What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Comparing and Contrasting: GRT and Dynon

asav8tor said:
........ wait........

ok...........


Nomex flight suit on......


ok, flame away.........:D
Click to expand...

You'll get no flames from me. I'm reluctant to install an autopilot too. If I need to take my hands off the controls to look at a chart or futz with something in the cockpit I just tell my wife (who flies with me at least 75% of the time) that it's 'her plane' (of which half of it really is, LOL).

I'm pondering a glass panel upgrade, and the Dynon seems to fit my day/minimal night VFR cross-country mission profile very well, but I'm starting to wonder if it all is really worth the expense. My steam gauges are serving me quite well, and the only things I'm feeling a real want for at the moment are a good fuel totalizer and a decent engine monitor. But when I ponder *any* kind of panel upgrade like that, I end up thinking, why not just bite the bullet and do the glass panel upgrade instead...I need help:confused:...or maybe some enablers :).

I have no troubles with the idea of doing the upgrade aside from the plane being down for a couple of months and writing that big check.

Thanks for your thoughtful contrasts of these two systems, Paul, but cost is going to play a big role in my decision to install a glass panel, and for me Dynon is looking best at the moment when I consider the feature set of the systems versus the cost and my mission. I like the ability the Dynon has of sharing display info across the serial bus, allowing the flight display to be placed on the passenger side of the cockpit in case the right seater is flying the plane. I plan on using a Garmin X96 in a AirGizmos dock for my moving map, and as I stated above, an autopilot may never be installed in my plane. I think your post helped me make a decision as to what I will do - that is, if I can just get beyond having to write that big check. The projected cost of installing a glass panel would buy a heck of a lot of avgas...but it would also make the plane more attractive to buyers when it finally comes time to sell it.

Back and forth, back and forth...what to do? :rolleyes:

Is Mikey going to be at Big Bend in February? I'd kinda like to see his face lift...
 
Last edited:
More EFIS/Auto Pilot Options

lostpilot28 said:
Hi Jeff,
I just wanted to mention that there are other EFIS vendors out there besides the 4 you mentioned. Even though some are brand new, they're worth considering. ;)
Click to expand...

One that I have been admiring is Tru Trak. I love the display and I understand they have a terrific auto pilot.
 
I did not forget Tru Trak. I have not seen their EFIS SG yet or read any reports. Aircraft spruce has them slated to come out this month. Bet that wont happen. The SG along with their autopilot and a GNS 430 would be pretty tight. Simply add a 496 for moving map and that would be a great panel.
Super simple.. I still like steam gauges for engine data.
 
jeff beckley said:
Dynon does not support third party autopilots and has said that they never will. I know they are developing their own autopilot but I must have a autopilot that is a separate system. I hate to think what would happen if the Glass goes belly up. With Dynon that will take out the A/P as well.
I do not want to have 20 button presses in order to have my A/P fly a simple ILS approach.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure we've said "never", but it's admittedly not too likely at this point (and it's certainly lower in priority than shipping our own auto pilot solution).

We definitely agree that you don't want a failure of your primary EFIS to take down your autopilot too. We'll have a compelling and price-competitive solution that will solve that problem handily (though we're not quite ready to talk specifics.)

Again without going into specifics, we also agree that you don't want 20 button presses to fly that coupled ILS approach either, and we'll have solutions for that problem too.
 
jeff beckley said:
It has been a while sense Dynon has updated us regarding there A/P. My point is while I am in the stage of panel planing for my next project I have to leave out Dynon as a contender. I have been burned in the past with promises of Gee Wis bang features only to be disappointed that it was all talk. A lot of time goes into a panel design. I do not want backup EFIS glass just so I can have redundancy of an autopilot. And I am sure not going to design a panel around future ware.
My frustration with Dynon is I want to incorporate there EFIS into a project I am working on now but I can not get past the fact that they will not support any autopilot that they do not make AND the fact that they do not have a autopilot. In my opinion this makes bad business sense. But what do I know?
I'm only the customer.
Just so I am not being misunderstood. I think Dynon has a great product. All four of the current front runners have a great product. GRT, Blue Mountain, Advance, Dynon.... None of them has what I think is the perfect system.
Click to expand...


You don't know how much I actually AGREE WITH YOU. If you're ready to start putting together your panel, and we're not quite there with a REAL PRODUCT you can buy and bolt to your airplane, I want you to rule us out. We've been guilty of getting a bit ahead of ourselves with advertising products that aren't quite there, and we're trying to find a better balance this time around. That's why we're letting people know where our next step is, without getting into deep details like configuration/pricing/pictures/etc just yet. We expect to have more information on our autopilot solution towards the air show season.
 
asav8tor said:
I have over 12,000 hrs total flight time, only 150 in RV's. A significant amount of the 12k was autopilot on, perhaps 7K. When I fly the RV the last thing I want is an autopilot. I can't believe you guys do all this hands on to build your own airplane then want to be hands off to fly it.
Click to expand...

With all the good mountain scenery that we have, I've found it much more interesting to look at far off places in the distance, as well as scanning for other aircraft............while on A/P.

Read an interview with an aging instructor/commercial pilot a few months ago. This time, he took a trip as a passenger, and was surprised just how beautiful the mountain country actually was. Say's he never got to see it as well, while acting as the pilot. IMO, the auto-pilot lets one do that, at least a bit more.

L.Adamson
 
Valkyries Autopilot

rv8180 said:
Ahem.......
Click to expand...

Since you asked twice...Tru-Trak Pictorial Pilot and AlTrak....I wrote that in one of the earlier posts in this thread...

Now I'm back on vacation, computer off!;)
 
Last edited:
Base your choice on your mission

Great writeup - now I'll throw in my 2 cents worth here.

I'm friends with the guy who installed one of the first 10 GRTs. Then pulled it out and installed another of the first 10 GRTs. And then pulled the whole thing out and sent it back.

While I'm glad they worked their problems out, I think it's only fair to say that every complex device goes through growing pains.

Ok, so I think either unit is now mature enough to be my primary flight display,how do I decide? The same way you chose your airframe - by the mission you most intend to fly.

I fly intense IFR cross country, and fly with my wife who is not a pilot (but will be able to land the airplane soon). That said, I built my panel around my primary radio (GNS 480, not the 430) which I chose because I can program in the airways just the way they give you your clearance - which is really, really nice up east where they ALWAYS hand out airways and it is such a pain searching your charts to be sure you programmed in the right ones because some make little dog-legs that will get you in trouble.

By the way, they have announced that the 480 is to be discontinued - so for those of you building, expect to see some deals on inventory fairly soon.

My next choice was also a no-brainer. I chose the TruTrack VSGV so that my 480 can fly the approach (either ILS or GPS) down to minimums and, if I don't break out, will fly the missed approach and enter holding for me. Do I intend to let it do that? Not at all - like the original poster here I prefer to hand fly all my approaches to keep myself current. But, I'm getting older - and what does my wife do in the weather if I conk out? So, I've programmed in my flight plan (including airways) and my precision approach at the beginning of the flight, and no matter what happens it will get her safely to within 1/2 mile. We will, of course, be conducting classes on how to re-program the flight plan. However, I have some previous experience with the TruTrack and I feel comfortable that as a last resort if she gets within 1/2 mile she could simply dial in a 500'/min descent and it would land FOR her...

Having decided already on those pieces of equipment, I next decided on my backup nav. I chose the Garmin 496 for a mirror of the 480 GPS display; weather; terrain; and obstacles. I can then choose anything at all for an emergency radio, or nothing (remember you can go NORDO to your filed destination if need be). I may even activate XM Radio for our listening pleasure, but that is irrelevant to this discussion.

So, I ALREADY have moving map; airways; approaches; terrain; weather; obstacles; and a fully capable FMS & Autopilot. What is left is a niche that the Dynon fills perfectly for my needs.

It is not that GRT doesn't offer more features, just that I don't need them or their added expense. And Dynon has awesome customer support.

And as for those newer siren songs of cheaper solutions - have at it guys. For me, I want something that has matured a bit for my wifes' piece of mind (pun intended)...
 
Second Look

Bill,

Huge thanks for your opinion/input, it caused me to put Dynon back into the running and crunch the numbers again. It also caused me to look at my mission (light IFR) and realize that some of the GRT features are beyond "need" and into the realm of "nice" - things like synthetic approaches, HITS & velocity vector, and what amounts to a 3rd moving map. All extremely "cool" but in light of the following, no longer a no-brainer.

HTML: 
GRT:
$8,995.00 GRT Dual Disp Pkg	
   475.00 GRT ARINC 429 Interface
    35.00 Fuel Pressure
    60.00 Manifold Pressure
   375.00 Fuel Flow
    27.90 USB Panel Mount x 2
$9,967.90 Total

Dynon:
$2,600.00 Dynon EFIS-D100 (SBrt)
$2,200.00 Dynon EMS-D120 (SBrt)
   650.00 Dynon HS34
   130.00 Dynon Backup Battery
   600.00 Dynon EMS-L4F Pkg
   200.00 Dynon Fuel Flow
    20.00 USB to Serial Converter
$6,400.00 Total

That is > $3,500 price difference and the backup battery is gravy, so I'm at least back on the fence and perhaps won over. I'm also back to thinking seriously of 480 vs. 430w. I'd already decided to stick with the VSGV and you've helped ratify that.

Thanks (really) :rolleyes:

George
(indecision may or may not be my problem)
 
George,

Just so you know, the Dynon D100 comes with a USB-serial adapter, so no need to buy an extra one from us if you go that route.
 
USB

I knew the EFIS did, I assumed I needed one for the EMS. If one will work for the two, then yay!

George
 
Compare it to the GRT Sport... it'd be a bit more fair comparison... still not quite apples-to-apples.... but closer (and much smaller price gap)
 
asav8tor said:
I have over 12,000 hrs total flight time, only 150 in RV's. A significant amount of the 12k was autopilot on, perhaps 7K. When I fly the RV the last thing I want is an autopilot. I can't believe you guys do all this hands on to build your own airplane then want to be hands off to fly it.

As far as IFR goes no amount of cockpit equipment will make the RV an all weather flyer. IFR in a SE piston plane is a marginal game where you lose in ice, snow or power plant failure. Fly the RV as the man intended. If you want to push buttons save gas and money and use MS flight simulator.
Click to expand...

In my humble opinion, the flight characteristics of the RV are the very reason I want an autopilot, and it really has little to do with IMC flying. It has to do with workload management and fatigue.

An RV has very sensitive controls (compared to most general aviation aircraft) and has a fairly snug cockpit (not to mention that tandem-seat RVs require some slightly more creative IFR cockpit organization than a side-by-side cockpit). I'll also be flying it single-pilot most of the time. If I happen to be going somewhere far away, I'll probably be filing IFR and cruising high.

So let's total those up: We've got the more rigorous standards of single-pilot IFR, the requirement to be very organized with your maps, charts and approach plates due to limited cockpit space, the inability to move around much and stretch your legs -- all this combined with a lower partial pressure of oxygen to breathe. It all makes for tiring flights sometimes, especially if your workload is high because of whatever the controller's demands are. Anyone who flies IFR in the busy Northeastern-US corridor knows what that's like.

I ferried a friend's Pitts across the country once (no autopilot, of course) and even at the energetic age of 19, I was still pretty darned tired after that many hours of constantly flying the airplane. I know an RV will "trim out" better than a Pitts, but still...

In the military, two of the aircraft types I flew in the 1980s/90s did not have autopilots at the time, so we used to hand-fly for many hours at a time without an autopilot. The first autopilots that showed up made life magical. It became a lot less fatiguing and therefore safer to go long distances when you could, say, fold a map properly without worrying about losing 200 feet and throwing the controllers into a conniption.

So I'm looking forward to arriving at my destinations with enough energy to actually enjoy where I've arrived. I agree with you completely that for most of my flying, the last thing I want is an autopilot. That's why it has an off switch. :D

It sure is nice, though, to turn it on for those times when it's needed.
 
breister said:
My next choice was also a no-brainer. I chose the TruTrack VSGV so that my 480 can fly the approach (either ILS or GPS) down to minimums and, if I don't break out, will fly the missed approach and enter holding for me. ...
Click to expand...

So the 480 generates the GPS steering command for VOR/LOC/GS?

Cool... Thats just great, another option to try to pick from!:D
 
The Sport would be a better comparison to the Dynon as far as price now that we are making ARINC-429 available for the Sport.

GRT:
$7000.00 GRT Dual Sport HS Pkg (Includes GPS option)
475.00 GRT ARINC 429 Interface (Available for the Sport 4/08)
35.00 Fuel Pressure
60.00 Manifold Pressure
375.00 Fuel Flow
27.90 USB Panel Mount x 2
$7,972.90 Total

Dynon:
$2,600.00 Dynon EFIS-D100 (SBrt)
$2,200.00 Dynon EMS-D120 (SBrt)
650.00 Dynon HS34
130.00 Dynon Backup Battery
600.00 Dynon EMS-L4F Pkg
200.00 Dynon Fuel Flow
90.00 Wiring harness
65.00 OAT
20.00 USB to Serial Converter
$6,535.00 Total


Todd Stehouwer
Grand Rapids Technologies
 
Brantel said:
So the 480 generates the GPS steering command for VOR/LOC/GS?

Cool... Thats just great, another option to try to pick from!:D
Click to expand...

That is what I have been told - and I will be stewed if it doesn't work! TruTrack says it is supposed to work, but still lists it as "unverified" on their site. If the TruTrack can get the ILS info off the ARINC stream, then the Dynon should, too.

Supposedly it passes everything as an NMEA / ARINC data stream. It may require pushing the OBS button to get it to switch which data stream gets encoded, but I haven't been able to get reliable reports from anyone who has actually DONE this.

On the Dynon forum, this thread follows someone who is about to press-to-test on this issue. Hopefully he will report soon...
 
grjtucson said:
Bill,

Huge thanks for your opinion/input, it caused me to put Dynon back into the running and crunch the numbers again. It also caused me to look at my mission (light IFR) and realize that some of the GRT features are beyond "need" and into the realm of "nice" - things like synthetic approaches, HITS & velocity vector, and what amounts to a 3rd moving map. All extremely "cool" but in light of the following, no longer a no-brainer.

HTML: 
GRT:
$8,995.00 GRT Dual Disp Pkg	
   475.00 GRT ARINC 429 Interface
    35.00 Fuel Pressure
    60.00 Manifold Pressure
   375.00 Fuel Flow
    27.90 USB Panel Mount x 2
$9,967.90 Total

Dynon:
$2,600.00 Dynon EFIS-D100 (SBrt)
$2,200.00 Dynon EMS-D120 (SBrt)
   650.00 Dynon HS34
   130.00 Dynon Backup Battery
   600.00 Dynon EMS-L4F Pkg
   200.00 Dynon Fuel Flow
    20.00 USB to Serial Converter
$6,400.00 Total

That is > $3,500 price difference and the backup battery is gravy, so I'm at least back on the fence and perhaps won over. I'm also back to thinking seriously of 480 vs. 430w. I'd already decided to stick with the VSGV and you've helped ratify that.

Thanks (really) :rolleyes:

George
(indecision may or may not be my problem)
Click to expand...

Yes, the 480 is a strange duck that changes the equation. Many poo-pooh it because it is not quite as user-friendly as the 430 - but when you think of it as a certified FMS system instead of a Nav/Comm you have to reconsider. I am convinced that this is why Garmin wanted (yes, wanted) it dead - it put the hurt on their dreams of a G1000 in every cockpit.

I agree with others who think that this is a GOLDEN opportunity for other avionics producers to reverse-engineer something like the 480 and seriously undercut Garmins' monopoly in this niche. The only thing my "solution" doesn't provide is the final approach charts, otherwise I would have a complete EFB with my chosen suite. I'm leaning towards EFlyBook at this point, but will wait until I'm flying again to see what's what at that time. If the Garmin knew the DH for GPSS approaches and if every runway had a GPSS approach I would never need an approach plate - just let the airplane fly the approach. This is particularly annoying because it would have taken very little additional programming and data space to include these altitudes - but they left them out on purpose exactly for the reason that they don't want to rely on GPS altitude during the approach (it could vary from baro, causing sequencing problems).

My final rant is that baro altitude should be eliminated and replaced by GPS altitude, with baro to be used only in emergencies. But that will be many years yet.
 
breister said:
I am convinced that this is why Garmin wanted (yes, wanted) it dead - it put the hurt on their dreams of a G1000 in every cockpit.
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt that... the boxes are sooooo different that I can't imagine there would ever be a G900 sale lost to a 480... Garmin decided to focus more of their efforts on the 430/530Ws. There should be some nice improvements in the future.
 
todds said:
The Sport would be a better comparison to the Dynon as far as price now that we are making ARINC-429 available for the Sport.

GRT:
$7000.00 GRT Dual Sport HS Pkg (Includes GPS option)
475.00 GRT ARINC 429 Interface (Available for the Sport 4/08)
35.00 Fuel Pressure
60.00 Manifold Pressure
375.00 Fuel Flow
27.90 USB Panel Mount x 2
$7,972.90 Total

Dynon:
$2,600.00 Dynon EFIS-D100 (SBrt)
$2,200.00 Dynon EMS-D120 (SBrt)
650.00 Dynon HS34
130.00 Dynon Backup Battery
600.00 Dynon EMS-L4F Pkg
200.00 Dynon Fuel Flow
90.00 Wiring harness
65.00 OAT
20.00 USB to Serial Converter
$6,535.00 Total


Todd Stehouwer
Grand Rapids Technologies
Click to expand...

Hi Todd,

Careful comparing the Sport in this specific instance - unless you are ready to change your website / documentation. According to their brochure, it will only accept VOR / ILS inputs from the SL30. Don't know if that signal is compatible with the 430/530 or 480, but if it were I think you would be advertising it. Also, pricing for the engine monitoring appears to be "optional" - and there is no line item in your price estimate for that feature. Not saying that you can't get the above cheaper than dual Horizons, just be careful what features you need before you quote price. And, unfortunately, any additional functionality you offer over the Dynon is irrelevant if the user doesn't NEED it.

On the flip side, you don't get dual AHRS with the 120/100 combination (it appears that the Sport has an internal, non-optional AHARS) - you are just getting "information sharing." That adds a safety margin not present in his specified choice.

My personal choice was to go with a single D180 initially, with steam gages and a hand radio to let someone talk me down if the world ends up in a basket. For exactly that reason I have the 496 able to talk to the D180 when both are on internal battery power only.

I can't tell from the GRT specifications, but I also think the GRT has a smaller screen than the 7" diagonal Dynon. My eyes aren't getting younger - and I paid extra for the brighter screen.

But my wallet was very thin after purchasing the 480 and TruTrack, and at the end of the day that drove many of my considerations. I have as much as I can stand in my toy now, so any other choice will have to wait for the future.

By the way, there WAS one non-mission critical factor in my decision. With my decision to go single EFIS / Steam backup, screen appearance was important - and I didn't like the side-by-side PFD / EMS of the GRT nearly as well as the Dynon. Since that will be the display I will generally have selected I thought it was important that I feel comfortable with that. The Odessey / Enigma are programmable in that regards, but I didn't feel they have passed the maturity test yet and so accepted "only what I needed" in the functionality area rather than ride the bleeding edge of technology.

Regards,

Bill
 
MNRVFlyer said:
I seriously doubt that... the boxes are sooooo different that I can't imagine there would ever be a G900 sale lost to a 480... Garmin decided to focus more of their efforts on the 430/530Ws. There should be some nice improvements in the future.
Click to expand...

Like Airways? I seriously doubt it considering their attitude towards that in the past.

Too, it wouldn't be "a G900 sale lost to a 480." It would be a G900/1000 lost to a 480 plus a third party display and autopilot, for a bunch less money.

By the way, disregard looking for a replacement 37-pin connector for my 480. Got it already.

Cheers,

Bill
 
Brantel said:
Where is this list of verified and unverified units?
Click to expand...

For the Dynon, see page 4-5 of the FlightDek D180 installation guide.

For the TruTrack it has been so long I don't recall where I saw their note - it may have been updated since then. You can probably call them and they will tell you if it has been verified in all flight modes.

Edit: TruTrack defines what is necessary to drive their DigiFlight autopilots in their FAQs. What they do not mention specifically there is how a VOR or ILS signal can be interpreted by their autopilots. Some of their older autopilots (and the Sorcerer) accept VOR / ILS signals natively - you may have to read the documentation for each of those units to see what radios are supported.

The 480 is a special case because (reportedly, and I'm gonna be mad if it isn't true!) it converts the VOR / ILS output signals to NMEA format. This is neat if for no other reason than that you only have to connect two wires from the 480 to an EFIS or an autopilot to convey ALL of the information it is capable of outputting.

The GRT reportedly outputs an NMEA autopilot steering signal, but I don't know if it accepts / converts the analog VOR / ILS signals from other radios. So, it might be possible, for example, to hook up an SL30 to a GRT and then to a Digiflight II VSGV and have it fly an ILS for you - but I don't know that for certain.

The field is still young, and you have to study very carefully to see which combination of gadgets give you all the features you need while playing nice together. The alternative, of course, is to do what Garmin wants and by a G900/1000 - for many thou$and$ of dollar$.

Cheers,

Bill
 
Last edited:
Hi Bill,

You are correct in the website is out of date and the Sport has some new features. We will launch our new website in the next couple of days.

The Dual Sport package includes an engine monitor. The package is equivalent to the Dynon 100/120 combination and has only 1 AHRS. The price I quoted is correct. We will have an external ARINC-429 module for the Sport in April. This will allow the Sport to connect to the Garmin 430/480 and 300XL.

The Sport will also be able to connect to the Digiflight IICSVG and couple to LOC/GS/VOR from the SL30, 430/480, and 300XL. The Sport will be able to control the autopilot vertically as the Horizon Series I does. We do convert the NAV signal to ARINC-429 to drive the Trutrak Autopilot.

The engine data can be displayed on the bottom of the screen without loosing any of the PFD display.

HSPFDENG511x380.JPG


The Dynon D100 and the GRT Sport-HS are of simular size, the Dynon is slightly larger.

Todd Stehouwer
Grand Rapids Technologies, Inc.
 
Oh man, is that sweet! There are not many better-looking displays than that, even in Boeings, Gulfstreams, etc. You guys should make a wall calendar out of pictures like that.

(Sorry. I got all excited. Couldn't help it.) :D
 
todds said:
Hi Bill,

You are correct in the website is out of date and the Sport has some new features. We will launch our new website in the next couple of days.
Click to expand...

Glad I didn't say, "It doesn't do it!" as opposed to "your documentation says..." :)

The Dual Sport package includes an engine monitor. The package is equivalent to the Dynon 100/120 combination and has only 1 AHRS. The price I quoted is correct. We will have an external ARINC-429 module for the Sport in April. This will allow the Sport to connect to the Garmin 430/480 and 300XL.
Click to expand...

Ain't competition a wonderful thing? A package for head to head comparison...

The Sport will also be able to connect to the Digiflight IICSVG and couple to LOC/GS/VOR from the SL30, 430/480, and 300XL. The Sport will be able to control the autopilot vertically as the Horizon Series I does. We do convert the NAV signal to ARINC-429 to drive the Trutrak Autopilot.
Click to expand...

(Bold mine) - and there is a truly competitive feature. You just took away half of the reason I chose the GNS 480, the fact that it natively puts out ARINC for both GPS and NAV source data and thus can drive my favorite autopilot. And if /when your EFIS knows airways and approaches and departures and lets you handle the flight planning you also have a solution for skipping the "Big Iron" Garmin altogether and just going with an SL30 and an inexpensive internal GPS receiver that meets TSO.

The engine data can be displayed on the bottom of the screen without loosing any of the PFD display.
Click to expand...

Looks like you borrowed that idea from Enigma? Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery! Doesn't matter - it is a better use of screen real estate.

The Dynon D100 and the GRT Sport-HS are of simular size, the Dynon is slightly larger.
Click to expand...

Yes, but I actually prefer your "lower 20%" view - you could even split the upper part in half.

Well, the real nut of life is that you have to make decisions at a point in time. For me, that point is past and I'll still be happy with what I have. For others this may be a deciding factor.

Cheers,

Bill
 
Now with all these features, the Dual Sport Package is really making my mouth water!

Hopefully that new website includes a user forum!

todds said:
Hi Bill,

You are correct in the website is out of date and the Sport has some new features. We will launch our new website in the next couple of days.

The Dual Sport package includes an engine monitor. The package is equivalent to the Dynon 100/120 combination and has only 1 AHRS. The price I quoted is correct. We will have an external ARINC-429 module for the Sport in April. This will allow the Sport to connect to the Garmin 430/480 and 300XL.

The Sport will also be able to connect to the Digiflight IICSVG and couple to LOC/GS/VOR from the SL30, 430/480, and 300XL. The Sport will be able to control the autopilot vertically as the Horizon Series I does. We do convert the NAV signal to ARINC-429 to drive the Trutrak Autopilot.

The engine data can be displayed on the bottom of the screen without loosing any of the PFD display.

HSPFDENG511x380.JPG


The Dynon D100 and the GRT Sport-HS are of simular size, the Dynon is slightly larger.

Todd Stehouwer
Grand Rapids Technologies, Inc.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
BuckWynd said:
Oh man, is that sweet! There are not many better-looking displays than that, even in Boeings, Gulfstreams, etc. You guys should make a wall calendar out of pictures like that.

(Sorry. I got all excited. Couldn't help it.) :D
Click to expand...

I've been thinking about the idea of producing an RV/Swimsuit calander for the last several months. I guess I'll have to rethink that idea a bit...
 
todds said:
...The engine data can be displayed on the bottom of the screen without loosing any of the PFD display.

HSPFDENG511x380.JPG


The Dynon D100 and the GRT Sport-HS are of simular size, the Dynon is slightly larger.

Todd Stehouwer
Grand Rapids Technologies, Inc.
Click to expand...

Very good to see the engine monitor displayed below the PFD. Up to this point my biggest concern about the GRT Sport system was not being able to see the engine data display when the moving map was set to full screen on the S100. My understanding is that this display arrangement is only available with the HS display, is that correct?

Also, I know I asked this question when I spoke with Carlos the other day, but will it be possible to put the moving map onto the S200 with the PFD as a split display? Sorry Carlos, I should have taken better notes of our conversation.
 
Todd,

Can you sum up the differences in the Series 1 and the new Sport series?

Will the WAAS IFR GPS be available for the Sport? What about price for it for the Series 1?

I've been weighing features and would love to add the Sport to this list.

Thank you for spending time on this forum answering our questions.

(Even though the Dynon ranks low in my mind today, it's still an option for me. I don't mean to ruffle any feathers with my rankings.)

todds said:
Hi Bill,

You are correct in the website is out of date and the Sport has some new features. We will launch our new website in the next couple of days.

The Dual Sport package includes an engine monitor. The package is equivalent to the Dynon 100/120 combination and has only 1 AHRS. The price I quoted is correct. We will have an external ARINC-429 module for the Sport in April. This will allow the Sport to connect to the Garmin 430/480 and 300XL.

The Sport will also be able to connect to the Digiflight IICSVG and couple to LOC/GS/VOR from the SL30, 430/480, and 300XL. The Sport will be able to control the autopilot vertically as the Horizon Series I does. We do convert the NAV signal to ARINC-429 to drive the Trutrak Autopilot.

The engine data can be displayed on the bottom of the screen without loosing any of the PFD display.

HSPFDENG511x380.JPG


The Dynon D100 and the GRT Sport-HS are of simular size, the Dynon is slightly larger.

Todd Stehouwer
Grand Rapids Technologies, Inc.
Click to expand...
 
Hey Sid,
Nice looking chart...I'm too lazy to do my own, but thought it would be worth trying to twist your arm to add more EFIS systems, like MGL's Odyssey. :D
 
Sid,
I'd like to make a few comments about your table:

You clearly weigh safety as your largest category. In fact, if you delete this element, the GRT, AFS, and Dynon are within 3.5 points of one another, and GRT is lowest.

Because safety is a huge factor to you, I suggest you re-think what makes a safe system. It's not just Pitot.

First, all of your systems include only one ADAHRS (the attitude system) sensor pack. So none of your packages are really a good idea for IFR, since they all have single failure points. With the Dynon system, you can upgrade the D120 to a D180 for $1200 and have a totally redundant primary flight instruments.

It's unclear whether or not you're going for an IFR capable airplane there, but note that none of the systems that you've configured can be used for IFR navigation either since they don't have a certified GPS. If you aren't going IFR, you may not want to include the HS34 and ARINC modules in the system prices. These are really only needed when you are hooking to a Garmin 430/480. With the GRT you may need it since you want to drive an AP.

Second, while the D180 is a single screen, and the D100/D120 is dual screen, there is still only one ADAHRS in the system, so they really are equally as "safe" if all you are thinking about is the EFIS.

Third, there's a lot more to safe operation than just reliance on Pitot. Some of your other configurations are totally reliant on electrical power in the plane, while both the Dynon and AFS units have internal backup batteries. Electrical failure is much more likely than a clogged pitot.

Also note that some other systems perform "better" when they have some combination of magnetometer, gps, and airspeed. How degraded each system's attitude performance without those various factors is a bit hard to determine. We're upfront about saying that we really do require pitot for best performance, but even our system can cope (with somewhere between slightly and significantly degraded performance) if your pitot ends up clogged, just as long as you take it very easy on the maneuvers. We do honestly believe that clogged pitot tubes (assuming you have heat to combat ice, which you ought to have anyway for IFR) are pretty rare. You're much more likely to have your GPS drop out for some reason or have your electrical system fail.

On top of that, the prices you have for the Dynon and AFS both have 496 units, so even if the EFIS goes out, you still have an independent GPS that runs on batteries, which gives you SOME increased situational awareness (some claim that you can fly a 496 in an emergency, but we're skeptical). In your GRT configuration, in contrast, your panel is blank if the power goes out.

Finally, if for some reason the system loses power or reboots in flight, the Dynon EFIS will come back up within a few seconds, while other systems can take minutes. Airspeed gives us some advantages as well, not just downsides. The precision and robustness of our attitude indication is hard to beat when you have it.

Again, since safety is really the only thing that differentiates the units on your table, you should really think about ALL the failure modes possible in your plane, and what you need to continue to fly it in a safe manner in each failure, and what the chance of each failure is. When was the last time you got a bug in your pitot when you were in the clouds?
 
Last edited:
Thank you very much for your input.

I agree with you that I have an unfounded fear of a pitot system failure. I also agree the most likely failure would be of my hand built electrical system. I think the 100 & 120 have a decently redundant system with a battery backup, 496 and 2 axis Trutrak in mind.

Just for some reason I don't want to put the 496 in a brand new aircraft. I guess it seems like I am being a tight wad not going for the 530W with the XM weather module. This will be an "IFR light" aircraft in the beginning with no plans to shoot IMC approaches to the minimums regularly in it. Emergency IFR only if you will.

Don't let the chart fool you, Dynon is winning the race to my checking account at the moment as I have already purchased and installed your heated AOA pitot with Safeair1's tubing system.

I look forward to pressing buttons at all the vendor's booths at Oshkosh this year as I won't make Sun-n-fun for the first time in many many years.

Thanks again for spending the time.
 
what i hate most about a forum

post removed, as it seemed to be to harsh for some. that was not the intent. and it has come to my realization that communication without an existing interpersonal relationship leads to people getting offended and feeling insulted. constructive criticism does not always present itself as such.
 
Last edited:
Cytoxin,

There were other aspects of this case that weren't elaborated on, likely because it wasn't necessary to do so, that let us down the path we chose.

When Paul initially contacted me with this case, we spent a fair bit of time discussing wire chases, connection integrity and continuity from pin to pin on all harness applications. All of this tested good with a VOM so logic dictated we move past conductors and look toward other causes of this failure. With respect to interconnection of two units that work independently, but seem to have trouble talking to each other, I am always suspicious of that interconnection link. I had, honestly, felt that we had covered all our bases and instructed Paul to move on. I suppose if we want to ?fault? someone here, I guess it would have to be me because I never told Paul to rip the connectors apart and make sure that all crimp pins were seated securely in the sockets. I was fooled by the VOM continuity just as Paul was, not considering at the time that the VOM probe entered the socket with enough depth to over come the recess. I suppose we live and learn.

We had a limited amount of BIT information being provided from the units and what we did have pointed towards the D10A being the potential problem. I will elaborate for good orders sake. As everything was initially installed, when an attempt to configure the DSAB network was made from the D180, which was to be the master, it would get hung on step 2 of 4. After resetting the units to bring us back to square one, I instructed Paul to attempt to configure the D10A as the master and see what happened. Upon doing that, the D10A would freeze hard, which was very abnormal behavior. Armed with this information, I asked Paul to sever the DSAB link between the two units and attempt to configure each unit individually. Upon doing so, both units would configure by themselves with no problem. In hind sight, this makes perfect sense, but at the time was odd because when linked together they wouldn?t make it happen. Since both units exhibited odd, but different, behavior when attempting DSAB configuration, I made the decision to send a refurbished D10A since the total freezing of the existing unit was more abnormal than the behavior of the other. This decision was the best I could make given the time constraints of the customer and the information I had at the time. I still think it was a good one, just not the right one.

This didn?t fix it, of course, which meant the D180 was all that was left. Since I felt confident that the wiring was OK, and we had ruled the D10A, this seemed logical. I told Paul we would try the swap when convenient for him. The rest of the story you know.

I do not advocate shotgun style trouble shooting. I believe it causes more harm that good because the potential to damage known good gear and never know it is high. In this case, you have to keep in mind that the units worked perfectly solo. My honest theory was that one of the RS-485 transceivers in one of the units had a lifted TX or RX line. I just had to figure out which one. I was technically right, it just turned out that it was external to the units. Based on this theory, I felt it safe to attempt O level trouble shooting. I probably wouldn?t vary much in the future, except to pay particular attention to the pins in the harnesses.

This whole situation was complicated due to a very tight schedule that Paul was trying to keep for Louise. I had to move quickly to ensure that her plans were kept intact. Not everyone I deal with has such a rigid schedule and flexibility is somewhat more the norm. I take customer support quite seriously and try to ensure that everyone is treated fairly and with the highest level of respect. It?s not that I thought Paul was any more or less technically inclined than anyone I talk to on a daily basis. If you are motivated enough to build a plane out of thousands of pieces shipped to you in a crate, then fly it around, then I am motivated enough to help you when you?re in a pinch with a piece of gear that I represent.

Fair Winds!

Eric
 
wow

post removed, as it seemed to be to harsh for some. that was not the intent. and it has come to my realization that communication without an existing interpersonal relationship leads to people getting offended and feeling insulted. constructive criticism does not always present itself as such.
 
Last edited:
Sid Lambert said:
Todd,

Can you sum up the differences in the Series 1 and the new Sport series?

Will the WAAS IFR GPS be available for the Sport? What about price for it for the Series 1?

I've been weighing features and would love to add the Sport to this list.
Click to expand...

Hi Sid,

The Sport is getting some upgrades that bring its capabilities very close to that of the Horizon Series I.

1) ARINC-429 module, allows integration to the 430/530/480 and the Trutrak IIVSVG

2) Vertical navigation for the Trutrak Digiflight IIVSVG, including coupled approach. The Sport will do lateral with any autopilkot without the ARINC-429.

3) Full inter-display link same as the Horizon Series I. Including cross checking of the AHRS if the seconf Sport has an AHRS.

4) New price structure and options, basically we made the Sport capable of MAP and ENG just by supplying the data, so an external GPS gives our full mapping same as the Series I.

We do not have plans at this time of making the RAIM GPS available for the Sport.

The Series I has greater redundancy because the AHRS is external and feeds all the displays. Any display can fail and the AHRS information is still available on the other display. With dual AHRS you even better, either display or AHRS could fail and your still have all the information available.

The Series I can also integrate a third or even forth display.

Todd Stehouwer
Grand Rapids Technologies, Inc.
 
Some comments on Sid's chart.

I do not have the price in front of me, I am not at work and we just set the pricing today, but a 2 screen Sport-HS package both having an internal AHRS, an engine monitor with the same sensor package you listed for the Series I and ARINC-429 is under $8000. Our new website will be up tomorrow before the end of the day.

You have the brightness score of 3.5 compared to the AFS at 5.0, the AFS 6.5" screen has the same LCD as our Sport. So they start out at the same brightness, but we had our screens modified to be brighter than they are from the manufacturer. I am not sure about the 8.5" display, maybe you are comparing us the that. This is for our Series I HS, and Sport-HS screens.

For the AOA we can display many of the manufactures AOA systems, not that you really need to, since they provide thier own display.

For the for the NAV we display 3 sources at once for our HSI, and 2 sources on the PFD.

Hey, just trying for all the points I can. ;)

Todd Stehouwer
Grand Rapids Technologies, Inc.
 
todds said:
The engine data can be displayed on the bottom of the screen without loosing any of the PFD display.

HSPFDENG511x380.JPG



Todd Stehouwer
Grand Rapids Technologies, Inc.
Click to expand...

Todd, can the regular units---non sport---be configured to display as shown above??

I have dual GRTs and am just getting the panel working, but havent seen that particular configuration displayed yet.

Thanks,
 
MacNab said:
Very good to see the engine monitor displayed below the PFD. Up to this point my biggest concern about the GRT Sport system was not being able to see the engine data display when the moving map was set to full screen on the S100. My understanding is that this display arrangement is only available with the HS display, is that correct?

Also, I know I asked this question when I spoke with Carlos the other day, but will it be possible to put the moving map onto the S200 with the PFD as a split display? Sorry Carlos, I should have taken better notes of our conversation.
Click to expand...

This extra engine display is only available on the HS. The HS is 4:3 screen format as compared to the 16:9 of our original screen. Using the same software left the area at the bottom of the screen. Had to fill it with something.

Both the Sport S100 and S200 can have split screens.

Todd Stehouwer
Grand Rapids Technologies, Inc.
 
BTW, it looks like that picture is showing the unreleased GRT softare

It shows the rolling numbers for altitude and airspeed. This is in a promised update coming any day now for the Horizon Is.
 
I did not know this. I'll change my numbers.

As for the display. I have not seen your display in person since Sun-n-fun last year. I have seen the 3500 AFS in the past few weeks and it was gorgeous. If it's the same display then I will be equally impressed. I will hopefully be at Oshkosh to check it out again this summer.

Can't wait to see the new site.

Thank you for your input. Both you and Dynon seem to honestly care about your customer base.

todds said:
For the for the NAV we display 3 sources at once for our HSI, and 2 sources on the PFD.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top