Advice welcome - Avionics upgrade

[EricJ]

After long experience trying to keep my Century III going, I wouldn't recommend spending any significant time or money trying to maintain one.   I especially wouldn't make a new panel design dependent on long-term operation of one of those.

[blaine beaven]

@chriscalandro
 

I have considered the thought of a G3X vice dual G5s and the JPI 900. Keep in mind that with a G3X, I would still require a GI275 or G5 as a backup. 
 

With a GI275 backup, the price difference is about $7k USD or $11k CAD (after taxes), which is close to a 20% increase over what I currently have planned. 

I know there are benefits to “buying once, crying once”, but I still have a budget, and just had our second child…

@EricJ

That’s the advice I was given about the Century III as well. I won’t hold my breath that brand new tech will last forever or be without issues (I follow the GFC500 threads closely…), but what man made thing is perfect? The Mooney is close, I’m just trying to get it closer. 

[Rick Junkin]

13 hours ago, blaine beaven said:

But if anyone wants to let me know their thoughts on doing a GNX 255 v a GPS 175 for my second required IFR source, I’m all ears! 

I recommend the GNC 255 to give you VOR capability when GPS is unavailable.
 

Yes, you’ll not have GPS or VOR redundancy in your panel but you’ll have your iPad as an emergency GPS navigation backup if your GNC 355 fails and ATC on the second radio to help you get down.

My original plan was for a GNC 355/255A combo and I ultimately decided to install a GTN 650Xi instead of the 355 for several reasons, one of which is to have two VOR receivers in the panel. But that’s quite a bit of extra money if the capability increase isn’t on your “need” list. Being budget conscious I would choose the 255 for the VOR capability over the GPS redundancy of the 175 and lean on my iPad for emergency GPS guidance.

i haven’t looked at the MTBF data for the Garmin radios but I’m betting it is a large number of hours. I’d look at that to inform your decision on how likely the 355 is to fail and what priority is appropriate for having a backup in the panel.

Cheers,
Rick

 

[Pinecone]

What does a GTN-650Xi have to do with ADSB?  Yes, you can display traffic on it, but it is a very full featured com/nav/GPS.

Also, a Canadian Compliant ADSB will work in the US.  The issue is, the US ADSB only requires a single bottom antenna.  So it is not complaint with the Canadian requirements, as it doesn't have diversity.

[blaine beaven]

2 hours ago, Pinecone said:

What does a GTN-650Xi have to do with ADSB?  Yes, you can display traffic on it, but it is a very full featured com/nav/GPS.

Also, a Canadian Compliant ADSB will work in the US.  The issue is, the US ADSB only requires a single bottom antenna.  So it is not complaint with the Canadian requirements, as it doesn't have diversity.

I appreciate my response to you did conflate the issue of ADSB and the 650. I guess that, at bottom, I don’t see what the added benefits of a 650 are to me, in my application. 

[vorlon1]

On 11/18/2023 at 9:41 AM, LANCECASPER said:

I personally would believe someone who has worked on Mooneys and GA airplanes for years over what google tells you in .32 seconds.

What part of his statement isn’t true? The G5 attitude indicator can’t drive the CIII autopilot. The GI-275 can. And many people that work on older autopilots liked the simplicity of the CIII since there are still many of them functioning properly today, decades later.

 

OK, in an attempt to correct a false statement, I suggested you Google it.
Did you?
Why not? It's not that hard...
Look, Google proper tells us very little original information. What it excels at is telling us what OTHERS say. By design.
In this case, a simple search (and I didn't even have to finish typing it)
"garmin g5 autopilot compatibility" offered a screenshot of the Garmin WEB SITE telling me that indeed the G5 DOES support the autopilot in question. Feel free (and they have made it easy) to ASK Garmin (just click the provided link for goodness sake!). Don't trust Google? OK, but they passed on what Garmin said, and even saved you time looking up the correct answer.

 

If you are too rushed to spend the .32 seconds to confirm it; I'll help: In a link (provided by Google) Garmin says they support it:

https://www.garmin.com/en-US/p/570665/pn/K10-00280-01#additional

For additional information regarding the G5 electronic flight instrument, contact a Garmin authorized dealer or visit: www.garmin.com/aviation. 

You might have to take the time to click on  "INTERFACES".

Now it will take an adapter (and I understand that adapter circuitry is integrated into the 275) but according to Garmin the CIII IS supported, and this is the statement I wish to correct.

 

[LANCECASPER]

14 hours ago, vorlon1 said:

 

OK, in an attempt to correct a false statement, I suggested you Google it.
Did you?
Why not? It's not that hard...
Look, Google proper tells us very little original information. What it excels at is telling us what OTHERS say. By design.
In this case, a simple search (and I didn't even have to finish typing it)
"garmin g5 autopilot compatibility" offered a screenshot of the Garmin WEB SITE telling me that indeed the G5 DOES support the autopilot in question. Feel free (and they have made it easy) to ASK Garmin (just click the provided link for goodness sake!). Don't trust Google? OK, but they passed on what Garmin said, and even saved you time looking up the correct answer.

 

If you are too rushed to spend the .32 seconds to confirm it; I'll help: In a link (provided by Google) Garmin says they support it:

https://www.garmin.com/en-US/p/570665/pn/K10-00280-01#additional

For additional information regarding the G5 electronic flight instrument, contact a Garmin authorized dealer or visit: www.garmin.com/aviation. 

You might have to take the time to click on  "INTERFACES".

Now it will take an adapter (and I understand that adapter circuitry is integrated into the 275) but according to Garmin the CIII IS supported, and this is the statement I wish to correct.

 

And people that know what they are talking about realize that the G5 can be used as an HSI with the Century III or virtually any other autopilot, or any almost airplane without an autopilot but it can't be used for attitude on the Century III (or Century IV or 41) or any King autopilot (KAP 150, KFC 150, KFC 200, KFC 225, etc)

When @philiplane said "You will either need to retain the existing attitude indicator to drive it, or switch to a GI-275. The G5 cannot drive it.", he was absolutely correct. 

To use it as an HSI you'll need a GAD 29B and a GMU 11 but it will not provide attitude information to the Century III. Admittedly Garmin saying it's "compatible" is confusing, since they are referring to the HSI/GPSS function, but this has been discussed over and over on here since the G5 was introduced in 2016.

And to correct another one of your mistakes, you didn't suggest that I google it, you suggested that @philiplane do that. I have nothing against google, but google only provides you a path to the correct answer when you know enough to ask the correct question.

https://www.google.com/search?q=can+a+Garmin+G5+eeplace+thw+attitrude+indicator+on+a+CenturyIII+autopilot%3F&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS1031US1031&oq=can+a+Garmin+G5+eeplace+thw+attitrude+indicator+on+a+CenturyIII+autopilot%3F&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCTI3MTQwajBqN6gCALACAA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

This post from one of their vendors makes it more clear than Garmin's website:

https://sarasotaavionics.com/whats-new-in-avionics/garmin-announces-g5-third-party-autopilot-support

Feel free to call Garmin yourself and confirm. 1-866-739-5687

[EricJ]

2 hours ago, vorlon1 said:

 

OK, in an attempt to correct a false statement, I suggested you Google it.
Did you?
Why not? It's not that hard...
Look, Google proper tells us very little original information. What it excels at is telling us what OTHERS say. By design.
In this case, a simple search (and I didn't even have to finish typing it)
"garmin g5 autopilot compatibility" offered a screenshot of the Garmin WEB SITE telling me that indeed the G5 DOES support the autopilot in question. Feel free (and they have made it easy) to ASK Garmin (just click the provided link for goodness sake!). Don't trust Google? OK, but they passed on what Garmin said, and even saved you time looking up the correct answer.

 

If you are too rushed to spend the .32 seconds to confirm it; I'll help: In a link (provided by Google) Garmin says they support it:

https://www.garmin.com/en-US/p/570665/pn/K10-00280-01#additional

For additional information regarding the G5 electronic flight instrument, contact a Garmin authorized dealer or visit: www.garmin.com/aviation. 

You might have to take the time to click on  "INTERFACES".

Now it will take an adapter (and I understand that adapter circuitry is integrated into the 275) but according to Garmin the CIII IS supported, and this is the statement I wish to correct.

 

A G5 HSI will drive the heading function for a Century III through a GAD29B, i.e., it'll replace a directional gyro with a heading bug.   This is how my system was set up.

However, the CIII also requires an attitude indicator with pitch and roll outputs, and a G5 can't do that.   Usually a vacuum-driven gyro must be retained (which is what I did, for a while), or a GI-275 can be used.

As time goes on, now that there are two reasonable digital autopilot solutions available for Mooneys, supporting ancient equipment like a CIII is less of an issue, so there really aren't significant barriers to doing a new install of two G5s.   The OP said the CIII was inop, so it's probably not a good direction to throw money.

[Z W]

On 11/19/2023 at 1:24 PM, blaine beaven said:

I appreciate my response to you did conflate the issue of ADSB and the 650. I guess that, at bottom, I don’t see what the added benefits of a 650 are to me, in my application. 

The benefit of the GTN650 suggestion was to:

1) Gain the benefits of enabling the VNAV function on your GFC500 autopilot.  Without a GTN, you will have a VNAV button in your panel, but it will not work.  I'm currently flying this way and it's not a big deal, especially when you can manually use the VCALC function on the GNC355, but I'm on a waitlist for a slot to have the GTN installed.

2) Gain the benefit of enabling "Smart Glide" and installing a smart glide switch in the panel to use during emergencies.  Again, the GNC355 will not drive this function, only a GTN.

3) Gain a redundant panel with 2 separate GPS navigators plus the ability to fly VORs and ILS's in the event of a widespread GPS outage.

It has nothing to do with ADSB which will display just fine and work on your planned GNC355.  I currently fly behind a 430W and a GNC355.  The 355 is a great unit and very cost-effective, but lacks an IFR nav radio and VNAV functions.  I think it's an ideal second backup GPS.

My main point was you're spending a lot of money to put in the GFC500 and not be able to use all of its functions.  You also won't have a true redundant IFR panel with either of the options you proposed.  In IFR flying, two is one and one is none as soon as you have a failure.  If you just fly VFR this is less of a consideration.

I understand everyone has a budget, and you can keep adding goodies at unlimited costs.  Just making a suggestion, having been here and done this.  I wish we'd put in the GTN while we had it all apart.

[blaine beaven]

3 hours ago, Z W said:

The benefit of the GTN650 suggestion was to:

1) Gain the benefits of enabling the VNAV function on your GFC500 autopilot.  Without a GTN, you will have a VNAV button in your panel, but it will not work.  I'm currently flying this way and it's not a big deal, especially when you can manually use the VCALC function on the GNC355, but I'm on a waitlist for a slot to have the GTN installed.

2) Gain the benefit of enabling "Smart Glide" and installing a smart glide switch in the panel to use during emergencies.  Again, the GNC355 will not drive this function, only a GTN.

3) Gain a redundant panel with 2 separate GPS navigators plus the ability to fly VORs and ILS's in the event of a widespread GPS outage.

It has nothing to do with ADSB which will display just fine and work on your planned GNC355.  I currently fly behind a 430W and a GNC355.  The 355 is a great unit and very cost-effective, but lacks an IFR nav radio and VNAV functions.  I think it's an ideal second backup GPS.

My main point was you're spending a lot of money to put in the GFC500 and not be able to use all of its functions.  You also won't have a true redundant IFR panel with either of the options you proposed.  In IFR flying, two is one and one is none as soon as you have a failure.  If you just fly VFR this is less of a consideration.

I understand everyone has a budget, and you can keep adding goodies at unlimited costs.  Just making a suggestion, having been here and done this.  I wish we'd put in the GTN while we had it all apart.

Thanks for the clear explanation of some of the benefits of the 650. The main issue I am running into is, with what I have decided to do at this point (G5s, GFC500, GNC 255, GNC 355, GMA 345, EDM 900, 2x USB ports, and new cut panel, with labour to install, and tax) I am presently 125% over the budget I originally set. So although I think a 650 would be awesome… I’m tapped out. 

[Pinecone]

125% over?  As in you are 2.5 times what your budget was?  Or are you 25% over budget?  

If 25% over, I would think about delaying the project a bit, and then do it.  Or, have the 355 installed now, but wire and set things up for a GTN to be easily installed later.  Then the 355 becomes the #2 radio.

 

[dkkim73]

41 minutes ago, Pinecone said:

... Or, have the 355 installed now, but wire and set things up for a GTN to be easily installed later.  Then the 355 becomes the #2 radio.

That's a smart idea. Leverage the up-front part of the work (panel cut-outs, wiring, tech time, etc) so might not have to repeat it later. Could have a spare slot, or plan to possibly pull and sell a unit while upgrading later. Previous poster made some good points about getting feature-value out of the GFC500. 

I suppose part of the value calculus would also depend on how long you're keeping the plane. If "indefinitely" is the answer, then planning something further in the future would seem to make sense. If not, it would seem that minimizing spend makes sense based on what I keep reading about recouping avionics investment. 

Definitely respect OP's budget discipline, all of us little demons are pretty much on one shoulder. 

[201Mooniac]

29 minutes ago, dkkim73 said:

Definitely respect OP's budget discipline, all of us little demons are pretty much on one shoulder. 

Me as well, I'm definitely in the camp of "might as well" when I start a project and my budget always to completely to crap.

[blaine beaven]

1 hour ago, Pinecone said:

125% over?  As in you are 2.5 times what your budget was?  Or are you 25% over budget?  

If 25% over, I would think about delaying the project a bit, and then do it.  Or, have the 355 installed now, but wire and set things up for a GTN to be easily installed later.  Then the 355 becomes the #2 radio.

 

Poor wording - 25% over what I budgeted. I will see if the shop an wire and set things up for a future upgrade path, and what that might cost. Thank you for the idea. 

1 hour ago, dkkim73 said:

I suppose part of the value calculus would also depend on how long you're keeping the plane. If "indefinitely" is the answer, then planning something further in the future would seem to make sense. If not, it would seem that minimizing spend makes sense based on what I keep reading about recouping avionics investment. 

Definitely respect OP's budget discipline, all of us little demons are pretty much on one shoulder. 

I have considered this a "forever" plane; I mean it has been 10 years and I am very happy with it. But with a family of four, it might become a bit small in the future. 

And yes, everyone loves to spend everyone else's money  myself included. With two kids under two, a spouse that is likely not going to work much for the next 5 years, and a desire to retire in the next 20, there's a lot to weigh, and I have to draw a line somewhere...

That said, the advice on this thread has been great! You have all pushed me into changing some of my original plans (I am presently at double cost what my original, no autopilot plan was), and I think that I will end up with a very capable IFR plane, with avionics that should last me for quite some time. 

[Pinecone]

You could also save a bit on the autopilot by only going pitch and roll servos, but wire for pitch trim and yaw to be added later.

[Rob G]

I also live in Canada and really like ADSB. I went for dual GI 275 with my KAP 150. 

[Ragsf15e]

On 11/21/2023 at 7:16 AM, blaine beaven said:

Thanks for the clear explanation of some of the benefits of the 650. The main issue I am running into is, with what I have decided to do at this point (G5s, GFC500, GNC 255, GNC 355, GMA 345, EDM 900, 2x USB ports, and new cut panel, with labour to install, and tax) I am presently 125% over the budget I originally set. So although I think a 650 would be awesome… I’m tapped out. 

Possibly ditch the gma345 for a pma450b which has built in usb c, ditch the additional usb ports and continue to use cheap usb adapter from cigar lighter.  Won’t save 25% but it’s something, and pma450 is really good.

[blaine beaven]

4 hours ago, Ragsf15e said:

Possibly ditch the gma345 for a pma450b which has built in usb c, ditch the additional usb ports and continue to use cheap usb adapter from cigar lighter.  Won’t save 25% but it’s something, and pma450 is really good.

The GMA345 has a built in USB as well. 

[Utah20Gflyer]

I did dual GI 275s, 355 gps and 255a nav/com and am very happy with the functionality of my plane.  It’s a world of difference from when I bought it with all steam gauges and an old VFR gps.  
 

Not trying to further bust your budget but if you don’t already have CIES fuel senders to go along with that JPI EDM 900.  Having really accurate fuel gauges increases the utility of your airplane.  

[blaine beaven]

13 hours ago, Utah20Gflyer said:

I did dual GI 275s, 355 gps and 255a nav/com and am very happy with the functionality of my plane.  It’s a world of difference from when I bought it with all steam gauges and an old VFR gps.  
 

Not trying to further bust your budget but if you don’t already have CIES fuel senders to go along with that JPI EDM 900.  Having really accurate fuel gauges increases the utility of your airplane.  

I will be doing the senders with the 900. Basically I’m doing same as you but G5s

[tcal780]

I've also just pulled the trigger on the same upgrades to my C model. EDM900, G5's, GNC255A, and a GI106A(nav2 backup). I already have an existing GNX375 and STEC30.

It started with just planning to do the EDM900, owner assisting the install. After finding a deal on a used EDM900, I thought, "While I'm at it, let's see about dumping the vac system... and the tired old KI214, Century HSI, and the KX165 with a missing digit... " next thing you know, I'm full-on, "throw the whole panel out." All that's left, is a plan (or none) for Com2/Nav2 and my KMA24. I could just leave those in place. The struggle is real.

[blaine beaven]

I’m not sure if I ever followed up on this thread, but I wanted to say thank you to everyone who provided advice and discussion. 
 

I ended up being able to increase my budget considerably through a business grant program (as I use my plane for work) and here is a picture of the end result:

[Ragsf15e]

19 hours ago, blaine beaven said:

I’m not sure if I ever followed up on this thread, but I wanted to say thank you to everyone who provided advice and discussion. 
 

I ended up being able to increase my budget considerably through a business grant program (as I use my plane for work) and here is a picture of the end result:

Well that ended up awesome!