.  I think I'll wait and see what Tru-trk and Trio does with their autopilots.

 

 

James '67C

[bradp]

The G5 AI for certified aircraft has an RS-232 output.  It is disabled.  That RS-232 is what drives a GPSS / roll steering unit when properly formatted.  It would have been great if Garmin could have used software to use the heading bug error and convert it to the proper RS-232 out data stream to be able to drive most GPSS roll steering units.  This seems like a total miss of low hanging fruit.  Had this been able to drive my autopilot I would have been all over it.

It would literally take a software update to make these things attractive and functional to about 800% addition potential buyers.  Was it pushed out the door for SnF?  I'll wait until Oshkosh to see if anything changes I guess. 

[bradp]

For the AI- had the RS-232 been enabled it could have provided altitude encoding functionality to your transponder. When my ancient encoding altimeter fails, this would have been a nice feature - alas the Experimental avionics in certified theme seems to be "look but don't touch" i.e. They can receive data in but not out data out. Unless you count your eyeballs which I'd think is more critical than any data bus.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Godfather]

I think Brad is right on with his thinking. To a certain degree I think everyone is mainly worried about their own plane or situation. People with a failed autopilot could care less about a AP output, those with a stec just want a heading bug, people who have a 256 are taking their ki300 anger out on Garmin, and finally the individuals that have a reliable certified aircraft but really want experimental sticker to keep up (inexpensively) with the changing times. 

The good news is Garmin is listening...multiple times on recent post they are working on AP compatibility...even during the webinar it was mentioned. They also implied that these features would be easily added via software in the future because all G5's are the same coming out of the factory. 

[gsengle]

The G5 AI for certified aircraft has an RS-232 output.  It is disabled.  That RS-232 is what drives a GPSS / roll steering unit when properly formatted.  It would have been great if Garmin could have used software to use the heading bug error and convert it to the proper RS-232 out data stream to be able to drive most GPSS roll steering units.  This seems like a total miss of low hanging fruit.  Had this been able to drive my autopilot I would have been all over it.
It would literally take a software update to make these things attractive and functional to about 800% addition potential buyers.  Was it pushed out the door for SnF?  I'll wait until Oshkosh to see if anything changes I guess. 

It's not a miss, it would have delayed the product with a TON more stc work. And everyone else would still be waiting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[M016576]

2 hours ago, Godfather said:

I think Brad is right on with his thinking. To a certain degree I think everyone is mainly worried about their own plane or situation. People with a failed autopilot could care less about a AP output, those with a stec just want a heading bug, people who have a 256 are taking their ki300 anger out on Garmin, and finally the individuals that have a reliable certified aircraft but really want experimental sticker to keep up (inexpensively) with the changing times. 

The good news is Garmin is listening...multiple times on recent post they are working on AP compatibility...even during the webinar it was mentioned. They also implied that these features would be easily added via software in the future because all G5's are the same coming out of the factory. 

They may be listening- but their business model is a tricky one.

they build aviation gps retrofits.  These retrofits can be placed in anything from a Lear to a cub.  That's a HUGE price variation and exceptionally wide target demographic.  They do their best to make a profit- and in order to do that, they evaluate the cost of their product and the price owners would be willing to pay- and they see what the competition offers.

Part of their business model has been keeping their systems proprietary- coded formats, etc.  they don't make autopilots, but if they did, I'm sure their higher end units would be limited to their own products.  Since they don't make autopilots, and they target markets based on economics, I would find it unlikely that they would add autopilot outputs to this unit; strictly because it would rob from their more expensive installs on aircraft where 20k is less than 1% of the hull cost (king airs, matrix, etc).

The way it looks to me is that while we like the gtn750/ifd540/gns530 display sizes and features, these "higher end" gps's are so expensive because the hull values of the target aircraft are expensive- and all these companies are looking for a profit.  The cost of components surely isn't the driver for the expense, nor is the technology.  The certification costs a bit, but that gets displaced by units sold.

so, I'd say that the typical <100K aircraft probably isn't Garmin's target audience for the 750.  More like the 650.  And while they are happy to sell you a super expensive (relative to hull cost) setup, they were most likely aiming at more expensive airplanes...  hence the reason to not add features that would directly compete with their own, higher end Nav and panel systems.  I wouldn't hold your breathe for GPSS/autopilot outputs... at least not until it's explicitly stated, as opposed to implicitly "implied"

I should add that I'm not in any sort of retail/wholesale or marketing type business... I'm but a Lowly, opinionated pilot that flys to put food on the table.

Edited April 1, 2017 by M016576

[mike_elliott]

4 minutes ago, M016576 said:

they don't make autopilots, but if they did, I'm sure their higher end units would be limited to their own products.  Since they don't make autopilots, and they target markets based on economics, I would find it unlikely that they would add autopilot outputs to this unit; strictly because it would rob from their more expensive installs on aircraft where 20k is less than 1% of the hull cost (king airs, matrix, etc).

They make the sweetest autopilot I have flown behind, the GFC 700.

[Marauder]

What Garmin is dealing with is what anyone in consumer product manufacturing is doing. I can remember years ago, a company that I worked for had 8 prototype products that were ready for release. When I asked why they had 8 the answer was they would introduce one that beat the specs of their competitor's latest entry into the market. Knowing full well, that their current offering would become the low end solution and would see a price degradation. This is an extreme example but Garmin is probably going through a similar process. How do you introduce new products without being parasitic on your other offerings?

The G5, based on what we know was introduced to take advantage of the new position the FAA has on replacing primary vacuum driven AIs. Introducing the HSI version targets customers who want an HSI but without the cost of a full blown Aspen or G500. Building in too much capability will have some of you Cheap Bast$#ds who are contemplating an Aspen or G500 to reconsider and buy the G5 AI/HSI version. Tell me that isn't what you are hoping for.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[tigers2007]

I'm curious if they could adjust pricing based on some sort of STC control - certain models only are approved for the cheap, lowly GA aircraft and other models (hypothetical GTN755, etc) will have STC approval for the expensive jets. Looking back, would I have been leaps and bounds ahead of the regulatory game if I would have just bought a Van's RV or a piston powered Lancair.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Marauder]

I'm curious if they could adjust pricing based on some sort of STC control - certain models only are approved for the cheap, lowly GA aircraft and other models (hypothetical GTN755, etc) will have STC approval for the expensive jets. Looking back, would I have been leaps and bounds ahead of the regulatory game if I would have just bought a Van's RV or a piston powered Lancair.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They have already done that. The certified G5 is a lot more expensive than the one for experimentals. 1AMU more for the certified one.

https://www.gulfcoastavionics.com/manufacturer/166-garmin.aspx


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[gsengle]

They have already done that. The certified G5 is a lot more expensive than the one for experimentals. 1AMU more for the certified one.

https://www.gulfcoastavionics.com/manufacturer/166-garmin.aspx


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Which is totally legit given the additional certification expense...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tigers2007]

What is the additional certification expense? Seems like the only thrifty way to do things is to only purchase at SnF or Oshkosh.
Regardless G5 and the D10/100 for certified birds is definitely a huge leap forward. Considering the piecemeal cost of the G5's, a pilot who is confident of upgrading is still better off with an Aspen VFR ($4300 or less?). I can't remember but does the HSI G5 allow it to display the attitude indicator as a backup to the top one? That would be an added safety feature that the Aspen cannot do by itself. Glad to see some market competition explode in such a short period of time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Marauder]

What is the additional certification expense? Seems like the only thrifty way to do things is to only purchase at SnF or Oshkosh.
Regardless G5 and the D10/100 for certified birds is definitely a huge leap forward. Considering the piecemeal cost of the G5's, a pilot who is confident of upgrading is still better off with an Aspen VFR ($4300 or less?). I can't remember but does the HSI G5 allow it to display the attitude indicator as a backup to the top one? That would be an added safety feature that the Aspen cannot do by itself. Glad to see some market competition explode in such a short period of time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The certified unit will theoretically be tested to different standards. I think they all get the environmental testing but even though this unit I don't believe is TSOd, it probably is tested against some of those requirements for a TSOd unit to be used in a certified plane.

The person who can answer this is JerryTJ. He was an electrical engineer for one of the major avionics manufacturers.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[gsengle]

What is the additional certification expense? Seems like the only thrifty way to do things is to only purchase at SnF or Oshkosh.
Regardless G5 and the D10/100 for certified birds is definitely a huge leap forward. Considering the piecemeal cost of the G5's, a pilot who is confident of upgrading is still better off with an Aspen VFR ($4300 or less?). I can't remember but does the HSI G5 allow it to display the attitude indicator as a backup to the top one? That would be an added safety feature that the Aspen cannot do by itself. Glad to see some market competition explode in such a short period of time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You think getting the STC approved was free? Maybe I'm wrong but there is work involved...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tigers2007]

Yeah are we talking $1M to get it certified? If Garmin is charging a $1k premium for the certified versions then they would break even after the first 1000 units are sold. They'll sell several thousand if these this year alone.
I'm suspecting that the certification costs must be high as Dynon priced their certified D10/100 similarly. I'll leave it at that as this might lead into someone ranting about high prescription drug costs lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk