Garmin G500 vs Aspen Evolution 1500....hmm.....

[Unit74]

My set up now:

430w
GTX327
GMA 340
GDL 88
496 slaved to 430W

I am on the fence with either the G500 or the Aspen 1500.

I do know the GDL 88 won't talk to the Aspen, so I'd have to trade in for abother UAT. Both should give me GPSS.

Other than that, is thee one that shines a both the other or is it like saying Ford vs Chevy?

 

[Henning]

The G-500 wins on display size.

 

[Clark1961]

Aspen wins on purchase price and installation time. I don't find the size to be an issue.

The ADS-B "in" box is supposed to be out this quarter for the Aspen.

 

[Unit74]

I have been looking at various preps and it's all over the board. Both are feature packed, but have some differences. Lots of folks saying they have had Aspen units go bad, other touting not one problem.

The Aspen is cheaper installed which is inviting.

 

[acluffpoa]

If you are comparing the two, look at the two screen Aspen 2000 configuration for price comparison.

 

[Henning]

If you are comparing the two, look at the two screen Aspen 2000 configuration for price comparison.

Yep, ends up the same price with half the screen real estate.

 

[Marauder]

Yep, ends up the same price with half the screen real estate.

Not quite. If you need a GAD-43 or 43e to drive your analog hardware (which you will unless you have a digital autopilot) you will be forking over another $3k to $5k. The Aspens come with the analog converter box.

 

[Marauder]

My set up now:



430w

GTX327

GMA 340

GDL 88

496 slaved to 430W



I am on the fence with either the G500 or the Aspen 1500.



I do know the GDL 88 won't talk to the Aspen, so I'd have to trade in for abother UAT. Both should give me GPSS.



Other than that, is thee one that shines a both the other or is it like saying Ford vs Chevy?

I went through this decision process a couple of years ago. I am a big proponent of redundancy, so my decision to go with the Aspen 2000 was based on what it would do that the G500 wouldn't.

An Aspen 2000 has two PFD units running side by side. The MFD 1000 is an PFD running map firmware. The G500 is a PFD with an MFD attached. You lose the PFD, you are on the analog backup gauges.

On the Aspen 2000 if the primary PFD fails, you can convert the MFD into a PFD through a process called reversion. They are always talking to each other and when you go into reversion, all of the failed PFD data moves over. It can also port over the autopilot control to the MFD running as a PFD.

The big selling point for me was the battery backup. Each Aspen has a battery backup that will allow the unit to run for a minimum of 30 minutes and up to an hour with the extended battery pack.

If you have analog devices connected to the Aspen or G500 you will need an analog converter.

I do like the G500 presentation but opted for the Aspen because of the backup capability. As for the GDL-88, unless they sent out the new firmware, the ADS-B in stuff will not display on the G500 or the Aspen. It was supposed to be released for the G500 sometime late last year.

 

[Clark1961]

Yep, ends up the same price with half the screen real estate.

That is not a true claim. Garmin has 6.5 in diagonal screens and Aspen is a 6 in diagonal. Garmin resolution is 640 x 480 and Aspen is 400 x 760. In use the Aspen size is not an issue.

 

[Cruiser]

Aspen redundancy is a major PLUS, include the battery backup and you would have to be one of the unluckiest people in the world to loose both systems at the same time.
The primary PFD is just as big as the current round gauges (AI and HSI) the MFD could be bigger for the moving map, traffic, weather, terrrain etc. Rumor is Aspen is working on a larger display.
Maybe the biggest advantage is Aspen works with open interface meaning almost any other equipment can be connected and compatible with the Aspen panel.
If you go with Garmin they only work with Garmin equipment. No 3rd party allowed

 

[Fitzee]

I got the Garmin dual G500 along with the GTN750, already had a 430W. Installed the STEC55x and to monitor the engine installed the JPI900. The gasoline indicators on the 900 are not to be used as a stand alone fuel management device (poor) but the engine monitoring is really good.

Plane is currently in the shop getting painted, I will post pictures when she is all dolled up.

1964 Comanche 260

Aspen vs. Garmin, guess the main selling point for me is the brand name. Good service centers and they are everywhere. Higher trade in value. Larger screen and the option to go with synthetic vision with better resolution.

Negative is cost difference.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

My avionics guy said that he'd go with the Aspen if you were just going to do the single one, but he'd go with a G500 over the dual Aspen, for what that's worth.

I haven't flown a G500, but have flown both G1000 and Aspen. I prefer the G1000 because there are dedicated knobs for things like the Baro setting, Heading, etc. rather than needing to push the knob the right number of times to get to what you're setting. The G500 still requires you to push a button and then twist the knob for those items, but I think it'd be easier to find the button than to get the right number of pushes in turbulence.

Either one beats the crap out of steam gauges, though!

 

[TMetzinger]

Question... has Aspen ever gotten past the whole "I don't care how many Aspen units you have, you still need another attitude instrument" crap from the FAA?

I was amazed when I'd see an airplane with two (or three!) full blown Aspen PFDs in it, each with their own battery-backed AHARS, and there'd be the original or a backup AI tucked away in a corner, because the FAA said so.

 

[Henning]

That is not a true claim. Garmin has 6.5 in diagonal screens and Aspen is a 6 in diagonal. Garmin resolution is 640 x 480 and Aspen is 400 x 760. In use the Aspen size is not an issue.

The long skinny format of the Aspen is what got me to go G-500. It may be 6" diagonal, but it sure is more crowded visually.

 

[Marauder]

Question... has Aspen ever gotten past the whole "I don't care how many Aspen units you have, you still need another attitude instrument" crap from the FAA?



I was amazed when I'd see an airplane with two (or three!) full blown Aspen PFDs in it, each with their own battery-backed AHARS, and there'd be the original or a backup AI tucked away in a corner, because the FAA said so.

Nope still a requirement. You also need the ASI and altimeter unless you bought the MFD with the extended battery backup.

 

[Henning]

Nope still a requirement. You also need the ASI and altimeter unless you bought the MFD with the extended battery backup.

Well, it's a requirement to have a backup, but a second Aspen system can serve as the backup as can various other glass options.

 

[Marauder]

The long skinny format of the Aspen is what got me to go G-500. It may be 6" diagonal, but it sure is more crowded visually.

I agree the form factor of the G500 is not as crowded. But after flying with the Aspens for a bit now I found that the pertinent information is easily found ( and I wear readers to)

 

[TMetzinger]

Well, it's a requirement to have a backup, but a second Aspen system can serve as the backup as can various other glass options.

Nope. See my post where two separate systems were not enough. I'd love to learn that two pfds with one in mfd mode was approved without another instrument.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Nope. See my post where two separate systems were not enough. I'd love to learn that two pfds with one in mfd mode was approved without another instrument.

It appears you can use two EFD1000's without any other backup now:

Evolution 2000’s safety architecture delivers an exclusive total backup ability that steam gauges and competing glass can’t match. From full PFD capability built into the MFD to dual redundant backup batteries, Evolution offers the only glass panel that can effectively eliminate heavy, unreliable steam instruments.

In the process of looking for that answer, I found this:

http://www.aspenavionics.com/products/evolution-backup-display

Interesting. They're now selling a unit that looks the same (but can be mounted horizontally) as a backup to other glass panels.

 

[Clark1961]

I *think* you can use two EFD1000's without any other backup now...

My understanding is that it can be done but an additional back-up battery has to be installed. The back-up battery has to be verified as charged prior to departure. That is second hand from an avionics tech so dunno how valid the info is.

 

[TMetzinger]

My understanding is that it can be done but an additional back-up battery has to be installed. The back-up battery has to be verified as charged prior to departure. That is second hand from an avionics tech so dunno how valid the info is.

If it's the 2000 setup with an external battery (to give two hours runtime instead of 30 minutes), ok. Still, has anyone ever tested the emergency backup on the Diamond backup electric AI, to see how long it lasts?

 

[Marauder]

It appears you can use two EFD1000's without any other backup now:







In the process of looking for that answer, I found this:



http://www.aspenavionics.com/products/evolution-backup-display



Interesting. They're now selling a unit that looks the same (but can be mounted horizontally) as a backup to other glass panels.

My understanding is that it can be done but an additional back-up battery has to be installed. The back-up battery has to be verified as charged prior to departure. That is second hand from an avionics tech so dunno how valid the info is.

I wish... If you buy the MFD with the 2 hour extended battery pack, you can eliminate the airspeed and altimeter. The attitude indicator needs to remain because the STC requires an independent AI. So, I fly around with 3 AIs:

 

[TMetzinger]

I wish... If you buy the MFD with the 2 hour extended battery pack, you can eliminate the airspeed and altimeter. The attitude indicator needs to remain because the STC requires an independent AI. So, I fly around with 3 AIs

Ah... I wonder if there's a new STC for the series? I will call them tomorrow and ask "hey how many of your devices do I have to put in the airplane so I can yank out all the other gyros"?

If the answer is "you can't", that kinda sucks. Can you put in a pair of G500s and pull out all the other gyros?

 

[Marauder]

Ah... I wonder if there's a new STC for the series? I will call them tomorrow and ask "hey how many of your devices do I have to put in the airplane so I can yank out all the other gyros"?



If the answer is "you can't", that kinda sucks. Can you put in a pair of G500s and pull out all the other gyros?

Let me know what you find out. There's definitely some changes going on since I now see a 2 hour battery backup. The old backup was only 1 hour.

I believe the G500 has no option for removing any of the 3 instruments since it does not have a battery backup. It also does not back itself up. The GRS77 AHRS in the G500 is a single source. This means if you lose the AHRS you are on steam. Unlike the Aspen that has dual AHRS.

 

[Clark1961]

If it's the 2000 setup with an external battery (to give two hours runtime instead of 30 minutes), ok. Still, has anyone ever tested the emergency backup on the Diamond backup electric AI, to see how long it lasts?

That's a good question. I know the Aspen internal back-up battery is a bit dodgy in terms of run time. I suspect the heaters weren't really being used during the certification testing. At any rate I don't count on the back-up battery lasting for any useful time on the Aspen. An STC to make all breakers pull-able so I could just power the Aspen from the ships battery would be ideal.

 

[TMetzinger]

Let me know what you find out. There's definitely some changes going on since I now see a 2 hour battery backup. The old backup was only 1 hour.

I believe the G500 has no option for removing any of the 3 instruments since it does not have a battery backup. It also does not back itself up. The GRS77 AHRS in the G500 is a single source. This means if you lose the AHRS you are on steam. Unlike the Aspen that has dual AHRS.

But if you put in TWO G500s, could you get rid of your gyros (and ASI/Altimeter too)?

 

[Henning]

Nope. See my post where two separate systems were not enough. I'd love to learn that two pfds with one in mfd mode was approved without another instrument.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Look at Av Shilo's panel, it has an EFIS back up. As long as you have two complete systems and can meet the back up power criteria, I can't see what is going to prevent a second Aspen PFD panel to serve as the back up.

 

[Marauder]

But if you put in TWO G500s, could you get rid of your gyros (and ASI/Altimeter too)?

Probably not since the power source for both G500s would be electrical with no power backup. You might be able to do this if you have two independent power sources, like in a twin application where you have dual alternators or in a single where you have an approved standby power dual battery setup.

Besides, for most of us, installing dual G500 wouldn't leave us any gas money so we wouldn't need to worry about an in-flight failure because we couldn't afford to fly.

 

[Henning]

Probably not since the power source for both G500s would be electrical with no power backup. You might be able to do this if you have two independent power sources, like in a twin application where you have dual alternators or in a single where you have an approved standby power dual battery setup.

Besides, for most of us, installing dual G500 wouldn't leave us any gas money so we wouldn't need to worry about an in-flight failure because we couldn't afford to fly.

Why? Why not add a spare battery and emergency buss?

 

[Marauder]

Why? Why not add a spare battery and emergency buss?

Most likely because the STC requirements for each airframe would drive the cost up and none of the OEMs want to take it on. Wonder if it could be done through a field approval or a DER process.

 

[Henning]

Most likely because the STC requirements for each airframe would drive the cost up and none of the OEMs want to take it on. Wonder if it could be done through a field approval or a DER process.

It can certainly be done on a 337, it already has.