Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

michal

I have seen this with my own eyes

Recommended Posts

Last Saturday I attended an open house at my local Hayward (HWD) airport in the San Francisco Bay Area. The open house was organized by Cirrus and local FBO to promote flight training using Cirrus equipment. They had SR-20 and SR-22 Perspective Turbo on display. The latter was loaded with all possible equipment options. I must tell you I wasn't prepared for what I saw. Based on what I have see in FSX I was always highly skeptical how a screen can handle this amount of information and detail displayed by G1000 (in FSX it simply doesn't look very good, no matter what resolution I tried, whether it was Flight1's Mustang or default FSX's G1000). Well, the displays on real thing look absolutely stunning, they are crisply sharp and colors are nicely saturated even in sunlight - big difference with FSX. The fit and finish of Cirrus aircraft is phenomenal, wings and fuselage are as smooth as glass. I thought however that seats were a bit flat, no car-like fancy bucket seats however in aircraft you probably don't need them since there are little side forces. Every inch of this aircraft exudes high tech aura. I also listened to presentation by Max Trescott (chosen CFI of 2008) who wrote books/courses on G1000 and gave us some insights into WAAS and advanced G1000 use. I am thinking of getting G1000 simulator software from Garmin - it is only $25 and really teach myself G1000 in-out. It was a well spent afternoon!!

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

The G1000 is a great system. It is a lot better then the avidyne system.

Share this post


Link to post
The G1000 is a great system. It is a lot better then the avidyne system.
I don't know if this is good or bad but G1000 is becoming de-facto industry standard. From light piston aircraft all the way to VLJ. Piper which to this point was primarily in the Avidyne camp announced that their Meridian will have G1000 and also selected G1000 for its upcoming PiperJet. Cirrus announced G1000 to be standard on their Vision jet despite the fact that prototype was flying with glass L3 SmartDeck. Epic aircraft that builds both certified aircraft and experimental announced to go 100% Garmin - G1000 for their certified line and G900 for their experimental yet just recently they were installing Cheltons or OPT Technologies avionics. Cirrus rep told me during this open house that their clients select G1000 over Avidyne in about 85% of sales. Then there is Mooney, Cessna, Beechcraft and Diamond that have been solidly in the Garmin camp. It is now hard to come up with a single aircraft manufacturer whose flagship product will depend on Avidyne. I think Garmin's 430 and 530 boxes set standard that is now impossible to beat. Where are days when Bendix-King was such a symbol of excellence in the GA??

Share this post


Link to post

"I don't know if this is good or bad but G1000 is becoming de-facto industry standard. Where are days when Bendix-King was such a symbol of excellence in the GA??"In my opinion Garmin will probably do the same. The companies make it initially because of a quality product, innovation, and support-then they get fat, rest on their laurals , reputation, and monopoly (can one say Microsoft?). I frankly feel that overall the new 696 shows the start of this problem for a lot of reasons, and I see a lot of pilot's who would have readily changed over not doing so.Seems a cycle that repeats and repeats. I am waiting for the next innovator..

Share this post


Link to post
Seems a cycle that repeats and repeats. I am waiting for the next innovator..
I agree about cycles. But for the next innovator to appear and leapfrog everyone there has to be some new technology that could be exploited. So what is the next big thing coming to avionics, the next 'disruptive' technology and not just tinkering around edges? I don't see one on the horizon but I would be interested to listen to someone's opinions. I quite do not yet see 3D holographic images being used in lieu of avionics :(

Share this post


Link to post
I agree about cycles. But for the next innovator to appear and leapfrog everyone there has to be some new technology that could be exploited. So what is the next big thing coming to avionics, the next 'disruptive' technology and not just tinkering around edges? I don't see one on the horizon but I would be interested to listen to someone's opinions. I quite do not yet see 3D holographic images being used in lieu of avionics :(
Yeah I agree with you, I don't see much happening right now. A lot has already happened with the G1000. First was a keypad then an integrated autopilot, then the blue auto right aircraft button, and now the synthetic terrain vision. I haven't personally been in hard IFR with one or used all of its features but does it have HITS yet? If not I think this will most likely be the next step.

Share this post


Link to post
I frankly feel that overall the new 696 shows the start of this problem for a lot of reasons, and I see a lot of pilot's who would have readily changed over not doing so.
I'll suppose that you noticed.................that I threw my Garmin 496 into the wind, and now use the 696 instead. :( FWIW ------------ I like the 696 a lot. The soft keys and joystick/twist combo are very easy and quick to use. The display never fades in all sunlight conditions, and is very sharp resolution wise. And that's great considering I have a sliding canopy and sun from so many angles. I also use it's XM weather and radio capabilities. L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
I'll suppose that you noticed.................that I threw my Garmin 496 into the wind, and now use the 696 instead. :( FWIW ------------ I like the 696 a lot. The soft keys and joystick/twist combo are very easy and quick to use. The display never fades in all sunlight conditions, and is very sharp resolution wise. And that's great considering I have a sliding canopy and sun from so many angles. I also use it's XM weather and radio capabilities. L.Adamson
Larry-I assume you are not paying for all the chart subscriptions which cost molto bucks a year, have only plates and are not even georeferenced?Most pilots I know are going the route of a tablet and software that does much more at at a fraction of a cost.If Garmin had looked at the competition which is extensive (voyager, flightprep, anywheremap, cheetah etc.) maybe they would not be resting on their laurels either-or charging so much for their subscriptions.Oh year-I also have HITS on my tablet (for the last 4 years). Nothing like seeing your aircraft flying on a plate with the 3d heads up depicted at the same time. Costs about $400 a year for a subcription-for everything...Here is a thread where I detailed it:http://www.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1953

Share this post


Link to post
but does it have HITS yet? If not I think this will most likely be the next step.
If you have synthetic vision enabled G1000 then HITS comes automatically with it. HITS can be turned off if you prefer Flight Director only. I know that you can get HITS on tablets these days but we are talking panel mounted systems approved for IFR and (hopefully) integrated with your A/P. I think Aspen Avionics is working on their own synthetic vision that you can retrofit in older airplanes and have IFR-approved capability.

Share this post


Link to post
If you have synthetic vision enabled G1000 then HITS comes automatically with it. HITS can be turned off if you prefer Flight Director only. I know that you can get HITS on tablets these days but we are talking panel mounted systems approved for IFR and (hopefully) integrated with your A/P. I think Aspen Avionics is working on their own synthetic vision that you can retrofit in older airplanes and have IFR-approved capability.
I was refering more to the 696 features vs. a present tablet, software, and its capabilities-a perfect case of a "monopoly" company thinking they have the market sewed up and putting out a product that is already far behind in capabilities that users can get at 1/3 of the cost-not to mention the terribly expensive subcriptions that have surprised quite a few.

Share this post


Link to post
I was refering more to the 696 features vs. a present tablet, software, and its capabilities-a perfect case of a "monopoly" company thinking they have the market sewed up and putting out a product that is already far behind in capabilities that users can get at 1/3 of the cost-not to mention the terribly expensive subcriptions that have surprised quite a few.
Geof.. I got your point. However Garmin's performance should be primarily evaluated based on their 430/530/G1000 since this is one area where they seem to have near monopoly. Their hand-held units clearly have many competitors like the arrangements you are talking about, this is a market which is very nimble and switching is easy. So in the market of portable units consumer is fairly well protected with many choices. At this moment however at least from my point of view Garmin hasn't yet rested on their laurels as far as panel mounted systems are concerned but it may change. But inertia here is huge - these units are expensive and pilots quickly get used to whoever is the dominant player - your comparison with the PC operating system has merit.

Share this post


Link to post
Larry-I assume you are not paying for all the chart subscriptions which cost molto bucks a year, have only plates and are not even georeferenced?
Of course not! :( But I sure like the GPS portion!L.Adamson
I was refering more to the 696 features vs. a present tablet, software, and its capabilities-a perfect case of a "monopoly" company thinking they have the market sewed up and putting out a product that is already far behind in capabilities that users can get at 1/3 of the cost-not to mention the terribly expensive subcriptions that have surprised quite a few.
Ah, once again I disagree. :) As I looked at many other options regarding large screens and the methods used; and I just don't like them as well as the 696. Even if they are a third of the cost.edit: I had to cram a "smile" after disagree. I'm not disagreeing............all that bad! :) BTW--- don't we have just :) for the emotion selections?L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
edit: I had to cram a "smile" after disagree. I'm not disagreeing............all that bad! :) BTW--- don't we have just :) for the emotion selections?L.Adamson
Use the "Whistler" smile then :( or perhaps the "Wry Smile" :( or possibly the "Thinking about it" :(

Share this post


Link to post
Yeah I agree with you, I don't see much happening right now. A lot has already happened with the G1000. First was a keypad then an integrated autopilot, then the blue auto right aircraft button, and now the synthetic terrain vision. I haven't personally been in hard IFR with one or used all of its features but does it have HITS yet? If not I think this will most likely be the next step.
My school just got some of the SP model 172s with the G1000 and the better of the two autopilots available. I flew it in solid IMC last fall and it was SO much easier than the standard R models. The scan is a lot easier and the flight director worked really well. I used the autopilot on the way home and that also worked flawlessly. It's an amazing system and every time I fly it I learn something new.

Share this post


Link to post