GTX 345 / GMX200

D

Dirtflyer

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Dec 13, 2016
Messages
12
Display Name
Display name:
Dirtflyer
hi all,

I am looking to get ads-b compliant and was wondering if anyone has experience with the gtx 345 and gmx 200 working together. I have a 530 non waas and the gmx 200 currently installed, will the gtx 345 w/gps be able to display traffic/weather etc directly to the gmx 200 without being integrated to the 530? Or will the 530 need to be upgraded to waas as well? I read the non waas 530s will not play nice with the 345. The gmx 200 gets its source from the 530 and I'm not sure how things will play with the gmx getting data from a waas source and a non waas source.

I think it would be cheaper to pay more for the 345 with gps than upgrading the 530 to waas and getting the 345 w/o gps.
 
I've read several install reports with the 345s and the GMX. All was goood. the MX 20 guys are also reporting functionality.
 
Dirtflyer said:
[...] I think it would be cheaper to pay more for the 345 with gps than upgrading the 530 to waas and getting the 345 w/o gps.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind though, that upgrading the 530 to WAAS will also add capability and value to your plane. The GPS option for the 345 will not.

Also, getting a 345 with GPS would require additional holes in your plane's skin and another external antenna.
 
German guy said:
Keep in mind though, that upgrading the 530 to WAAS will also add capability and value to your plane. The GPS option for the 345 will not.

Also, getting a 345 with GPS would require additional holes in your plane's skin and another external antenna.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The WASS upgrade will not add any significant value to the airframe. Adding a 750 will, but not the 530 mod.
 
They work well together if you forego the FS 210. The 345 has only one RS422 out, so it's either wx and traffic on the GMX, or on your iPad, but not both.

A friend explored every possible permution of paralleling outs, etc., it just ain't gonna work, so be forewarned.
 
Chip Sylverne said:
They work well together if you forego the FS 210. The 345 has only one RS422 out, so it's either wx and traffic on the GMX, or on your iPad, but not both. [...]
Click to expand...

The iPad can be connected through Bluetooth.

Possibly your friend also wanted to add a FlightStream!? That would also require a RS-422 input.
 
Last edited:
Chip Sylverne said:
They work well together if you forego the FS 210. The 345 has only one RS422 out, so it's either wx and traffic on the GMX, or on your iPad, but not both.

A friend explored every possible permution of paralleling outs, etc., it just ain't gonna work, so be forewarned.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that the iPad will connect via Bluetooth for traffic and weather, hopefully that is the case as another poster stated. If I wanted to stream my flightplan from ForeFlight to the 530 via flightstream that's another story, but that's not my goal at this point.
 
You don't need the FS unless you want to have two way flow with your EFB. otherwise, you will get the WX traffic and AHRS from the 345.

I have the 650, 345 and 210 running. it's great.
 
If you only want WAAS for ADS-B out, put it in the 345 and be done.
If you'd like to shoot precision GPS approaches, upgrade your navigator to WAAS, or replace it. No choices here.

And whomever said that WAAS/Non-WAAS navigator doesn't increase your planes resale value is missing some data.
 
Dirtflyer said:
I was under the impression that the iPad will connect via Bluetooth for traffic and weather, hopefully that is the case as another poster stated. If I wanted to stream my flightplan from ForeFlight to the 530 via flightstream that's another story, but that's not my goal at this point.
Click to expand...

As I said, if you add an FS210 at some point, you will lose traffic and FIS-B weather on the GMX. If you can live without the convenience of swapping flight plans between the iPad and GNS, then the GMX/345/iPad work just fine together. I only mention this because my friend's Garmin dealer didn't mention anything about it.

The 345 has only one RS422 port, it i/o's either the GMX OR the FS, not both.
 
That was me and it is true. I will concede that it will slightly go up, but we are talking a couple hundred of dollars of value.

For a $3500 investment in WAAS upgrate on a GNS, you are basically ****ing money down the drain.

About all you can't do is an LPV approach with WAAS. Big effing deal. Your mins are 60 ft lower. If you need hard IFR capabilities like that on a regular basis, you'll be looking at a 650 or 750 not a legacy box.

Ravioli said:
If you only want WAAS for ADS-B out, put it in the 345 and be done.
If you'd like to shoot precision GPS approaches, upgrade your navigator to WAAS, or replace it. No choices here.

And whomever said that WAAS/Non-WAAS navigator doesn't increase your planes resale value is missing some data.
Click to expand...
 
Chip Sylverne said:
As I said, if you add an FS210 at some point, you will lose traffic and FIS-B weather on the GMX. If you can live without the convenience of swapping flight plans between the iPad and GNS, then the GMX/345/iPad work just fine together. I only mention this because my friend's Garmin dealer didn't mention anything about it.

The 345 has only one RS422 port, it i/o's either the GMX OR the FS, not both.
Click to expand...

You mean its impossible to wire the FS to an open RS232 on the GNS box if one is equipped with a GMX and GTX345?

GNS-5XXW has five RS232 ports.

 
Last edited:
There are a couple of other things too, depending on your autopilot and if you have gpss. A non-waas gps won't fly a hold or compute and fly a pattern entry in A/P gpss mode.

I don 't have waas, hasn't been a big deal. I don't really fly hard ifr, and if I find myself needing lower mins, there's usually an ils somewhere close. As far as adding value or saleability? Yeah, maybe, but you won't get your money back more than .50 on the dollar.
 
bnt83 said:
You mean its impossible to wire the FS to an open RS232 on the GNS box if one is equipped with a GMX and GTX345?
Click to expand...

That RS232 port connection is how flightplan transfer happens between the iPad and the GNS, using the FS BT like a hub. Weather/traffic is RS 422, so you're still making the choice of sending that to the FS, or to the GMX. You can't do both. And paralleling the 422 won't work, because the formats aren't compatible.

You may still get foreflight and the gns to talk, but you'not getting everything you paid for out of the 210.
 
Unit74 said:
That was me and it is true. I will concede that it will slightly go up, but we are talking a couple hundred of dollars of value.

For a $3500 investment in WAAS upgrate on a GNS, you are basically ****ing money down the drain.

About all you can't do is an LPV approach with WAAS. Big effing deal. Your mins are 60 ft lower. If you need hard IFR capabilities like that on a regular basis, you'll be looking at a 650 or 750 not a legacy box.
Click to expand...

Please to explain the approach capabilities that are added in the GTN series that are not available in the "legacy" GNS series.

My point remains that you need to decide if you want WAAS for navigation or just for compliance in 3 years. Absolutely none of the ADSB Outs will give you the navigation. Absolutely every WAAS navigator will also give you position source as a bi-product.
 
Ravioli said:
Please to explain the approach capabilities that are added in the GTN series that are not available in the "legacy" GNS series.

My point remains that you need to decide if you want WAAS for navigation or just for compliance in 3 years. Absolutely none of the ADSB Outs will give you the navigation. Absolutely every WAAS navigator will also give you position source as a bi-product.
Click to expand...


We are talking about a WAAS upgrade to a GNS530. You don't need a WAAS navigator for compliance. There are several low cost integrated options for the price of the Garmin WAAS upgrade. Why upgrade unless you need the LPV for your AO?

Only thing a non WAAS navigator can't do is an LPV. That's what I'm talking about. What are you talking about? I'm confused what your trying to say.
 
Clark1961 said:
Actually I have owned/operated both waas and non-waas gps navigators and know of which I speak.
Click to expand...


Congratulations. So how many LPV approaches have you shot With that non WAAS system? I'm not talking LNAV +V.
 
The earliest GNS install manual I could find showed release date year 2000 so probably designed around 1998 . The Nokia 3310 was one of the best selling cell phones 2000.



First smartphones with color screens came out around 2001
 
Last edited:
Unit74 said:
Congratulations. So how many LPV approaches have you shot With that non WAAS system? I'm not talking LNAV +V.
Click to expand...
I never said that I have flown an lpv approach with a non-waas system. Why would you make up such an absurd thing?

I am saying that there is more difference between a waas and a non-waas system than lpv.
 
Right. But none of those are so important that it justifies The cost to upgrade a legacy box. The biggest advantage a WAAS box gives an IFR pilot is the lower mins of the LPV. The vectors to final suspension feature is confusing and the hold depictions are nice.

The added terrain is nice. But most if not all pilots are now on EFB with terrain. And with FAA dropping paper maps, I'd anticipate Jepp dropping paper service at some point some sooner than later. So EFB is here to stay.

If you are going to spend $3500 on a WAAS upgrade, you'd be foolish not to trade it to Avidyne and write them a slightly larger check for an IDF. Or spend a bit more for a GTN swap and try to sell the GNS.
 
You are certainly entitled to your opinion on the value and what the correct choice is. I've used terrain and sole navigation capabilities much more than lpv approaches. I think your focus on lpv ignores the true value of the waas systems.
 
Its too late now but a guy could have gotten $750 rebate on GTN650 and $250 rebate on a GTX335/345, then the $500 FAA rebate.

Then sell/trade-in the old GNS and whatever transponder you have.
 
bnt83 said:
Its too late now but a guy could have gotten $750 rebate on GTN650 and $250 rebate on a GTX335/345, then the $500 FAA rebate.

Then sell/trade-in the old GNS and whatever transponder you have.
Click to expand...

I use an iPad/FF and that has convinced me I neither want nor need any more touchscreens in my airplane.

I understand every airplane and every pilot situation is different, but I am sticking with my GNS navigators. As James331 has pointed out numerous times on various threads, despite their age they remain incredibly capable devices.
 
The push back I often see on the GNS navigators revolves around "it's old stuff..."

What year plane you flying? I've got two that are 1975's and one is a 1995.

Those GNS navigators are pretty darn "new" by comparison. YMMV
 
The issue is spending money really. If your going to spend it, you spend wisely. Doing a WAAS upgrade on a GNS is about like filling a car with gas that is smoking, running on 3 cylinders and the registration is expired during a state police convention.

Garmin has already stopped supporting the non WAAS GNS. It's only a matter of very short time it will not be economical for them to support a W box. Quote me on that. It's coming.

But, I'm not the one writing this check. If you want to stuff your bubble gum in the leaky dam, chew away.
 
Clark1961 said:
You are certainly entitled to your opinion on the value and what the correct choice is. I've used terrain and sole navigation capabilities much more than lpv approaches. I think your focus on lpv ignores the true value of the waas systems.
Click to expand...


Has nothing to do with the system. It's the hardware we are chatting about.
 
GRG55 said:
I use an iPad/FF and that has convinced me I neither want nor need any more touchscreens in my airplane.

I understand every airplane and every pilot situation is different, but I am sticking with my GNS navigators. As James331 has pointed out numerous times on various threads, despite their age they remain incredibly capable devices.
Click to expand...

Yes, they are good boxes and still very capable. Dumping hard cash that equates to more than 50% of the retail value to keep it is baffling though. If you have a W, keep it. You won't gain a lot going to a GTN. If you have a 430/530, buy a GTN or hit swap into an IDF, which is what I'd do if it were my cash.
 
Oh snap... just noticed that @Unit74 is flying a '79 plane with a low wing and T-tail. They don't make that **** anymore. Don't spend any money on that old ****.

Of course, they are actually fine airplanes and work as they should. As do GNS series navigators.
 
Ravioli said:
Oh snap... just noticed that @Unit74 is flying a '79 plane with a low wing and T-tail. They don't make that **** anymore. Don't spend any money on that old ****.

Of course, they are actually fine airplanes and work as they should. As do GNS series navigators.
Click to expand...


Wrong. They do Gulstream final assembly less than a mile from me right now and ......whoaaaa.....low wing, high tail. WTF were they thinking. $53m in junk sitting on the ramp per plane. If those fools only knew how irrelevant they were....:confused::confused:

But yea, since I'm right on dumping new money into tired avionics you gotta come with a fresh angle. Makes sense. :p
 
Piper continues to roll out T-tails? Not sure about that.

Gulfstream is pumping out piston singles? Not sure about that either.
 
Ravioli said:
Piper continues to roll out T-tails? Not sure about that.

Gulfstream is pumping out piston singles? Not sure about that either.
Click to expand...


This has nothing to do with Pipers. But you ran out of string in an avionics discussion so you choose to attack something else to try and get a touchdown when the score is 54-0 just to tell the cheerleaders you got one? I don't get it man. If you ain't got nothin, you ain't got it. Let it rest.
 
You sir are saying that the GNS series is worthless spending.

You fly a design nobody makes, and IIRC was superseded by the straight tail lance.
Edit: in 1980 the PA32R's went all straight tail.

I'll ask again, because I love typing, what does a GTN do that a GNS doesn't?
Edit: Other than cost double the upgrade cost, that is.
 
Last edited:
I suggest you reread the whole thread. I don't have any more time to rehash the same rational logic if you just don't get it.

Ravioli said:
You sir are saying that the GNS series is worthless spending.

You fly a design nobody makes, and IIRC was superseded by the straight tail lance.
Edit: in 1980 the PA32R's went all straight tail.

I'll ask again, because I love typing, what does a GTN do that a GNS doesn't?
Edit: Other than cost double the upgrade cost, that is.
Click to expand...
 
Unit74 said:
I suggest you reread the whole thread. I don't have any more time to rehash the same rational logic if you just don't get it.
Click to expand...

I took your advice and found this:

Unit74 said:
Yes, they are good boxes and still very capable. Dumping hard cash that equates to more than 50% of the retail value to keep it is baffling though. If you have a W, keep it. You won't gain a lot going to a GTN. If you have a 430/530, buy a GTN or hit swap into an IDF, which is what I'd do if it were my cash.
Click to expand...

My counterpoint is that upgrading costs about 1/3 of going GTN, which as you say above "won't gain a lot". <- my point all along
 
That's if you already have a W. My gawd you need to take those rose glasses off and think outside your own check books capacity.

You are so focused on arguing you can't even read english. step back, digest, ponder a minute and then realize how foolish you sound.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top