Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Welcome to our forums

KSN770 - opinions?

Isn't that just a combination of poor type specific training, and perhaps allowing people to fly the plane who have difficulty understanding the autoflight systems?

The club required a 3 evening theoretical course plus several hours training with an FI. If that isn't enough, then something must be wrong with the avionics IMO.

LSZK, Switzerland

There's a feature on the KSN770 in today's Avweb newsletter

LOAN Wiener Neustadt Ost, Austria

An interesting article - thanks.

I wonder what they mean by

On the other hand, IFR pilot's that aren't familiar with operating a FMS will have a lot to learn when it comes to building flight plans and loading procedures. That's because the KSN770 is a true FMS and you can create and load an entire flight from departure to approach before you even leave the ground.

I've been doing just that with the KLN94 for the last 11 years

Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

I've been doing just that with the KLN94 for the last 11 years

Not vertically, only laterally and not including approaches and holdings and alternates.

In real life, the biggest benefit is probably that you can say "I have a real FMS, you don't".

I can load a PROC before the flight.

Not a whole lot of point in doing that however until you know the sid (OK you get that from the DC), the star (won't know that till issued near the end), and likewise for the IAP.

I can't see the point in preloading any VNAV stuff because that is 100% under ATC direction, negotiated with the pilot according to wx, icing levels, a/c performance, etc.

Granted, the KLN94 IAP support is pretty crap (no curves, no RNAV sids/stars, etc) but my point is what do they mean by "FMS"?

A lot of people called the GNS480 "FMS-like" and great, with an equal number saying they cannot work it out.

Edit: just watched the video. It looks very nice. Especially the awesome zoom implementation. Clearly the processor is not a 4004 anymore...

The issues will therefore be, for the initial release...

  • Which major features are unimplemented
  • Which major features don't actually work
  • Which protocols to 3rd party devices will have been untested

I also wonder if they will implement a proper LPV drive to a KFC225.

Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Clearly the processor is not a 4004 anymore...

Yes but 300k pixels isn't quite state of the art anymore...

LSZK, Switzerland

I have to agree, the KSN770 looks nice, much better than I thought. Aspen are very good at designing user interfaces and this is a big plus for the device.

I bet Honeywell is going to acquire Aspen. I know that they have been looking at it for a number of years but couldn't agree on a price. If they really mean it with their reestablished GA focus, then this would be the right company to buy.

Seems like instead of only one option, there will soon be three good devices to choose from.

If Honeywell buy Aspen, everybody with a brain at Aspen is going to leave.

The whole culture is completely incompatible.

Re the KSN770, I would be less uncomfortable buying a beta 0.0 product from Honeywell than from Avidyne (IFD) because there is some chance that they will carry forward their old interfaces, so e.g. the protocol for some 1990s Shadin flow totaliser will probably work right.

Yes but 300k pixels isn't quite state of the art anymore...

I don't think the eye can resolve more than that, at the typical distance in this case. I have absolutely no problem with the detail on the KMD550 which is 320x240 and which displays just the right amount of info for the screen size.

It's the same issue on car satnavs. The other day I played around with a £1000 Kenwood box, to replace the crappy Satnav Systems RNS510 in my VW. In reality it is just annoying. Some buttons (touch screen) are too small, too close to the edge, etc.

Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

The screen is resistive, which means putting pressure on the surface with your finger or an object commands a given function on the screen. (From the Avweb article)

What a joke..

Clearly they froze the design before the IPhone (and with it capacity displays) became available. The extra display layer will certainly hurt readability in sun light..


It's an interesting point.

That video in the review posted higher up suggests readability is very good.

Looking at these boxes at exhibitions, one obviously cannot check that.

But I recall a year or two ago, at EDNY, Avidyne had some units on their outdoor stand, and the displays were practically invisible. I commented to that effect, and the man agreed.

However in a typical panel location it is less of a problem than it is with a handheld product. A panel mounted display will never have the sun's image reflecting back at the pilot - unless you are doing aerobatics.

But a handheld box, lying on your lap, often has exactly that, and most are almost useless. I have a pic here showing the LS800 tablet, which cost £1800 in 2005 and has a special LCD which you don't get on any handheld unit below about £2000 even today, versus the Ipad which is almost unreadable in a direct sun reflection even with a £25 matt filter on top, and totally unreadable without a filter. More LS800 pics here.

But I have never seen a civilian panel mount LCD product with these specialised LCDs. Milspec laptops exist, at c. £5000.

So a lot of panel mount makers get away with it.

But not by much. Look at the G1000 photos in this $3.2M plane and the horrid reflections. No way can one call that G1000 "sunlight readable". It has a display like a cheap laptop, although probably brighter.

Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top