Garmin G500
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Garmin G500
Has anyone had a Garmin G500 fitted ?
We're upgrading the avionics on our Commander, and originally we were going to go with a Garmin 530+SL30. We later revised this to a Garmin 430 + MFD+SL30 but have been checking out the G500. If we went for the G430+MFD option we'd need to replace the DI with an HSI (or we'd want to), and fit a new Garmin CDI to Nav 2 (SL30). However it transpires that the G500 fitted is not really any more than a decent MFD and HSI, so it is a no brain-er really. So fit a G430+G500+SL30 Nav/Com.
The way we see it is that the G500 would remove the need for an MFD (saving £5000) and as the HSI is software that as well (saving a further £5000). Nav 2 would also be input to the G500 so no need for a second CDI (saving £1100).
I am used to the G1000 and find it very easy to fly with, so I just wondered if anyone has any compelling reasons NOT to go with the G500 fit? We've had some quotes back already and know the price and it is pretty damn competitive...Has anyone retrofitted one and are you happy with it? Any problems to date?
Ta..
We're upgrading the avionics on our Commander, and originally we were going to go with a Garmin 530+SL30. We later revised this to a Garmin 430 + MFD+SL30 but have been checking out the G500. If we went for the G430+MFD option we'd need to replace the DI with an HSI (or we'd want to), and fit a new Garmin CDI to Nav 2 (SL30). However it transpires that the G500 fitted is not really any more than a decent MFD and HSI, so it is a no brain-er really. So fit a G430+G500+SL30 Nav/Com.
The way we see it is that the G500 would remove the need for an MFD (saving £5000) and as the HSI is software that as well (saving a further £5000). Nav 2 would also be input to the G500 so no need for a second CDI (saving £1100).
I am used to the G1000 and find it very easy to fly with, so I just wondered if anyone has any compelling reasons NOT to go with the G500 fit? We've had some quotes back already and know the price and it is pretty damn competitive...Has anyone retrofitted one and are you happy with it? Any problems to date?
Ta..
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lees Avionics at Wycombe Air Park fitted a G600 in the Wycombe based Airways Flying Club Piper PA28-236 Dakota. Works brilliantly. The G500 was announced just after it was installed but it does mean we will get the synthetic vision added as soon as EASA clear it (software change so is another 'mod').
Lees own the EASA STC and have so far done a couple of Saratogas and a Warrior since the Dakota. Stop by at Booker if you want to have a look at the Dakota and speak to Lees. Dakota has been featured in Flyer and in the latest AOPA magazine.
Lees own the EASA STC and have so far done a couple of Saratogas and a Warrior since the Dakota. Stop by at Booker if you want to have a look at the Dakota and speak to Lees. Dakota has been featured in Flyer and in the latest AOPA magazine.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That Lees installation was mentioned at £25k in the Loop article, IIRC. That was just the G500 with no add-ons or extra work.
I've been quoted £45k for a G500 in my TB20, though to be fair that figure includes a GNS430 which (or a 530) is mandatory for a G500.
Hence I am a bit suprised that one can do it for apparently so much less. I think this is possible only by purchasing the stuff in the USA and getting it installed by an installer who is happy with free issue kit (many small freelance chaps will be OK with it because hardware procurement pushes them past the mandatory VAT registration threshold).
My only objection to a G500 against separate avionics would be that one can replace separates in the field, and in most cases very easily (and unofficially if necessary
- the installation can either be reverted to original when the original item has come back from overhaul, or it can be legalised with a signature when you return from that long trip... pragmatism rules in avionics). The installation manuals for separates are all over the internet so if you need a little friendly avionics fitter, he can do it. The manuals for the glass cockpit products are tightly held and I have never seen them floating around; this means your maintenance options are potentially (depending on your location relative to Garmin dealers) limited, and an AOG situation will be that much worse.
I know one can fly VFR on the backup instruments but who wants to fly VFR halfway across Europe. It's not the lack of enroute clearance; it's stuff like not having carried VFR charts, etc etc. It's a major hassle.
I speak with (unfortunately) considerable experience of avionics hassles. I think the average owner will be more lucky but the risk remains. Whether it is significant depends on one's mission profile. If you fly pleasure flights out of Booker then there is no risk
If you fly across Africa, the risk of a nasty AOG situation is pretty significant.
I've been quoted £45k for a G500 in my TB20, though to be fair that figure includes a GNS430 which (or a 530) is mandatory for a G500.
Hence I am a bit suprised that one can do it for apparently so much less. I think this is possible only by purchasing the stuff in the USA and getting it installed by an installer who is happy with free issue kit (many small freelance chaps will be OK with it because hardware procurement pushes them past the mandatory VAT registration threshold).
My only objection to a G500 against separate avionics would be that one can replace separates in the field, and in most cases very easily (and unofficially if necessary
- the installation can either be reverted to original when the original item has come back from overhaul, or it can be legalised with a signature when you return from that long trip... pragmatism rules in avionics). The installation manuals for separates are all over the internet so if you need a little friendly avionics fitter, he can do it. The manuals for the glass cockpit products are tightly held and I have never seen them floating around; this means your maintenance options are potentially (depending on your location relative to Garmin dealers) limited, and an AOG situation will be that much worse. I know one can fly VFR on the backup instruments but who wants to fly VFR halfway across Europe. It's not the lack of enroute clearance; it's stuff like not having carried VFR charts, etc etc. It's a major hassle.
I speak with (unfortunately) considerable experience of avionics hassles. I think the average owner will be more lucky but the risk remains. Whether it is significant depends on one's mission profile. If you fly pleasure flights out of Booker then there is no risk
If you fly across Africa, the risk of a nasty AOG situation is pretty significant.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Norfolk UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know nothing about the world of avionics,but quite a lot about marine navigation on small boats,similar sort of thing really,including elevation above ground level
We had chart plotter,radar ,autopilot wind and compass,lots of other stuff all interfaced with plug in charts in the early 90's.
Buy all your gear from one manufacturer,in my case Raytheon,they were excellent in back up.
If you buy from several companies,they all blame the other for interface probs etc.
Don't know how this relates to UK aviation,I fly a 1942 L4 Cub,more instruments in most kitchens
We had chart plotter,radar ,autopilot wind and compass,lots of other stuff all interfaced with plug in charts in the early 90's.
Buy all your gear from one manufacturer,in my case Raytheon,they were excellent in back up.
If you buy from several companies,they all blame the other for interface probs etc.
Don't know how this relates to UK aviation,I fly a 1942 L4 Cub,more instruments in most kitchens
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks...
The first quote we've had was £9600 for G500 kit + £2800 fitting, plus obviously a G430 at about £4600. This was supply and fit by a reputable avionics installer who came recommended to us.
For a EX500 + KCS55A HSI (recon) we were quoted about £9850 (£5350+ £4500) + fitting....+ the 430 of course.
So it seems to make sense to upgrade to the G500 really. I saw the Dakota on the Lees page and it looks pretty smart. We're also going to fit an Aera 550 as a backup GPS.
The first quote we've had was £9600 for G500 kit + £2800 fitting, plus obviously a G430 at about £4600. This was supply and fit by a reputable avionics installer who came recommended to us.
For a EX500 + KCS55A HSI (recon) we were quoted about £9850 (£5350+ £4500) + fitting....+ the 430 of course.
So it seems to make sense to upgrade to the G500 really. I saw the Dakota on the Lees page and it looks pretty smart. We're also going to fit an Aera 550 as a backup GPS.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lees supplied the required kit for the AFC Dakota as totally legit UK Garmin dealer. Our 430 had to be upgraded to WAAS (making it a GNS430W).
Using our existing kit plus the G600 (G500) has actually given superb redundancy - KX155 with standaloan CDI, vacuum AH, turn co-ordinator etc. Works a treat both local flying and on its IFR European travels....
With thanks to Flyer magazine for their picture, contact them for the full article:
Using our existing kit plus the G600 (G500) has actually given superb redundancy - KX155 with standaloan CDI, vacuum AH, turn co-ordinator etc. Works a treat both local flying and on its IFR European travels....
With thanks to Flyer magazine for their picture, contact them for the full article:
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you buy from several companies,they all blame the other for interface probs etc.
If possible, choose known-compatible avionics. In most cases one can simply set up the stuff on the bench and see what happens.
Actually one has to get such an agreement anyway because even the G500 does not give you an autopilot, and interfacing to autopilots is the achilles heel of "modern" avionics installations. Invariably something ends up not working quite the way expected...
I would never fit something like a G500 without sitting down with the avionics installer and agreeing exactly how everything is going to inter-operate, and write it all down. If OTOH one free-issues the kit to the installer, then he is not (arguably) responsible for anything; he becomes just a wireman.
I do think the G500 is a nice piece of kit (if flush mounted, which most of them aren't
) but my views on the limited "management" options remain.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We've decided to go all garmin to keep the interfacing problems to a minimum, so it should interface ok to the 430W, SL30. We're going to keep the ADF standalone (so when Europe bins NDB's we can just take it out )and probably won't interface it to the AP as it is an old Centuary III. That is fine for alt and heading hold for the time being (i.e. until we have some spare cash )....We are thinking about a traffic system though, is there anywhere in Europe which uses TIS? We have a GTX330. Otherwise we may look at one of the Garmin traffic TCAS I traffic systems.
What the heck, when looking at Avionics, £10k becomes loose change
Actually, after looking at the pic of the Dakota on Lees site, I wonder how possible (I.e. legal) it would be to split the Nav 2 signal to a seperate CDI so if the worst should happen one can navigate on the second CDI as a backup or use the g500 HSI in normal operation?
)and probably won't interface it to the AP as it is an old Centuary III. That is fine for alt and heading hold for the time being (i.e. until we have some spare cash )....We are thinking about a traffic system though, is there anywhere in Europe which uses TIS? We have a GTX330. Otherwise we may look at one of the Garmin traffic TCAS I traffic systems.What the heck, when looking at Avionics, £10k becomes loose change
Actually, after looking at the pic of the Dakota on Lees site, I wonder how possible (I.e. legal) it would be to split the Nav 2 signal to a seperate CDI so if the worst should happen one can navigate on the second CDI as a backup or use the g500 HSI in normal operation?
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Too close to EASA
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back-up CDI
The G500 and G600 STCs produced by Lees require a back-up CDI to be installed if the aircraft is certifed for any thing other than VFR.
Lees are currently writing the EASA STCs for the G500 in the R112/114, B55/58 Barron, 23/35/36 Bonanza, and changing all of their current G600 STCs (PA28, 32, 23) to include G500 and SVT. PA34 and PA44 should also follow by April.
The Nav 2 data from either a GNS430W or SL30, can be sent to a dedicated CDI as well as the G500. The SL30 uses RS232 to communicate with the G500, so it's analogue 6-wire resolver and deviation/flag output is available for a mechanical CDI. A GNS430W has digital interface (429) to G500 and can use the un-switched VOR/LOC analogue output to the standby CDI.
Lees are currently writing the EASA STCs for the G500 in the R112/114, B55/58 Barron, 23/35/36 Bonanza, and changing all of their current G600 STCs (PA28, 32, 23) to include G500 and SVT. PA34 and PA44 should also follow by April.
The Nav 2 data from either a GNS430W or SL30, can be sent to a dedicated CDI as well as the G500. The SL30 uses RS232 to communicate with the G500, so it's analogue 6-wire resolver and deviation/flag output is available for a mechanical CDI. A GNS430W has digital interface (429) to G500 and can use the un-switched VOR/LOC analogue output to the standby CDI.
Last edited by wigglyamp; 7th Feb 2010 at 21:35. Reason: added extra info
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brilliant, thanks for the comprehensive info....So we could keep one of our existing CDI's and fit the G500 /430w / sl30 combo...
hopefully we'll be N reg too...
hopefully we'll be N reg too...
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Too close to EASA
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G500 STCs
Lees now have EASA STCs for the Garmin G500/600 EFIS in Beech Bonanza/Baron, Piper PA32, PA28 and Commander R112/114. All of these STCs include Synthetic Vision. The STCs cover all variants of all of these aircraft and a wide variety of autopilot interfaces.
PA34 STC should be done by end of April.
Wigglyamp.
PA34 STC should be done by end of April.
Wigglyamp.
Another option is a ASPEN PFD. Very neat unit with an extremely simple install scheme. ASPEN just announced EASA certification so worth a look.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Too close to EASA
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G500 Synthetic vision
Airways Flying Club at Wycombe Air Park have become the first customer woth a European registered aircraft to have Garmin's Synthetic Vision System (SVT) installed, on the G600 system in G-ODAK.
Lees Avionics also have it operating in their PA28 demonstrator G-HRYZ.
SVT is now approved for the G500/600 systems in PA28, PA32, Beech Bonanza, Baron and Rockwell 112/114.
Lees Avionics also have it operating in their PA28 demonstrator G-HRYZ.
SVT is now approved for the G500/600 systems in PA28, PA32, Beech Bonanza, Baron and Rockwell 112/114.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Too close to EASA
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aa5b G500 Stc
It depends on whether there's enough of a market to support someone writing the STC and paying the EASA fees. Doing the STC for a single-user would cost the owner about £8-10K, so not cost-effective unless you're really keen. Send me a PM if you're interested in looking at a shared-cost option.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Too close to EASA
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New G500 STC
Lees Avionics have gained an EASA STC for single and dual G500 EFIS in Piper Seneca aircraft. The PA34 STC includes SVT (Synthetic vision), TAWS-B and Chartview - what more could you ask for!
Why is a different STC needed for each airframe? Surely, assuming the kit all works, it couldn't care less exactly what shape of aluminium can it's flying around in?
Is it purely a fund-raiser to keep EASA numpties emplyed?
Is it purely a fund-raiser to keep EASA numpties emplyed?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it purely a fund-raiser to keep EASA numpties emplyed?
I could fit a G500 in my 1995 Toyota. So what does an airframe-specific STC mean? It is just EASA saying "we think avionics installers are idiots who are incapable of reading the wiring diagrams and connecting things up correctly, so we need to give them the full details for each aircraft". But this logic is bollox because you could have a C172 which is bare and a C172 which is equipped like a King Air.
Basically the Eurocrats don't like the American way of doing it, because it is American.
Plus I reckon there is substantial "industry pressure" within Europe to create business for EASA 145 companies generating the EASA STCs.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Bath
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Plus I reckon there is substantial "industry pressure" within Europe to create business for EASA 145 companies generating the EASA STCs.
Ian