Has anybody installed the Garmin G5 HSI with GAD29B and GMU11?

[WannFly]

I do not plan to let the autopilot "see" nav #2 (which is the KX-155 I mentioned), instead leaving that connected directly to my existing KX-155. I imagine one could install a switch to let the AP be driven by radio #2,

i have been told that set up is not supported. i already have a switch with Nav 2 that i need to take out

 

[Ryan F.]

i have been told that set up is not supported. i already have a switch with Nav 2 that i need to take out

Interesting. How could that be "not supported"? It's a switch for the AP, not the GTN650/G5/etc. I would think that sort of switch would essentially be transparent.

Perhaps you are referring to the fact that the G5 can't display a second radio input other than the primary source (i.e. GTN650/430W)? That is a known limitation.

I am referring to a totally separate CDI and nav radio which the AP could look at directly via a "#1 or #2" switch.

 

[Baron62]

I have a Century III autopilot, already have a G5 ADI and GTN 650, and am planning the HSI in a couple of months, so this probably holds true for both of us:

In the setup you describe, assuming a GAD29B is in play, the GTN650 can send GPSS directly to your AP if you leave the AP's mode select in "HDG" mode. If you switch it to NAV/etc., it'll work as usual, just using the steering guidance from the HSI instead of the KI-209 or 206 (I'm assuming you have one of those for your King CDI paired with the KX-155, which I also have.)

I do not plan to let the autopilot "see" nav #2 (which is the KX-155 I mentioned), instead leaving that connected directly to my existing KX-155. I imagine one could install a switch to let the AP be driven by radio #2, but to me that seems unnecessarily complicated, and something I'd rarely use. If I lost the G5 or the GTN650, it's true I'd lose AP nav and approach capability, but it would still work in heading mode, which is plenty good enough for my purposes.

At least that is my current thinking.

Thanks Ryan. I hope you are correct on the "If you switch it to NAV/etc., it'll work as usual, just using the steering guidance from the HSI instead of the KI-209 or 206". That is what I want.

Currently my AP does have a switch that allows the pilot to select #1 or #2 Kx-155 navigation guidance and I plan on having that same switch for the #1 GTN-650 or #2 kx-155.

How would your AP still have a heading signal if the G5 went down? The G5 is used to select HDG bug or GPSS and send that to the GAD29B which drives the AP heading.

 

[WannFly]

Interesting. How could that be "not supported"? It's a switch for the AP, not the GTN650/G5/etc. I would think that sort of switch would essentially be transparent.

Perhaps you are referring to the fact that the G5 can't display a second radio input other than the primary source (i.e. GTN650/430W)? That is a known limitation.

I am referring to a totally separate CDI and nav radio which the AP could look at directly via a "#1 or #2" switch.

well supported may be a poor choice of words. but i have this set up, GNS 480 and SL 30 coming to a switch via which i can choose which Nav source (and 2 diff CDI) the AP will fly. so far 3 avionics shops have told me, i have to get rid of that switch. one of them even game me a scenario while flying IFR, if i do something and switch by mistake when the 2nd Nav is tuned into something else, i will die and FAA will be angry at him or something to that effect ( from what i can gather, i can do it today with my current set up >> GNS tuned to 18 ILS approach and 2nd Nav tuned to a diff VOR, i hit the switch in IMC during the Approach and the AP takes me to the VOR). i dont understand why it will be a problem and i cant find a document that says it is not approved / is approved.

 

[WannFly]

well supported may be a poor choice of words. but i have this set up, GNS 480 and SL 30 coming to a switch via which i can choose which Nav source (and 2 diff CDI) the AP will fly. so far 3 avionics shops have told me, i have to get rid of that switch. one of them even game me a scenario while flying IFR, if i do something and switch by mistake when the 2nd Nav is tuned into something else, i will die and FAA will be angry at him or something to that effect ( from what i can gather, i can do it today with my current set up >> GNS tuned to 18 ILS approach and 2nd Nav tuned to a diff VOR, i hit the switch in IMC during the Approach and the AP takes me to the VOR). i dont understand why it will be a problem and i cant find a document that says it is not approved / is approved.

ok so i found the email and here is what it says:


"The problem is with the course reference. In your current setup, you set your desired course on the DG and it tracks left or right deviation from whichever source you have selected. With the G5, the course output is derived from the GNS480. If you are in GPS mode, the output is locked to the GPS course. That allows for a possible conflict. Let’s say you are coming into Fargo and plan on shooting the ILS to RWY36. The GNS480 is set direct to KFAR, the SL30 is tuned to the Fargo VOR, and Tower clears you direct to the VOR expecting vectors to final. If you flip the switch from GNS480 to SL30, the AP is still going to try to take you direct to KFAR and will end up getting lost as the deviation will never line up. Though you could do a workaround by setting the GNS480 to nav as well, the possibility still exists, and the Feds frown upon it especially when you are in actual IFR."

 

[Ryan F.]

How would your AP still have a heading signal if the G5 went down? The G5 is used to select HDG bug or GPSS and send that to the GAD29B which drives the AP heading.

You're right... I had a brain fart there. G5 going down = no AP capability other than roll mode.

So maybe the #1/#2 switch actually is a pretty good idea. LOL.

 

[Ryan F.]

ok so i found the email and here is what it says:


"If you flip the switch from GNS480 to SL30, the AP is still going to try to take you direct to KFAR and will end up getting lost as the deviation will never line up. Though you could do a workaround by setting the GNS480 to nav as well, the possibility still exists, and the Feds frown upon it especially when you are in actual IFR."

Okay. I sort of get it... I wonder what sort of switch that is? Is it a GPS/NAV switch ala the old annunciators you needed for the KLN-94 or 89B, which are "more than" switches, i.e. drive software? I'm thinking of purely a physical switch that lets the AP "see" the output of either the G5 HSI, or the #2 nav CDI. If that switch works the way I'm imagining, I can't see how the output would remain "locked" to GPS. But nonetheless, I know the requirements on these installations get a little bit interesting at times, so maybe it still matters for some reason.

 

[Ryan F.]

Okay, I thought about it a bit more... I think you may be right... the problem is you still need the heading bug on the DG to make the Century III AP fly an accurate nav course. So the switch wouldn't "lock out" the G5, because it couldn't -- it has to reference the heading bug and compare it to the CDI.

If this is a limitation, it's no more limiting than my current setup, which is also DG dependent. If my DG failed for some reason, so would the autopilot, basically. You need the heading bug to work even in nav mode.

 

[WannFly]

Okay, I thought about it a bit more... I think you may be right... the problem is you still need the heading bug on the DG to make the Century III AP fly an accurate nav course. So the switch wouldn't "lock out" the G5, because it couldn't -- it has to reference the heading bug and compare it to the CDI.

If this is a limitation, it's no more limiting than my current setup, which is also DG dependent. If my DG failed for some reason, so would the autopilot, basically. You need the heading bug to work even in nav mode.

so I sent another email to my avionics shop and this is what I got back and I think it makes sense...

"From a system architecture standpoint, think of it as the indicator that drives the autopilot, not the radio. In your current setup, the 480 drives the #1 CDI, the SL30 drives the #2 CDI, and the DG provides heading / course reference. When using NAV mode, you set the desired course on the DG and use the NAV 1 / NAV 2 switch to select which CDI to follow. The G5 is going to replace the DG as well as the #1 CDI. When the 480 is in GPS mode, the course output to the autopilot is locked. You cannot set the desired course for the #2 CDI to follow. Deviation data is useless without course data."

the switch I have is a mechanical one and I believe all it does is let the AP get the deviation data from either nav 1 or nav 2, but the way I understand now, it still get the course data from the DG which will be replaced by G5, which in turn gets it from 480. wondering if I can operate G5 HSI in manual mode? I am sure there is an option... but I don't want to fiddle with it in flight when things are failing left and right

 

[Ryan F.]

so I sent another email to my avionics shop and this is what I got back and I think it makes sense...

"From a system architecture standpoint, think of it as the indicator that drives the autopilot, not the radio. In your current setup, the 480 drives the #1 CDI, the SL30 drives the #2 CDI, and the DG provides heading / course reference. When using NAV mode, you set the desired course on the DG and use the NAV 1 / NAV 2 switch to select which CDI to follow. The G5 is going to replace the DG as well as the #1 CDI. When the 480 is in GPS mode, the course output to the autopilot is locked. You cannot set the desired course for the #2 CDI to follow. Deviation data is useless without course data."

the switch I have is a mechanical one and I believe all it does is let the AP get the deviation data from either nav 1 or nav 2, but the way I understand now, it still get the course data from the DG which will be replaced by G5, which in turn gets it from 480. wondering if I can operate G5 HSI in manual mode? I am sure there is an option... but I don't want to fiddle with it in flight when things are failing left and right

Lightbulb. Yep, that makes total sense. I believe you and your installer are correct. Thanks for edumacating me on that.

 

[WannFly]

Lightbulb. Yep, that makes total sense. I believe you and your installer are correct. Thanks for edumacating me on that.

thank my avionics guy, i dont know enough to come up with this answer (or any answer as a mater of fact :d:d)

 

[rklutts]

I am lookimg for reviews of this installation. How well does this set-up drive the legacy autopilot heading? My understang is that you can switch the G5 between heading bug and GPS steer when the unit is connected to an approved GPS navigator (430, 650, etc). Is a seperate GPSS/Heading bug indicator required or will the menu in the G5 be the only indicator?

Thanks

We just did dual G5's, GAD29, GMU11, GTN750 and GTX345 and Flightstream 510 in our 210. We have the Cessna 400b autopilot and it works reasonably well. Slow turns to the left but its going back in to get that fixed.

The G5 DG has a heading bug on it, just turn the dial. To switch from GNSS to HDG mode press the knob, turn 2 clicks to "GNSS" press knob, it cycles between the two modes. I wish that was the first field that comes up when you press the button rather than "Back".

So nice to not have to set DG to compass anymore as its always right.
Here's a pic of our panel. Its a great setup. Old AI is there to drive the autopilot. Waiting for the GFC500 to get certified for 210's to then remove it when we switch A/P's

 

[Ryan F.]

So nice to not have to set DG to compass anymore as its always right.
Here's a pic of our panel. Its a great setup. Old AI is there to drive the autopilot. Waiting for the GFC500 to get certified for 210's to then remove it when we switch A/P's

That's a gorgeous panel. Congrats.

In late '16 I did a big update with a lot of similar stuff, the GTN650, GTX345, G5 ADI and FS510. The plane goes back in the shop in March for the G5 HSI. Can't wait to see how the GPSS works with my old autopilot.

Hard to imagine beating the capability of the GTN series teamed up with the GTX345 and G5s.

 

[lucius]

That's a gorgeous panel. Congrats.

In late '16 I did a big update with a lot of similar stuff, the GTN650, GTX345, G5 ADI and FS510. The plane goes back in the shop in March for the G5 HSI. Can't wait to see how the GPSS works with my old autopilot.

Hard to imagine beating the capability of the GTN series teamed up with the GTX345 and G5s.

The compass rose on the HSI looks a little bit small. Garmin could have made better use of screen real estate IMHO.

 

[Ryan F.]

The compass rose on the HSI looks a little bit small. Garmin could have made better use of screen real estate IMHO.

No disagreement there -- but that's the beauty of software upgrades. Through rev. 5.00 we've already seen significant enhancements. Perhaps an arc view? The screen would seem to favor that presentation.

Incidentally, I believe the full compass rose presentation as currently provided by the G5 is actually a bit LARGER than the rose on the King KCS-55A, which everyone and their brother has been flying behind for decades. Amazing how quickly we get used to nice things...

 

[bnt83]

No disagreement there -- but that's the beauty of software upgrades. Through rev. 5.00 we've already seen significant enhancements. Perhaps an arc view? The screen would seem to favor that presentation.

Incidentally, I believe the full compass rose presentation as currently provided by the G5 is actually a bit LARGER than the rose on the King KCS-55A, which everyone and their brother has been flying behind for decades. Amazing how quickly we get used to nice things...

The King is 3" from bottom screws to the top screws (center to center), the G5 is 3.6 overall height

 

[bnt83]

I read somewhere where Garmin's goal was low cost. Well there is really nothing else on the market in that price range with standby battery.

A lot of folks asking about synthetic vision and other things that seem impractical to me. No way do I want to these chewing a bazillion lines of code and costing twice as much.

 

[Ryan F.]

The King is 3" from bottom screws to the top screws (center to center), the G5 is 3.6 overall height
View attachment 60794

Your image isn't quite to scale and your dimensions aren't quite right -- the KCS-55A is 3.375 x 3.55. The G5 is 3.4 x 3.6. You would assume that the KCS-55 would be able to feature a larger rose given all that "blank" space on the G5, but I think that's mostly an optical illusion.

The size of the compass rose itself is the question. I've seen these side by side on a bench with the G5 powered up -- the rose "appears" to be the same size or a bit larger, but I've never measured it. It's close enough that I'd consider them equivalent, at worst, with a nod to the G5 for other information being displayed in the "blank" areas.

Not to mention the fact that it's a reliable EHSI vs. an unreliable, and expensive to maintain, mechanical HSI.

 

[Ryan F.]

I read somewhere where Garmin's goal was low cost. Well there is really nothing else on the market in that price range with standby battery.

A lot of folks asking about synthetic vision and other things that seem impractical to me. No way do I want to these chewing a bazillion lines of code and costing twice as much.

I'd rather it remain a simple EHSI, honestly. On much larger PFD presentations (Collins Pro Line 21, Honeywell Planeview) I'll overlay terrain or weather radar on the HSI but that's about it. I leave traffic and other stuff on the MFD. That's where it belongs, in my opinion. The HSI is a primary instrument. I don't really want it cluttered up with other things. Just my personal preference, though.

An arc view would be great, though, and seemingly just a relatively simple matter of some code to that effect. Seems very doable, if the demand is there. I tend to always use arc view whenever it's available.

 

[bnt83]

]

Your image isn't quite to scale and your dimensions aren't quite right -- the KCS-55A is 3.375 x 3.55. The G5 is 3.4 x 3.6. You would assume that the KCS-55 would be able to feature a larger rose given all that "blank" space on the G5, but I think that's mostly an optical illusion.

The size of the compass rose itself is the question. I've seen these side by side on a bench with the G5 powered up -- the rose "appears" to be the same size or a bit larger, but I've never measured it. It's close enough that I'd consider them equivalent, at worst, with a nod to the G5 for other information being displayed in the "blank" areas.

Not to mention the fact that it's a reliable EHSI vs. an unreliable, and expensive to maintain, mechanical HSI.

The box is 3" high, G5 is 3.6. (outline drawings below were not adjusted so not scale)

 

[Ryan F.]

I understand, you are talking about the box. I'm talking about the face of the instrument. Not sure how the dimensions of the portion hidden in the panel are directly relevant simply because the display dimensions of the G5 don't align with its "box." (The Garmin logo portion at the top, the knob portion at the bottom, etc.) So that's an apples to oranges comparison.

The point I'm making is that the difference in actual size of the depiction of the compass rose is essentially equivalent at worst, with a possible "win" in size going to the G5 given the other information it displays in areas which aren't available on the KCS-55A due to actual instrument frame hardware needing to occupy those portions of what could be otherwise used for screen real estate. I say that because of the comment that the compass rose "looks" small on the G5's screen.

 

[bnt83]

I understand, you are talking about the box. I'm talking about the face of the instrument. Not sure how the dimensions of the portion hidden in the panel are directly relevant simply because the display dimensions of the G5 don't align with its "box." (The Garmin logo portion at the top, the knob portion at the bottom, etc.) So that's an apples to oranges comparison.

The point I'm making is that the difference in actual size of the depiction of the compass rose is essentially equivalent at worst, with a possible "win" in size going to the G5 given the other information it displays in areas which aren't available on the KCS-55A due to actual instrument frame hardware needing to occupy those portions of what could be otherwise used for screen real estate. I say that because of the comment that the compass rose "looks" small on the G5's screen.

I used powerpoint to scale stuff. Its pretty easy to cut and paste stuff and get them scaled down to compare. The outline draing of the KI525 shows the screws are 3" center to center so I drew a 3" high box and dragged the image down to fit, then the G5 image is of the whole instrument, including the bezel which is 3.6 by 3.42. The G5 image was taken "snipped" close enough that I just right click and resize it to 3.6 and let the other edge snap to whatever it is when maintaining aspect ratio.

IOW they are scale.

 

[Ryan F.]

I used powerpoint to scale stuff. Its pretty easy to cut and paste stuff and get them scaled down to compare. The outline draing of the KI525 shows the screws are 3" center to center so I drew a 3" box and dragged the image down to fit, then the G5 image is of the whole instrument, including the bezel which is 3.6 by 3.42. The G5 image was taken "snipped" close enough that I just right click and resize it to 3.6 and let the other edge snap to whatever it is when maintaining aspect ratio.

IOW they are scale.

Even if so, you're comparing the 3" "box" of the KCS-55A rather than the actual compass roses. Assuming there are no errors in your interpolation it's still quite apparent that the rose is substantially smaller than its 3" housing (not surprisingly, given the limitations of its mechanical operation) and as such it's comparable to the Garmin's rose.

In practice I don't think this matters very much; both are perfectly reasonable in terms of size for any pilot to use.

 

[arkvet]

I had an NSD 360 and recently installed the G5 HSI (now have dual G5's). Whether real or simply perceived I do agree that the G5 seems a little smaller and slightly more difficult to interpret. However, I must admit I have less time behind the G5 HSI so I'm sure my "speed to read" will get better very soon. I figure some of the reason for the perceived smaller size is the fact that it's a digital presentation with pixels. There is no way any EFIS is going to have enough pixels to compete with the real deal HD compass rose / needle on an old school mechanical HSI.

That being said no way in hell I'd trade this slight and subtly perceived negative aspect for an old unreliable expensive NSD 360. Oh and the GPSS is nice too

 

[bnt83]

I've heard the compaint a few times, which prompted me to to post some scaled images, its so close to the same that the complaints seem absurd to me.

 

[bnt83]

That fat magenta arrow could be smaller, but you can read it in the box above it anyway.

 

[GRG55]

I had an NSD 360 and recently installed the G5 HSI (now have dual G5's). Whether real or simply perceived I do agree that the G5 seems a little smaller and slightly more difficult to interpret. However, I must admit I have less time behind the G5 HSI so I'm sure my "speed to read" will get better very soon. I figure some of the reason for the perceived smaller size is the fact that it's a digital presentation with pixels. There is no way any EFIS is going to have enough pixels to compete with the real deal HD compass rose / needle on an old school mechanical HSI.

That being said no way in hell I'd trade this slight and subtly perceived negative aspect for an old unreliable expensive NSD 360. Oh and the GPSS is nice too

Did you tie it to a legacy autopilot? If so, which one?

 

[bnt83]

A side note, I was playing with one (G5) the other day and noticed how wide the viewing angles are, its impressive side to side. I don't think the angle was very generous when looking at it from above (or maybe it was below?) the viewing angles were not the same in the vertical plane anyway.

 

[GRG55]

I've heard the compaint a few times, which prompted me to to post some scaled images, its so close to the same that the complaints seem absurd to me.

Glass cockpits seem to have started with relatively large surface areas, migrating into GA from the big iron; G1000s, G500/600, the dual vacuum gyro replacement Aspens, etc. My impression is these newer G5 style "economical solution" derivatives are reluctant to give up features, so they are trying to cram a lot of information in a small space.

 

[Ryan F.]

Glass cockpits seem to have started with relatively large surface areas, migrating into GA from the big iron; G1000s, G500/600, the dual vacuum gyro replacement Aspens, etc. My impression is these newer G5 style "economical solution" derivatives are reluctant to give up features, so they are trying to cram a lot of information in a small space.

Yes. It's critical that the unit be easy to install without requiring a big panel re-cut. Ease of installation, convenience in terms of a standard form factor, low cost and solid state reliability are what makes the G5 so compelling.

Personally, I'm working on cutting panel access for an Aera 660 to increase my screen "real estate," rather than go with a full PFD/MFD for ten times the cost. I think the form factor of dual G5s is a great overall compromise. As stated earlier in the thread, an arc view would be a nice way to take more advantage of the available pixels, too.

 

[Ryan F.]

View attachment 60806[/QUOTE]

That fat magenta arrow could be smaller, but you can read it in the box above it anyway.

Yeah, the DG is definitely bigger. Not surprising since it's just the rotating compass card with no CDI/GS.

 

[bnt83]

Yes. It's critical that the unit be easy to install without requiring a big panel re-cut. Ease of installation, convenience in terms of a standard form factor, low cost and solid state reliability are what makes the G5 so compelling.

Personally, I'm working on cutting panel access for an Aera 660 to increase my screen "real estate," rather than go with a full PFD/MFD for ten times the cost. I think the form factor of dual G5s is a great overall compromise. As stated earlier in the thread, an arc view would be a nice way to take more advantage of the available pixels, too.

The 660 is a pretty good add on MFD. I want to do the same someday.

Hmmmm.

 

[Ryan F.]

The 660 is a pretty good add on MFD. I want to do the same someday.

Hmmmm.

View attachment 60812

That is extremely close to what I'm looking to end up with. In a month or so I'll have the G5 HSI added in, then everything else you have in your panel pic except I have a GTX345 instead of that transponder. I even have a KX-155A, heh. Still have my old Century autopilot for now, though. Otherwise they'd match...

The Aera makes way too much sense as an MFD given it communicates with the GTN650 via RS-232.

 

[arkvet]

Did you tie it to a legacy autopilot? If so, which one?

Yes the HSI is tied to my Century 41 AP. The vacuum AI was moved to the T/C hole to suffice the AI aspect of the AP.

 

[Steve Flangan]

so I sent another email to my avionics shop and this is what I got back and I think it makes sense...

"From a system architecture standpoint, think of it as the indicator that drives the autopilot, not the radio. In your current setup, the 480 drives the #1 CDI, the SL30 drives the #2 CDI, and the DG provides heading / course reference. When using NAV mode, you set the desired course on the DG and use the NAV 1 / NAV 2 switch to select which CDI to follow. The G5 is going to replace the DG as well as the #1 CDI. When the 480 is in GPS mode, the course output to the autopilot is locked. You cannot set the desired course for the #2 CDI to follow. Deviation data is useless without course data."

the switch I have is a mechanical one and I believe all it does is let the AP get the deviation data from either nav 1 or nav 2, but the way I understand now, it still get the course data from the DG which will be replaced by G5, which in turn gets it from 480. wondering if I can operate G5 HSI in manual mode? I am sure there is an option... but I don't want to fiddle with it in flight when things are failing left and right

@WannFly So what did you finally wind up doing to use your GPS, Analog NAV/COM with the G5 HSI/DG, GAD29, and the Century Autopilot w/ Radio Coupler.

I am trying to use a GNX-375 RNAV GPS (Digital) and MX170B (NAV/COM) with and G5 DG/HSI and my Century IIB. Installer is telling me to get a different Radio Controller - 1C388-2, vs the -M I have today, and that we can only connect the RNAV to the Autopilot, and will lose the ability to use the Analog NAV with Autopilot.

Thoughts?
Thanks, Steve