Jump to content

GFC 500 Install Price


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, PJClark said:

insisted I'd need a G5 backup whether I have 1 screen or 2 screen G3x

I keep hearing murmurs (on MS and elsewhere) about Garmin eliminating the need for a G5 in aircraft with suitably-equipped G3X gear.  I've been very curious whether we'll see any announcements at Oshkosh. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PJClark said:

If you just add EIS to the 10.6" G3x, it's about $2500 cheaper than the installed EDM900. But to me that felt a little too dependent on that one display.  EDM900 $7600 installed.  Add EIS and 7" G3x touch instead of EDM, $11,100

Understood. 

I'll PM you for some more info. The quote I've been looking at is upwards of $35k for a G3X with a single 10" display, EIS, and an attitude G5 backup. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm...well that certainly makes a heckofalot more sense to me.  IF they delete the G5 backup requirement before I get to the avionics shop in early Aug I'm gonna switch to the 2-screen G3x installation and delete the G5!  Yipee!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, toto said:

Understood. 

I'll PM you for some more info. The quote I've been looking at is upwards of $35k for a G3X with a single 10" display, EIS, and an attitude G5 backup. 

I’ve seen right at 40k for a G3X touch 10” and a GFC-500

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, PJClark said:

If you just add EIS to the 10.6" G3x, it's about $2500 cheaper than the installed EDM900. But to me that felt a little too dependent on that one display.  EDM900 $7600 installed.  Add EIS and 7" G3x touch instead of EDM, $11,100

I am sort of confused why one would want engine on your G3x generally, to pay and buy a new install, for those of us with reasonably nice digital engine monitoring already - eg I have an EDM830.  I figure if and when I go G3x then I would not bother with engine monitoring since I already have it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ummm...  "vanity".   "While we're in there?" you're probably right there are no really good reasons!

 

sorry I apparently haven't figured out how to use this "quote" feature.  Reply to Eb's question about the EIS...

Edited by PJClark
added info
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/5/2019 at 9:46 AM, PJClark said:

The thing that was weird to me: initially I wanted a 2 screen G3x system, the 10" and 7".  Both can be reversionary to each other but regardless all the shops I worked with insisted I'd need a G5 backup whether I have 1 screen or 2 screen G3x. 

That's because, if you get the package-deal 10"+7" G3X Touch, they share a single AHRS. That means that the reversion is only good in the event of a display failure. In the event of an AHRS failure, both screens will go dead. The G5 has its own built-in AHRS, and the G5 and G3X Touch can do miscompare monitoring against each other as well. Finally, if you're doing the GFC 500 autopilot, both the G3X and the G5 can drive it, so failure of either one still leaves you with an operable autopilot.

On 7/5/2019 at 10:03 AM, PJClark said:

Hmmm...well that certainly makes a heckofalot more sense to me.  IF they delete the G5 backup requirement before I get to the avionics shop in early Aug I'm gonna switch to the 2-screen G3x installation and delete the G5!  Yipee!

TANSTAAFL. Even if they do delete the G5 backup requirement, it'll mean you need a second AHRS for the second display. That costs $1500 for the experimental version, so it'll probably be roughly $2500-$3000 for the certified version... And that's if it's a valid backup to have the second independent G3X and would actually work correctly that way. Garmin indicated at one point that it wasn't/didn't. Better speak with your friendly Garmin dealer or rep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

Just one of the things I like about the Aspen and the reason I'm adding the MFD this summer. Individual AHRS so the MFD can fully back up the PFD. No need for any additional redundant instruments. :)

And adding this optional switch circuit as shown in the Aspen Install Manual allows you to fly the autopilot on the 2nd AHRS, so losing AHRS #1  is a non-event. Wouldn't it be nice if the G1000, G500/G600 or the TXI had that?

1174185578_ScreenShot2019-07-07at6_45_03PM.png.f4f5527fdefa8c1a028b0711f10b5142.png

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

And adding this optional switch circuit as shown in the Aspen Install Manual allows you to fly the autopilot on the 2nd AHRS, so losing AHRS #1  is a non-event. Wouldn't it be nice if the G1000, G500/G600 or the TXI had that?

1174185578_ScreenShot2019-07-07at6_45_03PM.png.f4f5527fdefa8c1a028b0711f10b5142.png

 

Does that switch transfer both the heading/nav info and the attitude from the ea100?

I was originally planning on having the mfd run the AP and monitor the pfd but this appears to be a great setup. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/7/2019 at 6:47 PM, LANCECASPER said:

And adding this optional switch circuit as shown in the Aspen Install Manual allows you to fly the autopilot on the 2nd AHRS, so losing AHRS #1  is a non-event. Wouldn't it be nice if the G1000, G500/G600 or the TXI had that?

1174185578_ScreenShot2019-07-07at6_45_03PM.png.f4f5527fdefa8c1a028b0711f10b5142.png

 

G500/600/TXi are only single AHRS, with the exception of the dual-7" TXi display with battery backup, so the second AHRS doesn't exist to do it in the first place - It's not just missing a switch.

The G1000 does have the ability to run the GFC 700 autopilot off of either PFD/AHRS in the dual setups. There's a button on the GMC 710 controller, above the AP and YD switches, labeled "XFER" which is used to select which side you're using. But, in a Mooney we only have a single PFD/AHRS.

To me, this is what's so compelling about the G3X Touch/G5/GFC 500 combo in particular. The G3X and G5 have miscompare monitoring against each other, and either one of them can run the autopilot in the event the other one fails.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, flyingcheesehead said:

G500/600/TXi are only single AHRS, with the exception of the dual-7" TXi display with battery backup, so the second AHRS doesn't exist to do it in the first place - It's not just missing a switch.

The G1000 does have the ability to run the GFC 700 autopilot off of either PFD/AHRS in the dual setups. There's a button on the GMC 710 controller, above the AP and YD switches, labeled "XFER" which is used to select which side you're using. But, in a Mooney we only have a single PFD/AHRS.

To me, this is what's so compelling about the G3X Touch/G5/GFC 500 combo in particular. The G3X and G5 have miscompare monitoring against each other, and either one of them can run the autopilot in the event the other one fails.

Although I have't tried it, yet, if the G500 TXi display fails, the number 1 NAV and the G5 continue to run the GFC 500 autopilot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, donkaye said:

Although I have't trie it, yet, if the G500 TXi display fails, the number 1 NAV and the G5 continue to run the GFC 500 autopilot.

I don’t have a dog in the fight, but why not try it to see if it magically clears up the pitch oscillation?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ragsf15e said:

I don’t have a dog in the fight, but why not try it to see if it magically clears up the pitch oscillation?

 

I have an appointment at Garmin in Olathe on the way to Oshkosh next week.  The pilot who did the certification flight testing will be working with me.  Hopefully they will be able to diagnose my problem and come up with a resolution.  The above test was done by the install shop and they said it worked.  After everything is working properly I will try it myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, flyingcheesehead said:

To me, this is what's so compelling about the G3X Touch/G5/GFC 500 combo in particular. The G3X and G5 have miscompare monitoring against each other, and either one of them can run the autopilot in the event the other one fails.

Im curious if a txi w/ backup G5 along with another G5 AI on the copilot side would have that redundancy between the two G5’s. If the pilot side G5 failed the TXI would route through the copilot G5. 

That would be a strong incentive to use a G5 for copilot instruments vs another txi. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/10/2019 at 3:45 PM, donkaye said:

Although I have't tried it, yet, if the G500 TXi display fails, the number 1 NAV and the G5 continue to run the GFC 500 autopilot.

Right, because the G5 has been running the autopilot the entire time. The GFC500's brains live in the G5/G3X, in the TXi installations the TXi is merely feeding commands to the G5 to make it work.

So, in your TXi/G5 installation, if the G5 fails, you lose the autopilot. Period. With a G3X/G5 installation, the G3X is capable of running the autopilot without the G5, and vice versa.

At least, that's my understanding of it based on a discussion with a Garmin autopilot engineer and many of Garmin's materials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, flyingcheesehead said:

Right, because the G5 has been running the autopilot the entire time. The GFC500's brains live in the G5/G3X, in the TXi installations the TXi is merely feeding commands to the G5 to make it work.

So, in your TXi/G5 installation, if the G5 fails, you lose the autopilot. Period. With a G3X/G5 installation, the G3X is capable of running the autopilot without the G5, and vice versa.

At least, that's my understanding of it based on a discussion with a Garmin autopilot engineer and many of Garmin's materials.

That's true, and the G3X may be a good solution for some, but even if had been available at the time I did my installation I would have chosen the TXi over the G3X because the interface capability of the G3X is limited.  It may be possible to add a second G5 and get that capability, but I'm fine with hand flying in that rare circumstance.  I'd much rather have the capability of the WX 500 Stormscope and even the GDL 69 XM Radio that the G3X does not appear to support.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, flyingcheesehead said:

Right, because the G5 has been running the autopilot the entire time. The GFC500's brains live in the G5/G3X, in the TXi installations the TXi is merely feeding commands to the G5 to make it work.

So, in your TXi/G5 installation, if the G5 fails, you lose the autopilot. Period. With a G3X/G5 installation, the G3X is capable of running the autopilot without the G5, and vice versa.

At least, that's my understanding of it based on a discussion with a Garmin autopilot engineer and many of Garmin's materials.

A similar “emergency” situation could occur if the gad 29(b) is lost on a g3x system. All communication to the gps navigator would be lost including the hsi approach information. I feel price and features could give the g3x the advantage but failure modes are not vastly different. IMO a secondary ship battery and/or alternator are a better hedge against a black screen than different types of pfd’s.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunetly in most of the small planes we have lots of single points of failure. The G3X installation together with the G5 and GFC eliminates quite a few of them which is more than most of the avionics currently have. From my point of view the concept is pretty impressive and well engineered:

 

- Dual AHRS

- redundant interface for AHRS and EIS via CAN and Rs232

- Batterie Backup for the G5

- Redundant AP function and controller (the G3X can control the AP if the GMC fails)

- Attitude x-checks between AHRS, G5 and GMC 507

- Backup VFR GPS navigation in the G3X if your main Navigator fails

- if the GAD fails and you have a GNC255 you can still shoot an ILS with NAV 2 - autopilot coupled

- triple GPS redundancy for attitude - main navigator, G5 and G3X

 

A weak point may be the CAN, but that bus runs in millions of cars with a magnitude of hours for safety critical functions.

 

The price you have to pay for this is a lack of connectivity to legacy avionics. But as said somewhere else - connectivity costs a lot of development and testing money which at the end increases the price of the unit and doesn‘t necessarily improve the whole system (it usually is a compromise of the attached units).

 

To eliminate the SPOF of the display it really makes sense to add the second display.

Using the second display instead of a G5 you will loose the battery backup and might not be able to remove the vaccum system or turn coordinator/AI...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, donkaye said:

That's true, and the G3X may be a good solution for some, but even if had been available at the time I did my installation I would have chosen the TXi over the G3X because the interface capability of the G3X is limited.  It may be possible to add a second G5 and get that capability, but I'm fine with hand flying in that rare circumstance.  I'd much rather have the capability of the WX 500 Stormscope and even the GDL 69 XM Radio that the G3X does not appear to support.

I also think development wise the txi software upgrades will closely follow the nxi vs being a mature product like the g3x that will probably  remain the same.  Garmin might even put out a replacement to the g3x in a couple years to remain cutting edge in the experimental market. 

Edited by MIm20c
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.