What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Choosing an EFIS?? - Dynon, GRT, Advanced, MGL?

Surprisingly, the Garmin units are more popular than what may be reflected in this thread. Right now in our shop we have 3 different panels with G3X stuff being isntalled, and already have a number of customers flying behind it (including our own illustrious pink scooter drivin DR). I suppose a lot of those guys may not be super active in the forums, or just haven't posted as of yet. Yes it's more money than the lowest cost items, but it's again a apples/oranges comparison. It is a higher priced unit but it obviously carries a bit of a premium, and that premium is for a number of reasons that are too extensive for me to list here in detail. As I've stated in the past there is a significant difference between actual hardware, software, engineering, testing, R&D, etc..

Anyway, I just thought people may like to know that even though there may not be a lot of posts here about the G3X, they are reasonably popular and gaining in popularity every day.

Cheers,
Stein
 
Last edited:
benamyava said:
Six pages and no mention of the Garmin 3X.
...
So why follow when you can go with a leader?
Click to expand...

The G3X looks like a great system. I like the symbology in the PFD, things like the way the altitude and airspeed tapes look and flow, and the availability of a traditional, full-sized HSI display on the bottom. Large format map that works really well. The 696 is supposed to get geo-referenced approach plates, so the G3X will probably get them too. Garmin is going to be around for a while, but my guess is so will the larger of the smaller manufacturers.

Downsides: Very expensive for a single screen system, somewhat expensive for a dual-screen system, no EIS function available yet.

TODR
 
Mike D said:
[*]Integration of AP
  • a. GRT can use TT, Trio, and Nav-aid
  • b. Dynon can use dynon only
  • c. AFS has their own version of TT being developed but can use TT now.
Please, Please correct me if I am wrong.
Click to expand...

Hi Mike,

Just a small correction.

Dynon Gen 1 EFIS does not have moving map, so in no circumstance could drive an external autopilot. However, it was far less expensive than most other choices, and most folks had a primary navigation radio/GPS anyway. It also offered the least expensive AP upgrade option, which could be driven by whatever navigation system you used.

Dynon Skyview doesn't STOP you from using a third party autopilot; however, it just doesn't drive one.

Therefore - If you have a GNS 430 (or better yet, a GNS 480) as your primary IFR GPS, either of those will drive a TT or Trio just fine and it is pretty much irrelevant whether or not the EFIS can drive an external autopilot.

Again, it's just a matter of looking at it as a whole system, not as "what does my EFIS do."
 
akschu said:
I suppose I'll chime in here even though I should know better :rolleyes:

The idea of one brand doing IFR and not another is bogus. All of the EFIS's can do what steam gages did years ago and that worked just fine for a lot of people. Because of this the question isn't which brands can do IFR, rather, how well do they do IFR.

I feel that a good autopilot is critical to a well rounded IFR platform for a number of reasons. It can act as the backup source of attitude in a pinch, it frees the pilot of to think about navigating instead of flying, and if it's designed well it can add a bit of safety since it is less likely to make a mistake than you are.

Given those things I don't think that the MGL and Dynon autopilots are good IFR platforms since you can't get a fully coupled approach with them, and because neither are as mature (known to work in many different types) as the TT autopilot. In other words buying a TT autopilot was pretty much a requirement in my panel. For me this meant buying an EFIS that integrated well that provided the features I wanted. The only two on the market at that time that could do this where the AFS and GRT. I picked the one that I liked better.

So for me AFS/GRT with a TT are good for IFR, while the Dynon and MGL are not so great.
Click to expand...

Same comment I had above. I have a GNS 480 + TruTrak, so in my plane Dynon completes the picture (moving map, coupled approaches, Airways). MGL would have worked, too.

It's not about the EFIS. It's about the whole system.

Chocolate, or vanilla? :D
 
I did it

So I pulled the trigger today!!!

Thank you to everyone who chimed in, to all those who gave me their opinions through PM?s and to those who emailed me directly. All very good information.

I would like to relate my experience because there might be someone else trying to go through this, so forgive the preachy or soap box tone.

Some of the best advice came from those who said to look at the whole system. What I learned through this process is this is absolutely necessary when deciding what to buy. You can make any EFIS work with almost any other piece, BUT, and this is a big but, how easy is it?, what does it cost?, and how reliable is it? Everyone should re-read Paul?s post on ?Comparing and Contrasting: GRT and Dynon?. But use as advice to look at all the systems.

The market is moving fast. Check the dates on what you are reading, and find out when the person giving you advice formed their opinion. Things may have changed,(I ran into this alot) but the process is the same. 1) know your mission (and be truthful), 2) design a system that meets that mission.

Do you really need to toss out your system every 5 or so years? I sure hope not. Steam gauges work for years and years. Modular always costs more than all-in-one, but with modular you can change or build your system slower and more closely match your needs and budget. But if you have an all in one unit, hopefully the manufacture has a great upgrade program.

So what did I go with and why?????? (oh, this could be dangerous:))
The GRT Sport S200 (single screen) w/the EIS4000.

Why?
  1. Because they have a great trade up program
  2. Because the features advertized are working now, and shipping now (this is a remark about my timing not a hit to Dynon or AFS)
  3. Because I really don?t need synthetic vision
  4. Because I like the HITS, and moving map with obstruction warnings
  5. Because I like the AP serving as a independent back up (can be done with all systems but can the EFIS drive it)
  6. Because it has 90 percent of the features in the HX (all the features I want plus more)
  7. Because they gave me a good deal that includes the fuel flow and the current sensor
  8. Because all the pilots who I trust have a GRT?s and had reasons for their choice matched my mission. (okay, this is a gut reaction based reason, forgive me)
  9. Because it fit my budget (Garmin rarely fits my budget and is way over my budget on this area)

You can see there are a lot of I?s and my?s in these reasons. That is because these are the reasons suited to my situation. If you are looking at the different options, you will need to go through the same process I did to find the best system for you. But remember that you should be planning for a system and a mission, not just an EFIS. This is where I got tripped up and why this was so much work. Don?t get caught on the eye candy.

As for GRT, I don?t like the EIS module because it is so big, and with the data sent remote to the EFIS, I will hardly ever touch it. I like the Skyview EMS setup better. I will have to decide if I hide the EIS or put it on the panel. I also don?t like how on the GRT the right knob changes the barometric pressure. You don?t change it that often, so I don?t understand why GRT would make it a first level input. I would suggest to push the knob to activate the barometric pressure and let the first level function be the altitude bug. These are things I will have to adapt to. Every system has some of these things you will have to adapt to.

End of teaching from the soap box. :)

So, that is my story. I did not take this as lightly as these posts make it seem. I went to Osh and pushed the buttons, I talked to others (some are even ?experts? :)), I waited till Skyview came out to give it a fair shake, and even I looked for used. But I made my choice and I will have to live with it.

Thanks again to everyone!!!
 
benamyava said:
Six pages and no mention of the Garmin 3X.

I like the point made by the poster explaining the issue of how many units a plane will go through in an 8-10 year period. He stated he had used two units in a 4.5 year period. I want to do this once. I want it work.
Click to expand...

Good point on this - I can't vouch for the reliability of Garmin either way, but I can tell you the one occasion each where I have had to send my Dynon and Tru Trak products back for service was most inconvenient. It is hard to put a price on quality and peace-of-mind.



benamyava said:
Garmin is not going out of business. And Garmin is what every other manufacter copies in one form or another.

So why follow when you can go with a leader?
Click to expand...

Well as I said before, you can't put a price on reliability. But what kind of leader is Garmin? Not so much of one in the market of experimental aviation, or affordability. Dynon and Tru Trak each hold good sway in these fields, in my mind, considering the product and innovation you get for your buck.
 
Mike D said:
So, that is my story. I did not take this as lightly as these posts make it seem. I went to Osh and pushed the buttons, I talked to others (some are even ?experts? ), I waited till Skyview came out to give it a fair shake, and even I looked for used. But I made my choice and I will have to live with it.
Click to expand...

Oh how I understand this condition - I had purchased new Dynons in 2008 and now wish I could manage the expense of upgrading to Skyview panel! But, timing is everything!

I have even called and ordered some fantastic free brochures from Dynon Kelly and spoken with their sales representatives, who had all the right answers for what a Skyview would do in my overzealous VFR setup. But, the cost of upgrading is too much for now.

Dynon, now that you have this splendid new product, perhaps you will finally take that step towards the type-certificated market and send a Skyview to this Saratoga's lonely panel?!?
 
Mike D said:
So I pulled the trigger today!!!

...
So what did I go with and why?????? (oh, this could be dangerous:))
The GRT Sport S200 (single screen) w/the EIS4000.
...
Click to expand...

So what are you going to use for your nav function? It is my understanding that the GRT cannot be used for IFR flight.

What about your radios, intercom/audio panel, backup GPS (496?), weather, etc.?

Remember, you are building a system, not just selecting a video game.
 
Auburntsts said:
It is my understanding that the GRT cannot be used for IFR flight
Click to expand...
Hunh? Are you talking the Sport specifically or GRT in general? Would like to know details if you have any.
Click to expand...
Old debate. The GRT, Dynon, etc. can all be used for IFR flight when coupled with a certified navigation device appropriate for the flight at hand. Meaning you can't file using the internal GPS built into the GRT, just like you can't use a hand held for IFR flight.

At least that is my understanding, I always reserve the right to be wrong.
 
I have a KX-125 nav/comm, a lowrance 2000C, and a GTX320a now. I can change these out for an SL30, a Garmin X96 (or a GNS430), and a GTX330 as budget permits. I also have a Icom 200 as a second comm. The 2000C can hook up to the GRT and I can build slowly as budget permits. I won?t be going IFR/IMC anytime soon and I really need to learn how to use the GRT first.

I only have the Vans gauges and basic steam gauges now. So the EIS and EFIS were the priority.
 
I think that GRT has it right having the BARO on the right hand knob at the first level. If you are doing any amount of cross country work and cross a lot of systems you are constantly changing the altimeter setting especially in this area.
 
AP74

N941WR said:
As a Dynon Beta Tester, I would submit you simply don't know what you are talking about.

The Dynon AP has some safety features that just blow away the competition. Having the AP driven by the EFIS allows for all types of intelligence that you don't get with other AP's. That's all I'll say about this subject right now. If Dynon wants to elaborate, great, but I will add, the Dynon AP can be a life saver and perform in ways others, including TT can't.
Click to expand...

Having just put the new Dynon AP in my RV12 I would be curious where you have your sensitivity ratings set. I know a 9 is a different airplane but I've found the higher settings do a better job but shake a bit more. Trying to find the happy medium. I'm still amazed what it can do with just the EFIS and the Garmin 496.
 
Norman CYYJ said:
I think that GRT has it right having the BARO on the right hand knob at the first level. If you are doing any amount of cross country work and cross a lot of systems you are constantly changing the altimeter setting especially in this area.
Click to expand...

Yup - at the speed of the RV, cross-country flight will have you changing Baro settings more often than altitudes or climb/descent rates (the other curent uses for the knob). You'll know what we mean after you've made a few trips!

paul
 
Peterk said:
Having just put the new Dynon AP in my RV12 I would be curious where you have your sensitivity ratings set. I know a 9 is a different airplane but I've found the higher settings do a better job but shake a bit more. Trying to find the happy medium. I'm still amazed what it can do with just the EFIS and the Garmin 496.
Click to expand...
Pete,

Check your PM's. I didn't want to drift this thread.
 
Last edited:
Ironflight said:
Yup - at the speed of the RV, cross-country flight will have you changing Baro settings more often than altitudes or climb/descent rates (the other curent uses for the knob). You'll know what we mean after you've made a few trips!

paul
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more with both of you. The expansion modules Dynon sells are worth every dime! When first testing their AP I didn’t install the AP74 to get a feel of how the AP worked in that configuration. After installing the expansion module I can’t imagine flying without it.

Oh, and you can put the knob wherever you like and program the knob to serve several functions in any sequence you like. Dynon did a good job of listening to their beta testers when developing this feature.
 
Wish they would Open Source or Escrow the software

Consider this an open letter, request, or outright plea to the various glass panel makers: could you please change your software to open source or at least use a software escrow service in case of business failure?

Where I work (a government engineering office doing water resources numerical modeling) we had to abandon a GUI we had developed because the company making an SQL proprietary interface we used just quietly disappeared. They quit responding to queries with no warning or explanation. That, and the GUI IDE maker abandoned the platform. Again no warning or upgrade path.

Well, it's one thing if some software on your PC doesn't work anymore and you can't get an upgrade. Buy from another company, use freeware or shareware, maybe you lose $100. It's another thing entirely if your EFIS/AP/Glass Panel company quits or abandons the software. You're not out just the software, you're out $5000-$15,000 in hardware, and the huge trouble of installing something new. Hasn't happened yet but it can.

Given that the money is made in selling hardware, I think they should open-source the accompanying software. But maybe there's some proprietary or trade secrets in the code. OK, could you file it with a software escrow service that will release it under certain conditions, like going out of business?

Sure, most of us here couldn't take advantage of the source code. But some could, and in the potential worst case some clever person could make a little money resurrecting the software and keeping the hardware going for a few more years.
 
Long term viability of EFIS vendor

You've raised an issue that I have been contemplating as I ponder the various EFIS vendors and models that are currently available. It's the issue of the long term viability of each vendor. No one wants to spend thousands of dollars on the latest EFIS system just to hear that the company is closing their doors or not supporting the software/hardware/databases any longer. So do you go with large, well known, well capitalized company "G" with lots of employees, even though their product doesn't currently offer all the features of some of the other vendors and at a higher price? Or do you choose one of the other "cutting edge" vendors who offer products with a plethora of features at a more attractive price point, but that leave me (and maybe you) with the uneasy feeling caused by sending a significant amount of my money to a company that has few total employees, and maybe thinly capitalized. Since they are private companies, we don't know their financial strength, the number of employees, the number of units that they have sold, etc.

But what we do know is the reputation that these smaller companies have within our community, based on the dealings that others have had with them and reported in these forums. Trust is so difficult to gain and even harder to keep. And that's what makes the decision even harder. From what I have read in these forums, each of the EFIS vendors have ardent supporters and make good products.

What would make choosing an EFIS easier for me? I know that it would be expensive to develop and maintain, but a simulator that would run on my computer with which I could explore the features and user interface would help me decide which model best fits me and my needs.

Using a simulator and factoring in the wisdom gleaned from these forums, I feel that I would then be able to select the EFIS system that best fits my flying profile.
 
Hard and light IFR don't exist....What exist is VFR and VFR.

In IFR flight, you can get fair or bad weather. In bad weather is very tough, even the B747 captain have dificulties into a bad weather approach.

If you want to fly IFR you must be current (3 app in the last 3 months) and have some equipment fited.

If something fail, you need redundancy. I recomend 2 EFIS and back up analogic (ADI,altimeter, ASI).

AP is mandatory for IFR. You need at minimum a heading mode and altitude hold.

You need a nav/comm, not one but two (for redundancy).

You need DME. In europe the VOR app are with DME ad you need distance. Ok you can use GPS for distance....In Us to fly above 18500" you need DME

You need radar. if you fly at night, IFR, the radar can help you to avoid some CB's

ADF. In my airplane I want a ADF, why? to be proficient with it. At moment I'm ready and with enough skill to fly an NDB aproach. There is NDB app in Usa and a lot in mexico and South america

So, in IFR , we need redundancy (2 EFIS, 3 analogics, AP, with AH, 2 navs, 2 comms, one DME, and.....why not a ADF.)

what you need less to fly IFR is GPS.
 
I agree with this business about VFR and IFR...... there is no such thing as light IFR. :)

As for needing less GPS.....are you kidding :eek:

Not sure about your part of the world but down here with NDB's becomming decommissioned and unreliable and a LONG way apart, a TSO146GPS like a G530/430W is almost the benchmark. Along with VOR/ILS as a bonus.

Now back that with another radio and another GPS..... you are in good shape. But there are many parts here where an ADF is only good for listening to the Cricket scores on 612 :D

As an option to the analogues, if you go all electric and 2 x EFIS, just have two seperate power supplies.

Cheers

DB:cool:
 
A word of advice for EFIS shoppers. Have somebody, a friend that has the system or a vendor at a show, demonstrate some basic functionality before you buy a system. As much fun as it is to list and check off features, it is the simple things that really make an EFIS/EMS a joy or pain to use:
  • change baro
  • set/cancel bug
  • enter/exit fuel leaning mode
  • fill tanks on the fuel computer
  • modify EMS setting, e.g. oil temp red line

Other things to consider are flight recording/downloading and software updating.
 
Read the manual

a simulator that would run on my computer with which I could explore the features and user interface would help me decide which model best fits me and my needs.
Click to expand...

Choosing an EFFIS, Yes a simulator helps. I know of at least one vender that provides an EFIS simulator. Want to know about a particular manufactures product? Do what I do, read the user manual and installation manual. You can learn a great deal.
 
Buggsy2 said:
Consider this an open letter, request, or outright plea to the various glass panel makers: could you please change your software to open source or at least use a software escrow service in case of business failure?
Click to expand...

It is not necessary, and perhaps not advisable as a business model, to do this.

However, protection from company failure CAN be made available to your customers through either a provision in the company charter to GO open source upon failure, or to make the intellectual property a mandatory support item in the event the company is required.

These sorts of provisions are becoming "standard and expected" in proprietary software.
 
Sky View

It seems to me that most weather related accidents are VMC into IMC and that has ruined more than one persons day. The ability to have a better idea of what's under you and around you seems like a fine idea to me. The gentleman who mentioned he does not care what's under him when he is on an IFR flight might not have had an engine failure yet, and I say yet because they do fail. My old instructor told me two things you need to know about flying, 1. Flying is fun and 2. the engine is going to quit. He was right as I have found out on more than one occasion.
I am not a huge fan of single engine IFR, though I have been there more than once. I am not a fan of light twin IFR either (make mine a Turbine please) been there done that. When I do go IFR I like to have all the tools I can gather and with todays options I am amazed at my choices, Sky View,, yes please.
Not trying to cause any heartburn with anyone, just my view.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top