Archived

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

Guest BeaverDriver

Baron Avionics?

Recommended Posts

Now, someone please correct me if I'm missing something here. I have found that when you switch the #1 Garmin 430 to GPS, or select a flight plan in the Number 1 430, the #2 unit follows suit exactly. Whatever/however you tune on the #1 unit, is reflected exactly in the #2 unit. You can't have the GPS mode selected on the #1 unit and the VOR/LOC mode selected on the #2 unit. I'm not sure (yet) what happens when you select a nav or com frequency on the #1, if that's reflected in the #2 unit also (if it is, that's even worse), so before I go off on a total rant, has anyone discovered a switch that allows you to operate the 430's independently of each other?Thanks.:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Now, someone please correct me if I'm missing something here. I have found that when you switch the #1 Garmin 430 to GPS, or select a flight plan in the Number 1 430, the #2 unit follows suit exactly. Whatever/however you tune on the #1 unit, is reflected exactly in the #2 unit. You can't have the GPS mode selected on the #1 unit and the VOR/LOC mode selected on the #2 unit. I'm not sure (yet) what happens when you select a nav or com frequency on the #1, if that's reflected in the #2 unit also (if it is, that's even worse), so before I go off on a total rant, has anyone discovered a switch that allows you to operate the 430's independently of each other?Thanks.:(
GPS or VOR/LOC mode determines which radio drives the autopilot..It would not make sense to have this set differently on the two units.The autopilot can only follow one input :(..and I do believe you'll find that the upper unit is NAV/COM1 andthe lower unit is NAV/COM2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welllll, not really Bert (with respect). You are correct in that the autopilot will follow either the GPS or the NAV modes (not both at the same time), but the 430's being totally slaved to each other doesn't make sense. This is why I was asking if Carenado hid a switch somewhere that would slave one to the other (the units are not slaved to each other in real life - only way to have them have the same info and doing the same things is to load both with the same info). Think of the dual 430's as dual Nav/Com's. On Nav 1 you have VOR A which is displayed on your HSI/VOR1, and even your HSI or VOR #1 can often be switched between NAV 1 or NAV 2. Meanwhile, you have NAV 2 set to another VOR station that could be used (for example) to identify intersections. The 430's are the same thing, except you have the additional option of selecting a GPS input that will display on your HSI. You can even have 2 GPS routes/info selected at the same time (1 input on each 430) giving you different info. Of course, your autopilot will follow whatever input you have going into it via the switch on the A/P head, but it is switchable so you could have it following a GPS course to an IAF from your #2 430, while the #1 430 is set to VOR/LOC and has the ILS frequency set. As soon as you hit the IAF, you switch your A/P to the #1 430 and it will then track the ILS inbound for you (yes, there are other and maybe easier ways to do this, but this is just an example having different applications for 2 units). In real life, dual 430's are as independent of each other as are a 530 and 430 installation, or 2 nav/com units. That's not to say the 2 430's don't "talk" to each other, but it's via switching lines that you select on the panel. They for sure don't both deliver the same info at the interface when switching one unit only (i.e. switching modes on one will most definitely not switch the mode on the second unit automatically as these do in the Baron). I've not, and nobody here where I work have ever seen 2 430's slaved to each other, particularly "hardwired" as these ones appear to be (thus the reason I was looking for a switch to "untie" them). In fact, having them completely hardwired like this is the setup that makes no sense. You lose your redundancy and verstatility completely this way. If there is no switch to allow them to operate independently, then Carenado has really screwed up royally on this aspect of the aircraft, without a doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Welllll, not really Bert (with respect). You are correct in that the autopilot will follow either the GPS or the NAV modes (not both at the same time), but the 430's being totally slaved to each other doesn't make sense. This is why I was asking if Carenado hid a switch somewhere that would slave one to the other (the units are not slaved to each other in real life - only way to have them have the same info and doing the same things is to load both with the same info). Think of the dual 430's as dual Nav/Com's. On Nav 1 you have VOR A which is displayed on your HSI/VOR1, and even your HSI or VOR #1 can often be switched between NAV 1 or NAV 2. Meanwhile, you have NAV 2 set to another VOR station that could be used (for example) to identify intersections. The 430's are the same thing, except you have the additional option of selecting a GPS input that will display on your HSI. You can even have 2 GPS routes/info selected at the same time (1 input on each 430) giving you different info. Of course, your autopilot will follow whatever input you have going into it via the switch on the A/P head, but it is switchable so you could have it following a GPS course to an IAF from your #2 430, while the #1 430 is set to VOR/LOC and has the ILS frequency set. As soon as you hit the IAF, you switch your A/P to the #1 430 and it will then track the ILS inbound for you (yes, there are other and maybe easier ways to do this, but this is just an example having different applications for 2 units). In real life, dual 430's are as independent of each other as are a 530 and 430 installation, or 2 nav/com units. That's not to say the 2 430's don't "talk" to each other, but it's via switching lines that you select on the panel. They for sure don't both deliver the same info at the interface when switching one unit only (i.e. switching modes on one will most definitely not switch the mode on the second unit automatically as these do in the Baron). I've not, and nobody here where I work have ever seen 2 430's slaved to each other, particularly "hardwired" as these ones appear to be (thus the reason I was looking for a switch to "untie" them). In fact, having them completely hardwired like this is the setup that makes no sense. You lose your redundancy and verstatility completely this way. If there is no switch to allow them to operate independently, then Carenado has really screwed up royally on this aspect of the aircraft, without a doubt.
OK, lets back up a bit.. this is a simulation and Carenado has not implemented every function of the GNS430..as a matter of fact, their 430s are a barebones version of the real units.But even if you equip the Baron with two RXP GNS430s, with crossfill enabled, they talk to each otherand they do that on purpose.. It is actually quite powerful that the same flightplan is active on both.You can show the active flight plan on the map on one unit and show the waypoints on the other. See the example below..If you can switch the autopilot GPS source at the A/P, great, but that capabilityis not present in this implementation, nor have I seen it in any other FSX airplane. It may well be that FSX only supports one GPS source.I never use the Carenado GPS units, since I like the RXP units better, but the autopilot sourceis switched at the GNS there as well. Same if you look at the RealAir Duke with dual GNS units..You can still have a VOR or ILS frequency dialed in and have it show on a VOR gauge - just the activesignal that drives the autopilot is one or the other. Using your example, when you switch to NAV/LOCwith the ILS frequency active, the autopilot will start tracking the glideslope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It may well be that FSX only supports one GPS source.
I just checked the FSX SDK, and although FSX supports NAV1 and NAV2,there is only one GPS source supported - so what you are after may bean FSX limitation rather than a Carenado oversight..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, lets back up a bit.. this is a simulation and Carenado has not implemented every function of the GNS430..as a matter of fact, their 430s are a barebones version of the real units.
No argument there. And as you say, no sim does implement all functions (that I know of). That's not my quibble though.
But even if you equip the Baron with two RXP GNS430s, with crossfill enabled, they talk to each otherand they do that on purpose.. It is actually quite powerful that the same flightplan is active on both.You can show the active flight plan on the map on one unit and show the waypoints on the other. See the example below..
Again no argument. But in real life, you would need to load both 430's with the same flight plan (which you certainly can do), and if you switch the mode on one, the other one will remain as previously set until you switch it manually as well.
If you can switch the autopilot GPS source at the A/P, great, but that capabilityis not present in this implementation, nor have I seen it in any other FSX airplane. It may well be that FSX only supports one GPS source.
That's quite possible, and if that's the case, then it can't be helped. However, I'm pretty sure I've flown FSX aircraft with dual installations that can function on differing modes. However, that's still not my point. My point is simply that if you switch one 430 in the Baron from VOR/LOC to GPS, they BOTH switch. That shouldn't be the case.
I never use the Carenado GPS units, since I like the RXP units better, but the autopilot sourceis switched at the GNS there as well. Same if you look at the RealAir Duke with dual GNS units..
That's understandable that you would like the RXP better - they are outstanding. But again, not my point. The autopilot will/can only run off one unit at a time. If it had 2 conflicting sources, it wouldn't know which to follow. This isn't in question at all.
You can still have a VOR or ILS frequency dialed in and have it show on a VOR gauge - just the activesignal that drives the autopilot is one or the other. Using your example, when you switch to NAV/LOCwith the ILS frequency active, the autopilot will start tracking the glideslope.
You seem stuck on the autopilot issue, which I'm not questioning. The autopilot will only follow a single source - here or in real life. That's true and I never stated otherwise.My whole point is, if you switch modes on one 430 (VOR/LOC to GPS for instance), it should not automatically switch modes on the other 430. If you want to use the autopilot in this equation, let's say the autopilot is tracking 430 #1, and you switch modes on #1, then the autopilot will follow the new input from #1, be it going from a GPS course to an airway course. But, if the autopilot is following #1 430 which is on GPS, and you switch the 430 #2 from GPS to VOR/LOC, this should not in any way affect the autopilot because it's tracking off 430 #1. BUT, in the Carenado Baron, it will because the 430 #1 will ALSO switch to VOR/LOC, which is NOT correct, and in real life, could never happen. The 2 430's are independent of each other. Completely. One doesn't know what the other is doing. The autopilot, if connected will follow whichever one you have chosen as the input source. Switching the other 430 will have no impact on the autopilot. Except, in the Carenado Baron, which is not correct. Now, if this is an FSX limitation, then so be it, but I'm almost certain there are other aircraft out there with dual 430's or dual 530's, or 430's and 530's where each one can display a separate mode. They may not be able to display 2 separate GPS courses, but I'm certain you can have the GPS on one and your VOR/LOC mode that allows you to use your nav (VOR head) on the other. As I said, I'll see if I can find such a machine on my system, but I tend to use aircraft that have steam gauges so I may have to ask others what they have found.Please note that I'm not just talking off the top of my head. I've been an Avionics Tech for a bit over 15 years now and am a senior tech at an avionics repair and installation facility now. Before writing this I looked up the interconnect and installation drawings for the 430 (which we are a dealer for), and consulted with 2 other techs (one of whom is also a simmer and he's never seen two 430's tied like this). I just find it very odd and can't find anything in the Baron manual that explains this behaviour. My original point of writing was to make sure I wasn't missing a hidden switch somewhere on the panel that tied these things together so that I could untie them to make them behave in a realistic manner. If it's an FSX limitation, so be it. If not, then (again) more attention to detail needs to be paid in these aircraft. I think there is example upon example of this throughout ever forum for this brand of aircraft. But, I was "asking first and shooting later", or at least trying to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My whole point is, if you switch modes on one 430 (VOR/LOC to GPS for instance), it should not automatically switch modes on the other 430. If you want to use the autopilot in this equation, let's say the autopilot is tracking 430 #1, and you switch modes on #1, then the autopilot will follow the new input from #1, be it going from a GPS course to an airway course. But, if the autopilot is following #1 430 which is on GPS, and you switch the 430 #2 from GPS to VOR/LOC, this should not in any way affect the autopilot because it's tracking off 430 #1. BUT, in the Carenado Baron, it will because the 430 #1 will ALSO switch to VOR/LOC, which is NOT correct, and in real life, could never happen. The 2 430's are independent of each other. Completely. One doesn't know what the other is doing. The autopilot, if connected will follow whichever one you have chosen as the input source. Switching the other 430 will have no impact on the autopilot. Except, in the Carenado Baron, which is not correct. Now, if this is an FSX limitation, then so be it, but I'm almost certain there are other aircraft out there with dual 430's or dual 530's, or 430's and 530's where each one can display a separate mode. They may not be able to display 2 separate GPS courses, but I'm certain you can have the GPS on one and your VOR/LOC mode that allows you to use your nav (VOR head) on the other. As I said, I'll see if I can find such a machine on my system, but I tend to use aircraft that have steam gauges so I may have to ask others what they have found.Please note that I'm not just talking off the top of my head. I've been an Avionics Tech for a bit over 15 years now and am a senior tech at an avionics repair and installation facility now. Before writing this I looked up the interconnect and installation drawings for the 430 (which we are a dealer for), and consulted with 2 other techs (one of whom is also a simmer and he's never seen two 430's tied like this). I just find it very odd and can't find anything in the Baron manual that explains this behaviour. My original point of writing was to make sure I wasn't missing a hidden switch somewhere on the panel that tied these things together so that I could untie them to make them behave in a realistic manner. If it's an FSX limitation, so be it. If not, then (again) more attention to detail needs to be paid in these aircraft. I think there is example upon example of this throughout ever forum for this brand of aircraft. But, I was "asking first and shooting later", or at least trying to.
OK, I understand your point. You are correct that if you switch one unit to VOR/LOC, the other should stay on GPS.The RXP units do this correctly.Regarding communication between the 430s, however, Garmin provides a Crossfill protocol where you can either automatically or manually have one 430 update the other with the current flightplan, waypoints etc. This can be selected on the AUX page.I have mine set to Auto, and the current flightplan gets copied over whenever anything is changed. This is really nice!This is not to say that I defend the Carenado 430s in any way... as I mentioned before, I do not use thembecause I find the user interface too frustrating.. and the RXP units are so much better..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, I understand your point. You are correct that if you switch one unit to VOR/LOC, the other should stay on GPS.The RXP units do this correctly.
Yeah, I had those way back when and they were really superb instruments. If I were flying fixed wing aircraft more (or non-bush machines) I'd really be thinking about them again. They really did those up well!
Regarding communication between the 430s, however, Garmin provides a Crossfill protocol where you can either automatically or manually have one 430 update the other with the current flightplan, waypoints etc. This can be selected on the AUX page.I have mine set to Auto, and the current flightplan gets copied over whenever anything is changed. This is really nice!
Yup, they do. All Garmin products seem to integrate very well with each other. As good as they are, you should see some of the new Sandel instruments that are coming along! If I can get the link tomorrow at work, I'll fire off a video for you. These are really impressive!
This is not to say that I defend the Carenado 430s in any way... as I mentioned before, I do not use thembecause I find the user interface too frustrating.. and the RXP units are so much better..
No, I didn't get the feeling you were defending them for the sake of defending Carenado. I'm not sure (after re-reading) my original post was all that clear. It did look like I was speaking of the A/P function, which wasn't what I meant. You had good points. We were just debating 2 different points at first is all :(.I'll see if I can dig up that Sandel video tomorrow as I say and put a link here. It's pretty cool!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally found that Sandel video (there's 2 actually). These are mostly for helicopters though, but impressive nonetheless. They are here: Sandel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Finally found that Sandel video (there's 2 actually). These are mostly for helicopters though, but impressive nonetheless. They are here: Sandel
Very nice indeed! What is a nuisance alert for a helicopter may well amount to a realalert for a fixed wing pilot though... :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Very nice indeed! What is a nuisance alert for a helicopter may well amount to a realalert for a fixed wing pilot though... :(
Yeah, agreed. This was made specifically for helicopters (forgot about that when I first brought it up), which have quite different operating parameters. Nevertheless though, the powerline alert is a good feature, especially again with helo's. Man, how things have changed! I started out with coffee-grinder 1 1/2 nav com units when radio ranges were still around, and look at what we have now! I just finished calibrating an altimeter for a 182 in the hangar. When I dropped it back out into the aircraft for the guys to install, I noticed it's G1000 (or later) equipped and is an all glass panel. The aneroid altimeter is a backup only. Go figure :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just finished calibrating an altimeter for a 182 in the hangar. When I dropped it back out into the aircraft for the guys to install, I noticed it's G1000 (or later) equipped and is an all glass panel. The aneroid altimeter is a backup only. Go figure :(
That sounds like the one Flight1 is getting ready: http://www.simforums.com/forums/cessna-skylane-tc_topic39267.htmlMaybe they were just waiting for you to calibrate the backup altimeter :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That sounds like the one Flight1 is getting ready: http://www.simforums...topic39267.htmlMaybe they were just waiting for you to calibrate the backup altimeter :(
Well now...!!! I didn't see this one coming - thanks!!! I'd definitely be interested in that machine. Looks great!PS - backup altimeter is calbrated & installed :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PS - backup altimeter is calbrated & installed :(
Should be nothing holding up the release, then :biggrin:It does look rather nice, doesn't it? The G1000 in their Citation Mustang is very good, I imagine this one will be of similar quality. Might be a bit more expensive than the typical Carenado release, though.By the way, I've wanted to ask this question about the Baron for ages: What is the framed inset into the front windscreen (behind the whiskey compass) for? Is that the heated part of the windshield?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Morn'n Folks, Wow - that G1000 182 captured my attention... We all know Carenado has the - hands down - BEST visual models out there... Flight models - Patches - and - Avionics have left something to be desired for me... It's nice to have a few choices again for GA planes since DF left the picture...Regards,Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Should be nothing holding up the release, then :biggrin:It does look rather nice, doesn't it? The G1000 in their Citation Mustang is very good, I imagine this one will be of similar quality. Might be a bit more expensive than the typical Carenado release, though.
Yeah, if it all works out of the box, it's worth a few extra bucks.
By the way, I've wanted to ask this question about the Baron for ages: What is the framed inset into the front windscreen (behind the whiskey compass) for? Is that the heated part of the windshield?
Exactly. It is heated and is a "portal" in case the window is iced up. You still have something you can see through. Would hate to be in that bad an icing condition in that plane though, even with boots!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites