Garmin takes over

wrote in message ...
=20
=20
.... If for no other reason that it
comes from the factory with all components truly talking to each =
other.
=20
=20
Naturally, that part about "talking to each other" is hugely important.
But it isn't mystical at all.
My new Honeywell ART 2000, and my old Ryan 9900BX talk very well to,
and also are digitally controlled by, my new Apollo MX20.
And my new Apollo CNX80, besides talking to 3 other Apollo boxes,
also talks quite well to my old Collins FD112V Flight Director.
That's what documented protocols and interfaces are for.

(Unfortunately, my ancient Hoskins fuel totalizer can't talk to =
anything.)
---JRC---

In article , writes:

I myself like the G1000 at first blush, but only because it is pretty. It
does not appear to add any real capability other than WAAS, dual
glideslopes, etc., which you could get just as easily from the CNX-80 and
MX-20 displays.

I'd go for the G-1000 over a mix-and-match. If for no other reason that it
comes from the factory with all components truly talking to each other.


Garmin rep at a meeting last week suggested that the G1000 would not be
available for retrofit for at least 2 years and would go for $100,000 or so.
If you want the G1000, you will have to go new plane. The CNX-80 etc you can
get now.

Chuck

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
nk.net...
All modern jets have the same issue. It is a natural byproduct of
integration. My first plane, a Turbo Lance, had independent avionics
and
instrument and no integration. My current plane, a Mitubishi MU-2
Marquise
has a SPZ500 flight director/autopilot system which is more
integrated..
The altimeter is merely a display for an airdata computer located in
the
nose for instance. The trend is not new. If there are enough G1000s
in
service, other companies will start making boxes which will interface
with
them.

If you have a jet, but small GA is going sole source.

The G1000 is not being installed only in small GA, so that assumption dies
right there. The Citation Mustang will have it, and it appears that the
Caravan and some other Cessna jets will offer it at least as an option.

As long as small GA operators are willing to pay jet prices for avionics
they will be available. The new AS9100 requirement will eliminate most of
the small players that are not already frightened away from small GA by
liability issues.

I suppose that when Sperry came out with the first steam gauges that there
were people complaining about being locked into a sole supplier and that
those new-fangled gauges would never replace seat-of-the-pants flying.

Honeywell is expensive.

Most of the objections to the G1000 so far sound like so much ignorant
squawking. It is hard to take any of them seriously. I doubt if the
complainers have so much as even seen one of the installations, let alone
tried to use it. When we get some people who know what they are talking
about, then maybe I will pay attention.

There is no problem with Garmin's products. In fact, the high quality and
reasonable price is part of why they are headed toward owning the market.

I myself like the G1000 at first blush, but only because it is pretty. It
does not appear to add any real capability other than WAAS, dual
glideslopes, etc., which you could get just as easily from the CNX-80 and
MX-20 displays.

The free flight Garmin equipment flying in Alaska is excellent and cheap.
so cheap that you can get the entire system for less than a Honeywell TCAS.
Honeywell has a digital display offering, but it can not compete at the
price Garmin is offering.

Tarver Engineering wrote:


The free flight Garmin equipment flying in Alaska is excellent and cheap.
so cheap that you can get the entire system for less than a Honeywell TCAS.
Honeywell has a digital display offering, but it can not compete at the
price Garmin is offering.



John,

If you are referring to the "Capstone" project currently underway here,
it is merely one component of the "free flight" concept, and
absolutely none of the hardware is provided by Garmin.

Happy Flying!
Scott Skylane

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
I doubt if the
complainers have so much as even seen one of the installations, let alone
tried to use it. When we get some people who know what they are talking
about, then maybe I will pay attention.

I didn't say I did not like it, just that I question the economic viability
long-term.

I suspect the initial owners will love the system now. They will probably
start to complain in 5 years when there is some new steam-gauge avionics
feature not in the G1000. Then they may really start to complain in 10 or
15 years when support gets harder and/or more expensive.

Bottom line: The G1000 may look and act terrific, but no doubt it is more
of an economic risk than buying an airplane with individual, modular
components in the panel. I would not want to risk 6 digits on that type of
uncertainty -- YMMV.

--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
s.com...




"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
I doubt if the
complainers have so much as even seen one of the installations, let
alone
tried to use it. When we get some people who know what they are talking
about, then maybe I will pay attention.

I didn't say I did not like it, just that I question the economic
viability
long-term.

The bottom rungs of the ladder are being cut off, you should be concerned.

I suspect the initial owners will love the system now. They will probably
start to complain in 5 years when there is some new steam-gauge avionics
feature not in the G1000. Then they may really start to complain in 10 or
15 years when support gets harder and/or more expensive.

Bottom line: The G1000 may look and act terrific, but no doubt it is more
of an economic risk than buying an airplane with individual, modular
components in the panel. I would not want to risk 6 digits on that type
of
uncertainty -- YMMV.

--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
nk.net...

All modern jets have the same issue. It is a natural byproduct of
integration.

Exactly... Pilots who buy a Cessna 182 with the Garmin G1000 will pay jet
or turbine avionics support prices for a piston airplane.




--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

Richard,

as I said elsewhe Your theory doesn't hold. There's Avidyne, Chelton
and others.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...

as I said elsewhe Your theory doesn't hold. There's Avidyne, Chelton
and others.

Are their components modular? If Chelton adds a new feature to their glass
EFIS system can I install that feature in my Garmin G1000? Not more easily
than running Mac software on a PC.


--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

Richard,

Are their components modular? If Chelton adds a new feature to their glass
EFIS system can I install that feature in my Garmin G1000? Not more easily
than running Mac software on a PC.


So? Is a Garmin 430 modular? Is an AI modular?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)