Several years ago I purchased the flight Cheetah Software (TrueMap) from Aviation Safety. Put it on a Motion M1300 with a WX Works Receiver and used it in a variety of pressurized twins and some high performance singles. Really liked it but it was large, Bulky, and difficult to see in the sunlight with its 260 nit screen. It also routinely crashed the hard drive above 11,000?. When I started flying the F1 I purchased their flight Cheetah 210 with a solid state hard drive. It is a stand-alone unit with a 100o nit screen that could be viewed under a bubble canopy in direct sunlight. The drive didn?t crash in the thin air. It ran on a skinnied down Windows NT system and occasionally crashed just because. Aviation safety was great to work with and they discounted the price of my 210 by the amount I paid for the original software for the M1300.
I sold the 210, along with my update subscription, with much regret when I installed the G4 BMAs in my new plane and purchased a Garmin496 as a backup. The original FL190s were on Motion M800s with a 280 nit screen and they just were not real readable in the light. The Samsung Q1 was no better.
The Samsung Q1 Ultra is the unit they are using for the FL190 now. It has a brighter screen (300 nits) and many more features than the vanilla Q1.
Recently I bought my wife a Q1 Ultra for her birthday. While playing with it I loaded my old TrueMap software turning it into a Flight Cheetah 190 but I needed the unlock code and several years of updates. Called Aviation Safety and it turns out (correctly so) that when they gave me the credit on my old software I really was no longer supposed to use it. They could have compelled me to pay for the software plus updates. But they were nice and gave me the code and only charged for updates. How many companies would do that?
Flew from Southwest Mississippi to Princeton New Jersey and back last week and ran the 496 side by side with the Flight Cheetah 190.
Viewability.
The FL 190 has a much bigger screen and is slightly easier to view than the 496 when in Terrain mode (not obstacle mode) in even bright sunlight conditions. When you turn the terrain off on the 190 it is hands down easier to view.
The FL 190 is easier to operate and navigate through menus with it?s on screen buttons than the 496 with its small buttons and rocker pad. This is in clear air and very mild turbulence.
Propensity to crash
Neither even hiccuped in 12+ hrs of flight time.
Cables attached to unit
Weather was severe clear so I did not use weather. Each unit had only 1 cable for the GPS antenna. Ran off battery power only. Fully cabled up each unit would have 3 cables?weather, antenna, aux power.
Refresh rate
No noticeable difference in refresh rate or speed at which units changed screens.
Information available and degree of difficulty in obtaining it.
No significant difference. The Flight Cheetah will be a bit more difficult for a new user who is used to the Garmins but with practice it is just as intuitive as the Garmin.
Traffic
Both units can display the Zaon traffic although I do not have it the FL190 display is larger and a bit more concise from what I have seen.
For IFR pilots
The Cheetah has approach plates and enroute charts co-located so you can follow your flight on them if you wish. The 496 does not offer these charts.
Battery life
I have the long life battery on the Q1 Ultra; it was still going strong 1 ? hours after the Garmin quit. (without weather unit attached)
The Garmin drains much more quickly when weather is attached. The Flight Cheetah will not power a weather receiver. The WxWorks receiver has to be powered by the aircraft.
The added benefit of the FL190 is that the Samsung unit is a real computer and can be used for all those things while travelling that you use your laptop for.
I actually like the new flight Cheetah well enough I am thinking of getting rid of the 496
What follows are several side by side photos of the 496 and Flight Cheetah 190 in bright indoor light conditions.
