Garmin G1000

Hi Gary,

yes we have read this very interesing article! thank you for the headsup!

yes we do think it is possible...

Jean-Luc

i've got about 40 hours behind the G1000 in Cessnas and others now, and I've got about 20 hours behind the Avidyne in an SR22

Both are light years ahead of anything else, but in my opinion the G1000 sets the standard.

By the way it's fine for day/night IFR/VFR nowadays.

-Tim

To me the thing that makes the G1000 superior to the Avidyne is it's architecture.

All the functionality of the G1000 is in software, so it will be an easy thing for Garmin to change the flight planning metaphor from the GNS400/500 series to the FMS-like 480 (with knowledge of airways, etc).   Adding a third display unit is easy, so that larger airplanes like the Cessna Mustang can have two PFDs and a central MFD.

Adding ADS-B and the other things that are coming down the road will involve a software update, and maybe a module replacement.  Gone will be the days of paying for hours and hours of avionics work because the tech won't have to run new wires, rip out old wires, put in some sort of interface converter, etc.  

Here's an example.  Adding XM weather to the G1000 on the 182 is 20 min for the software update, and less than one hour to install the receiver module into the avionics bay if it's not already there.  A quick test flight and you're done.

Over the 20-odd year life of the airplane this savings will really add up.  I expect you'll replace flat panels with newer high res models, maybe add the Infrared FMS keyboard that Garmin can support (got this from a Garmin rep at OSH), replace the AHRS or add a second one for more reliability, get a WAAS GPS sensor or two, but you won't have to open the airplane for rewiring.  PS they do want to let you use that IR port to upload flight planning and download operational (flight tracks, engine data) information.

Once Garmin has it's autopilot ready it will be like flying a busjet, at least from the flying and navigation standpoint.

Now if Garmin is really smart, in a few years they'll either make all the interface specs public (so that you could buy add-on products to interface with it), or license them for a small fee.  They've already done this to some extent with the interface to the lightning detection sensor.  That would let folks add TCAS or other functions that Garmin doesn't make yet.

The obvious difference between the G1000 and the Avidyne is.. the Com and Nav Radios are seperate for the Avidyne. You need the Garmin 430''s with it.

gor the Garmin 1000 you don't need the 430's. It has a Radio/Nav panel (a thin strip/Module wit hknobs) between the PFD and the MFD.

Can anyone else comment of the ease of use between the two systems?  Other than the seperate Garmin 430's necessary with the Avidyne unit?  I have heard that it is easier to access the info you want on the Avidyne.  Does Garmin need to do more work on the interface, or is it just a matter of personal prefrerence?

Tony

"Uh, just a minute tower, let me hit Ctrl-Alt-Del and reboot my system and I'll be right with you."

Tony

All the glass panels run some sort of real-time OS, optimized for reliability and drastically simplified.  QNX (a unix-like kernel) is a popular choice, as is the Microsoft microkernel.  In MS defense here, 99% of crashes in NT and XP are due to device drivers that aren't written to spec (and are given privileges to the kernel so that a driver can crash it - because the alternative is to make the performance significantly slower).  That doesn't happen in the real-time OSs used in aviation, as very very few things have those privileges, and those that do are extensively tested and certified.

The latest G1000 Software does add two needles to the HSI, essentially making it a three-needle RMI.   All the needles are selectable, so you can have NAV1, NAV2, and RNAV/GPS all at once.  If you install the ADF module it can drive the RMI as well.

Makes flying a vor approach WITHOUT GPS guidance very easy.