December 4, 2011 at 5:33 pm #83628
I will be installing a G500 in my new Crusader. I’d like some advice on exactly where to place it. It has always bothered me that many installations are “off center”. I want mine centered over the pilot’s yoke – or at least the PFD portion of it. Take a look at the attached pictures. The bottom picture is another completed Crusader panel with the G500 placed off-center to the right, so that backup instruments are on the left. The top picture is a mockup of my panel, with the the G500 centered over the yoke, with backup instruments on the right of it.
Any thoughts on the arrangement?December 5, 2011 at 4:34 am #95274
I know you said that it bothered you that the G500 is off center but actually the PFD is centered and the MFD portion is to the right. This also gives you space to put the stand-by gauges to the left of the unit. I feel in IMC I want the PFD directly in front of me, without having to look slightly to the side. I guess the preference is yours and if it bothers you, then it will be hard to convince otherwise. Just personal preference.December 5, 2011 at 1:12 pm #95275quote AHOFWEGEN:
Arie, that is good logic. But as you can see from the photo, with the backup instruments on the left, the PFD is still slightly off center to the right. I think I’d be OK with the PFD centered over the yoke but that may be impossible to do.December 5, 2011 at 3:47 pm #95278
The mockup that you present in the top photo shows the G500 placed with the PFD to the left of yoke center and the backup instruments to the right while the lower photo (1385V) shows the PFD centered with backup instruments to the left. Do you prefer the backup instruments on the right?
What I have found is cross-checks of the PFD to backup instruments are most convenient when the backup instruments are adjacent to the PFD (i.e. to the left of the PFD). For me, cross-checks occur more frequently than I had originally anticipated. I can’t say that I rely on the original instruments to make decisions but, perhaps subconsciously, they remain part of the active scan. Therefore I would personally bias the placement decision on backup instrument-to-PFD scan proximity. Discounting actual panel constraints for a moment, I don’t think that horizontal alignment of the PFD to yoke centerline is much of a factor. If the PFD is offset left or right of centerline you naturally adapt to its actual location. My G500 is currently offset to the left to accommodate switches on the right (photo attached). After Garmin finishes certification of the GAD43 I plan to replace the G-550A with a standard AI and move the G500 up and to the right, relocating the switches beneath the G500. The primary reason for the move is to provide more room for the annunciator panel and backup instruments – it is pretty tight with the current placement.December 12, 2011 at 2:19 am #95301
I just had a G500 installed in my 340. I went through this same thouight process. I have a friend with a Baron and he had his placed centrally withe the backups below. It was very starange to fly. The scan felt awkward. Even though it is decentered the PFD is pretty much centered and the backups being to the left is a very easy refernce scan also. Don’t forget about the engine gauges also. The further left the PFD is the further you have to scan to the manifold and RPM. May not seem like a big deal but it was in my frine’s Baron. Good luck
N4287ADecember 12, 2011 at 1:33 pm #95302quote TKISLAN:
Based on everyone’s feedback, and thinking about it some more, I’ve decided to put the backup instruments on the left and offset the G500 to the right. I don’t really think it would matter (left or right) in the event I had to fly on the back up steam gauges, but I think clustering all the glass together and not have it broken up by the old stuff will look a lot better.
BTW, it sounds like some of you include the old gauges in your scan. That’s probably wise, but I’m concerned about them becoming a “crutch” as I try to learn to fly off the G500. I can envision actually covering them up while I’m making the transition, so I’ll become comfortable on the glass. Any thoughts?December 13, 2011 at 2:17 am #95303
They are definitely a crutch. My instructor did the exact thing. He covered them and had me do multiple approaches under the hood and in actual IMC. THis really gets you used to the tape measure fast. It was strange at first but I still glance especially on departure. Expect 8 weeks down time minimum. I was told 6-turned into eight.
N4287ADecember 13, 2011 at 10:39 pm #95309
Keep in mind, right or wrong, by offsetting the G500 to the right you put the attitude indicator and HSI directly in front of you. If you’re keeping the ARC Y/D in place, you could probably mount the Stec T/C out of sight if space is an issue. It has been done in several factory installations.December 14, 2011 at 2:29 am #95310
I would vote to put the standby attitude indicator on top even if you plan to cover it for a while.December 14, 2011 at 7:35 pm #95311
I used to have a Saratoga with the factory Avidyne PFD and MFD. The stand by instruments where to the left and they were very easy to scan for me.
1978 340A RAM VIIDecember 14, 2011 at 7:38 pm #95312
Bob, if the photo of N1385V Panel is a 303, looks perfect to me.
1978 340A RAM VIIDecember 15, 2011 at 3:02 pm #95315
I have about 200 hours on my Aspen PFD and i have to admit i still look at the old airspeed indicator and VSI as a primary source. 😳 I really must do some flying with them covered up to get me out of this habit.December 15, 2011 at 3:31 pm #95316quote SAINSBURY:
My only complaint about the Aspen is how they handle the vertical speed indication. I had about 50 hours on my Aspen in the 210 before I sold it, and I really liked having the analog VSI. I could pick up minor altitude deviations better with it than I could the vertical speed tape (which only displays on the Aspen if you exceed 100′ a minute or something) on the Aspen.
Other than that I loved the Aspen and will probably put one in my 421.
RobertDecember 16, 2011 at 1:26 am #95318
Do not loose your time, you will keep looking to the analog instruments forever. I do it since 8 years ago. I have the Aspen and used to have an Avidyne PFD on my past airplane.
Tapes indicators were designed for cramped spaces, not for easy and logical use.
I hope there is a solution to replace tape indicators with logical rounded indicators on PFDs. Your brain is just too busy to understand if a number means “too high”, “correct” or “too slow”. A needle on a round instrument gives you a fast clue of what is happening.
So now you know: I hate tapes.
1978 340A RAM VIIDecember 16, 2011 at 5:58 pm #95321
I understand the issue with tapes, however, for 6 years I flew aircraft with nothing but tapes and actually got use to the things. I experienced much more precise speed control, however, the system that we had incorporated trend vectors on both the airspeed and altimeter tapes. The reason for the control was that the trend vector would respond before any change on the tape was noted. Therefore, if you kept the airspeed vector buried you could freeze the airspeed. This occurred during my days with the airlines, now that I fly a couple of times a month, I am sure that this issue would be a different animal.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.