Gi275’s vs Aspen Pro Max User Experience

[802flyer]

Planning a PFD upgrade from steam. I’m familiar with the specs, redundancy considerations, upgrade path to GFC500 (when it gets out of jail), and other basics that you can read or watch videos about.
 
But I’m curious to hear from folks that have actually spent time flying both systems, how does the user experience compare? What might you have noticed about either that was a quirk/perk/hinderance compared to the other that might not have been immediately obvious.
 
Thanks!
 
 
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[philiplane]

the Aspen has at least 30% more usable screen space than two round gauges. It's less cluttered while showing more information. The traffic and weather presents better because of this. 

[Marauder]

I’ve flown behind Aspens for a decade now. I have also had the opportunity to fly in planes with everything from G5s through the G3X.

The 275’s screen is pretty clear and the information is definitely there but it is really packed in there, especially for the HSI with the moving map and CDIs active. I find the Aspen display has everything I need in plain view.

With a planned GFC500, you’ll need a Garmin product to interface it with. I would try to find some owners nearby who have both and see them in action for real. Using them in real life adds a different twist to the evaluation over pushing the buttons at the avionics shop.

Quite honestly, a lot of this glass stuff is overkill for what we are doing. Yeah, it’s cool and does provide more situational awareness. But then I fly with a friend with his 6 pack and an iPad with ForeFlight and I realize how much overkill it is.

People ask me why I have a 650 instead of a 750 in my panel. For me, everything I need is on the Aspens and the 650 is nothing more than data input device and a com radio. Even that role has diminished now that I use Garmin Pilot to push flight plans and changes to the 650.

Spend some time looking at all the options and make your decision based on which user interface works for you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[PeteMc]

What will you have to backup the Aspen, I went with one of each.  GI275 is a great display, but as @philiplane said, not nearly the same screen real estate. 

I fly the Aspen and typically put the 275 on the Traffic screen for VFR or VMC flights.  But the primary reason for the 275 is as a backup to my Aspen and on a real IMC flight I'll have it on the AI screen.  It also has my primary and second GPS fed into it, so on an Approach, I can have both units displaying the Approach from different boxs.  If any combination of Aspen, 275 or GPS fails, I've already got the other one setup.  Pending when and why the failure, I can opt to go missed or continue.

 

[Utah20Gflyer]

I don't have any experience with the Aspen but really like the GI 275.  One consideration is if you are trying to economize on space the GI 275 has an advantage.  Two 3 and 1/8 instruments replace the six pack versus you need two aspens to get rid of the sixpack which would take up at least twice as much space.  Both seem like good options, it just depends on your specific plans and preferences. 

[802flyer]

the Aspen has at least 30% more usable screen space than two round gauges. It's less cluttered while showing more information. The traffic and weather presents better because of this. 

Yeah this is a big part of what’s drawing me to the Aspen even though the Garmins have a few definite perks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[802flyer]

I’ve flown behind Aspens for a decade now. I have also had the opportunity to fly in planes with everything from G5s through the G3X.

The 275’s screen is pretty clear and the information is definitely there but it is really packed in there, especially for the HSI with the moving map and CDIs active. I find the Aspen display has everything I need in plain view.

With a planned GFC500, you’ll need a Garmin product to interface it with. I would try to find some owners nearby who have both and see them in action for real. Using them in real life adds a different twist to the evaluation over pushing the buttons at the avionics shop.

Quite honestly, a lot of this glass stuff is overkill for what we are doing. Yeah, it’s cool and does provide more situational awareness. But then I fly with a friend with his 6 pack and an iPad with ForeFlight and I realize how much overkill it is.

People ask me why I have a 650 instead of a 750 in my panel. For me, everything I need is on the Aspens and the 650 is nothing more than data input device and a com radio. Even that role has diminished now that I use Garmin Pilot to push flight plans and changes to the 650.

Spend some time looking at all the options and make your decision based on which user interface works for you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Agree that there’s definitely some overkill in terms of “wants” vs needs. I think I like the display on the Aspen more. I’m not planning on a GFC500 in the immediate future since I have a stec autopilot that works fine, but choosing the Aspen over garmin at this stage definitely makes that an even more expensive upgrade later.

Totally agree with you on the 650. That’s the other thing I’m struggling with since I have a 430W presently that truly does everything I need it to. But the allure of racking-in an IFD440 for a few extra bells and whistles is challenging.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[802flyer]

What will you have to backup the Aspen, I went with one of each.  GI275 is a great display, but as [mention=12083]philiplane[/mention] said, not nearly the same screen real estate. 
I fly the Aspen and typically put the 275 on the Traffic screen for VFR or VMC flights.  But the primary reason for the 275 is as a backup to my Aspen and on a real IMC flight I'll have it on the AI screen.  It also has my primary and second GPS fed into it, so on an Approach, I can have both units displaying the Approach from different boxs.  If any combination of Aspen, 275 or GPS fails, I've already got the other one setup.  Pending when and why the failure, I can opt to go missed or continue.
 

This is intriguing. I’ll have my vacuum AI still for backup. And I guess the hardwired GDL39-3D for a last ditch AHRS backup. Your argument definitely makes me feel better about possibly kicking the can down the road and adding a gi275 later if I decide to get a GFC500 someday. For now, I think I’d prioritize other areas of the panel rather than adding the Aspen and gi275 together.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PeteMc]

38 minutes ago, 802flyer said:

I think I’d prioritize other areas of the panel

Makes sense.  But if you move things around in your panel, you can keep the potential 275 in mind.

Pending how serious you're considering the 275, you might ask your avionics guy about the pro, cons and cost to pre wiring for the 275.  Wouldn't make much sense if you're going to add radios down the road, but if the radios are planned for this upgrade, making a harness with the 275 connectors already there might make sense.

And just to toss out my radio config...  I went with the GTN650Xi as the primary GPS/NAV/COMM and the GNC355 as the backup GPS/COMM.  At the time I was also considering the costs and I think this is a great combo.  But I almost went with two GTNs.  Didn't think I'd use the charts in the 750 and with the iPad for general reference I didn't see the need for the bigger screen off to the right.

 

[philiplane]

Aspen Pro MAX display, ADBS weather on the HSI

The Aspen has 14.5 square inches of screen, (6 inch diagonal) plus dedicated menu keys around the perimeter. 

The GI-275 has 5.7 square inches of screen, and only two knobs to access the features. So two GI-275's combined are 30 percent smaller, and harder to use. 

Edited December 4, 2022 by philiplane

[Fly Boomer]

7 minutes ago, PeteMc said:

And just to toss out my radio config...  I went with the GTN650Xi as the primary GPS/NAV/COMM and the GNC355 as the backup GPS/COMM. 

Is this the general consensus these days?  The thinking used to be primary GPS/NAV/COM and secondary NAV/COM without the GPS.  I guess these days it's more important to have redundancy on the GPS than the NAV radio.

[rbp]

34 minutes ago, Fly Boomer said:

Is this the general consensus these days?  The thinking used to be primary GPS/NAV/COM and secondary NAV/COM without the GPS.  I guess these days it's more important to have redundancy on the GPS than the NAV radio.

so, I tried to save money with a 750/355 setup instead of 750/650, and I regret it because the 355 has minimal integration with the 750 (no crossfill or database updates), where as the 750/650 combo is fully integrated 

[Fly Boomer]

5 minutes ago, rbp said:

the 355 has minimal integration with the 750

I'm sure that's not an accident -- upselling at its finest.

[DCarlton]

I've considered the Aspen too over the Garmin solutions.  Random thought...  We were all taught back in the day to scan, and our instruments were big, bold and easy to see quickly.  It kept you from fixating especially during stressful situations.  Has anyone studied the impacts of having so much data crammed into a small screen?  Is there a potential down side?  I actually wonder if I would completely fixate on the one little screen and it would impact my overall situational awareness.  Any thoughts in this area?  I've moved from having great vision to needing reading glasses; big and bold can still be a good thing.  

[PeteMc]

1 hour ago, rbp said:

no crossfill or database updates

This is true at the moment, but since so many people went with the smaller box (GNC/GNX/GPS) as their second box, G is supposedly working on the software fix.

You apparently can update the Nav DB from the GTN to the GNC, but I don't do it that way.  I just swap out the SD Card in the GNC.  For the GTN I do have to put a SD Card in and power up the radios to load the DB.  Then I have to shut back down to swap out the SD Card and put my FS510 back in.  It will be really nice once they get the DB update and Crossfill fixed.

Story I heard was that Engineering asked if they should make the then new GNC/GNX/GPS boxes compatible with the GTNs and Marketing said no.  I think they were thinking it would force people to go with two GTNs and obviously they were wrong (at least for their non corporate/commercial customers).

 

[Pinecone]

1 hour ago, DCarlton said:

I've considered the Aspen too over the Garmin solutions.  Random thought...  We were all taught back in the day to scan, and our instruments were big, bold and easy to see quickly.  It kept you from fixating especially during stressful situations.  Has anyone studied the impacts of having so much data crammed into a small screen?  Is there a potential down side?  I actually wonder if I would completely fixate on the one little screen and it would impact my overall situational awareness.  Any thoughts in this area?  I've moved from having great vision to needing reading glasses; big and bold can still be a good thing.  

The point is, you don't have to scan several instruments, as all the data is on one.

I currently have an Aspen 1000 (not Max) and a G5.

I was comparing upgrading to the Max and adding the 1000 MFD.  Technically would not need to keep the G5 but would.

But the price was within spitting distance of a G3X.   Hmmmm.

[DCarlton]

30 minutes ago, Pinecone said:

The point is, you don't have to scan several instruments, as all the data is on one.

 

That is the potential upside.  I never assume the upside is what it appears on the surface though.  Kinda wonder if there's any studies proving it's best to have everything jammed in one small spot or if there's a point of diminishing returns.  I would certainly take a G3X but would be very happy at this point in life to have one or two MFDs surrounded by steam gages.   

[larryb]

I have a 3 display Aspen system + 2 GTN 650's.  This was 5  years ago before the G500TXi was available. I think the Aspen display are a bit small, but perfectly fine. I am happy with my system. I think bigger is better though, and if I were going to start over with today's choices it'd be the G500TXi, 2 GTN650Xi, and the GFC500 AP. 

[Marauder]

That is the potential upside.  I never assume the upside is what it appears on the surface though.  Kinda wonder if there's any studies proving it's best to have everything jammed in one small spot or if there's a point of diminishing returns.  I would certainly take a G3X but would be very happy at this point in life to have one or two MFDs surrounded by steam gages.   

I’m not sure there are documented studies but from my personal experience, having everything in one location in front of me really has improved my “scan”. Especially when you consider the Nav (CDI) information is laid over the primary instruments.

With the Aspens, you also have additional useful information like time and distance to a waypoint, winds aloft and reminders like minimums for an approach. Plus, in the configuration I have, I can have two approaches overlaid to use as a cross check.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Pinecone]

4 hours ago, DCarlton said:

That is the potential upside.  I never assume the upside is what it appears on the surface though.  Kinda wonder if there's any studies proving it's best to have everything jammed in one small spot or if there's a point of diminishing returns.  I would certainly take a G3X but would be very happy at this point in life to have one or two MFDs surrounded by steam gages.   

Military has been flying with the same basic symbology on HUDs systems for many years. 

I know in bombing, is it GREAT to have all the info in one place.

IIRC, the HUD is primary for IFR on the F-16.  

[802flyer]

I've considered the Aspen too over the Garmin solutions.  Random thought...  We were all taught back in the day to scan, and our instruments were big, bold and easy to see quickly.  It kept you from fixating especially during stressful situations.  Has anyone studied the impacts of having so much data crammed into a small screen?  Is there a potential down side?  I actually wonder if I would completely fixate on the one little screen and it would impact my overall situational awareness.  Any thoughts in this area?  I've moved from having great vision to needing reading glasses; big and bold can still be a good thing.  

I’ve done a lot of instrument flying behind G5s and really like them compared to the six pack. The gi275s seem a bit more cramped, but still seems like less eye movement to get the essential data.

On thing I already know I like about the garmin units better is the heading tape on the Attitude Indicator half of the display. Scan for an approach is just that much easier if you can see your heading bug and loc/gs dots all together with the airspeed/altitude/attitude info. Aspen still requires looking down a bit more to see the heading bug. Not that you can 100% fixate on the upper G5/275, but I liked having it there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Schllc]

I’m heavily biased, being most of my time is with the g1000.  
I obtained my multi rating in a Comanche with an aspen, and I absolutely hated it.  I never got used it it, didn’t find it intuitive or well organized. 
I would never purchase one of them.  
But people tend to like what they get proficient with, and I’m no exception. 
if you have no experience with either, decide on one and get proficient with your choice, you will likely be a fan forever. 
I’m currently putting a complete panel in my Aerostar and I went with all garmin except for the autopilot (didn’t have a choice).  
Get the popcorn and watch me get raked over the coals!

 

[802flyer]

Makes sense.  But if you move things around in your panel, you can keep the potential 275 in mind.
Pending how serious you're considering the 275, you might ask your avionics guy about the pro, cons and cost to pre wiring for the 275. 
 

That’s a great thought, thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gmonnig]

I've flown behind all of the screens and ended up with the 275s in my E. I had a pair of G5s installed in my Comanche 250 just two month before they announced the new "GI-275". I put about 500hrs on those G5s and really liked them. The reason I didn't do the Aspen, in the Comanche or Mooney, was wanting to get rid of the vacuum system all together. The Aspen required a backup for IFR, or a second screen. So the G5s had redundancy, battery backups, played nicely with my GNX480, Stec30 and gave my autopilot GPSS. 

I am extremely pleased with the GI-275s in my Mooney. They aren't smaller than the G5s screen since there is no bezel. They are very sharp and if you think they are cluttered, they can be customized to show whatever you want. Problem solved. Most people just get used to all the info. I only have 4hrs behind the 275s and feel comfortable. Only thing I've told myself is IFR approaches are much easier on the dedicated HSI screen. It shows all the good info you need and none of the clutter of the enhanced HSI.

[Ragsf15e]

On 12/3/2022 at 7:18 AM, 802flyer said:

Planning a PFD upgrade from steam. I’m familiar with the specs, redundancy considerations, upgrade path to GFC500 (when it gets out of jail), and other basics that you can read or watch videos about.
 
But I’m curious to hear from folks that have actually spent time flying both systems, how does the user experience compare? What might you have noticed about either that was a quirk/perk/hinderance compared to the other that might not have been immediately obvious.
 
Thanks!
 
 
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If you’re pricing 2xgi275s, might want to also consider the smaller g3x as it displays similar information as the aspen  on one screen like the aspen and doesn’t cost a lot more than 2x GI275s.