IFR with G1000 Impressions

A

AcroGimp

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Aug 30, 2013
Messages
1,480
Location
San Diego, CA
Display Name
Display name:
AcroGimp
I may actually join a local flying club that has several DA40's and Cirrus SR-22's with the G1000 in them to get some TAA exposure and higher-end travel options and am interested in observations, impressions and recommendations/tips on preparing for these integrated EFIS systems.

I am familiar with the G430/530 (flight experience) and the G500/600 (took the CAP ground school and have the excellent PC trainer which I play with semi regularly) as well as the excellent Carenado Malibu PropJet on Flight Simulator X (FSX), and I have an extremely well done SR-22 GTSx add-on in FSX that accurately emulates 90-95% of the G1000 Perspective from Cirrus.

Any input is appreciated.

'Gimp
 
If you have used the G600 you won't have too much problem with 1000. Ground trainers are available for the 1000 as well.
 
I do a lot of G1000 training with CAP and everyone agrees it is a fantastic system, particularly if you have the GFC 700 AFCS. Its autopilot is smooth as glass and works great. The real trick is confirming that the autopilot is doing what you want it to do (always check the status line in the top center of the PFD after invoking any autopilot function) and keeping an eye on your power setting. Updating your flight plan is much easier on the G1000 than on a 430/530 because the MFD FPL page is supersized and well laid out. If you aren't current with WAAS APV approaches make sure to study up on that. You'll find good coverage in Max Trescott's book and at www.Garmin1000.com.
 
Besides when your engine fails in the clag your roll steering autopilot will fly you into the side of a mountain and you can watch it happen on the G1000.
 
Small data point: The Cirrus does not have G1000 (if you ask Garmin and Cirrus Marketing). The perspective has some additional programming and integration that the G1000 does not. Buttonology is similar enough that G1000 learning material should readily transfer to Perspective.

Take this grain of salt and all, as I have minimal hours with both and am not an instructor.
 
flyingron said:
Besides when your engine fails in the clag your roll steering autopilot will fly you into the side of a mountain and you can watch it happen on the G1000.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure an engine failure would disconnect the autopilot and probably leave the flight director on.
 
write-stuff said:
I'm pretty sure an engine failure would disconnect the autopilot and probably leave the flight director on.
Click to expand...
Why would that happen? What are the auto-disconnect criteria in that system? Which one would be met just by the engine failing?
 
I flew IFR for 10 years on steam gauges in my Mooney Encore before installing a G500. Then I flew the G500 for about a year before trading up to an Acclaim with a G1000 and GFC 700 autopilot. I now have almost 200 hours experience with the Acclaim, including about 10 hours of actual instrument and a couple dozen WAAS approaches flown in actual instrument conditions. So I feel qualified to offer you some good input.

I was comfortable and proficient with all three panels, and I never had any problems flying IFR with any of them. However, I must say that the G1000 coupled with the GFC 700 and WAAS approach capability is damn hard to beat.

To get proficient with the G500 I used Garmin's PC trainer coupled with 5 hours of dual with a knowledgeable instructor. Much of what I learned transferred to the G1000, but once again I used Garmin's PC trainer to transition, and my insurance company required 10 hours of dual with a G1000-qualified instructor. I also took the King Course for the G1000 and read Max Prescott's excellent book. To maintain proficiency I use a TouchTrainer, which very faithfully simulates the G1000 and can also be logged for currency.

If you plan to fly long XC flights under IFR, as I do, the two most important things to learn are how to work with the flight planning system (loading DP's, airway entry and exits, various types of waypoints, arrivals, etc.) and how to operate the autopilot in the various flight regimes. Knowing how to properly load and activate an approach procedure into the autopilot is key and when you've mastered that, especially if you do so while using either Garmin's or Jeppesen's electronic flight charts, you will be getting the maximum utility and single-pilot IFR safety cushion from the system.

About a year ago I took my uncle for a ride in the Acclaim in solid instrument conditions. He's a 777 captain for United and flew in the Air Force before that, so he's been in a few cockpits. We flew 6 WAAS approaches down to minimums at two different airports. These were full approaches with procedure turns and DME arcs. Watching the approaches unfold overlaid on the Jepp charts is always impressive. I didn't have to disconnect the autopilot on any of them until we had the runway in sight. We also executed a missed approach. He said it was the most impressive cockpit automation he's ever seen, and that it definitely blew the 777 away.

Bottom line: Learn it! It's a great system and a lot of fun.
 
Last edited:
I haven't tried it in the GFC 700. But the KAP140 equipped G1000 will happily put you into a stall if you reduce power on it as it tries to maintain altitude.
Edit: and it also runs the trim really well, so when you do disconnect you're going to be pushing forward hard to get the nose back down.
Obviously I highly encourage everyone with an autopilot to go out and practice those kinds of failures and see how it responds.
 
Last edited:
AcroGimp said:
...and I have an extremely well done SR-22 GTSx add-on in FSX that accurately emulates 90-95% of the G1000 Perspective from Cirrus.
Click to expand...

(longtime sim nerd here...) If you're referring to the Carenado Cirrus, I'd avoid drawing any training/experience parallels between their rendition of the Perspective avionics and the actual unit. I only have time in Avidyne Cirri but from what I can tell and what I've heard, Carenado's Perspective system looks pretty but is lacking in functionality (in fact, I merged mine with my RXP 430W to get even basic flight planning capability).

In the sim world, Fly This Sim's PC-based trainer is supposed to be the way to go for learning the Perspective / G1000 - but unfortunately it only works with XPlane. :( In FSX, Flight1 has some good options relatively faithfully replicating the functionality of the G1000 (The T182T and BE20 are pretty great).

While it's obviously not 100% the "real deal" it is a good inexpensive way to get the buttonology down. I know the RXP units sure helped me learn the 430/530.
 
flyingron said:
Besides when your engine fails in the clag your roll steering autopilot will fly you into the side of a mountain and you can watch it happen on the G1000.
Click to expand...

I'd say your chances are just as good hand flying on steam gauges.

The G1000 is an awesome system. It gives you unbelievable SA and tools to use....If you know how to use it. The desktop trainers are fantastic, but make sure you get familiar with the switchology. By that I mean knowing which rotary switch to turn so going from pages and chapters is second nature and you don't have to think about it. Make sure you know when to be on your A-game and when it is ok to relax. Descending into Centennial airport in Denver is not the time to be listening to Jimmy Buffett radio on the satellite radio. Flying VFR-on-top over Indiana? Parrothead it up!
 
Last edited:
V1-Vr-V2 said:
(longtime sim nerd here...) If you're referring to the Carenado Cirrus, I'd avoid drawing any training/experience parallels between their rendition of the Perspective avionics and the actual unit. I only have time in Avidyne Cirri but from what I can tell and what I've heard, Carenado's Perspective system looks pretty but is lacking in functionality (in fact, I merged mine with my RXP 430W to get even basic flight planning capability).

In the sim world, Fly This Sim's PC-based trainer is supposed to be the way to go for learning the Perspective / G1000 - but unfortunately it only works with XPlane. :( In FSX, Flight1 has some good options relatively faithfully replicating the functionality of the G1000 (The T182T and BE20 are pretty great).

While it's obviously not 100% the "real deal" it is a good inexpensive way to get the buttonology down. I know the RXP units sure helped me learn the 430/530.
Click to expand...
It is the Carenado and I have checked much of the functionality outside of flight planning and hard approach A/P integration until I link it up to my RXP 430/530 setup just as you say.

Page layout and switchology/navigation appears good, and many of the setup/customization selections in the real plane are there near as I can tell but as with most FSX setups flight planning and A/P integration out of the box pretty much suck.

I'll look into the Flight1 products as well although I tried I think a Lear 23 of theirs and was not impressed but that was a while ago.

I have X-Plane as well as FSX but haven't invested in it for years. I might dust it off.

Thanks!

'Gimp
 
colojo said:
I flew IFR for 10 years on steam gauges in my Mooney Encore before installing a G500. Then I flew the G500 for about a year before trading up to an Acclaim with a G1000 and GFC 700 autopilot. I now have almost 200 hours experience with the Acclaim, including about 10 hours of actual instrument and a couple dozen WAAS approaches flown in actual instrument conditions. So I feel qualified to offer you some good input.

I was comfortable and proficient with all three panels, and I never had any problems flying IFR with any of them. However, I must say that the G1000 coupled with the GFC 700 and WAAS approach capability is damn hard to beat.

To get proficient with the G500 I used Garmin's PC trainer coupled with 5 hours of dual with a knowledgeable instructor. Much of what I learned transferred to the G1000, but once again I used Garmin's PC trainer to transition, and my insurance company required 10 hours of dual with a G1000-qualified instructor. I also took the King Course for the G1000 and read Max Prescott's excellent book. To maintain proficiency I use a TouchTrainer, which very faithfully simulates the G1000 and can also be logged for currency.

If you plan to fly long XC flights under IFR, as I do, the two most important things to learn are how to work with the flight planning system (loading DP's, airway entry and exits, various types of waypoints, arrivals, etc.) and how to operate the autopilot in the various flight regimes. Knowing how to properly load and activate an approach procedure into the autopilot is key and when you've mastered that, especially if you do so while using either Garmin's or Jeppesen's electronic flight charts, you will be getting the maximum utility and single-pilot IFR safety cushion from the system.

About a year ago I took my uncle for a ride in the Acclaim in solid instrument conditions. He's a 777 captain for United and flew in the Air Force before that, so he's been in a few cockpits. We flew 6 WAAS approaches down to minimums at two different airports. These were full approaches with procedure turns and DME arcs. Watching the approaches unfold overlaid on the Jepp charts is always impressive. I didn't have to disconnect the autopilot on any of them until we had the runway in sight. We also executed a missed approach. He said it was the most impressive cockpit automation he's ever seen, and that it definitely blew the 777 away.

Bottom line: Learn it! It's a great system and a lot of fun.
Click to expand...
Excellent input, thanks!

'Gimp
 
write-stuff said:
I do a lot of G1000 training with CAP and everyone agrees it is a fantastic system, particularly if you have the GFC 700 AFCS. Its autopilot is smooth as glass and works great. The real trick is confirming that the autopilot is doing what you want it to do (always check the status line in the top center of the PFD after invoking any autopilot function) and keeping an eye on your power setting. Updating your flight plan is much easier on the G1000 than on a 430/530 because the MFD FPL page is supersized and well laid out. If you aren't current with WAAS APV approaches make sure to study up on that. You'll find good coverage in Max Trescott's book and at www.Garmin1000.com.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I'll grab that book if I commit to flying the DA40 or Cirrus. Had the same issue with the G500/600 and KAP140, mode selection and annunciation is key to avoid surprises.

'Gimp
 
write-stuff said:
The real trick is confirming that the autopilot is doing what you want it to do (always check the status line in the top center of the PFD after invoking any autopilot function) and keeping an eye on your power setting.
Click to expand...

This bears repeating, it is critical to get in the habit of checking the scoreboard for the FMS status. It shows not only the current status, but the armed mode, which is just as critical. It is easy to think that the autopilot is doing something like flying the plane, when it isn't. This can be very dangerous in IMC. The other thing I do is hold the yoke long enough after engagement to verify through feel that the AP is working.

Really taking advantage of the G1000 takes some time because you have to retrain your brain to look for what's important.
 
Gucci Pilot said:
Descending into Centennial airport in Denver is not the time to be listening to Jimmy Buffett radio on the satellite radio. Flying VFR-on-top over Indiana? Parrothead it up!
Click to expand...


Huh. I'm sure I could get at least one chorus of Margaritaville in from CASSE to DA. Not sure what's so "a-game" about KAPA unless you're dumb enough to descend into the power lines at Lincoln Ave.
 
denverpilot said:
Huh. I'm sure I could get at least one chorus of Margaritaville in from CASSE to DA. Not sure what's so "a-game" about KAPA unless you're dumb enough to descend into the power lines at Lincoln Ave.
Click to expand...

Is it easy to do so?

I've flown into 2 AP where I can think off top of my head there are power lines perpendicular to the approach path and close enough to be of concern. One of them I drive by regularly and happened to see the lines one day- long after I performed operations there in someone else's Mooney.
 
6apu3eva.jpg


upehyvev.jpg


3 miles out landing 35R, if you're past LECET on altitude, never gonna be a factor.

I'm just trying to figure out why he thought this particular airport needed an "A-game"... There's nothing particularly difficult about this approach.

Maybe he came in here in really bad weather. Which would make sense. Since if you actually need this ILS all the way to minimums, it's bound to be ultra crappy out, here. Probably not flyable in anything small or without FIKI capability.

We just don't get stratoform stable IMC here much. Probably blowing 40 in a snowstorm if you're not looking at the runway by somewhere just inside CASSE. Heh.
 
P.S. Don't you love how I was doing 25 ft/min vertically sitting in my chair at home? LOL
 
I agree that the G-1000 is at its best with a Garmin AFCS. Also, a data input panel is a major plus for single-pilot ops.

Touch screen input is the ideal but I don't know of such an option for the G-1000.

With a Garmin AFCS I would take the 35R LPV over the ILS in the KAPA example.
 
denverpilot said:
Huh. I'm sure I could get at least one chorus of Margaritaville in from CASSE to DA. Not sure what's so "a-game" about KAPA unless you're dumb enough to descend into the power lines at Lincoln Ave.
Click to expand...

In IMC on an IFR flight plan it would be a piece of cake. But opposite direction practice approaches on a sunny Saturday AM? A-game or death wish required. :D
 
I have only flown into C-Springs. Just trying to use a close GA alternative. If I would have know it was gonna create this much controversy I would have said JFK or just kept it simple and said, "I listen to it in cruise and not when I'm descending for an approach at a towered field"

What I was getting at is a persons ability to task manage is different for different people. While Joe Cessna may feel task saturated going into a towered airport, Joe Boeing is a little faster at task managing and JFK is a walk in the park for him. Learn the system and automation so you aren't fumbling around trying to figure it out when you are getting task saturated.
 
Last edited:
Alexb2000 said:
This bears repeating, it is critical to get in the habit of checking the scoreboard for the FMS status. It shows not only the current status, but the armed mode, which is just as critical. It is easy to think that the autopilot is doing something like flying the plane, when it isn't. This can be very dangerous in IMC. The other thing I do is hold the yoke long enough after engagement to verify through feel that the AP is working.

Really taking advantage of the G1000 takes some time because you have to retrain your brain to look for what's important.
Click to expand...

Yes, very good suggestions. Also do the AP check while holding short of the runway and check for any failures. It is usually on the checklist but many don't bother with it. You will get a red annunciator on the PFD but it is kind of small if you have a failure. I've had a roll servo fail before with the GFC700. There will be no sound and no other indication other than the AP won't engage when you try to turn it on. If you blindly turn it "on" in this condition and assume it is flying without checking the scoreboard you will be in for a surprise (and maybe not a good one). Always double check the scoreboard and watch what the plane is doing. That is true for any AP of course, never trust it and always monitor it. It can be tempting because of the high level of automation that the G1000/GFC700 offers to get lulled into complacency.
 
Last edited:
AcroGimp said:
and I have an extremely well done SR-22 GTSx add-on in FSX that accurately emulates 90-95% of the G1000 Perspective from Cirrus.
Click to expand...
Is this the Carenado product by any chance?

I watched some Youtube videos demonstrating this product and frankly I am taken aback how poorly this G1000 seems to be done. In this one video a fellow is flying a coupled LPV approach at CEC and the AP annunciations are all wrong. We are talking absolutely basic AP functionality here with proper annunciations on the status/AFCS bars. They were even wrong through his enroute portion as well. And the fellow who is narrating this demo seems like a happy camper - totally oblivious to gross inaccuracies of the unit he is proudly showcasing. I observed before that even in best cases any 3-rd parties simulations of G1000 miss many of key features of the real unit like for example proper sequencing through missed approached procedures (this even when the rest appears to be OK). So I must say Garmin's PC trainer is the only viable trainer for us real pilots to learn button-logy of the G1000 (full agreement here with Max Trescott). So IMHO this 90-95% is a very generous number, I would drop it to 70% on the best day. But this makes sense since replicating a real G1000 would simply be too expensive and uneconomical if you later intended to sell it for $34.95 to the 'entertainment' crowd.

I know it's an older thread but I couldn't resist, for a few minutes I was hoping there could indeed be some acceptable reproduction of the SR-22/Perspective among the FSX/X-Plane,etc. add-ons.
 
Last edited:
olasek said:
Is this the Carenado product by any chance?

I watched some Youtube videos demonstrating this product and frankly I am taken aback how poorly this G1000 seems to be done. In this one video a fellow is flying a coupled LPV approach at CEC and the AP annunciations are all wrong. We are talking absolutely basic AP functionality here with proper annunciations on the status/AFCS bars. They were even wrong through his enroute portion as well. And the fellow who is narrating this demo seems like a happy camper - totally oblivious to gross inaccuracies of the unit he is proudly showcasing. I observed before that even in best cases any 3-rd parties simulations of G1000 miss many of key features of the real unit like for example proper sequencing through missed approached procedures (this even when the rest appears to be OK). So I must say Garmin's PC trainer is the only viable trainer for us real pilots to learn button-logy of the G1000 (full agreement here with Max Trescott). So IMHO this 90-95% is a very generous number, I would drop it to 70% on the best day. But this makes sense since replicating a real G1000 would simply be too expensive and uneconomical if you later intended to sell it for $34.95 to the 'entertainment' crowd.

I know it's an older thread but I couldn't resist, for a few minutes I was hoping there could indeed be some acceptable reproduction of the SR-22/Perspective among the FSX/X-Plane,etc. add-ons.
Click to expand...

Indeed, the Garmin trainers are the only effective way and they aren't 100%, because there are no knobs or autoflight buttons. And, they are nav procedures trainers at most.
 
I'm wondering when the big real estate GTN based system will be out with touch screen and menus. Right now I would prefer a dual G-600 with one or two GTN 750s (Actually I would think that a G-300 next to a GTN 750 providing the MFD for each side would be an excellent panel) to a G-1000. The problem is still the same as always with the GNS (although they did throw V-airways in on the 1000 series), and that is the 'buttonology'. The GNS has the most inelegant user interface I have come across in a long time. It didn't much surprise me because all the early Garmin marine stuff had awful human interfaces as well, unfortunately the hardware was top notch so that's what I always ended up with. In the early days the only unit from Garmin that would talk to a computer was the DGPS-53, that was an excellent unit btw, still is in fact. It's not WAAS, it uses local telemetry for differential correction, LAAS. Not sure how much of that system is still around.:dunno: it was good for precision where you had it.
 
It's not that bad once you get used to it. Even though I have a keypad to enter intersections/waypoints there are times when I will do the multiple twist and push using the big knob/small knob on the PFD instead of using the keypad. For example if I'm down low, and it's bumpy. It is a little slower but you're less likely to make mistakes and you don't have your head buried down in the cockpit watching what your fingers are pressing. This would be even worse with a touch screen.
 
No, the touch screen works beautifully, besides, the 750 has buttons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top