0fficer wrote:
Is it really that important to have an iPad if you have the G1000 NXi in front of you?
Yes, it absolutely is! (I’m speaking from experience with the old G1000 and I don’t think the NXi is different in this respect.)
For VFR, you want to have better navigational charts than the G1000 can offer.
For IFR, you want to be able to display plates, textual information, possibly information from an ADL device etc. etc.
Haven’t read the whole thread in detail, but echo those strongly suggesting the stromscope. Even though IFR is not planned right now, think about the future, resale value etc. Our stromscope gives many “early warnings”, often not CBs, but gives a good understanding of where the bad weather is.
I guess the implication was precisely about going bellow minima because you can “see” the runway/airport on the screen? :-) Otherwise I also don’t see why it would be ilegal.
It certainly is not illegal, but the effect of synthetic vison on approaches is considerable.
The runway image on the screen is hard to ignore, and flying the needles instead of the runway image takes effort and discipline.
In most circumstances – GPS, NDB and VOR approaches – this is no issue because the navigation source that drives synthetic vision is either the same or better than the raw data source.
But for an ILS to minimum, this is different. 99 percent of the time GPS and ILS agree, but not always, and all the integrity protections you have when flying an LPV approach are not present.
There are two ways to deal with this. One thing is to scan and cross-check the needles. just requires a bit of discipline.
The other way is to turn it off as part of the pre-approach checks.
And as always, make sure you retain sufficient practice to fly if some gizmos fail, so a raw data ILS without GPS guidance anywhere once jn a while may be a good idea.
hmng wrote:
I guess the implication was precisely about going bellow minima because you can “see” the runway/airport on the screen? :-) Otherwise I also don’t see why it would be ilegal.
Ah I did not think about that one, it’s reassuring to stay on HSI/GS all the way to minima, more reassuring when AP does it while you glance outside, very reassuring to see your flight path vector on the runway on SV, top reassuring to see the runway itself there by the eye, well before going bellow minima, you need to arrive at minima in stable fashion and spend few seconds to find the runway before continue or go-around, having an AP+FD+SV these are piece of cake even in (legal) low visbility & low ceiling
The eye need some time to get used to runway env,
1) In high visbility 3D approach, you are either outside clouds or you are not, once you see the ground in the buttom left corner of the pannel before hitting DH, you know the job is done (you will find the runway in next 1s)
2) In low visbility 3D approach, you may not see the runway even after being out of clouds with ground in sight, you likely need 10s “to get used to looking outside” while “hoovering at DH”, if you are hand flying there is NFW you will be able to spot the runway and land without taking that 10s, if you have an auto-pilot coupled it helps as you can afford to look ahead a bit well before DH, if you have AP+SV it’s a walk in the park to visually spot the runway at DH
3) In low visbility & low ceiling approach, you will surely wish you have bought that SV as you approach DH, I did that wish once 
life expectency in those “flight corners” is about 20s for stable approach and maybe 5s if you are all over the place in ASI/VSI & HSI/GS parameter space, so the time spent near DH has to be used wisely (as well as fuel endurance for unplanned diversion)
Some will argue that the best way to get around 2) is to fly 2D dive-and-drive rather than CDFA but if you add final approach track offset & cross wind and lack of rudder, you could be looking at the wrong place and you will need a very long runway to land from that overhead join at the MAPt…
If your ILS neddles & GPS/SV data & tablet EFB matches nothing can go wrong, it’s when they start to diverge that is not reassuring
I am rebounding on gallois’ post.
For us owners, fully integrated suites like the G1000 mean we are tied to the goodwill of the manufacturer and are unable to source alternative parts should anything fail or become obsolete. Experience has shown that there is no such thing as a manufacturer’s goodwill: whether DAI or Garmin, what they want is P R O F I T and if we happen to be too small a cash-cow herd , they’ ll go milk others before helping us. See G1000 saga on the TDI Diamonds.
I think the G1000 belongs in 300 knot plus IFR aircraft where it makes complete sense. But the point is moot in this thread since the only way Diamond makes DA40s is with G1000.
So here’s how I would resolve the issue.
The goal is to implement what I have proven to work: shifting the CG of avionics as much as possible towards an iPad.
The "as much as possible " is increasing steadily btw. For whatever it’s worth I am so satisfied that I have just upgraded to my THIRD iPad Pro in the Extra 400.
Doing this in a DA40 is challenging: it requires freeing up real estate in the panel!
The side mount arms are not good enough if we want the ipad to do so much work IMO.
So here’s a way to do it:
Order the plane with the standard standby instruments.
Replace (and resell) the attitude indicator with a combo instrument which has primary attitude and secondary altitude and airspeed. Plenty of choice.
This will be a minor project costing around 5-6 K minus quite some money for the brand new AI which will easily sell .
Now we have one integrated backup instrument which could replace all three.
While we must keep the backup altimeter and airspeed indicator for paperwork reasons, there’s nothing stopping us from covering them with an … iPad as long as it can be easily removed in flight.
And here we have the centrally mounted iPad mini.
For 150 € per year, one gets Garmin Pilot including SV, SafeTaxi and all IFR charts in Europe. Downloading updates is a breeze.
Of course one can also install Foreflight, Skydemon, you name it… it is OUR choice!
The possibilities are endless and apps keep coming and getting better at “iPad pace”.Throw in the 4G connectivity, the fact you can even display weather from an ADL and you have a powerhouse of an avionics suite for basically 1000€ or so.
If I could order a custom DA40 I would certainly have them put a big tablet (like the one I have in the Extra) right in the middle of the panel!
Summary: do not listen to G1000 marketing. Only buy what MUST be in there and keep your freedom of movement for what can be had on a tablet. And please don’t get me wrong: IFR approaches and all critical phases of flight MUST be done with the certified avionics. This does not preclude us from enjoying a massive increase in functionality, situational awareness and … flying pleasure with the tablet-centric approach.
AND it is perfectly legal.
Flyingfish wrote:
For 150 € per year, one gets Garmin Pilot including SV, SafeTaxi and all IFR charts in Europe. Downloading updates is a breeze.
Of course one can also install Foreflight, Skydemon, you name it… it is OUR choice!
Apologies for the thread hijack, but why exactly did you end up with Garmin Pilot as opposed to the other ones?
A bit crazy though, innit? Buying a factory new, 600k plane, just to make it a project straight away (removing and selling some of the avionics, putting some sort of mount to put an ipad to give you the information that the installed brandnew avionics don’t give you…
People who buy new aircraft are usually the ones who do it because all they want to do is fly…
I do agree though that an ipad within more or less the primary field of view is indispensable. But that’s one of the many reasons that make the DA40 such a terrible aircraft: no space to put an ipad on the lap, and no space “on the panel” either.
The only way I found adequate to mount a tablet was this. You can also stick it in the middle of the windshield, up front, and then the tablet ends up just above the glareshield. The device is awkwardly called Sea Sucker and you can bend the arm considerably.
A bit crazy though, innit? Buying a factory new, 600k plane, just to make it a project straight away (removing and selling some of the avionics, putting some sort of mount to put an ipad to give you the information that the installed brandnew avionics don’t give you…
That is why I didn’t buy a DA40 (or an SR20) in 2002. Arrogant dealers, customer assumed to be stupid despite being expected to part with 200k+VAT (in 2002 money), would not install what I wanted, while Socata did it all, almost out of the box. Details here.
But still, 20 years later, panel mounted kit has crappy mapdata for VFR flying. Avidyne had MFDs which were pretty good but that’s all dead (especially as Jepp stopped their VFR/GPS charts in 2013). My son has been flying VFR around Croatia just now and amazingly the 25 year old KMD550 has the VRPs etc
For IFR, panel kit does the work. You just need a “VFR solution” for emergencies.
I don’t think there is always a solution for tablet mounting. There isn’t one for the TB20; every one I have seen jams the controls at the extremes of travel. One can probably do an Ipad Mini or the old Samsung T705, but the huge Ipads in current vogue will be far harder.
This is a panel mounted ipad pro with 4g connectivity, 12.9 in screen brighter than a G1000’s. It clicks in and out of its mount with one hand, no tools needed. This fulfills the FAA requirement for panel mounting a non-required device. All mandatory primary instruments are still in so it is 100% legal and was signed off without a problem in 2016
@tmo: I went for an all Garmin panel and the decision to stay with the Garmin user experience was natural.
GTN750 and Garmin Pilot look and feel more and more similar and I love both.
I do find foreflight and skydemon amazing in their own way, but Garmin Pilot was the most natural for my circumstances.
The beauty of the concept is there’s nothing stopping us from changing our mind. Just download the new kid in town ! One can even have GP and Foreflight and test them!
It is a radical departure from the fenced world of integrated avionics and as far as I am concerned there’s no reason to look back.
