GTN 750 vs current upgrades

[flyboy0681]

4 minutes ago, INA201 said:

I can’t remember who gave this advice here. “Opening up your panel is like major surgery and the more you accomplish while it’s opened up the better.” I agreed and went for it. Keep us posted.

There is also a saying, "if you give a mouse a cookie.."

[gsxrpilot]

7 hours ago, MIm20c said:

Still surprised out of 440 student Don has not instructed in a IFD panel yet...  I expected a number of units in the wild. 

Simple... the Avidyne's are so simple and intuitive and make flying so easy, that IFD panel pilots don't need supplemental instruction. 

[MIm20c]

1 minute ago, gsxrpilot said:

Simple... the Avidyne's are so simple and intuitive and make flying so easy, that IFD panel pilots don't need supplemental instruction. 

Well I should get one on order ASAP and schedule my check rides next week!  I can’t believe all the money I’m going to save on training. 

[kortopates]

Going through the thread, I see mention of many of the pluses of the GTN's including RF legs, Voice commands,  and visual approaches to every runway, but I didn't see mention of the VNAV functionality that loads minimum altitudes on each approach segment and allows you to specify your assigned altitude on the enroute portion and use this for VNAV. Its a huge feature in my mind and the FS510 capability to wirelessly load all nav data, both Garmin and Jepp data is another one. 

But the GTNs only support 3 of the 6 required RNP nav legs required for RNP approach approval, but I doubt we'll ever see a box for light GA with RNP approach approval since there is a lot more too it. 

Edited December 4, 2018 by kortopates

[donkaye]

38 minutes ago, kortopates said:

Going through the thread, I see mention of many of the pluses of the GTN's including RF legs, Voice commands,  and visual approaches to every runway, but I didn't see mention of the VNAV functionality that loads minimum altitudes on each approach segment and allows you to specify your assigned altitude on the enroute portion and use this for VNAV. Its a huge feature in my mind and the FS510 capability to wirelessly load all nav data, both Garmin and Jepp data is another one. 

But the GTNs only support 3 of the 6 required RNP nav legs required for RNP approach approval, but I doubt we'll ever see a box for light GA with RNP approach approval since there is a lot more too it. 

I didn't mention VNAV because I believe the Avidyne's also have it, although maybe not autopilot coupled like the Garmin unit can do with a GFC 500 or GFC 600.

[M016576]

6 hours ago, donkaye said:

I didn't mention VNAV because I believe the Avidyne's also have it, although maybe not autopilot coupled like the Garmin unit can do with a GFC 500 or GFC 600.

yes, they share this feature- but you can’t couple to it- it’s a visual depiction on the IFD alone (Boeing banana + descent rate).

Edited December 4, 2018 by M016576

[donkaye]

1 hour ago, M016576 said:

yes, they share this feature- but you can’t couple to it- it’s a visual depiction on the IFD alone (Boeing banana + descent rate).

If you have the G500 or G500 TXi, you will get a vertical deviation carrot on the glide path and vertical rate carrot on the VSI.  This can be followed manually unless you have one of the Garmin autopilots, in which case the autopilot can fly it automatically.  You can fly one leg VNAV Direct on any  autopilot.  This behaves just like an ILS.  Since I hadn't had enough time to play with this before my plane became inop until January  (see my other post on that one), I'm not sure how well VNAV Direct works on the KFC 150 autopilot.

[Fookz92]

23 hours ago, Marauder said:

 

 

Yeah, lots of talk money spending but no one actually saying what those panels actually cost. For an owner these are significant financial decisions with implications.

Hunter - plan it out with both your short and long term goals. Spending $40k to $50k on plane that you may not keep, is worse than throwing money down a bottomless pit. Owners like Don, Bob and Steven are and will be long term owners of their planes. Others have the financial means to throw into the pit and don’t care about the future resale implications.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

I actually plan on keeping this airplane for a while. I cannot find a faster machine for the cost anywhere. I will not throw money into the pit either. Just want to make this a good IFR platform for myself. I have these few items such as WAAS upgrade to the 530 that I need to get to achieve my mission's capabilities. If I need to spend 6-8K between WAAS, software update, ADS-B etc. I wanted to see how far off I am if to just spend another 4-5k and get the big 750 that takes care of pretty much everything.

 

On ‎12‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 8:21 AM, StevenL757 said:

Agree on either the EDM-900 or EDM-930.  Both are priced within $1k of each other, so the larger-footprint 930  (along with its mounting arrangement now aligned closer to that of the 900) is becoming a better option.

Also look at the NGT-9000+ rather than the 9000.  The "+" adds active traffic (TAS or TCAS - whichever route you go) and gives the most complete traffic picture...more so than ADS/B alone will ever be able to show.

Steve

Now the Lynx is super awesome but wouldn't the GTN750 give me traffic as well as ADS-B &WAAS? I don't see why I would get something that nice if I can already get traffic.

I saw a few posts directing me to the EDM-900. Yes that is a sweet monitor. Yes my instruments are 40 years old. However, Now I would have to be out more $$ for someone to redesign my entire panel and gut pretty much everything. Plus I already have a blank spot for the 830 to fit into.

 

I really do appreciate everyone 's input. I had no clue the GTN750 could be voice commanded. AWESOME!

[gsxrpilot]

The EDM-900 will fit in the same blank spot you have for the 830 (they are the same size/shape). And there's no requirement to pull the old gauges out. It just means that you're not tossing the 830 AND your old gauges once they start failing to replace them with the 900.

[Oldguy]

54 minutes ago, Fookz92 said:

I saw a few posts directing me to the EDM-900. Yes that is a sweet monitor. Yes my instruments are 40 years old. However, Now I would have to be out more $$ for someone to redesign my entire panel and gut pretty much everything. Plus I already have a blank spot for the 830 to fit into.

For the 830 vs. 900 decision: the sensors you put in for the 830 will take the same work as the ones for the 900, with the difference being the additional sensors for a few more monitored functions for the 900 you do not have on the 830 (fuel pressure, fuel level, oil pressure - is that all?).

Paul (@gsxrpilot) is correct. The 900 will occupy roughly the same space on your panel as the 830 (4.7" x 5.6" for the 900 and 3.2" x 4.2" for the 830) but both of them use the same standard 3.125" instrument hole for mounting. And leave the existing gauges in place until such time as you are ready to do the next phase of the panel upgrade and cut a new panel then.

1 hour ago, Fookz92 said:

Now the Lynx is super awesome but wouldn't the GTN750 give me traffic as well as ADS-B &WAAS? I don't see why I would get something that nice if I can already get traffic.

The GTN will not give you the traffic the NGT 9000+ will. The Lynx will give you all traffic with a transponder regardless of whether they are ADS-B Out equipped or in range of a radar station rebroadcasting, if I have my terms right. For me, it would be in areas around non-towered airports where you cannot get ADS-B broadcasts. Low and slow is where I worry most about the "big sky" theory falling apart.

Again, all of us are quite willing to spend OPM, but you know what you want and what your budget is, so take all of our recommendations with a grain of salt.

[StevenL757]

33 minutes ago, Fookz92 said:

Now the Lynx is super awesome but wouldn't the GTN750 give me traffic as well as ADS-B &WAAS? I don't see why I would get something that nice if I can already get traffic.

The 750 does not have a built-in traffic monitoring technology - it only displays traffic from another compatible TAS and/or TIS and/or TCAS-capable device...such as the NGT-9000, 9000+, 9000R+, GTX345, standalone Skywatch, etc. devices.

Keep in mind the differences between ADS/B traffic (TIS) and TAS/TCAS.  They are two different technologies.  The latter is the most comprehensive traffic awareness technology you can buy.  The airlines use it for a reason, as it will pick up anything with at least a Mode-A transponder or better.  ASB/B (or "TIS") traffic has coverage limitations and will only "see" targets in the ADS/B (TIS) coverage area in which the airplane is flying.

Also keep in mind that a standalone entry-level active traffic solution (which scans out to +/- 11nm) will run north of $10k installed.  A more robust solution (scanning out farther) will be close to ~$15-20k or more installed.  If you really want this technology, you should budget for the NGT-9000+ (or 9000R+...the remote unit).  Its built in TAS/TCAS option will scan out to 35 miles, and is one of the best active traffic options in GA today.  I can't say enough good things about mine...it's some of the best money I've ever spent.  In addition to the NGT-9000+ cost, you'll need the NY-164 antenna if you don't already have it (~$1700), but you'll have Mode S (ES), ADS/B In and Out, weather, Notams, and active traffic all in one box.  Remember what I said about standalone TAS/TCAS costs and do the math as far as the value of the NGT hardware.

Steve

[StevenL757]

11 minutes ago, Oldguy said:

The GTN will not give you the traffic the NGT 9000+ will. The Lynx will give you all traffic with a transponder regardless of whether they are ADS-B Out equipped or in range of a radar station rebroadcasting

Exactly.  And to clarify for @Fookz92, the NGT-9000+ includes this TAS/TCAS/active traffic capability.  The NGT-9000 does not.

[MIm20c]

1 hour ago, Fookz92 said:

Now the Lynx is super awesome but wouldn't the GTN750 give me traffic as well as ADS-B &WAAS? I don't see why I would get something that nice if I can already get traffic.

I think your total budget will cover the upgrade from the 530 to the 750. It will not include adsb or any type of active traffic. 

With your budget I’d try to spread the wealth a little bit to other areas of the panel.  You can always add a 530w and sell it off later if the budget allows. 

[m20kmooney]

4 hours ago, Oldguy said:

The Lynx will give you all traffic with a transponder regardless of whether they are ADS-B Out equipped 

With own ship ADS-B out equipped you will see all traffic within 35 nm radius ±3500 ft. And with the top of the line GTX345 you will also get the benefit of target trend which is dynamic traffic depiction relative to own ship. I believe this is only available from Garmin. 

Edited December 4, 2018 by m20kmooney

[Oldguy]

49 minutes ago, m20kmooney said:

With own ship ADS-B out equipped you will see all traffic within 35 nm radius ±3500 ft. And with the top of the line GTX345 you will also get the benefit of target trend which is dynamic traffic depiction relative to own ship. I believe this is only available from Garmin. 

This is correct if you are receiving ADS-R from a ground station. Around smaller, non-towered airports without a ground station, those aircraft not equipped with ADS-B Out would not be seen by an airplane with ADS-B Out/In. The Lynx provides "old school" traffic awareness via TAS/TCAS.

If you look at all of the graphics explaining how ADS-B works, you see a ground station shown in many of them. Here is a bit of text from one of the sites talking about the best scenario for seeing traffic with ADS-B Out:

 This is the best possible case. You have an ADS-B Out transponder in your airplane, so you are transmitting out to the ground stations and creating your own “hockey puck” of traffic information. You’ll see all traffic within a 30 mile diameter and +/- 3500 ft.

This is one of the reasons why there are consistent warnings to not rely solely on ADS-B Traffic - without a ground station, you will not see non-ADS-B traffic.

[Marauder]

Here is an example of a TAS target on the Lynx 9000+



And one of a TIS-B




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Cruiser]

On 12/3/2018 at 12:03 PM, MIm20c said:

Still surprised out of 440 student Don has not instructed in a IFD panel yet...  I expected a number of units in the wild. 

there are......... they just don't seem to cross paths with him.

[Cruiser]

16 hours ago, M016576 said:

yes, they share this feature- but you can’t couple to it- it’s a visual depiction on the IFD alone (Boeing banana + descent rate).

Not sure which firmware you are using but my A/P, Aspen PFD, IFD540 will fully couple to LNAV/VNAV, LNAV+V and LP+V approaches.

[Cruiser]

57 minutes ago, Oldguy said:

This is correct if you are receiving ADS-R from a ground station. Around smaller, non-towered airports without a ground station, those aircraft not equipped with ADS-B Out would not be seen by an airplane with ADS-B Out/In. The Lynx provides "old school" traffic awareness via TAS/TCAS.

If you look at all of the graphics explaining how ADS-B works, you see a ground station shown in many of them. Here is a bit of text from one of the sites talking about the best scenario for seeing traffic with ADS-B Out:

 This is the best possible case. You have an ADS-B Out transponder in your airplane, so you are transmitting out to the ground stations and creating your own “hockey puck” of traffic information. You’ll see all traffic within a 30 mile diameter and +/- 3500 ft.

This is one of the reasons why there are consistent warnings to not rely solely on ADS-B Traffic - without a ground station, you will not see non-ADS-B traffic.

All true except for the airplanes that are not seen by the ATC radar. IF ATC cannot see them then you will not see them either.

This is most likely to occur around remote airports that are not in range of radar coverage at the pattern altitude. In this case there can be a bunch of airplanes buzzing around that will not be seen other than visually.

[StevenL757]

3 hours ago, Oldguy said:

This is the best possible case. You have an ADS-B Out transponder in your airplane, so you are transmitting out to the ground stations and creating your own “hockey puck” of traffic information. You’ll see all traffic within a 30 mile diameter and +/- 3500 ft.

With the Lynx 9000+, you’ll see traffic up to 10,000 feet up or down in Unrestricted mode.

[kortopates]

23 hours ago, M016576 said:

yes, they share this feature- but you can’t couple to it- it’s a visual depiction on the IFD alone (Boeing banana + descent rate).

To clarify, are you saying the approaches show the minimum altitudes with the step down fixes in the flight plan when you load an approach? That's helpful, but I understand there is no auto pilot interface like Garmins GAD43e that can can do VNAV with it. I was trying to find that in the pilots manual but could only find altitude constraints that provide the same functionality of the previous Vcalc functionality to descend to a certain AGL or MSL altitude within x NM of some Waypoint in the flight plan based on specified descent rate. 

[kortopates]

7 hours ago, Cruiser said:

Not sure which firmware you are using but my A/P, Aspen PFD, IFD540 will fully couple to LNAV/VNAV, LNAV+V and LP+V approaches.

Yes, but that's from the Glide slope to minimums. The comments where about IF segment min altitudes before the FAF and glide slope. i.e. the altitudes to descend down to on the approach from the IAF till you can capture the GS. 

[M016576]

3 hours ago, kortopates said:

To clarify, are you saying the approaches show the minimum altitudes with the step down fixes in the flight plan when you load an approach? That's helpful, but I understand there is no auto pilot interface like Garmins GAD43e that can can do VNAV with it. I was trying to find that in the pilots manual but could only find altitude constraints that provide the same functionality of the previous Vcalc functionality to descend to a certain AGL or MSL altitude within x NM of some Waypoint in the flight plan based on specified descent rate. 

I was referring to enroute altitudes (or restrictions) manually programmed into a flight plan.  The IFD series will show a “Boeing banana” (time to descend/ascend mark) on the leg of the segment based on whatever the programmed target climb/descent rate is to achieve the manually entered route altitude, but it doesnt provide a vertical guidance signal to my autopilot... at least not that I have been able to use with my kfc150.

I can couple to any approach, but the extent of the vertical guidance the autopilot will fly with my setup is limited to glideslope (either GPS provided or ILS provided).

for a precision approach- all altitude restrictions are displayed up to the FAF in big magenta lettering next to the segment on the IFD (I have a 440- so no georeferenced plates overplayed on the IFD itself- yet it still shows the segment altitudes).   In this case, the KFC150 will fly hands off on the approach segment starting at glideslope intercept, and GPSS cueing through the aspen up to that point 2 dimensionally.

on a non-precision approach- again all step down altitudes are displayed next to their segments on the IFD once the approach is loaded, and the autopilot I have (KFC150) will fly the approach 2 dimensionally, but I have to manually fly the altitudes (I typically do so using the up/down altitude rocker on the autopilot).

is that what you were asking?  Or did I miss read the question?

Edited December 5, 2018 by M016576

[M016576]

11 hours ago, Cruiser said:

Not sure which firmware you are using but my A/P, Aspen PFD, IFD540 will fully couple to LNAV/VNAV, LNAV+V and LP+V approaches.

I believe he was asking about enroute vertical guidance, not approach vertical guidance.

my KFC-150 couples though my aspen to any approach off the IFD and will fly anything that has a glideslope signal if I’m in the approach mode (just as you describe) but if I’m on an enroute segment that I manually enter an altitude restriction on, it will not climb/descend to said altitude- just show me when to do it and what VSR is needed to make it.

 

It is possible that the IFD is capable of providing this cue/signal (for enroute climbs/descents), but I don’t know if *my autopilot* is capable of flying it on an enroute segment

Edited December 5, 2018 by M016576

[M016576]

On 12/4/2018 at 2:23 AM, donkaye said:

If you have the G500 or G500 TXi, you will get a vertical deviation carrot on the glide path and vertical rate carrot on the VSI.  This can be followed manually unless you have one of the Garmin autopilots, in which case the autopilot can fly it automatically.  You can fly one leg VNAV Direct on any  autopilot.  This behaves just like an ILS.  Since I hadn't had enough time to play with this before my plane became inop until January  (see my other post on that one), I'm not sure how well VNAV Direct works on the KFC 150 autopilot.

I remember seeing the pictures you posted of your TXi showing this feature.  

My ifd440 is connected to an aspen pfd- which does not show vertical guidance unless it’s a glide slope signal.  The vsr is displayed on the IFD in a data window. 

Would that feature of the G500TXi work with a G530W connected to it?  Just curious.. honestly don’t know who would spend that much for a G500TXi and *not* upgrade to a GTN to drive it.  A pilot is kind of committed to full garmin if they head down the G500TXi road I think.

either way- for the OP- he would want/need a nice pfd to compliment the GTN and/or IFD... and unlock some of the features described above. And that could add anywhere from 3-30K more to the price tag.

does the G5 display show any of that vertical guidance, or does garmin reserve that for the more robust/expensive pfd’s?

Edited December 5, 2018 by M016576