Opinions on a new panel layout

[Skates97]

On 12/14/2023 at 4:57 AM, Pinecone said:

I am not on the bandwagon of putting the autopilot controls at the top or near the top.  I know that airliners have them up there, but not sure the reasoning behind this.,

Mine is at the top of the stack, not because of ergonomics, but because it is a much shallower instrument and fits there even with the angled supports behind it. You can't put a deep instrument at the top of the stack because of those supports.

[jlunseth]

A few comments. First, you and your avionics shop need to carefully check the Type Certificate for your aircraft before you start removing any gauges or instruments. For example, the TC might not be required for instrument flight, although a slip/skid indicator is required, but the TC may be listed on your Type Certificate so you can't just pull it without an approved (read STC'd) substitute. Then, any substitutes for instruments/gauges not only need to be approved, but they need to be STC'd as primary to act in place of instruments that are required, such as the slid/skid indicator, an AI, etc., if you are going to pull an instrument that is in the Type Certificate. Sounds like your G5 is not certified as primary for anything. I don't have a G5, I have two GI275's, so I have not paid much attention to the G5, but I can tell you that Garmin makes different part numbers for those types of readouts that are certified differently. For example, there is one 275 part number for an AI that is just going to serve as backup to a primary AI and another, more expensive part number for one that is going to serve as a primary AI and/or slip skid. 

Second, I assume you generally fly from the left seat and someone else is temporarily flying from the right seat in your photo, so you can take the picture.

Third, I found with my panel that it is a mistake to put primary engine instruments like the MP and RPM indicators, and the various temp and pressure gauges, way over on the right. When they are over there, in the event of a mechanical issue, you experience the full impact of the issue first and then look at the gauge to verify. If the instruments are in your scan you see the first indications of a problem before it gets out of hand and can do something about it, like ascend or descend out of the clouds as quickly as you can before the problem gets too big, or power back, or whatever the right solution is. A gauge that is certified to act as primary for the engine gauges and that can fit in your primary scan on the left side is far superior. If an EGT for one cylinder starts to act up, for example, you will see that right away before there is a complete failure rather than checking the gauges once the failure has happened. I have a JPI930 on the left side and that has saved my bacon more than once. 

Lastly, I would not put an iPad on the primary (left) side of the panel. Takes up way too much space that should be occupied by primary instruments. I have a great old aluminum kneeboard that I keep mine in. Yoke is ok, I guess, but I find that yoke mounted iPads impair my ability to grab the yoke when I need it like right now, and they also block too much of the panel itself. 

Edited January 25 by jlunseth

[ttflyer]

On 12/14/2023 at 6:57 AM, Pinecone said:

What GPS is that?

I would recommend a 650, preferably 650Xi.  Gives you nav, com, GPS, and a LOT of capabilities.  With the GFC500 and GTN-650Xi, you can also have Smart Glide.  Also VNAV.

I am not on the bandwagon of putting the autopilot controls at the top or near the top.  I know that airliners have them up there, but not sure the reasoning behind this.,

Our Mooney has the GFC 500 controls at the bottom of the stack.  We are currently re-doing the panel and I'm moving it to the top of the stack (swapping the audio panel and the autopilot panel).  Why?  I fly professionally and it feels weird to have the autopilot panel on the bottom of the stack.  Not sure I can give a better reason but it makes more sense on top to me. 

[Vance Harral]

11 hours ago, jlunseth said:

Sounds like your G5 is not certified as primary for anything

The G5 is certified primary for use as an attitude indicator, DG, HSI, or turn coordinator.

When configured as an ADI, the G5 display also shows airspeed and altitude tapes, and a VSI indication.  But those are for "entertainment purposes only", the G5 cannot replace the factory instruments.  In my experience, this is not well understood, and many pilots assume the G5 altitude is "better" than the old round dial.  The fact that a GFC500 autopilot gets altitude hold information from a G5 adds to the confusion.

to be clear, G5 altitude and airspeed accuracy isn't inherently poor, it just needs to be calibrated to be accurate.  The calibration is electronic rather than mechanical, it's set through menus in the unit.  The shop that does your biannual static system check can easily perform this calibration, but it takes extra time, and they will understandably bill extra to do the work.  Most shops know that (1) it's not required; and (2) many owners don't want to pay extra for this, so they commonly leave the G5 calibration at the factory default setting and only check the certified primary altimeter.  In my experience, this almost always results in the G5 altimeter reading high relative to the certified altimeter, when both are set to the same Kollsman setting.

[carusoam]

Way cool…

A bunch of color screens to aviate and navigate…

but no colorful engine monitor?

tachometers get better… when they aren’t driven like a bicycle’s speedometer… 

 

Important note…

When using two digital displays like the G5s…

they look like they can both show attitude if one display fails….

Be sure they both have an independent AHRS unit to support each one…

Nothing is worse than expecting to have a back up display, when your single AHRS unit fails…. You get two red Xs for the price of one failure… bargain!

 

Sure, the TC used to count as a back up attitude indicator… and so did the TnB before it…

in real life… old TCs only work good enough in smooth air.  So don’t have an AI failure in rough air….  

And if you haven’t practiced partial panel using a TC lately…

make doubly sure you have two truly independent AI systems…
 

There is a thread around here where an MSer (unknowingly) had a single AHRS device supporting two screens…. The AHRS device failed in IMC… fortunately, he is still around here somewhere.

 

For fun… watch your TC on a bumpy day… see if you can follow it with any accuracy.   

PP thoughts only… not a CFI.

Best regards,

-a-

 

[ArtVandelay]

I would lose the TC and add AV20 or AV30 as a backup AI, it’s not a Garmin box so completely independent.

[jlunseth]

10 hours ago, Vance Harral said:

The G5 is certified primary for use as an attitude indicator, DG, HSI, or turn coordinator.

When configured as an ADI, the G5 display also shows airspeed and altitude tapes, and a VSI indication.  But those are for "entertainment purposes only", the G5 cannot replace the factory instruments.  In my experience, this is not well understood, and many pilots assume the G5 altitude is "better" than the old round dial.  The fact that a GFC500 autopilot gets altitude hold information from a G5 adds to the confusion.

to be clear, G5 altitude and airspeed accuracy isn't inherently poor, it just needs to be calibrated to be accurate.  The calibration is electronic rather than mechanical, it's set through menus in the unit.  The shop that does your biannual static system check can easily perform this calibration, but it takes extra time, and they will understandably bill extra to do the work.  Most shops know that (1) it's not required; and (2) many owners don't want to pay extra for this, so they commonly leave the G5 calibration at the factory default setting and only check the certified primary altimeter.  In my experience, this almost always results in the G5 altimeter reading high relative to the certified altimeter, when both are set to the same Kollsman setting.

Well, to be clear, that was not exactly my point. My point is that Garmin makes its small instruments in multiple varieties, some of which can be primary for, for example, AI, and some of which cannot. As I said, I don’t have a G5 so have not dug into that issue with the G5, I just know it is or can be an issue. In other words, the OP needs to check what version (part number) of the G5 he has and make sure it is certified as primary for each of the gauges he wants to replace it with. If you pull a primary gauge, such as, for example, a slip/skid, and the replacement is not certified as primary for that gauge, the aircraft is not airworthy. If you tell me all G5s are primary for AI, DG, HSI and TC, I will believe you, but before I make that assumption for my own aircraft I would verify from Garmin’s specs that is true for the specific part number G5 being installed.

[Vance Harral]

1 hour ago, jlunseth said:

If you tell me all G5s are primary for AI, DG, HSI and TC, I will believe you, but before I make that assumption for my own aircraft I would verify from Garmin’s specs that is true for the specific part number G5 being installed.

Your point is well taken, and yes, people should check part numbers.  This can be "artificially confusing" for the G5, however, because the number of G5 variants is less than what is implied by the part numbers used for sales purposes.

There are exactly two flavors of G5 instrument: experimental and certified.  The "experimental" G5 (P/N 010-01485-01, see https://www.garmin.com/en-US/p/514383) is not certified for anything.  Garmin doesn't want this unit in any certified aircraft for any reason, though I'm sure a few people have played games with stretching the interpretation of rules in a way that jives what they want.

There is only one "certified" G5 instrument, and it's certified as primary for any/all of the functions I mentioned above (see the installation manual for details).  If you visit https://www.garmin.com/en-US/p/570665/pn/K10-00280-01, however, it appears there are three different flavors of certified G5 with different part numbers: one for use as a certified Attitude Indicator, one for use as a certified DG/HSI, and one for use as a certified HSI "with GPS interface".  This is misleading.  Again, there is only one certified G5 instrument, and it can be used for any of the certified functions.  The different names/part numbers just reflect additional gizmos that are bundled with the instrument when you order it.  If you order a "G5 Attitude Indicator", you get only the G5 device itself and nothing else.  If you order a "G5 DG/HSI", you get a the same G5, but also a GMU11 magnetometer which provides heading information to the G5.  If you order a "G5 DG/HSI with GPS interface", you get the G5 plus the GMU11 plus a GAD29B bus converter that allows the G5 to talk to ARINC429 devices.  But you can buy the GMU11 and/or GAD29B from one vendor, connect them to a "G5 Attitude Indicator" you bought from another vendor, and still have a legally certified DG/HSI.  Garmin is very clear about this if you dig into details and/or talk to their support staff.

[Pinecone]

On 1/24/2024 at 8:20 PM, ttflyer said:

Our Mooney has the GFC 500 controls at the bottom of the stack.  We are currently re-doing the panel and I'm moving it to the top of the stack (swapping the audio panel and the autopilot panel).  Why?  I fly professionally and it feels weird to have the autopilot panel on the bottom of the stack.  Not sure I can give a better reason but it makes more sense on top to me. 

That is a reason I can fully understand.

However, on your work plane, the readouts are also up there.  While on a GFC-500, the readouts are on the instruments.

I also just found out that the G3X can control the GFC-500 directly, without using the -507 at all.  Just tap the autopilot status bar and you get a split screen with autopilot controls.  And with that you can set VS or IAS digitally directly to the desired number.

[ArrowBerry]

The G5s are primary for attitude and the DG, we don't have those round gauges in the panel anymore or a vacuum system to run them. We aren't going to be removing any of the other four gauges from the original six pack, the turn coordinator, altimeter, airspeed, VSI are all staying--just a matter of deciding where to put them.

Both G5s are AHRS capable, the HSI can be toggled to display attitude independently with its own battery. It also shows all of the same non-primary functions (alt, VSI, TC etc) so you have the non-primary backup of those as well. In the event of an electrical failure, in theory you would have the aircraft battery, and two G5 batteries to run through before you would loose the screen. I know these can fail, but each one is remarkably more reliable than a gyro and people used to fly these all the time IFR with just one gyro attitude. Obviously we're shooting for improvement and higher standards but it seems archaic to me to cling to these "primary" relics. A properly calibrated G5 runs off the same pitot static lines as the analog gauge, and the primary is still in the panel--albeit not right in front of you, but still available to verify.

The iPad now contains a lot of information that seems more useful than staring at an analog altimeter while I already have two in front of me. ADSB traffic, real time weather, maps, charts, frequencies etc... basically an entire flight bag sitting right in front of you. 

I take the point of lacking an engine monitor. I agree. It's on the list. 

Also, regarding the autopilot location. I've flown a C182 with it mounted at the bottom right above the engine controls. My work plane with the G1000 has it mounted at the top centre and that feels more natural to me. It's more heads up, and easier to see the little lights beside which mode is active/armed. I'm sure its a matter of preference.

[Vance Harral]

41 minutes ago, ArrowBerry said:

The iPad now contains a lot of information that seems more useful than staring at an analog altimeter while I already have two in front of me

You'll find many, many pilots who agree with you...

...but most of them are not pilots with a lot of experience, and time in IMC, including approaches to minimums.  There is an inverse correlation between this experience, and fascination with iPads, and it's not just because pilots who have a lot of experience are old and/or iPad-phobic.

You seem to have pretty much made up your mind on this, and I don't want to be a jerk by arguing about for the sake of argument.  What I will say is that if you're genuinely looking to test an opinion you have, you should work hard to find input from those who disagree with you.  The easiest way to find that input for this particular topic, is to talk to people with a lot of time flying actual IMC in the system.  In my experience, all of these folks really like iPads and the wealth of information they provide; but none of them would even glance at an iPad inside the FAF, much less rearrange their panel to prioritize it over a certified altimeter.

If the panel in question were for VFR only, that changes things; but I get the impression you want to use your airplane in IMC.  Correct me if I'm wrong.

[hammdo]

I can say for certain, I do not look at the iPad after FAF in actual. It is far too easy to get out of sync fast. With dual G5s, I’m locked in on those and preparing for miss after FAF…

-Don

[Vance Harral]

3 hours ago, hammdo said:

With dual G5s, I’m locked in on those and preparing for miss after FAF…

If you're using G5 altitude to define when you arrive at minimums, please make sure your "secondary" G5 altimeter was/is tested and calibrated by a shop that knows how to do so.

Apologies if I'm beating a dead horse about this, but the problems I've seen are not one-offs - I have a number of data points because I work part-time as an instructor.  The flight school I primarily teach at has five aircraft with dual G5s.  None of them are calibrated, because they don't have to be.  Every single one of them reads at least 75' higher than our 5055' MSL field elevation, when set to the altimeter setting given on the AWOS.  One of them reads 125' high.  Not a single one of them reads low, all the errors are in the "dangerous" direction.

The G5 ADI in our Mooney had exactly the same 100-ish-foot-high error, until I asked our transponder/static check guy to come out with his test equipment and calibrate it.

I also give instruction to owners in their own airplanes, some of which are equipped with G5s.  In some cases, those G5s read very close to the certified altimeter, and are accurate compared to field elevation, like our Mooney is now.  I'm assuming these units were adjusted by the shop at installation.  All the other cases have the same large errors in the "dangerous" direction.

I realize that my 10-or-so data points aren't really enough to identify something systematic about the G5's pressure/altitude system, but what I've seen with my own eyes has made an impression on me, and it could kill someone in low IMC, hence my fixation on it.

One piece of information I don't have is what would happen if you flew all these "bad" units down to sea level.  It may be that the source of error corrected by calibration has more to do with the pressure/altitude relationship curve over thousands of feet, than a baseline bias.

[hammdo]

I use my ‘certified’ altimeter and note the difference. It is my ‘real’ altitude. G5s are mostly for ‘on glide path, on localizer or correcting’ callouts. My DH or MDA is defined by the round gauge if you will. I have the round gauges (except Attitude indicator/DG) still in my panel.

Besides, I add round up to the next 100’ for the mins anyway to account for error - 250’I go 400’. I don’t shoot to minimums in real IFR  weather — the ‘guy in the pink shirt’ minimums if you will…

-Don

[EricJ]

5 hours ago, Vance Harral said:

One piece of information I don't have is what would happen if you flew all these "bad" units down to sea level.  It may be that the source of error corrected by calibration has more to do with the pressure/altitude relationship curve over thousands of feet, than a baseline bias.

The G5 is not primary for altitude, so the air altimeter should be used for DA-type things, imho.   I have dual G5s and the error seems to increase with altitude.   At my field elevation of 1478' the error is negligible compared to the primary air instrument, but does increase as you climb.   I may be opening up my static system to add new equipment this spring, and if I do I'll take another crack at calibrating the G5s.   For some installations the issue may not be that the shop didn't calibrate it, but that they couldn't.    I've heard of experiences where the G5 cal software couldn't be made to work due to sensitivity (kept repeatedly terminating the calibration procedure), and in some cases only worked when the G5 was isolated from everything else and connected only directly to the calibration equipment.  I suspect this sort of thing is why some of them wind up uncalibrated or not very well calibrated.

[ttflyer]

23 hours ago, Pinecone said:

That is a reason I can fully understand.

However, on your work plane, the readouts are also up there.  While on a GFC-500, the readouts are on the instruments.

I also just found out that the G3X can control the GFC-500 directly, without using the -507 at all.  Just tap the autopilot status bar and you get a split screen with autopilot controls.  And with that you can set VS or IAS digitally directly to the desired number.

Somewhat ironically, the readouts are not up there on the jet I fly (Challenger 350/3500).  In fact, it's exactly the same as the Mooney / GFC500:  Pushing a button on the autopilot control panel in the Challenger is just a rumor. What is displayed on the PFD is what actually happened....  No heading readouts, no altitude readouts - nothing.   

[Pinecone]

How about the knobs for heading and altitude select?

[ArrowBerry]

Okay so the argument is whether or not the G5 altitude readout is accurate. That's a very valid point. If you kept the layout the same, would you say it's better to put the TC on the right side and keep the airspeed and altimeter on the left? The only reason we had drawn it out the way we had was to have a back up "keep the wings level" sort of instrument. But you're right, in not ideal conditions the TC may not be as helpful as you'd want for that purpose. Its too bad the panel wasn't just a bit bigger to fit everything in!

Secondly, the iPad. The company I fly for (King Air) uses the iPad as an electronic flight bag. That's essentially what we would like to use it as in our Mooney. We don't carry paper charts, maps, booklets, or company manuals etc for work either. Legally we're required to keep two charged iPads in the cockpit with all the up to date data, and we would employ the same rule for our private flying. My partner also flies corporate jets (Challenger and King Air) and his company has the same policy.

The geo referenced charts for arrivals, departures, approaches, and taxiing are invaluable for situational awareness in my opinion. For shits we "taped" the iPad to the right side of the panel one day to see how it worked and it's just too far to be able to see the fine print of an approach plate. Not to mention how far it is away from your scan when in actual IMC. You're right to say that past the FAF and other critical phases of flight its not a primary focus, but in the event of a missed approach, it also gives you the geo referenced missed approach on the plate. The primary direction still comes from the GPS to your HSI and command bars, but I've always thought having that big picture map was really helpful to have close by. 

[EricJ]

8 hours ago, ArrowBerry said:

Okay so the argument is whether or not the G5 altitude readout is accurate. That's a very valid point. If you kept the layout the same, would you say it's better to put the TC on the right side and keep the airspeed and altimeter on the left? The only reason we had drawn it out the way we had was to have a back up "keep the wings level" sort of instrument. But you're right, in not ideal conditions the TC may not be as helpful as you'd want for that purpose. Its too bad the panel wasn't just a bit bigger to fit everything in!

Secondly, the iPad. The company I fly for (King Air) uses the iPad as an electronic flight bag. That's essentially what we would like to use it as in our Mooney. We don't carry paper charts, maps, booklets, or company manuals etc for work either. Legally we're required to keep two charged iPads in the cockpit with all the up to date data, and we would employ the same rule for our private flying. My partner also flies corporate jets (Challenger and King Air) and his company has the same policy.

The geo referenced charts for arrivals, departures, approaches, and taxiing are invaluable for situational awareness in my opinion. For shits we "taped" the iPad to the right side of the panel one day to see how it worked and it's just too far to be able to see the fine print of an approach plate. Not to mention how far it is away from your scan when in actual IMC. You're right to say that past the FAF and other critical phases of flight its not a primary focus, but in the event of a missed approach, it also gives you the geo referenced missed approach on the plate. The primary direction still comes from the GPS to your HSI and command bars, but I've always thought having that big picture map was really helpful to have close by. 

The air altimeter is the primary altitude instrument whether or not the G5 is accurate, fwiw.   There is also regulation regarding certification, I think even in the CAR3 regs, that the primary instruments have to be within direct view of the pilot (or something like that).   The G5 can be used to replace the TC, or the AI, so that's a consideration.    Since the two G5s back each other up and are almost trivial to switch either between PFD and HSI modes, and each has their own independent backup battery, having the TC within view is less important than it might be with a single vacuum horizon.

I keep my EFB on my knee with a strap, but that apparently doesn't work for everybody.

[ttflyer]

On 1/27/2024 at 1:47 PM, Pinecone said:

How about the knobs for heading and altitude select?

Just like the Mooney / GFC 500 - Buttons and knobs on the Challenger are at the top of the glareshield. Readouts are all on the display screens.  Twisting knobs while looking at the PFD becomes second nature. Don't even think about it...

[Cassity]

On 12/22/2023 at 8:21 AM, ArtVandelay said:

I thought a lot about ergonomics, no matter what you’re going to have avionics well below eye level.


1. Got rid of the post mounted compass.
2. Put rarely interacted with avionics to right stack (JPI & Xpndr)
3. Shifted G3X to the right, because I always use split mode, this puts the AI centered on the yoke, puts the knobs/buttons on the right side. Left hand flys, right hand operates avionics. The left hand buttons I rarely use because they are duplicated elsewhere (DirectTo done on the GTN, heading on the GFC, etc).
Other than operating the lights and setting the baro (done with G5), the right hand can do the rest. No awkward reaching over the yoke, no leaning over, minimal head movements.

I love your setup!  I would like to do something similar.  Do you have a recommendation on where to go?  Also, where did you get your yokes wrapped?  

[ArtVandelay]

I love your setup!  I would like to do something similar.  Do you have a recommendation on where to go?  Also, where did you get your yokes wrapped?  

Thanks.

Yokes were done by PO.

Where to go? Id recommend someplace reasonably close to you, you might need to make return trip(s) to fix issues or just want to visit it during the process, which takes a minimum 3 months for a full upgrade.

[StevenL757]

On 1/29/2024 at 1:27 PM, ArrowBerry said:

Secondly, the iPad. The company I fly for (King Air) uses the iPad as an electronic flight bag. That's essentially what we would like to use it as in our Mooney. We don't carry paper charts, maps, booklets, or company manuals etc for work either. Legally we're required to keep two charged iPads in the cockpit with all the up to date data, and we would employ the same rule for our private flying. My partner also flies corporate jets (Challenger and King Air) and his company has the same policy.

Understood; however, the iPad shouldn’t be IN the panel…period…especially taking up the space where you show it on the left.  It’s a piece of consumer-grade hardware that happens to be accepted and used widely as an EFB.  It’s fine, as long as it’s mounted in a location where it can be viewed easily when needed, but easily removed when you change aircraft as regularly as we do.  In other words, out of your primary scan as well as your first officer’s (if you have one).