Does this make sense to you?

[RoundTwo]

Does it make sense to remove a perfectly functioning GTX 330ES and GDL88 and replace them with the GTX345R talking to GTN750? FlightStream 210 is already there too.

Besides the weight savings and redistribution to the avionics bay, panel declutter and benefit of backup AHRS, are there other benefits? And, is there a downside I’m missing other than cost?

TIA

[rbp]

I have the remote TXP and audio panel on my 750, and I love it!  for me there have been no downsides going from discrete to integrated. but maybe there are better ways to spend the money? 

[Ragsf15e]

The ahrs in the gtx isn’t great. I wouldn’t do it for that. Cleanup is nice though.  Remote too!  It’s only money…

[donkaye]

4 hours ago, RoundTwo said:

Does it make sense to remove a perfectly functioning GTX 330ES and GDL88 and replace them with the GTX345R talking to GTN750? FlightStream 210 is already there too.

Besides the weight savings and redistribution to the avionics bay, panel declutter and benefit of backup AHRS, are there other benefits? And, is there a downside I’m missing other than cost?

TIA

When I did my upgrade, the GTX 345 wasn't out.  I got the GDL 88 and GTX 33ES.  I chose to have the transponder in the panel because it provided some more functionality and I still had a transponder if the GTN failed.  The transponder can still be controlled by the GTN 750 in addition to the transponder itself.  While I lost a couple of data fields on the 750, they were more than made up for on the GTN 650.  However, I did not like the green color of the 330ES at night, so when the 335 came out I sold the 330ES and bought the 335.  It had some additional features that I liked in addition to the white characters.

If you were to get rid of the GDL 88 you will lose functionality.  Right now you have BOTH 1090 and 978 OUT.  With the 345 you only have 1090 OUT.   Also, some people have had issues with the AHRS in the 345.  I have the FS 210 and it is rock solid.

Bottom line, even if you gained a couple of pounds of useful load, I would NOT replace the 330ES with the 345.  If you don't like the green color of the characters on the 330ES, then I would upgrade to the 335.  After sale of my 330 ES I think the net upgrade cost was $500.

[Ragsf15e]

1 hour ago, donkaye said:

When I did my upgrade, the GTX 345 wasn't out.  I got the GDL 88 and GTX 33ES.  I chose to have the transponder in the panel because it provided some more functionality and I still had a transponder if the GTN failed.  The transponder can still be controlled by the GTN 750 in addition to the transponder itself.  While I lost a couple of data fields on the 750, they were more than made up for on the GTN 650.  However, I did not like the green color of the 330ES at night, so when the 335 came out I sold the 330ES and bought the 335.  It had some additional features that I liked in addition to the white characters.

If you were to get rid of the GDL 88 you will lose functionality.  Right now you have BOTH 1090 and 978 OUT.  With the 345 you only have 1090 OUT.   Also, some people have had issues with the AHRS in the 345.  I have the FS 210 and it is rock solid.

Bottom line, even if you gained a couple of pounds of useful load, I would NOT replace the 330ES with the 345.  If you don't like the green color of the characters on the 330ES, then I would upgrade to the 335.  After sale of my 330 ES I think the net upgrade cost was $500.

Why are you concerned with having both 1090 and 978 out?  As long as you have 1090, you can use it anywhere.  It’s dual receive, so you get everything.  Are you concerned with the few people that only have 978 in?

[donkaye]

1 hour ago, Ragsf15e said:

Why are you concerned with having both 1090 and 978 out?  As long as you have 1090, you can use it anywhere.  It’s dual receive, so you get everything.  Are you concerned with the few people that only have 978 in?

Did you mean 978 Out?  Then I ask you these questions:  If there are so few people that have 978, then why did Garmin make the 345 dual band ADS-B In?  And why did the Government modify their ADS-B system to accept dual band Out simultaneously?

I personally like having the most flexibility when it comes to receiving traffic.  Most people wouldn't have spent the money to get Active Traffic.  I did by installing the GTS 800 as part of my upgrade.  It works from the ground up and also in areas not served by ADS-B.

[Ragsf15e]

1 hour ago, donkaye said:

I think you mean 978 Out.  Then I ask you these questions:  If there are so few people that have 978, then why did Garmin make the 345 dual band ADS-B In?  And why did the Government modify their ADS-B system to accept dual band Out simultaneously?

I personally like having the most flexibility when it comes to receiving traffic.  Most people wouldn't have spent the money to get Active Traffic.  I did by installing the GTS 800 as part of my upgrade.  It works from the ground up and also in areas not served by ADS-B.

Nope, I meant it just as I typed it.  I was responding to the part of your post where you seem to say that it’s a negative to only transmit out on one frequency.  The gtx345 is dual in, so it will receive traffic from both frequencies.  I don’t think there’s benefit in transmitting out on both.  I was wondering what you think the benefit is of transmitting out on both?
 

Possibly there are some systems that only have 978 in, but they are rare.  Were you concerned with people possibly not seeing you on their adsb if you only transmit out one freq?  Typically the cheaper solutions (stratus) are dual in or out only (like wingtip), so dual out doesn’t really help these see you?

[RoundTwo]

Thanks for the responses. I wasn’t aware there were complaints about the AHRS in the 345. Interesting.

R2

[StevenL757]

9 hours ago, RoundTwo said:

Does it make sense to remove a perfectly functioning GTX 330ES and GDL88 and replace them with the GTX345R talking to GTN750? FlightStream 210 is already there too.

In a word…Yes.

[donkaye]

33 minutes ago, StevenL757 said:

In a word…Yes.

In another word...Why?  My answer would be a resounding...No.

[PT20J]

If you have a system that works and does everything you need it to, I wouldn't change it. As soon as you do, Garmin will come out with something even better than what you just bought.  Besides, every time a shop goes into the wiring, you run the risk of introducing gremlins. 

I have a GTX 345. The AHRS was unusable (well, unless you wanted computer-directed unusual attitude entries ). I got a warranty replacement, and the second was better, but it drifts. I wouldn't want to use it for more than a few minutes. I believe Garmin has a recent software update that is supposed to improve this, but I haven't installed it because installing the G3X disabled the GTX AHRS.

The primary advantage of the GTX 345 is that you get ADS-B out (1090 - works everywhere) and ADS-B in (978 so you get FIS-B products) in a single box. You also get ADS-B traffic on both frequencies so you have no dependence on ground based ADS-R. There is no real advantage to having dual band for TIS-B. The only advantage to having dual band ADS-B out is that it ensures that all other ADS-B equipped aircraft will see you without relying on ground-based ADS-R retransmissions. But those areas would tend to have much less traffic. 

Personally, I try to minimize integration unless it has a lot of benefit because I want to avoid a single failure affecting multiple capabilities. For this reason, I don't like to remote avionics to the GTN 750 (and in fact, I got a 650 instead). But that's really a philosophical issue; some prefer having it all tied together for simplicity of operation.

Skip

[Ragsf15e]

1 hour ago, PT20J said:

If you have a system that works and does everything you need it to, I wouldn't change it. As soon as you do, Garmin will come out with something even better than what you just bought.  Besides, every time a shop goes into the wiring, you run the risk of introducing gremlins. 

I have a GTX 345. The AHRS was unusable (well, unless you wanted computer-directed unusual attitude entries ). I got a warranty replacement, and the second was better, but it drifts. I wouldn't want to use it for more than a few minutes. I believe Garmin has a recent software update that is supposed to improve this, but I haven't installed it because installing the G3X disabled the GTX AHRS.

The primary advantage of the GTX 345 is that you get ADS-B out (1090 - works everywhere) and ADS-B in (978 so you get FIS-B products) in a single box. You also get ADS-B traffic on both frequencies so you have no dependence on ground based ADS-R. There is no real advantage to having dual band for TIS-B. The only advantage to having dual band ADS-B out is that it ensures that all other ADS-B equipped aircraft will see you without relying on ground-based ADS-R retransmissions. But those areas would tend to have much less traffic. 

Personally, I try to minimize integration unless it has a lot of benefit because I want to avoid a single failure affecting multiple capabilities. For this reason, I don't like to remote avionics to the GTN 750 (and in fact, I got a 650 instead). But that's really a philosophical issue; some prefer having it all tied together for simplicity of operation.

Skip

I fully agree with skip.  However, imo, the Mooney panel doesn’t have a lot of room.  If you want to save room by “remoting” something, the transponder is a good choice.  If it goes out, that sucks and you’ll have to get it fixed, but it won’t compromise your comm or navigation to get down if you’re IFR.  Might just make atc less happy.

[PT20J]

23 minutes ago, Ragsf15e said:

I fully agree with skip.  However, imo, the Mooney panel doesn’t have a lot of room.  If you want to save room by “remoting” something, the transponder is a good choice.  If it goes out, that sucks and you’ll have to get it fixed, but it won’t compromise your comm or navigation to get down if you’re IFR.  Might just make atc less happy.

That makes sense to me. 

[StevenL757]

3 hours ago, donkaye said:

In another word...Why?  My answer would be a resounding...No.

Hey Don, I could’ve sworn the 345 was 1090 and 978…which is why I replied the way I did.  Apparently, I didn’t read the Garmin web page’s description of it carefully-enough.

If it’s only 1090, then I’ll reconsider my reply.

[Ragsf15e]

17 minutes ago, StevenL757 said:

Hey Don, I could’ve sworn the 345 was 1090 and 978…which is why I replied the way I did.  Apparently, I didn’t read the Garmin web page’s description of it carefully-enough.

If it’s only 1090, then I’ll reconsider my reply.

It’s dual IN, but only 1090 out.  Imo, the dual in is important, but I was also wondering why you would need dual OUT?

[LANCECASPER]

I wouldn't change it if it's working and doing everything you want, but if someone is considering a new transponder I wouldn't recommend anything but the GTX 345 - it is a game-changer when it comes to integration. It sends out traffic and weather to virtually everything else out on the panel or portable, Garmin or otherwise, wired or wireless. If you have active traffic and run it through the GTX345 it blends the traffic.

I've had them on two airplanes and the AHRS is only good if someone takes the time to set it up when the airplane is leveled and follows the instructions explicitly. If they do its OK and would get you down in an emergency.

[PT20J]

16 hours ago, Ragsf15e said:

It’s dual IN, but only 1090 out.  Imo, the dual in is important, but I was also wondering why you would need dual OUT?

The only advantage I see to dual out is if you are in some rare location with no ground station coverage (and hence no ADS-R) then other aircraft are assured of picking up your ADS-B transmissions no matter what ADS-B equipment they are using. 

[donkaye]

46 minutes ago, PT20J said:

The only advantage I see to dual out is if you are in some rare location with no ground station coverage (and hence no ADS-R) then other aircraft are assured of picking up your ADS-B transmissions no matter what ADS-B equipment they are using. 

So, if you have both, and have the extra benefit of not needing ADS-R, why would give it up for a lot of extra labor and equipment cost, and a few pounds of useful load?

[201Mooniac]

An advantage of the GTX 345 over the GDL 88 + other transponder is that if you have a GI 275, the GDL 88 will not display traffic on the GI 275 but the GTX 345 will.  Now that I have the GI 275 as my backup ADI, I'm considering swapping out my GDL 88 and GTX 327 for a GTX 345.

[Steve0715]

You want this….well, I sure want that panel.  Nice plane too..

From recently sold M20J by an MSer.

[RoundTwo]

6 hours ago, Steve0715 said:

You want this….well, I sure want that panel.  Nice plane too..

From recently sold M20J by an MSer.

Yes, Brian’s J was a beauty for sure. I’m sure the new owner is very happy.

[Pinecone]

WOW.  Nice panel.

I wonder how much it cost?  I know, if you have to ask.........

[Ragsf15e]

It has an IO-390 too…

[bmcconnaha]

On 12/19/2022 at 8:23 PM, Steve0715 said:

You want this….well, I sure want that panel.  Nice plane too..

From recently sold M20J by an MSer.

New owner loves it! It went to a good home.  He is quickly becoming a Mooniac! definitely miss the ol gal.  I will say I liked that set up in my J much more than the garmin perspective plus I am flying now.  

[Steve0715]

@bmcconnahawhen I get ready to build a new panel, I’ll want to get your input and thoughts about any, after the fact, changes you would consider.