Which remote Garmin ADSB to Legacy G1000

[drstephensugiono]

You can get a Mooney with the G1000Nxi.  You just have to buy the Acclaim M20V.  I've flown and taught in all models of Acclaims, and while they are fast and fun to fly, upgrading your M20M with all the avionics you ever dreamed of having is the way to go in my opinion.  You could put your dream avionics in and still be all in for half the cost of an Acclaim.  The only reason you would buy a regular Acclaim would be for the extra speed, and for most trips the time saved isn't that much.  Or am I missing something?

Why could they put a G1000NXi on the M20V with the same fuselage and can’t grant the same for the M20TN??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[donkaye, MCFI]

13 minutes ago, drstephensugiono said:

Why could they put a G1000NXi on the M20V with the same fuselage and can’t grant the same for the M20TN??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's not the same fuselage.  It was certified with 2 doors and the G1000Nxi.

[drstephensugiono]

I don’t know if I’d go through the cost and aggravation to go Bravo -> Acclaim. Transaction costs, catch up maintenance, downtime, etc are significant, especially if importing a non-WAAS plane. The acclaim is faster and has longer legs, but unless your 90% mission needs the range, the trip time will be similar.  In Illinois, where my plane is registered, sales tax alone would be the better part of $30,000, and unless you can run a trade through the seller’s balance sheet, sales tax is collected on the purchase price, not the delta.
 
In your shoes, I’d take the money and do a modern Garmin autopilot and panel.
I got WAAS-compliant with a 330-ES transponder, which was maybe half or a third the cost of a 335. It won’t do ADS-B in, but I don’t care.  While out of production, you probably could find one.
-dan

I did buy a Garmin GTN750 for the Bravo sitting on my desk in a box with new tray and hardware I got from an acquaintance that took it out of his Pilatus. I was on the market for a GTX345, like that on my Swift that would communicate with it.
I hate to say this but flying in a 6 Pack makes me feel like a real pilot. I’m old pilot


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[drstephensugiono]

It's not the same fuselage.  It was certified with 2 doors and the G1000Nxi.

I know I know there’s an extra door but seriously?!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[donkaye, MCFI]

2 minutes ago, drstephensugiono said:

I know I know there’s an extra door but seriously?!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bottom line, it was certified with the G1000Nxi and that's all that counts.  Mooney did that when they were viable.  They are not now, so no upgrades to legacy G1000s.

[drstephensugiono]

Bottom line, it was certified with the G1000Nxi and that's all that counts.

Wonder if it had the same GFC700 Autopilot?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[donkaye, MCFI]

1 minute ago, drstephensugiono said:

Wonder if it had the same GFC700 Autopilot?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It does.

[TGreen]

Is there any benefit to the WAAS upgrade other than being able to shoot RNAV approaches when the ceiling is below 500 agl? Can't imagine it makes any meaningful difference for lateral guidance. 

[1980Mooney]

1 hour ago, TGreen said:

Is there any benefit to the WAAS upgrade other than being able to shoot RNAV approaches when the ceiling is below 500 agl? Can't imagine it makes any meaningful difference for lateral guidance. 

Depends on the airport. I have seen LNAV mins as low as 315 ft and some as high as 700 ft.  Precision Approaches (and autopilot coupled approaches) are limited to ILS without WAAS and those keep disappearing. Also ILS seems to be more likely to be out of service than LPV.  A coupled precision approach can be a real help on a long tiring flight in bad weather. 
 

Of course we used to fly without WAAS or even GPS but I don’t want to go back…

Edited April 21 by 1980Mooney

[LANCECASPER]

11 hours ago, TGreen said:

Is there any benefit to the WAAS upgrade other than being able to shoot RNAV approaches when the ceiling is below 500 agl? Can't imagine it makes any meaningful difference for lateral guidance. 

Another benefit is that all of our airplanes will get sold someday. G1000 airplanes without WAAS linger on the market for many months and many times the seller ends up having to discount more than the WAAS upgrade price since the perception of the buyer is, "What else have they cut corners on?". Also if there are no WAAS units available down the road the discount might be a fire sale price.

My thinking would be: "If you're going to end up "paying" for the upgrade when you sell it, in the form of a discount, why not upgrade it now and get some benefit out of the upgrade while you own it? Then when it does go on the market someday down the road it should sell a lot sooner."

[Schllc]

On 4/20/2025 at 9:39 PM, TGreen said:

Is there any benefit to the WAAS upgrade other than being able to shoot RNAV approaches when the ceiling is below 500 agl? Can't imagine it makes any meaningful difference for lateral guidance. 

Aim small, miss small…

It is comforting to see the centerline of the runway on your pfd align with exactly what you see outside the window. 
 

[dkkim73]

54 minutes ago, Schllc said:

 

It is comforting to see the centerline of the runway on your pfd align with exactly what you see outside the window. 
 

It's amazing how well that actually works, too. I was practicing uncoupled the other day and marveling at how well the SVS and calculated velocity vector work. 

[Pinecone]

Some people over on BT have been playing with landing 0-0 using synthetic vision.

The only issue has been the flare.  

Hmm, sounds like having an LHS would solve that problem.  I need to give it a try.

[dkkim73]

6 hours ago, Pinecone said:

The only issue has been the flare.  

Hmm, sounds like having an LHS would solve that problem.  I need to give it a try.

"Wow, Dave, that landing was different. It's usually rougher..."

[201Mooniac]

8 hours ago, Pinecone said:

Some people over on BT have been playing with landing 0-0 using synthetic vision.

The only issue has been the flare.  

Hmm, sounds like having an LHS would solve that problem.  I need to give it a try.

When I did my instrument check ride more than 30 years ago my examiner had me continue the ILS to landing under the hood just using the pressure altitude to decide when to flare.  It was certainly an experience and not my best landing, even back then.  He wanted me to know it would be survivable I guess.

I have recently done an LPV approach under the hood with a safety pilot and used the LHS to decide when to flare.  Worked out pretty well.  Certainly hope to never need it but much more than just survivable.

[Pinecone]

Synthetic vision would make it even easier.