RobertGary1

Garmin G5 rumors

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Austintatious said:

Sure there is.... 15,000usd + to purchase and install.

Yea I know how nice they work...however so does my KFC150.  Probably not as precise, but I find myself disconnecting and hand flying a lot just to have a little fun.

 

You have a valid point about the servos.  I suspect 1 or more of them going bad will push me over the edge.  They are spendy.

And how about the folks with a problematic Century A/P? I wonder how much they would be willing to spend on getting it repaired before they bite the bullet for the GFC 500? Especially if they already have 1 or 2 G5s.

Another Mooney driver spent well into the high single AMUs to get his Century working correctly before the GFC 500 came out. In talking with him, he would have gladly spent the money on a G5 and GFC 500 had they been available at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Members that donate $10 or more do not see advertisements*

2 hours ago, Oldguy said:

I would think the I/F from a G5 to a legacy King A/P would require a similar box in between the two devices as the G5, from my understanding, is digital and the King A/Ps are analog.

Completely willing to be shown my error, BTW.

Correct.  But it's not a difficult thing to do at all.  And certainly not worth $3000.  I suspect it could easily be added to the G5 solving a huge problem for folks stuck with legacy analog autopilots.  (speaking as an electronics engineer).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, pwnel said:

Correct.  But it's not a difficult thing to do at all.  And certainly not worth $3000.  I suspect it could easily be added to the G5 solving a huge problem for folks stuck with legacy analog autopilots.  (speaking as an electronics engineer).

Testing it all sufficiently for certification is expensive, though.    I think that's the usual barrier for doing that stuff, especially considering the limited market.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a different certification standard for attitude Reference emulation than say heading reference function :or GPSS? 
 

An ability to ditch the Legacy AI and drive KFC AP would be huge.  They would sell GFCs when folks consider whether to keep repairing the legacy, go with the aerocruze, or go with a GFC.  If your dual G5 setup works with a KFC,  opens up the garmin stuff to a pretty wide market.  If G5’s worked with KFC the gateway drug would have already been tried, so to speak. 
 

Im guessing a GAD29C will be forthcoming. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, bradp said:

Is there a different certification standard for attitude Reference emulation than say heading reference function :or GPSS? 
 

An ability to ditch the Legacy AI and drive KFC AP would be huge.  They would sell GFCs when folks consider whether to keep repairing the legacy, go with the aerocruze, or go with a GFC.  If your dual G5 setup works with a KFC,  opens up the garmin stuff to a pretty wide market.  If G5’s worked with KFC the gateway drug would have already been tried, so to speak. 

You beat me to it.  Exactly my reasoning.   Plane going in for annual on Monday.  I'm overhauling the NSD360 HSI for $1500 rather than going G5 because spending $6000 just for GPSS isn't worth it.  Already did the AI so my vacuum stuff works just fine and folks crossed oceans with that setup for decades.  Now if the G5 AI could drive the Century ..... I would pop the Garmin gateway drug, locking me into a GFC500 in future and into 650 to replace the 430W rather than going Avidyne and Aspen.

EDIT:  By the same argument, if Aspen could substantially drop the price of the $3000 EA100 it swings it back to them. 

Edited by pwnel
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It used to be the argument for Garmin not supporting the older autopilots was that they wanted to sell their GFC's.  It was in my case working against them.  As much as I wanted to ditch my legacy vacuum system and gyros, I was holding off getting the G5 and especially dual G5's because I'd have to spent so much getting new radios and autopilot.  I for one would get a G5 or even dual G5's in the next couple of months if they supported my KAP150 and legacy radios.  And would likely upgrade to the GFC500 in the nearer future because of it.

Bruce

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MisfitSELF said:

It used to be the argument for Garmin not supporting the older autopilots was that they wanted to sell their GFC's.  It was in my case working against them.  As much as I wanted to ditch my legacy vacuum system and gyros, I was holding off getting the G5 and especially dual G5's because I'd have to spent so much getting new radios and autopilot.  I for one would get a G5 or even dual G5's in the next couple of months if they supported my KAP150 and legacy radios.  And would likely upgrade to the GFC500 in the nearer future because of it.

Bruce

same!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, bradp said:

 

An ability to ditch the Legacy AI and drive KFC AP would be huge. 

Im guessing a GAD29C will be forthcoming. 

They don’t need a 29C, they already have the GAD 43, all they need is to certify it with G5, and call it GAD 43g.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, EricJ said:

Testing it all sufficiently for certification is expensive, though.    I think that's the usual barrier for doing that stuff, especially considering the limited market.

Another barrier may be the non-TSO status and experimental pedigree of the G5. I’m not sure but am curious to know if a non-TSO box can be interfaced with a flight control system such as an autopilot. Can a G5 be allowed to provide attitude reference to a KFC from a certification or regulatory perspective? Anyone know if there is any precedent? Garmin didn't do it with the G3X touch. Also non-TSO with an experimental pedigree. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:

They don’t need a 29C, they already have the GAD 43, all they need is to certify it with G5, and call it GAD 43g.

I wonder what communication protocol is used between the G500 and the gad43? Does the g5 output in that format?  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, PTK said:

Another barrier may be the non-TSO status and experimental pedigree of the G5. I’m not sure but am curious to know if a non-TSO box can be interfaced with a flight control system such as an autopilot. Can a G5 be allowed to provide attitude reference to a KFC from a certification or regulatory perspective? Anyone know if there is any precedent? Garmin didn't do it with the G3X touch. Also non-TSO with an experimental pedigree. 

Which is odd because the GAD29b already provides left right interface to legacy autopilots in a non-TSOd but STCd fashion.  Left right can still put you into the side of a hill just as much as bank angle and up down. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bradp said:

Which is odd because the GAD29b already provides left right interface to legacy autopilots in a non-TSOd but STCd fashion.  Left right can still put you into the side of a hill just as much as bank angle and up down. 

The difference is the AI input is keeping the plane right side up. The HSI only steers it, it isn't actually flying the plane. If the AI goes sideways the plane will crash. If the HSI goes sideways the plane will fly in circles.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

The difference is the AI input is keeping the plane right side up. The HSI only steers it, it isn't actually flying the plane. If the AI goes sideways the plane will crash. If the HSI goes sideways the plane will fly in circles.

But does that have impact on the certification standards- ie whether STCd or TSOd ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bradp said:

But does that have impact on the certification standards- ie whether STCd or TSOd ? 

Good question! I think Garmin needs to finish the job by completing the G5 interface with legacy autopilots. Finish what they started with the HSI G5 and provide attitude reference. They need a dual G5 setup to feed legacy autopilots. This would be a stepping stone for many panels to eventually go with GFC500. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/8/2020 at 7:41 PM, hypertech said:

There's been a rumor that they will come out with something to interface to legacy autopilots (KFC150, 225, etc).  I'm not holding my breath and scheduled a full GFC500 install.  Happy to be wrong and save some bucks though.

As far as I can see - the Aspen E5 has become a major competitor in that it is now very inexpensive and it can drive the legacy autopilots.  It is equivalent to two Garmin G5's if they could drive legacy autopilots.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PTK said:

Good question! I think Garmin needs to finish the job by completing the G5 interface with legacy autopilots. Finish what they started with the HSI G5 and provide attitude reference. They need a dual G5 setup to feed legacy autopilots. This would be a stepping stone for many panels to eventually go with GFC500. 

I agree completely.  Stepping stones are a great way to rope in customers (like me).  Two years ago when my KI256 needed overhaul, I would have in a heart beat gotten a G5 if it would have driven my then perfectly good KFC200.  I wish at that time I could afford two G5s and a GFC500 but you know, too much in one step during this moment I have 3 boys in college to pay for.    So if I had invested in a G5 at that time, or two, instead of overhauling the KI256, then I would be that much closer to buying a GFC500 when the KFC200 shows signs of needing work, and my boys graduate...

As it is, I decided to hold the fort - to simply overhaul the KI256 - ...actually I would have gotten the AVP30 if that had been available.  

So now, I will eventually upgrade to something but it will not necessarily be Garmin, but it would have definitely been Garmin if I were already half way there. When I need to do something next, I will evaluate everything that is available. price, bang-for-buck, at that time in the future. trutrek?  aspen?  AVP?  KFC230?  

So I think it would be wise for Garmin to be actively trying to rope people like me in with stepping stone investments that make the next logical incremental step to be to buy more Garmin rather than the current defacto  model which is drop 30k all at once or don't bother.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, bradp said:

Is there a different certification standard for attitude Reference emulation than say heading reference function :or GPSS? 
 

An ability to ditch the Legacy AI and drive KFC AP would be huge.  They would sell GFCs when folks consider whether to keep repairing the legacy, go with the aerocruze, or go with a GFC.  If your dual G5 setup works with a KFC,  opens up the garmin stuff to a pretty wide market.  If G5’s worked with KFC the gateway drug would have already been tried, so to speak. 
 

Im guessing a GAD29C will be forthcoming. 

Well said - gateway drug.  They should be in the business of selling gateways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:

They don’t need a 29C, they already have the GAD 43, all they need is to certify it with G5, and call it GAD 43g.

But Garmin is very good at making you buy something new for their equipment to work together... why would they make the Gad43 work with a G5?   That would allow the G500 to work with a GFC500.  They don’t want that.  They want the G500 owners to buy a GFC500 Txi and a GFC600 autopilot.  It’s not about what we need - it’s about what can drive the “ecosystem”. 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, aviatoreb said:

As far as I can see - the Aspen E5 has become a major competitor in that it is now very inexpensive and it can drive the legacy autopilots.  It is equivalent to two Garmin G5's if they could drive legacy autopilots.  

I stop short of calling the E5 a “major competitor” or “equivalent to two G5’s” The redundancy offered by a dual G5’s is a huge advantage! In my opinion the E5 is a distant competitor behind the G5 but not equivalent!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, bradp said:

But Garmin is very good at making you buy something new for their equipment to work together... why would they make the Gad43 work with a G5?   That would allow the G500 to work with a GFC500.  They don’t want that.  They want the G500 owners to buy a GFC500 Txi and a GFC600 autopilot.  It’s not about what we need - it’s about what can drive the “ecosystem”. 

Give us a complete dual G5 to drive our perfectly functioning autopilot today enabling us to go to gfc tomorrow. Wouldn’t this be driving the “ecosystem”? Seems to me it’s does!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PTK said:

In my opinion I can’t go as far as calling the E5 a “major competitor” or “equivalent to two G5’s” The redundancy offered by a dual G5’s is a huge advantage!

It is a  major competitor as it will draw away a certain number of customers.  I would have purchased the Aspen E5 in a heartbeat if when 2 years ago when my KI256 had failed, it would have been available at its current very competitive price to drive my KFC200.  But it was not, and neither was the G5.  In a scenario where the E5 is now available to drive my KFC200 and G5 is not, then E5 is the major competitor to simply overhauling the KI256 gyro as I did.  Garmin G5 as nice as it might be, is simply not a competitor at all in its current form as it is unavailable to drive my autopilot.  So it is not a matter of choosing between your favorite brands.  It is a matter that brand G has until now decided not to enter the playing field of those who wish a stepping stone for under $30k to drive their legacy autopilots. Economic reality.  

My guess - Garmin is a very savvy player in the field and they are correcting this hole in their offerings and next week they will do exactly this and drive legacy autopilots with some kind of irresistible new electronic toy at a price that is situated to be exactly 15% more expensive than the Aspen E5 option.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, PTK said:

Give us a complete dual G5 to drive our perfectly functioning autopilot today enabling us to go to gfc tomorrow. Wouldn’t this be driving the “ecosystem”? Seems to me it’s does!

I agree - but today - as it was two years ago - this option was not available and did not exist.  My guess - next week they will change all that and offer exactly what we are discussing.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PTK said:

But wouldn’t this drive the ecosystem? Give us a complete dual G5 to drive our perfectly functioning autopilot today enabling us to go to gfc tomorrow?

Yes you’re correct it would drive a garmin ecosystem for existing KFC / KI-256 owners. 
 

I was talking about existing G500/Gad43 owners above.  @donkaye you can’t control your GFC500 with your G500txi but you could very well control a GFC600 with a G500txi.  That they are not cross compatible is on purpose. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forget all the extra features. I'd like it if they would just have it certified so I could ditch all my extra steam gauge instruments. What's really the point with 2 G5s with 4 hour backup batteries in each? As far as reliability and redundancy, just those 2 instruments are far and away better than all my old ASI, ALT, VSI and vacuum driven ATT, DG. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, JimB said:

Forget all the extra features. I'd like it if they would just have it certified so I could ditch all my extra steam gauge instruments. What's really the point with 2 G5s with 4 hour backup batteries in each? As far as reliability and redundancy, just those 2 instruments are far and away better than all my old ASI, ALT, VSI and vacuum driven ATT, DG. 

The FAA will never allow that. Even the new planes with G1000 systems must have a backup steam gauge ASI, ALT.

-Robert

Share this post


Link to post
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.