Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Those of you with a 750, how do you like it? Currently have a 530w but my avionics guy planted the big on going the 750 route at some point. Not stoked about the idea of touch screen but we do already have the gi275 so can’t argue there. One big difference I believe is the ability to have certain RNP approaches available that the 530 doesn’t support. 

Edited by drifter001
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Night and day better than the GNS. Touchscreen is meh and kind of a pain to use, but the trade off is a lot of real estate for maps and graphics goodies. The display is huge compared to either the GNS or the Avidyne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll chime in with my mostly-unpopular opinion, that most of the complaining about touchscreens stems from primacy, i.e. what-I-learned-first syndrome.  I know the internet is replete with people who say the GNS hardkey/knob interface is superior to touchscreens, but best as I can tell, the vast majority of those folks learned to competently work with a GNS navigator first, and are more bothered by the switch to a different interface, than anything objective about the GTN touchscreen interface itself.

The first high-end GPS navigator myself and my airplane partners were exposed to - about a decade ago - was the GTN we installed in our airplane.  The local flight school I teach at these days also has a couple of airplanes with GTNs, and a couple of airplanes with GNSes, as well as a Redbird simulator whose "steam gauge" cockpits emulate the GNS devices.  Because of this instructional history, I've worked with over a dozen folks who learned to use GTN devices first, and only later tried to transition "backward" to a GNS.  Not a single one of those people has ever said to me, "Oh, this hardkey and knob interface on the GNS is so much better than the GTN touchscreen - why did Garmin ever switch?"  On the contrary, I mostly get, "Good grief, how does anyone use this GNS thing?"  I don't interpret that comment as an objectively valid criticism of the GNS, by the way, it's just the same primacy thing at work in the other direction.

Regarding the ubiquitous "but what about turbulence?" argument, the front range of the Rockies where I live is famous for bumpy weather (and it annoyingly seems to get worse every year).  I've flown hundreds of hours in the stuff, and I feel pretty confident in saying that I find programming errors due to turbulence to be equally likely with either device.  This does assume you use the bezel of the GTN for a palm/thumb rest as designed, though.  Not everyone intuitively gets that, and the resultant arm flailing is kinda hilarious until I provide a little motor skill training.

I particularly don't get the touchscreen hate now that (1) basically everyone is using a phone or tablet in the cockpit, and so many of them claim these portable devices work "flawlessly", and are actually better than the panel-mounted stuff; and (2) about every other GNS I use has a flaky, worn-out COM radio flip-flop button, because the owner doesn't really want to send it back to Garmin for their $1600 (or whatever it's up to) flat repair rate.

Having said all that, as far as making the mission, I've yet to see anyone whose dispatch rate is higher or personal minimums are lower because they upgraded from a WAAS GNS to a GTN.  I just don't think it makes much practical difference, including IFR, and thus I don't think upgrading is objectively "better" or "safer".  But from a standpoint of comfort and fun and cool factor (and let's be honest, isn't that 90% of what it's about?), I'd take the GTN every time!

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not sure if that was directed at my “meh” comment, but I’ll chime back in fwiw :)

Don’t get me wrong, I love the GTN and I’m very happy with the unit. I’m certainly not a touchscreen hater, and I think that the avionics we have today are shockingly capable compared to the panel I learned to fly behind. But still - it’s definitely hard to use the touch screen in any amount of turbulence.

That’s not to say that buttons and knobs are a walk in the park when you’re bouncing around, but there’s at least a tactile element to physical inputs that a touchscreen lacks.

Avidyne went the other direction with their IFD units, sacrificing screen real estate for more physical inputs (and they also have a little Bluetooth FMS keyboard thingy). When I see the Avidyne and the GTN side by side, I have a strong preference for the Garmin on screen size alone - and I accept the limitations of the touchscreen as a trade off for all of that real estate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you think the GTN is difficult to use in turbulence, you aren't using the benefit of the GTN knob.  Last week as we were hitting our heads on the aircraft ceiling due to thermal turbulence we had no trouble accurately changing frequencies with the knob just like the GNS series navigators.  And the standby and active frequencies can be flipped by simply pushing the knob after frequency entry.  Hold the knob and you can then enter nav frequencies and flip them the same way.

There is just absolutely no comparison between the GNS series navigators and the GTN series navigators.  The GTN just has so much more capability; SIDS that can be fully flown, same with STARS, VNAV, approach charts, holding patterns, Glide Range Ring, Fuel Range Ring, Smart Glide, just to name a few.

And when used in conjunction with the GMA 35c, almost all screens can be displayed using Telligence without even touching the screen.

Without turbulence the touch screen makes getting everything you want even easier.

It's actually laughable to think there are people out there who would chose a GNS over a GTN.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, donkaye said:

If you think the GTN is difficult to use in turbulence, you aren't using the benefit of the GTN knob.

I'm not sure how I became the anti-GTN person here, but it sounds like this was directed at me?

To OP:  The GTN is awesome, and I'm super happy with it.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10+ years with a 430W

2+ years with the GTN750

thoughts:  I actually kept the 430W as my number 2 though I barely use it (keep it on direct to final destination for the wife more than anything).  I like the GTN UI as it is more consistent with the other gear in my panel.  After learning the 750, I don't find it any more difficult to use - even in turbulence compared to the 430..  When I replace the 430W, I'd love to get another 750 if it would fit.

-K

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, toto said:

I'm not sure how I became the anti-GTN person here, but it sounds like this was directed at me?

To OP:  The GTN is awesome, and I'm super happy with it.

No!  Just a general comment to make a point that the GTN works as easy or easier (Telligence) in turbulence than the GNS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the people transitioning from knobs to a touchscreen are where the idea comes from the touchscreen is more difficult to use in turbulence.  Once you figure out how and where to brace, it is no more difficult to use than hanging onto and turning a knob.  Most of the time, the touchscreen will be easier to use, more intuitive and do so much more.

Back in the olden days, I was concerned about breaking those little knobs off a new KX155 that replaced a KX170. Nope, just a matter of getting used to it.

Now if I can learn how to use an iPad on a bumpy day!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had to chuckle reading this thread. I have a friend who flies regularly between NC and NY with a GNS530. Fortunately he now has FlightStream but before that, I can tell you that inputting RIC V157 ENO V16 JFK in a GTN is a heck of a lot easier than inserting the individual waypoints on that route into a GNS (even if you only do the bends)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget the knob can be used to enter waypoints just like a 430/530. Also, to quickly center up course just press Direct-to then push the knob once.

Love my 750/345 combo. Telligence is amazing as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the 650/750/175/355/375 it is so easy to enter an airway routing. But it inserts every intersection along that airway, then as it sequences, you just passed heyou, and are 3.2 miles from exlax, then 2.7 to funny, etc. Gotta dig to find how far from ENO.  Sometimes we get too much info.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the reasons David Lloyd mentions above, I find almost no benefit to actually loading airways in GTN navigators.  Instead, I almost always manually load a minimal set of "important" waypoints along the airway, skipping enroute intersections I don't care about.  My partners and students load airways so infrequently that they often get confused about how that works on the GTN.  You can't directly enter "V220" as a flight plan element.  You must first load a waypoint along the airway, then select that waypoint from the flight plan, at which point you get an option to load the airway from that waypoint up to an exit point.

I freely admit I can be cavalier about airways because I've never flown east of the Mississippi in anything other than the back seats of an airliner.  Airway legs in my part of the country are often long with no turns, and we get a lot of off-airway direct clearances that make loading airways moot.  I'm told that loading airways is much more useful in the eastern part of the country, particularly the very dense airspace of the northeast.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/29/2022 at 11:14 PM, drifter001 said:

Those of you with a 750, how do you like it? Currently have a 530w but my avionics guy planted the big on going the 750 route at some point. Not stoked about the idea of touch screen but we do already have the gi275 so can’t argue there. One big difference I believe is the ability to have certain RNP approaches available that the 530 doesn’t support. 

You might consider changing the title of this post to GTN750.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Vance Harral said:

For the reasons David Lloyd mentions above, I find almost no benefit to actually loading airways in GTN navigators.  Instead, I almost always manually load a minimal set of "important" waypoints along the airway, skipping enroute intersections I don't care about.  My partners and students load airways so infrequently that they often get confused about how that works on the GTN.  You can't directly enter "V220" as a flight plan element.  You must first load a waypoint along the airway, then select that waypoint from the flight plan, at which point you get an option to load the airway from that waypoint up to an exit point.

I freely admit I can be cavalier about airways because I've never flown east of the Mississippi in anything other than the back seats of an airliner.  Airway legs in my part of the country are often long with no turns, and we get a lot of off-airway direct clearances that make loading airways moot.  I'm told that loading airways is much more useful in the eastern part of the country, particularly the very dense airspace of the northeast.

I'm in California and I still find being able to load Airways very useful.  As an example, when going from San Jose (KSJC) to French Valley  (F70), the way to do it with the lowest terrain is by taking V459 from Lake Hughes to DARTS, then V186 to Paradise, then Direct F70.  If you don't know the LA Basin well, then being on Airways is the best way to go.  That flight plan can be loaded in under a minute.  The same thing goes with coming back to San Jose from San Diego.  Using V23 to Seal Beach, then V459 to Lake Hughes makes traversing the LA Basin  a piece of cake.  Even though most trips are done GPS Direct, having the ability to get on an Airway when necessary in parts of the country you are unfamiliar with shouldn't be underestimated.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Vance Harral said:

I find almost no benefit to actually loading airways in GTN navigators.

I take it you do not fly on airways with turns in them?  Once I get out of the NYC area I typically file Direct with a Waypoint in the general direction I'm going and one near or as an Arrival at my Destination.  But if you ever start flying long Airways with turns, you may reconsider the ease of just putting in the Airway and the condensing the Flight Plan view.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/30/2022 at 12:57 PM, David Lloyd said:

Yes, the 650/750/175/355/375 it is so easy to enter an airway routing. But it inserts every intersection along that airway, then as it sequences, you just passed heyou, and are 3.2 miles from exlax, then 2.7 to funny, etc. Gotta dig to find how far from ENO.  Sometimes we get too much info.

fortunately there is a REMOVE button that can help with that:

image.png.dc1e1ceeccc31e33dc72d4393f0dfd22.png

 

airway before:

image.png.97e8395d5441aa5c132997fcae160caa.png

 

airway after removing a bunch of waypoints:

image.png.f23e1c8a435941a8b4e6239cb45e4d44.png

 

takes but a coupl'a seconds, boom!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, eman1200 said:

fortunately there is a REMOVE button that can help with that:

image.png.dc1e1ceeccc31e33dc72d4393f0dfd22.png

 

airway before:

image.png.97e8395d5441aa5c132997fcae160caa.png

 

airway after removing a bunch of waypoints:

image.png.f23e1c8a435941a8b4e6239cb45e4d44.png

 

takes but a coupl'a seconds, boom!

Looks good, I’ll try that out asap. And read about it too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At first I didn’t think i liked all the airway waypoints either, but came to realize they were actually quite important in busy air space when the controller is trying to give a helpful shortcut direct to some waypoint ahead. When it happens to you, suggest looking ahead on your navigator or iPad for the waypoint before tying up the freq to ask to them spell it or for more clarification. I’ve never not had it be anything but a airway waypoint (or an approach waypoint if getting on the approach).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/30/2022 at 3:37 AM, donkaye said:

If you think the GTN is difficult to use in turbulence, you aren't using the benefit of the GTN knob. 

 

... if the knobs are there when you need them. A few weeks ago I was flying along and when I grabbed the inner knob to change frequencies, it literally crumbled in my fingers. This picture shows when the first piece crumbled, then a few minutes later the rest of it did. Yet later the large knob crumbled. The dead giveaway that something was awry was that the rubber on both knobs turned very sticky in a short period of time, I guess a sign that the rubber was breaking down and disintegrating. Luckily, the same knobs are used on a wide variety of Garmin units (ie G1000) and are readily available for an average of $25 per.

IMG_5826.JPG

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you think the GTN is difficult to use in turbulence, you aren't using the benefit of the GTN knob.….


5 years on the GTN 650, haven’t used the knob one time other than the pre purchase to see if it worked lol. Which reminds me, maybe it’s time to check it again.
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.

 Share

×
×
  • 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.