What's new
Van's Air Force

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

GRT News

drill_and_buck

drill_and_buck

Well Known Member
Patron
Any new announcements from GRT at OSH?

At Sun & Fun there were whispers about potentially a new display with higher resolution.

Tks,

-Mike
RV-8 finish
Need to finalize my panel design
 
RV 8 GRT

Here is an idea for you---a few details to be sorted......
Stein is building mine.

[http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/2151/rv8panelxq5.jpg
rv8panelxq5.jpg
 
Last edited:
Chuck,
Try resizing to 800 x 600 pixels next time to prevent this.

Panel looks great by the way.

-mike
 
Couple of thoughts

Chuck,

Very nice panel.
I have dual GRTs in m -7. Here's a couple of thoughts.
1/. In hindsight I would have fitted Three GRT screens as the MAP/NAV system is so good.

2/. If the MAP on your panel was on centre line under the Flight Display I think it would fell more natural. The Lubber lines and Course to Steer indicators on the two displays would line up one above the other.

3/. I find I spend a lot more time with the MAP display than the Engine Display.

Pete.
 
Stein is culpable

Stein set it up---in about 15 minutes or so it seemed, not sure about the program.

Thanks for all the complements.....
 
Space Available

Chuck,
It looks as if you intend to make the Panel taller by extending it downwards. Two GRTs one above the other on the standard panel will fit, but it is tight. And if you extend it there is not a lot of room to the top of the stick. See attached pic of my mates RV-8.......... and one of my RV-7

Pete.
my.php

my.php
 
Last edited:
drill_and_buck said:
Any new announcements from GRT at OSH?

At Sun & Fun there were whispers about potentially a new display with higher resolution.
Click to expand...
They have a new format engine page on display - looks a bit like the Advance format with round dials. GRT is looking at a higher resolution display, but its not a simple swap. If it happens they are quoting an $800 to $1200 price increase, but also the current drain goes from 1.5 amps to approaching 5A, so a cooling fan is probably required. Would also required a software re-write. The impression I got was that they don't really want to do it just yet.

Pete
 
Taller??

hopefully or intentionally not. Stein did this rendition on his computer based on some other panels he has done. There is barely enough stick clearance as is-----downward migration is not a realistic option.
details to follow..................
 
I don't think the drawing is implying that Stein is extending the panel - it is just shown out of position relative to the side panels (dropped down). It does all fit in the standard panel, but there isn't much extra room!

Paul
 
It would seem like they will have to pretty soon as Dynon just announced another "new" 7" screen at 845 X 480 pixels with double the brightness (800 nits as opposed to 400 nits) of the previous 7" with only a $200 upgrade, not $1200.....

Seems like GRT may be falling behind the crowd.

Jim Streit
 
Last edited:
Part of the problem is finding exact replacement. Todd told me at S'n'F they were having a hard time finding a higher res screen of exact same size. They found some but those were slightly bigger, so it wasn't a trivial replacement.
 
wooody04 said:
Seems like GRT may be falling behind the crowd.

Jim Streit
Click to expand...

I'm not in any of the glass camps (Dynon, BMA, GRT, Gramin, AFS) but this statement seriously lacks context. Perhaps the better statement is:

"Dynon is catching up"

With the exception of resolution the GRT has equal or better features on just about every point of comparison with the dynon. Certainly the dynon is catching up in many areas (recent screen size, sl30 integration, network of screens, HSI, CDI etc) and has better with resolution, it still has none of the integrated navigation features, AP integration, weather, terrain, HITS etc that GRT (and BMA) have had for a loooong time.
 
chuck said:
With the exception of resolution the GRT has equal or better features on just about every point of comparison with the dynon. Certainly the dynon is catching up in many areas (recent screen size, sl30 integration, network of screens, HSI, CDI etc) and has better with resolution, it still has none of the integrated navigation features, AP integration, weather, terrain, HITS etc that GRT (and BMA) have had for a loooong time.
Click to expand...
I completely agree, GRT has the best integration by far, just look at their autopilot integration and their nav functions. In my book the functionality is far more important than a pretty display. The current display seems just fine. This stuff changes so fast that by S'n'F next year everyone could have new displays, but for now my vote remains with GRT.
Pete
 
Cheaper dual ADAHRS, 5Hz WAAS GPS?

Maybe this was announced earlier, but this was news to me anyways. From the GRT website:

The Horizon Series I will be available with an IFR internal WAAS GPS with RAIM and 5 updates per second. We will be offering a Jeppesen IFR database later this year. We will also be releasing a dual ADAHRS upgrade for $1500.

Progress indeed! The dual ADHARS upgrade is what is most interesting to me. IMHO, the AHRS are the weakest link of any of the experimental EFIS. The "big 3" - Dynon, GRT and BMA - have all had stability problems with their AHRS, although I get the impression that GRT's is somewhat better. Providing redundancy and continuous error-checking / comparison between two units would be a big step forward.
 
Boy, this will certainly blur the line on what's legal for IFR. I'm not sure what an "IFR GPS" is. Does that mean the GPS is from a certified IFR system?
 
What would be "news" is if they finally documented all the features of their equipment! I've been flying a dual GRT for over a year now and still have features that I can't utilize because there's no documentation available to tell me how. I stopped by their display at OSH and was told to just call Todd while I'm sitting in the airplane and he'll walk me through the setup.

Well, that's great customer service but not really a good long term solution. I really like my GRT and agree that their integration is very good. But it is difficult to take full advantage of everthing the unit has to offer.

For kicks, I've been trying to get the navigation display to act as a VOR head for my Garmin 430. No joy. Also, I'd like to try out the synthetic instrument approach capability tied to my TruTrak but haven't dug deep enough into the intall options to figure it out.

Maybe I'm just lazy, but I would pay good money for a color illustrated operator's manual for the darn unit. Can you imagine trying to figure out a Garmin 430/530 without a manual?
 
f1rocket said:
Can you imagine trying to figure out a Garmin 430/530 without a manual?
Click to expand...


I had enough trouble learning all the features of my 430 WITH a manual!! :D

I haven't had any trouble using the HSI display as VOR head Randy - I just go to the third Map page (HSI), and if I have a VOR tuned in, I get the bearing pointer displayed - select VOR as the Nav source, and the CDI displays. Diddle the right knob as an OBS, and voil?!

How did I figure this out? Yeah...by playing with it....I agree the docs are still way behind where they should be, and if I had a bunch of time, I'd write a manual for them - but alas - no time....I new going into it that the docs were always going to be behind a rapidly evolving system, so that was just one of the choices I made.

I look at the GRT EFIS like any up-scale software package today - I know there are tons of features that I don't use, and don't know HOW to use, but as long as I can do all of what i want, I figure I can go learn the bells and whistles later....

I had one of the very early AHRS units, and while I was still building, I had a little gyro instability problem (either that, or we were having an earthquake, cause the plane was sitting in the garage...). Greg had me ship it back, he confirmed it had an early type of gyro that they had quit using, and sent me a new one. A year and a half (and 200+ flight hours) later, I haven't had a single AHRS problem. Another RV-8 driver at our airport stopped by the other day with his broken vacuum pump - with 180 total hours on it....the moral being, no matter what you use, have a backup plan!

Paul
 
FWIW

the_other_dougreeves said:
Maybe this was announced earlier, but this was news to me anyways. From the GRT website:

The Horizon Series I will be available with an IFR internal WAAS GPS with RAIM and 5 updates per second. We will be offering a Jeppesen IFR database later this year. We will also be releasing a dual ADAHRS upgrade for $1500.

Progress indeed! The dual ADHARS upgrade is what is most interesting to me. IMHO, the AHRS are the weakest link of any of the experimental EFIS. The "big 3" - Dynon, GRT and BMA - have all had stability problems with their AHRS, although I get the impression that GRT's is somewhat better. Providing redundancy and continuous error-checking / comparison between two units would be a big step forward.
Click to expand...

I stopped and talked with GRT about their "IFR WAAS GPS Module". As far as I can tell, it isn't designed yet. They kept mentioning that they had found the GPS chipset that another IFR GPS company was using, and they were just going to use that. I believe the phrase was "If another company can use it and be IFR WAAS certified, then we'll use it and be the same". I was quite shocked at those words. There is *tons* more work that would need to go into an IFR WAAS GPS to meet the TSO 146(a) requirements.

While I do hope they make something work. IFR WAAS and the FAA is *way* more complex than just finding a chipset. There are TSO's that will need to be evaluated against. Specifically, the "Tollerance Monitoring" (which btw, has nothing to do with RAIM. In fact, IFR WAAS has nothing to do with RAIM, so I'm not even sure why they use that phrase), in fact, a WAAS implementation should allow the approach to be continued *even* if there is loss of a satellite or two as a part of the "solution".

Maybe this is all part of the new "market" strategy (their words, not mine), to bring out a new higher resolution display, with more integrated features (like 3D terrain), but at the penalty of price. While no specific price was discussed, it was implied that it would be in a similar range as "other high end" systems.

Makes one just go hmmmm I guess - from many perspectives.
 
aadamson said:
IFR WAAS and the FAA is *way* more complex than just finding a chipset. There are TSO's that will need to be evaluated against.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Meeting the TSO will be tough - perhaps more than GRT wants to tackle. There are lots of external NAV/COMM boxes out there that meet the TSO for IFR approaches. In addition, IMHO, there is a TON of liability involved in making avionics for IFR approaches. Not much room for error. Why not just interface with the systems via ARINC 429?

If you look at the two EFIS / FMS systems that meet the TSO for IFR GPS Approach and offered to experimentals at a reduced price (Garmin G900 and Chelton/Direct2Avionics), they are both expreimental versions of systems that were TSOed by the FAA.

It will take a LOT of work and money for GRT to try and meet this standard, so why do it? It would really drive up the price, IMHO. I'd rather see GRT remain a different product than the Garmin / Chelton solutions - less capable, but LOTS cheaper.
 
Just a little tweak

the_other_dougreeves said:
Agreed. Meeting the TSO will be tough - perhaps more than GRT wants to tackle. There are lots of external NAV/COMM boxes out there that meet the TSO for IFR approaches.
Click to expand...

Doug, if you'll allow, just a little tweak to the above... There are *lots* of boxes - GPS ones, that support TSO-129a (non-WAAS GPS) for enroute and terminal only. There is only 2 GPS boxes that support the TSO for WAAS - the Garmin 480 (14K last time I looked) and the Freeflight 1201 (granted, GPS only, no comm/nav).

I also looked at the TSO's for the G600, no mention of the the FMS TSO for vertical guidance on LNAV/VNAV (it's either 146 or 146a, I get confused). The chelton support this. BTW, it's buying future capabililty really. It allows the combination of the TSO capable GPS and the FMS to support "Primary Nav". It makes sense that the Gamin will need to do it, however, as they are targetting it for a 6 pack replacement unit. But then, you never know, they may require "steam gauge backup" like they do on the G1000/900X. Also, the Garmin isn't certified for Level 1 or A failures (catastrophic). I can't remember what specification that is against, but the Chelton booth mentioned both... Will be interesting.

I talked to the G600 guys for some time.

No 3D terrain
No HITS
No integration with fuel/ADC systems
No integration with COMM/NAV radios
only Flightplan exchange integration with 430(has to be W) and/or 530(has to be W)
No integration with transponder (altho I expect they will support TIS via ARINC 429 from the transponder, but you never know, they may require it to be interfaced to the 430W or 530W only).

It's my opinion that the G600 is severly limited in what it can do, but mind you is *way* better than any other 6 pack combination.

Because the requirement is 430W and 530W, the 29K price is a little misleading. I know of no-one who has a 430W or 530W, so you'd have to buy those too. Price just went up by another 14K or 19K (retail prices mind you).
 
aadamson said:
Doug, if you'll allow, just a little tweak to the above... There are *lots* of boxes - GPS ones, that support TSO-129a (non-WAAS GPS) for enroute and terminal only. There is only 2 GPS boxes that support the TSO for WAAS - the Garmin 480 (14K last time I looked) and the Freeflight 1201 (granted, GPS only, no comm/nav).
Click to expand...
Yes, agreed. However, I think the 480 is down to $10k, at least through Van's. It's actually less than the 530, and from what I understand, the 480 is more FMS-like in how it allows you to build routes, etc. I think this would be an advantage for heavy IFR flyers.

aadamson said:
It's my opinion that the G600 is severly limited in what it can do, but mind you is *way* better than any other 6 pack combination.
Click to expand...
Agreed - the G600 is designed to retrofit existing 6-pack instruments more than to be a highly integrated system like the G1000 or Chelton. I think the lack of FMS and engine monitoring are the biggest drawbacks.
 
more tidbits

Talking with Greg and Todd I understand the following will be out soon.

- 28 day updates to Nav information (free :)
- Automatic Log book - keeps track of time en route, departure and destination,
fuel used, distance (vert and horiz), and a ton of other information, for
all your flights.
- Dual AHRS in the same sized box as one - easy to upgrade.
- New Engine monitoring page - looks suspiciously like XXXX's, very very nice.

Not too shabby. I'm very happy with mine. Left Los Angeles, flew to Dallas,
picked up a friend and flew to OSH. Never had an issue with the GRT.
In fact George flew most of the trip while I looked for traffic and enjoyed
the scenery. Integration between the GNS430, TT AP and GRT is excellent.
 
FUD (Fear, Uncertainty & Doubt)

What was the title of this thread again?

When did the discussion of GRT News become "what's wrong with Garmin's new products and why Chelton is so much better?"

FYI, the Garmin 430W is $10,750 and the 530W is $16,495 list. The upgrade to "W" for existing 430/530 owners is still $1,500. Did that 14K & 19K list price come from the same guy that listed all those "limitations"?

The engine page on the GRT display is significantly improved presentation.
 
Last edited:
See the rain west of Blythe on my way from KCPM to KADS?

IMG_1005.jpg


See GRT depiction of rain west of Blythe. Blyth is 42 nm and 17 minutes away,
range of scope is 20 nm. Radar is 2 min. old. Slightly off course, tracking
087. Slow progress (144 kts gs), still no wheelpants or gear leg fairings.
Time is not set to correct time. 6 kt crosswind. The area in yellow
on the right is Restricted area R-2507N. L-64 - Desert Center is 11 nm at 11
oclock. I should have turned on the terrain so you could see that too. Oh
yeah, TIS traffic is available but nobody's around on this hot as **** day.
You should see what's on the other two screens :).

IMG_1008.jpg
 
walter said:
You should see what's on the other two screens :).
Click to expand...

Hey! Don't keep us on the edge of our seats! :D :D
More pics!

My only dislike of the GRT is how blocky the weather is ... but in reality, I am generally gonna give that stuff a wide berth anyway so having it in detailed resolution pixel by pixel is probably not all that valuable.

Thomas
 
Response.

w1curtis said:
FYI, the Garmin 430W is $10,750 and the 530W is $16,495 list. The upgrade to "W" for existing 430/530 owners is still $1,500. Did that 14K & 19K list price come from the same guy that listed all those "limitations"?
Click to expand...

The higher 430/530W prices were the "A" models. They make 2 versions, one low power, and one high.
 
Cool Walter!

I've been wondering what the weatehr display looked like - hadn't seen a picture before! I've been thinking that I might go ahead and add that - it's just a box, some power, an antenna, and a serial line - right?

How big is the extra box - and any thing else you can say about the Wx option?

Edit: Never Mind....if I'd just gone to the GRT web page, I'd have answerd all my questions.....



Paul
 
Last edited:
hmmmmm the wx on my GRT is not blocky at all... looks just like the GRT web sight depiction. I'll attempt to post a picture soon.
 
Long-winded post....

w1curtis said:
What was the title of this thread again?

When did the discussion of GRT News become "what's wrong with Garmin's new products and why Chelton is so much better?"
Click to expand...
Sorry if that's how my comments came across - that wasn't my intent. I can't speak for others.

IMHO, Garmin's new products are good. There has been a lot of clamoring for a highly integrated system like the G1000 for homebuilts, and here we have the G900X. The G600 looks to be a great retrofit system for existing certified airplanes as well as an option for new expreimentals. As far as I know, the next lowest price certified MFD/PFD system is the Avidyne, and that's over $50k.

However, all products are different, and it's the differences that are interesting, at least to me. Everyone will look at user interface, price, performance, features and reliability differently and will have different criteria.

The price for the new Garmin systems seem to be higher than other experimental systems in terms of what it delivers. A 3-screen GRT system with XM WX, dual AHRS and dual external IFR-certified approach GPS (such as the G430) should cost less than the G600 PFD/MFD alone.

Chelton is interesting to me because of how they approach the user interface. The combination of synthetic vision and HITS on the PFD along with the FMS might be better for IFR flight - there is some research that suggests this. However, it is not without problems - smaller screens, unproven ADHRS, higher cost than its GRT / BMA competitors. However, I think that the user interface is very important (recall the Air Inter A320 crash, where the flight crew selected a 3,300 fpm decent rather than a 3.3 deg slope decent - there is only one small indication on the autopilot display and PFD to differentiate between the "vertical speed" and "flight path angle" modes - see the MIT aerospace lab's excellent experiment on this design problem).

GRT's recent announcements shows that their product continues to evolve at a steady pace. IMHO, they have the best product in the $10k-15k range.

So, no one system is perfect, and everyone will have different things that matter most to them. Competition and choice is good.
 
GRT XM Weather resolution

The weather in Walter's picture is blocky because at that scale the blocks of data shown are the actual size of the data from XM.

On PC software they run smothing algorithms to make it look better. We could actually do the same since the data is processed on another processor in our XM weather hardware. I will look into what it will take to add the smoothing algorithms.

Todd Stehouwer
Grand Rapids Technologies
 
I'll just put on my engineer's hat and put in my $.02. I actually like the fact that it's blocky when you zoom in. There's something to be said for displaying exactly the information you recieve...no more, no less. It's a very intuitive way of conveying the precision/granularity of the data being displayed.

Just one man's opinion. :)
 
I agree

jcoloccia said:
I'll just put on my engineer's hat and put in my $.02. I actually like the fact that it's blocky when you zoom in. There's something to be said for displaying exactly the information you recieve...no more, no less. It's a very intuitive way of conveying the precision/granularity of the data being displayed.

Just one man's opinion. :)
Click to expand...

And that's why its GRT for me. Not nearly as concerned with resolution, fancy shaded terrain et al. Just show me what you have. Reliably. Consistantly. Dual AHRS reduntantly.. eh? OK, I want that, too. Anyway, I'll do the rest.

Compared to a 6-pak.. and less than even that in the unmitigated rental junk I've flown before. I want it. Blocky or not.

John
 
Last edited:
GRT Radar Display

Here are a couple of shots I took in my hangar as the weather got nasty. One is at the 100nm scale, the other at 50nm. You can see the image getting smoother as you zoom out. I usually set the range at 100 when weather is on the screen so I can see where my flight path will take me.

Great stuff, how did I get along without it for the last 35 years?

Martin Sutter



 
Martin great post.
Can you tell me if it allows you to slew around?
So in my case, Im usually trying to plan say 200nm out on a cross country. Can you zoom out that far?
Im so on the fence right now getting this for my grt. The 296/496 has so many great items that the grt does not handle. ex Winds aloft. GRT is much cheaper as an ad on and I dont need a portable gismo sticking out. I got enough GPS's now. Got the MX20 which is $5k+ to put wx on. SO Ive been sitting on the fence.

Where you you see metars? On the airport details pages?
On this page it shows TBD & TBA. WHats the difference?
Thanks for your info.
 
Great photos!

Martin Sutter said:
Here are a couple of shots I took in my hangar as the weather got nasty. One is at the 100nm scale, the other at 50nm. You can see the image getting smoother as you zoom out. I usually set the range at 100 when weather is on the screen so I can see where my flight path will take me.

Great stuff, how did I get along without it for the last 35 years?
Click to expand...
Great "action" photos! I wish GRT had photos like that on their site - they would sell more units.
 
GRT Radar Display

The max range on the radar display is 300nm but you can slew in any direction beyond that and take a look at any location in the XM coverage area. The same is true for text weather on any airport. If the airport you are checking on has no reporting (no AWOS or ATIS), you will see the report from the nearest station and it will tell you the name of the reporting station, it's location relative to the airport you are checking and the age of the report.

Martin Sutter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top