Negatives of F1 GTN750

[DavidP 1,408]

4 hours ago, scottb613 said:

Hi Folks,

Yeah - wish it had weather like the real deal...

Price - $120.00 for both 650/750 (P3D) is painful and obnoxious when you know F1 benefits greatly from the bulk of coding done by Garmin in the GTN Trainer itself and released for Free... As stated the 650 and 750 is the same product in a little different wrapper which also hurts... Hopefully RXP breeds a little competition which benefits the consumer as it's certainly needed...

Other than that - works pretty darn good all around - never noticed any FPS hit...

Regards,

Scott

If you look at the price point of their offerings for X-Plane, there may not be much difference - separate units, $49.95 each. I don't see that RXP will do it any different, after all, they were the first to hack the GNS 530/430 Trainer in FS9/X

[ukplane1 37]

38 minutes ago, MadDog said:

They are fantastic units; but I'd say that the #1 negative is that you can't automatically crossfill flightplans between GTNs (even though they've been promising it as an upgrade for nearly 3 years now).

just wondering why would you need more than 1 GTN750?

sorry im a noob at these gps avionics. 

[barrel_owl 304]

1 hour ago, ukplane1 said:

just wondering why would you need more than 1 GTN750?

sorry im a noob at these gps avionics. 

You don't actually "need", but it may be useful in some cases. For example, many developers release products with a plug-in which allows to fit two separate GTN or GNS units. Example, 2x GTN 750, 1 x GTN750 + 1x GTN 650, or 1x GNS 530 + 1x GNS 430 etc. In such cases, you can use one unit for radio and flight plan operations and the other to show the map all the time.

As long as crossfill is not guaranteed, however, this makes little sense. Moreover, I noticed, for example in the Flysimware Lear 35a, that using 2 GTN 750 units instead of one significantly increases the FPS load.

[ukplane1 37]

Thanks for the responses .

on this link http://library.flight1.net/?cat=35 it seems to be missing some planes which i thought could the gtn 750 could slot in to.

Can these planes have a GTN750 fitted into their VC?

Carenado pc12?

Carenado piper seneca?

Carenado hawker850?

Flysimware learjet35?

[scottb613 1,187]

Hi...

• Carenado pc12? - - - Yes V2
• Carenado piper Seneca? - - - don't know...
• Carenado hawker850? - - - Yes - but a kludge as the real plane uses FMC - need the mods from Bert...
• Flysimware learjet35? - - - Yes - native support and the best of the lot in my book...

Regards,

Scott

[ryanbatc 12,798]

Another reason to have two GTN750's - the on screen variables. One unit only offers four at a time. Ex wind, ETE, GS, distance etc.  with two units you can have more data in front of you - very handy even if you can't cross fill flight plans.  The F1 units in P3D and RXP units in XP11 are basically the same.

[SolRayz 392]

The only negative I can think of is no crossfill. Come on F1 you can do it...

 

[Dreamflight767 311]

I (try) to use it as a moving map in the PMDG products.  But since the "upgrade", it's been freezing whenever I pause the sim or try to open one of the sim menus, the screen freezes.

I asked for help in the F1 forum but they told me they don't support the GPS w/ use of those aircraft.

[BrettT 63]

This is certainly a minor negative but the GTN and the flight sim use two different data bases for the airfields.  So if the airports identification code has changed since the establishment of the FSX data base, it will be different (updated) in the GTN than it is within FSX/P3D.   Some may view this as a positive as well

[Dreamflight767 311]

Yes, besides the database not being updateable, you also cannot import flight plans from PFPX.

[ryanbatc 12,798]

The database is updateable

[Dreamflight767 311]

Really!?  At least not from what I've seen in navigraph. 

[Bobsk8 12,531]

6 hours ago, Dreamflight767 said:

Really!?  At least not from what I've seen in navigraph. 

Once a year Garmin releases an updated Trainer. 

[BrettT 63]

Quote

Once a year Garmin releases an updated Trainer. 

Yes, for example.  In FSX/P3D Mariposa-Yosemite Airport is listed as O68 and shows up that way in Plan-G and any planning software that uses this data base.  In the GTN the same airport is listed as KMPI which of course is accurate for flying for real in todays world (as opposed to 10 years ago).  There are other examples similar to this.  It is more of a nuisance when it comes to inputting the flight plan into the GTN than anything else.  In addition to this, a decent amount of the smaller farm strips/airports don't show up in the GTN even though they have a designation.  This may be a case where the airport in FSX/P3D existed 10 years ago but doesn't anymore thus not in the GTN database.   This really isn't a big deal either, just really a nuisance to those that enjoy flying into the smaller remote airstrips.  Overall it is an impressive add-on

[ryanbatc 12,798]

8 hours ago, Dreamflight767 said:

Really!?  At least not from what I've seen in navigraph. 

It's not navigraph data.  It's Garmin data.  It's real world data you can buy for a lot of money.  However there is expired data.  PM me for details