At Oshkosh this year I saw the Garmin tech reps demo the various touch screen nav/com/gps's available now or soon. They worked great attached to a wall in their display booth. I was wondering how they work under typical flying conditions. Anybody have a PIREP on the new touchscreen units such as the 796 or panel mounted 530 touchscreen whatever it is called now??
Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
Touch screens: good or bad while flying?
- Thread starter dabney
- Start date
BuckWynd
Well Known Member
I've managed to get quite a few hours flying with both the new GTN-650 and GTN-750 in a non-RV aircraft, and I must say that I was a bit skeptical of them at first. My biggest concern was using them in turbulence. This issue turned out to be almost a non-issue, thanks to a well-designed bezel that allows you to anchor your hand as you type. And you can always use the conventional tuning knob, too...
The operating system is REALLY nice -- it's very intuitive and it has some nice little shortcuts that can shorten your heads-down time. For instance, when you enter a new frequency into the standby, you have a choice: You can simply enter the new frequency and leave it in the standby, or you can enter the numbers AND swap them into the active freq with one "button" press instead of two.
The screen seems to be very bright, and doesn't seem to be affected by glare in direct sunlight.
My only issue has been with wearing Nomex gloves. On my first evaluation flight, the touchscreens sometimes responded erratically, so I cut off the tip of my glove's left index finger, and that solved the problem. Garmin claims the screens will work with gloves, and technically that's correct, but it's not quite reliable enough for me.
Overall, I have become a fan of the new units. Now, I just wish they would be about 25% less expensive, so I could justify putting one of 'em in my RV.
The operating system is REALLY nice -- it's very intuitive and it has some nice little shortcuts that can shorten your heads-down time. For instance, when you enter a new frequency into the standby, you have a choice: You can simply enter the new frequency and leave it in the standby, or you can enter the numbers AND swap them into the active freq with one "button" press instead of two.
The screen seems to be very bright, and doesn't seem to be affected by glare in direct sunlight.
My only issue has been with wearing Nomex gloves. On my first evaluation flight, the touchscreens sometimes responded erratically, so I cut off the tip of my glove's left index finger, and that solved the problem. Garmin claims the screens will work with gloves, and technically that's correct, but it's not quite reliable enough for me.
Overall, I have become a fan of the new units. Now, I just wish they would be about 25% less expensive, so I could justify putting one of 'em in my RV.
I installed a 510 (same screen as all the 5XX) in a -7. Touch screens don't belong in airplanes, and it's most unfortunate manufacturers are pushing avionics this direction. Even on your sofa, it's easy to miss the target on the dinky screens, then at least two more pokes are in order to get it right. A larger screen makes a larger target, but barely diminishes the difficulty.
I played with the newer Garmins 7s and they are better. The 7's touch technology is superior to the 5's for tactile consistency. Both have ease-to-understand menu trees vastly superior to the 6's.
I've been in plenty of nasty stuff over 40 years when you can't hang onto a knob or even a fat engine control. Using a touch screen in light turbulence is annoying (this also includes several iPad experiences), cuss-worthy in moderate, and nigh impossible in anything worse.
John Siebold
I played with the newer Garmins 7s and they are better. The 7's touch technology is superior to the 5's for tactile consistency. Both have ease-to-understand menu trees vastly superior to the 6's.
I've been in plenty of nasty stuff over 40 years when you can't hang onto a knob or even a fat engine control. Using a touch screen in light turbulence is annoying (this also includes several iPad experiences), cuss-worthy in moderate, and nigh impossible in anything worse.
John Siebold
I am with John regarding the use of touch screen, especially in a RV. Although, I am not speaking of hands on experience with Garmin, but I have experienced touch screen in turbulence and I was glad it was not an essential part of the avionics. I can imagine how frustrating it can be if you are in IMC and trying to navigate the screen for an approach.
Warning, Sarcasm coming!
Using a Aera 5xx series GPS as a baseline for judging the useability of the GTN boxes is like us using an Ercoupe with no rudder pedals to judge the flight characteristics of an RV7.
Luckily the Garmin GTN boxes that people are skeptical of (sometimes without flying behind them) still have knobs and buttons to perform critical functions should you not desire to use the scary touchscreen. Whether we like it or not, the avionics world is moving that way and technology marches forward whether we're comfortable with it or not. The beauty of us in the experimental world is that most everyone who has something like the GTN boxes and uses their plane for IFR flight also have a pretty powerfull EFIS and Autopilot of some sort that has a really good interface to the other boxes.
No flames intended and apologies if the sarcasm offends, but just my 2 cents as usual. I was merely attempting to point out that it's hard to judge something based on perception or use of an older generation inferior product.
Cheers,
Stein
Using a Aera 5xx series GPS as a baseline for judging the useability of the GTN boxes is like us using an Ercoupe with no rudder pedals to judge the flight characteristics of an RV7.
Luckily the Garmin GTN boxes that people are skeptical of (sometimes without flying behind them) still have knobs and buttons to perform critical functions should you not desire to use the scary touchscreen. Whether we like it or not, the avionics world is moving that way and technology marches forward whether we're comfortable with it or not. The beauty of us in the experimental world is that most everyone who has something like the GTN boxes and uses their plane for IFR flight also have a pretty powerfull EFIS and Autopilot of some sort that has a really good interface to the other boxes.
No flames intended and apologies if the sarcasm offends, but just my 2 cents as usual. I was merely attempting to point out that it's hard to judge something based on perception or use of an older generation inferior product.
Cheers,
Stein
I recently installed an iFly 700 in my Midget Mustang. I was pretty worried at first, but it really hasn't been a problem. I guess I might be a little less impressed if I was using the iFly as my primary means of navigation, but I find that I use the iFly about like I use a sectional chart... sort of an automated way to keep my finger on a sectional chart to always know where I am rather than the more precise 1-2 degree corrections for exact course tracking that I do with the 496.
FWIW
FWIW
RV7AV8R
Well Known Member
iPad touch screen
In turbulence it can be frustrating. It is so sensitive that it is too easy to touch somewhere you didn't intend. With the large pad it is hard to rest the edge of your hand on the side to stabilize your hand with the pad while at the same time not touching the screen inadvertently. I would like to see ForeFlight to use the motion sensors in the IPad to modify the screen sensitivity during turbulence. I am thinking making the screen harder to sense a touch, requiring a more purposeful touch. This would probably be longer time on the button before it is recognized as a real input. This will avoid the unintended touches but may make it harder to hit and hold long enough what you do want to touch. It would have to be real life tested to get it right.
In turbulence it can be frustrating. It is so sensitive that it is too easy to touch somewhere you didn't intend. With the large pad it is hard to rest the edge of your hand on the side to stabilize your hand with the pad while at the same time not touching the screen inadvertently. I would like to see ForeFlight to use the motion sensors in the IPad to modify the screen sensitivity during turbulence. I am thinking making the screen harder to sense a touch, requiring a more purposeful touch. This would probably be longer time on the button before it is recognized as a real input. This will avoid the unintended touches but may make it harder to hit and hold long enough what you do want to touch. It would have to be real life tested to get it right.
apkp777
Well Known Member
I have about 5 hours flying with a Garmin 750 installed in C421. It's a pretty sweet unit. I was never particularly impressed with the 430/530 but the 750 is another story. The buttons are quite large, larger than my 510. They also don't require much contact to make them activate. I have only flown one approach with it and it's pretty intuitive. It's on the list of things to add to my RV.
RV7Guy
Well Known Member
Fly the plane!!!!
Like Stein, there possibly could be some sarcasm here. I believe this touch screen myth is a result of the internet with no real support data. It falls into the, "I heard," category.
Flying hundreds of hours of cross country in the Southwest, I've experienced 3+ G turbulence. The first priority is to fly the plane!!! Get the auto pilot off, reduce power, whatever your procedure is. I have not found a need to be turning a knob or touching a screen in this situation. I can only recall lengthy continuous turbulence in a couple of occasions. The only possible changes that could be necessary is a frequency change. This happened once when LA Center called. I told them I was in turbulence. They replied, "when able."
So, for me there is no issue and it isn't really an issue. I feel once everyone can get some time behind these incredible new technologies, you'll agree.
Like Stein, there possibly could be some sarcasm here. I believe this touch screen myth is a result of the internet with no real support data. It falls into the, "I heard," category.
Flying hundreds of hours of cross country in the Southwest, I've experienced 3+ G turbulence. The first priority is to fly the plane!!! Get the auto pilot off, reduce power, whatever your procedure is. I have not found a need to be turning a knob or touching a screen in this situation. I can only recall lengthy continuous turbulence in a couple of occasions. The only possible changes that could be necessary is a frequency change. This happened once when LA Center called. I told them I was in turbulence. They replied, "when able."
So, for me there is no issue and it isn't really an issue. I feel once everyone can get some time behind these incredible new technologies, you'll agree.
The issue is touch screens, not technologies in general.
Stein and I will engage in a round of sarcasm (Incoming!). "Gee, Stein, I wonder why Garmin kept buttons and knobs for critical functions? And touch screens aren't scary. They're maddening."
The boxes are simply nav/coms and gps receivers. No new technology there, with some added interface tricks. (Yeah, they improve, like getting rid of tubes for transistors. But the primary purpose and function remain the same.) What keeps changing is the user interface and now adding touch screens - which introduced the ergonomic question that started this thread.
The substantial and useful change with the 7 and 5XX Garmins is the "home" menu structure. You don't even need to crack the user manual to swiftly figure out how to use them. Not so with the older stuff. You get callouses working the older navigators' buttons and knobs. The newer operating systems combined with less button pushing and knob twisting are good. Reliance on a touch screen is foolhardy. Even VFR.
Recently I spent 20 minutes at maneuvering speed for moderate to severe. I needed the autopilot to keep the -7 upright while trying to punch in a "direct to" on a 696. Got it done in maybe 15 seconds. The touch screen with me (an iPad in this case) was utterly unusable. I know the 510 would have been next to impossible from my experience with it in even light turbulence.
Touch screens? No, thanks. Though acceptable 95% of the time, I don't want an interface that becomes increasingly difficult to use in synch with increasing piloting difficultly. That's backasswards.
John Siebold
Stein and I will engage in a round of sarcasm (Incoming!). "Gee, Stein, I wonder why Garmin kept buttons and knobs for critical functions? And touch screens aren't scary. They're maddening."
The boxes are simply nav/coms and gps receivers. No new technology there, with some added interface tricks. (Yeah, they improve, like getting rid of tubes for transistors. But the primary purpose and function remain the same.) What keeps changing is the user interface and now adding touch screens - which introduced the ergonomic question that started this thread.
The substantial and useful change with the 7 and 5XX Garmins is the "home" menu structure. You don't even need to crack the user manual to swiftly figure out how to use them. Not so with the older stuff. You get callouses working the older navigators' buttons and knobs. The newer operating systems combined with less button pushing and knob twisting are good. Reliance on a touch screen is foolhardy. Even VFR.
Recently I spent 20 minutes at maneuvering speed for moderate to severe. I needed the autopilot to keep the -7 upright while trying to punch in a "direct to" on a 696. Got it done in maybe 15 seconds. The touch screen with me (an iPad in this case) was utterly unusable. I know the 510 would have been next to impossible from my experience with it in even light turbulence.
Touch screens? No, thanks. Though acceptable 95% of the time, I don't want an interface that becomes increasingly difficult to use in synch with increasing piloting difficultly. That's backasswards.
John Siebold
apkp777
Well Known Member
The 750 has a Direct To button, although you can access the function via touch screen as well. The same is true of the radio tuning knob. I have the IPAD and 510, although touch screen is not perfect, in some turbulence my SL30 can be hard to dial in also. With many of the devices you can set everything up while on the ground and do little tapping in flight. I think whether we like it or not, MFGrs are going touch screen more and more. I am sure it'll be "thought screen" before too long.
N546RV
Well Known Member
That sounds like a truly dangerous feature, particularly if your spouse/SO happens to be in the plane with you...
While I do agree that turbulence will make things increasingly difficult, I would submit that if it's bad enough to make a GTN hard to use it'll be as hard or harder to use the older stuff. If the bumps are terribly bad like John's example about not being able to hang onto an engine control, it won't matter what you're using for avionics - it'll be tough. The GTN's are one of those things you just gotta go fly because you absolutely can't compare it to an Ipad, Aera or 696.
My opinion is no better than the next guys, but I'd encourage some time with the actual boxes in question as to part of the opining process. For what it's worth, from what I see most of the positive opinions in this thread about the GTN's come from those who've used them and most of the negative opinions come from those who haven't. You'll notice that the majority of those who've actually own or fly the boxes in question really like them (some don't and some won't), but by and large the majority do. Several of the people commenting in this thread positively about the GTN's are guys that fly a lot, and also a lot of actual IFR (some with things that make it even more difficult like NVG's or full flight suits/gloves) or flying in heliflingers, warbirds, etc.
Like I said before, some of the discussions and personal opinions on whether touchscreens belong in a cockpit are a bit of a moot point because (like EFISes, Autopilots, SVT, traffic systems, etc..) it's the way the world is going whether we individually like it or not - Avidyne, Garmin, Collins, Honeywell, L-3, Barco, Universal, Boeing, Airbus, Lockheed, Esterline, Cessna, Bombardier, Gulfstream and the US military all say so. Heck, I imagine it won't be too many years before voice recognition surpasses touchscreens anyway...
Just my spirited & awnry two cents as usual!
Cheers,
Stein
Cheers,
Stein
Last edited:
GusBiz
Well Known Member
Technology moves faster than people
With the new iphone I don't even type an SMS any more. I just hit the Siri button,
"SMS Caroline"
"When will you be home? and can you make sure that you ring my parents to tell them when we are coming over"
All that while I am driving with two hands on the wheel looking ahead.
I think that will be part of the touch screen in less than two years.
On top of that annunciations based on locations, contextual reminders at critical points of flight, all sorts of things that all this "I can't put my finger on it" stuff will just surpass quicker than you can say "What? Steve Jobs died?"
With the new iphone I don't even type an SMS any more. I just hit the Siri button,
"SMS Caroline"
"When will you be home? and can you make sure that you ring my parents to tell them when we are coming over"
All that while I am driving with two hands on the wheel looking ahead.
I think that will be part of the touch screen in less than two years.
On top of that annunciations based on locations, contextual reminders at critical points of flight, all sorts of things that all this "I can't put my finger on it" stuff will just surpass quicker than you can say "What? Steve Jobs died?"
LeeM_2000
Well Known Member
I flew a 2.6 in moderate-to-severe turbulence on Saturday with a GTN 650 and an Aera 796. I had no issues at all with either touch screen. I actually prefer the touch screen to buttons/knobs for the most part. Also, the menu structure with PC-like shortcuts is far more intuitive to me than the older page-based stuff.
That was one of the hardest parts of teaching GPS approaches in my CFI days was getting people to under stand the "chapter>page" layout of the gps. Especially in the KLN's. Good unit though once you understood it.
