Gi275 AI in all Steam out?

TimRF79

TimRF79

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Dec 10, 2017
Messages
352
Location
Houston, TX
Display Name
Display name:
Tim
I have been looking at a lot of youtube vids about the GI275.
It seems that almost all that get a GI275 AH and GI275 HSI pull all other gauges out (AI, VS, TC, Altitude, VOR indicators).
What are the pro's and cons of doing that?
Why not leave the old steam gauges in and take them out when they fail?
 
Most like the weight savings of removing the vacuum system and also, they lack the space to keep both.
 
Kent Wien said:
Most like the weight savings of removing the vacuum system and also, they lack the space to keep both.
Click to expand...

I think the steam gauges he is referring to are the ones on each side of the newly installed 275s - namely the redundant Airspeed, Altimeter and VSI.

The vacuum system can come out, but seems from the few GI 275 installations I have seen these three gauges (and the TC) have been left in so there are no holes in the panel.
 
GRG55 said:
I think the steam gauges he is referring to are the ones on each side of the newly installed 275s - namely the redundant Airspeed, Altimeter and VSI.

The vacuum system can come out, but seems from the few GI 275 installations I have seen these gauges have been left in so there are no holes in the panel.
Click to expand...
Exactly, my point.
I would rather have redundancy and not just blanks, but soo many videos I have seen take them out?
 
TimRF79 said:
Exactly, my point.
I would rather have redundancy and not just blanks, but soo many videos I have seen take them out?
Click to expand...

Can post a link to a video of one of the retrofits where they did this? Would be curious to see what that looks like.
All the early ones I have seen, from shortly after the GI 275 came out, seemed to leave those instruments installed as it is less work and $ to do so. And the panel doesn't require a bunch of hole blanks installed. If someone was building up from a completely new panel blank I could maybe see using that space for something else, but most Gi 275 installs are retrofits for the vacuum gyros.
 
FWIW, while I wasn't interested in removing everything, my avionics shop also strongly advised me not to, as they didn't feel it was an adequately sized screen to pack all that info into without analog backups. I tend to agree. Though it would be legally feasibly to do.
 
I'm not sure I've ever seen a GI275 or G5 install that didn't keep the analog pitot static gauges. There's just no reason to do so.
 
I have 2 g5's recently installed. I am pretty sure that you have to keep your airspeed, vsi, tc, and altimeter. The g5 can only be used as one primary instrument at a time.
Sure, I have airspeed in the g5, and vsi, and tc, and altimeter, but they are all secondary. I do not know if the gi275 is certified to primary replacement of all of those. Two g5's do not make a g1000.
 
And I read only one isn’t a suitable replacement, for ifr. The second one will need to be able to act in revisionary (sp?) mode. Two needed.

In my case, I was wondering if I could replace my turn and slip indicator with a digital AI with ball. I found that if the original AI was in place, and the new AI had it’s own battery, then yes. Or I could also replace the original AI with a digital one. That probably would be safer than my belt drive single vac pump. Unfortunately, I don’t have any spare entreals to sell, so this digital stuff will have to wait.
 
TimRF79 said:
I have been looking at a lot of youtube vids about the GI275.
It seems that almost all that get a GI275 AH and GI275 HSI pull all other gauges out (AI, VS, TC, Altitude, VOR indicators).
What are the pro's and cons of doing that?
Why not leave the old steam gauges in and take them out when they fail?
Click to expand...

Because humans...


They are programmed to believe anything "new" is better than old, and removing the "old" is better than keeping it. Never mind that there is a lucrative business in repairing aircraft electronics, and no end to the supply of work.

Semi-rant? Maybe.

A lot of the old instruments they are removing probably look bad too, I certainly wouldn't drop that much cash and retain instruments that looks like they have taken a swim in Ohio River. Rather than freshen these old dials up and retain them people just remove them.
 
I like the idea of the GI275, but in practicality I am not a big fan (yet). I have two G5's that replaced the AI and HI. The vacuum system was removed at the same time. I really like these units for the info they provide and have the relative wind option as well, but the GI275 just seems so small to pack in all all they have to offer. I haven't flown behind them and have only seen articles and videos so maybe I am not getting a true picture.

For those of you that have flown with the GI275, is their size a problem for you?
 
GRG55 said:
Can post a link to a video of one of the retrofits where they did this? Would be curious to see what that looks like.
Click to expand...
Here's one. It makes the panel look very clean but I think I'd prefer the other gauges be left in.
 
Kevin Eggert said:
I like the idea of the GI275, but in practicality I am not a big fan (yet). I have two G5's that replaced the AI and HI. The vacuum system was removed at the same time. I really like these units for the info they provide and have the relative wind option as well, but the GI275 just seems so small to pack in all all they have to offer. I haven't flown behind them and have only seen articles and videos so maybe I am not getting a true picture.

For those of you that have flown with the GI275, is their size a problem for you?
Click to expand...


Kevin Eggert said:
I like the idea of the GI275, but in practicality I am not a big fan (yet). I have two G5's that replaced the AI and HI. The vacuum system was removed at the same time. I really like these units for the info they provide and have the relative wind option as well, but the GI275 just seems so small to pack in all all they have to offer. I haven't flown behind them and have only seen articles and videos so maybe I am not getting a true picture.

For those of you that have flown with the GI275, is their size a problem for you?
Click to expand...


I've been researching this alot lately as I'm considering an upgrade. For awhile I was thinking G5 but after deeper research, the 275 seems the best solution for me. As far as size goes, here's a video that compares them. They are pretty much the same size. The G5 looks bigger because of the big bezel around it. I actually thing the 275 better utilizes the space, not to mention the 3x resolution increase. I also much prefer the aesthetics of the round 275 vs the square G5.

I do think if you maxed out all the info on the screen it's too cluttered, but I wouldn't use mine that way. I'd be curious if those that got the synthetic vision found it useful or not. I'm on the fence about that.

 
N1120A said:
I'm not sure I've ever seen a GI275 or G5 install that didn't keep the analog pitot static gauges. There's just no reason to do so.
Click to expand...
I've seen several YT videos when people removed their gauges. Besides the redundancy, I much prefer keeping the 6-pack look as opposed to having a bunch of empty holes.
 
Kevin Eggert said:
...but the GI275 just seems so small to pack in all all they have to offer. I haven't flown behind them and have only seen articles and videos so maybe I am not getting a true picture.

For those of you that have flown with the GI275, is their size a problem for you?
Click to expand...

I haven't flown with them, but I did print out full size versions of the AI and HSI GI-275 units and attached them to my steam gauge AI/DG in the plane. I had no problem reading everything on the screen.

But I did have 2 issues with one relating to information overload on the HSI. The HDG and CRS buttons and the CDI button cover the bottom portion of the compass rose covering the reciprocal heading value. I find that being able to quickly identify reciprocal heading by just glancing at the HI compass rose is a great help in situational awareness. Can't be done with the GI-275. No problem with a G-5.

The other issue, BTW, is that it takes several hard and soft button pushes to switch back and forth between heading and nav modes driving the autopilot. Much more complicated than it should be when flying in IMC and, for example, changing from enroute navigation, to vectors to final, and then back to tracking the approach course.

Garmin told me that they were working on a modification to bypass this behavior with a switch in the panel, and that they would contact me when it was approved. So far nothing from them.
 
bkspero said:
...The other issue, BTW, is that it takes several hard and soft button pushes to switch back and forth between heading and nav modes driving the autopilot. Much more complicated than it should be when flying in IMC and, for example, changing from enroute navigation, to vectors to final, and then back to tracking the approach course.

Garmin told me that they were working on a modification to bypass this behavior with a switch in the panel, and that they would contact me when it was approved. So far nothing from them.
Click to expand...

This is a well known and deserved criticism about the GI 275 that Garmin has heard an earful about. So I expect they will correct it. I hope it's a more elegant solution without requiring an external switch.

Many owners chose the 275 over the G5s specifically because the G5 has such limited interface capability with legacy autopilots. To pay the significant premium for the 275 for that reason and then have a really dumbass user interface to manage the autopilot has resulted in a lot of feedback.
 
GRG55 said:
This is a well known and deserved criticism about the GI 275 that Garmin has heard an earful about. So I expect they will correct it. I hope it's a more elegant solution without requiring an external switch.

Many owners chose the 275 over the G5s specifically because the G5 has such limited interface capability with legacy autopilots. To pay the significant premium for the 275 for that reason and then have a really dumbass user interface to manage the autopilot has resulted in a lot of feedback.
Click to expand...

The 275 also doesn't require the GAD29B to communicate with the autopilots that the G5 does work with, which ends up saving money
 
2 G5's with gmu11 and gad29 was $5k, isn't that about what one 275 runs?
 
Wagondriver said:
2 G5's with gmu11 and gad29 was $5k, isn't that about what one 275 runs?
Click to expand...

Pricing it out based on Garmin's site, 2xG5s (including HSI w/gps interface), gad29 and gmu11 runs $6865. Two GI275s, no gad29 needed, gmu11 runs $8770. 27% price increase is easily worth it IMHO.

Also, I never liked the square shape of the g5. It makes a panel look mis-matched. That's just a personal preference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top