Normally, a G500 installation in a TB20 meets the backup AI requirement with the cheapest possible vacuum AI (Sigmatek) on the RHS panel.
The Piper M (formerly known as PA46) use an Aspen EFD1000 as backup to the G1000.
The Piper M (formerly known as PA46)
I would think it is still a PA46, in terms of the type certificate..
Normally, a G500 installation in a TB20 meets the backup AI requirement with the cheapest possible vacuum AI (Sigmatek) on the RHS panel.
This is not true when using either the Garmin supplied STC, or the Socata STC. The Garmin STC requires these to be withing 6" of the display, or 4" when all backup instruments are 2 1/4" instead of 3 1/8". The socata STC has the attitude indicator and airspeed indicator left of the display and the altimeter in the small panel below.
Offcourse it would be possible to use other approvals as well.
The Piper M (formerly known as PA46) use an Aspen EFD1000 as backup to the G1000.
The difference in this, is that it will be certified as standard equipment, therefore they do not use the STC, and can do things differently then in these STC’s.
Sometimes there are multiple STC’s for the same equipment, with different options between them, depending how one has designed the STC.
Going back to photo #1 it is an interesting decision to not use the Garmin remote audio system controlled by the GTN750 but to use more panel space and have a PS Engineering audio panel.
Using a “real” audio panel would always be my preference if sufficient space in the radio rack is available. Using the excisting audio panel, or using a Garmin GMA-340 would also be more economical then using the remote panel. When you loose the GTN you also loose control of the audiopanel (it goes in emergency mode to COM 2 as a safety feature)
Jesse.
Thanks for your veiws about the remote Garmin audio system, it is of course logical that the system will fail to COM 2, like you I think that the remote audio is perhaps one step too far in terms of centralized control.
The other positive thing about having a physical intercom panel is the multiple reports of difficulties with the touch screens once the turbulence becomes significant.
Some people like them and some people don’t like them as much as the mfg would hope for.
Peter wrote:
The other positive thing about having a physical intercom panel is the multiple reports of difficulties with the touch screens once the turbulence becomes significant.
What do you have to do with your audio panel in turbulence? That would not be a factor for my decision making…
I would go for the integrated solution, panel space is precious. In top of that I have an extra antenna and a BNC connector to attach to my handheld radio. That I consider to be quite essential in a plane, a totally independent backup. What if your complete electrics go down (very much possible, a short circuit somewhere)? Being able to communicate is the most important thing, situational awareness is guaranteed via mobile phone/tablet.
