FSX-MS GTN 650 or 750?

[pilottj 198]

If you like big moving map displays and magenta lines, get the 750.  

 

If you are an old school pilot who prefers to use the primary flight and nav instruments, get the 650, it is much less obtrusive.  A GTN 750 in a 1960s Cherokee is like putting a modern automobile gps, backup camera, bluetooth/wifi interface in a 1960s car  Not only does it spoil the look of the vintage VC, but if you are into realism, it would be very unlikely to see a brand new $25K USD piece of avionics in a 50 year old airplane worth about $30K-40K USD   Even the 650 is pushing it but at least it is smaller and much less obtrusive.  Yes it requires a few more clicks to get the same info, but at 110kts you have plenty of time to press buttons.  

 

Whats next? A G1000 in a DC-3? LOL

 

I have both, and find the 650 perfect for typical GA cockpits.  The 750 is ideal for extreme high performance aircraft like the Turbine Duke, in which things happen very quickly and you need info promptly, but for a much slower 182, Cherokee, 172, the 650 is plenty.  

 

Another point in favor of the 650, being the smaller unit, it will likely see more addon compatibility because it will require less panel redesign from the developers.  Tandem/Single seat aircraft with fighter type cockpits will likely only have room for the 650 as well. 

 

Cheers

TJ

[LAdamson 240]

Getting past the fact that we're just simulating flight, I certainly believe in bigger screens as better, when it comes to GPS. In real life, I left that "old school navigation" many years ago. Actually starting in 1993, when the first Garmin moving map portables became available. At that time, portables could do far more than panel mounts. As GPS progressed, the Garmin 295 portable had much more power, and a much better screen than the Garmin 430/530 panel mounts.  I always upgraded to the latest Garmin portables, for my experimental class kit plane. I quit flying just as the newest large screen portables became available. I would now consider the 295 as ancient, and wouldn't even consider a KLN90 for simulation.

 

 

As to the DC-3,  as well as Connies, the B-29 Fifi, and many other vintage planes, you'll usually always find a portable GPS on board, if it isn't mounted to the panel.  Why a larger screen?  I always used Satellite weather.  I liked seeing what was around for hundreds of miles in all directions, instead of being limited by a small screen. I used all of that small stuff once. Just didn't care for it anymore, once I went with the larger screens. 

 

Ba humbug to old school. A long time hobby of mine, involved airplane accidents, in which the airplane unexpectedly met rising terrain.  I'd always incorporate an accident site into my flight plan, for comparison sakes with modern GPS.  Thanks to terrain mapping GPS, the accident rate due to clobbering mountains,  has dropped significantly.  A pilot no longer has to spend a large percentage of their time, navigating. They'll always know where they are within three feet. They'll know what the weather ahead and behind is. They'll have constant altimeter setting updates. They'll know how much fuel is left, within a half a gallon. They'll know all of those exact boundaries for airport and military airspace. That's something, that pilots of the old, didn't have to contend with, near as much. These days, there is restricted airspace all over the place. If everything goes to crap, IMC wise, the GPS terrain altitude will be the one you want to use, to avoid rocks. An altimeter can easily be several hundred feet off, if the setting wasn't recently updated.  Another great option of GPS, is more direct routing. I'd have to hopscotch all over, when flying in mountain areas with the VOR system. VOR is line of sight. I'd often be flying below mountain peaks, and out of VOR range, just as so many pilots do in Alaska.

 

Note:  I always pre-planned long distance mountain flights with a sectional map, before loading the plan into the GPS database. I then followed progress, with the sectional. One usually doesn't just blindly follow a magenta line. But............at least with a modern moving map, they'll be warned far in advance, of terrain, boundaries, etc. In the old days of point A to B GPS with no advanced features, many pilots and passengers met their doom, just as they did with radio navigation, that didn't always work, or the pilots became disoriented. Happened frequently.

[pilottj 198]

Oh yes, modern technology in cars has made the roads sooo much safer, allowing drivers to do things other than driving....like texting, yaking on cell phones, conducting office meeting conference calls, sorting through their MP3s, staring at their GPS instead of the road....etc.  

 

You notice the GTNs have instant message capability now.....yay...pilots can text while flying...that should make things exciting LOL.   That should go well with the new G1000s that have web browsing ability....you know, gotta watch youtube vids and check facebook likes while the autopilot flies the plane...

 

I know I am being a little sarcastic ^_^ ....GPSs are great, being able to fly GPS approaches into airports that don't have any traditional navaids is wonderful, the safety features are great, the magenta line can be helpful when it is an appropriate time to use it.  There are also appropriate times to focus on good ol stick n rudder flying and 'old school' navigation to keep basic flying instincts sharp.  Besides its good exercise for the ol 'grey matter' in one's head as an exercise in concentration.  

 

You can get a lot more out of a GPS if you understand the old school stuff....like that OBS function, you can turn any fix into a navaid, very handy for finding airstrips not in the GPS database by setting up radials from a fix, then fly the GPS like a VOR and find your arrival point.

 

Cheers

TJ

[addman 33]

If I can't play a round of Angry Birds while taking off, I'll (rage) quit flying! hmpff!!

[jprism 0]

I fly both the Carenado Phenom 300 and TBM 50 most of the time. Has anyone successfully integrated the 750 with these planes.

Many thanks

[jprism 0]

I fly both the Carenado Phenom 300 and TBM 50 most of the time. Has anyone successfully integrated the 750 with these planes.

Many thanks

[tjrush 54]

4 hours ago, jprism said:

I fly both the Carenado Phenom 300 and TBM 50 most of the time. Has anyone successfully integrated the 750 with these planes.

Many thanks

For the Phenom 300 go to the Carenado support forum here at AVSIM to obtain the mod.

 

 

[Zatoichi 45]

On 5/13/2017 at 11:26 AM, tjrush said:

For the Phenom 300 go to the Carenado support forum here at AVSIM to obtain the mod.

 

 

+1

[eelb 5]

I think most of the Carenado models have F1 GTN mods available.

Once you fly with the GTN-750, no GPS/MFD will ever be the same.