Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 10:12 AM - Dynon vs. GRT (Herron, Al)
2. 10:57 AM - Re: Dynon vs. GRT (Brinker)
3. 11:37 AM - Re: Dynon vs. GRT (David Lloyd)
4. 12:00 PM - Re: Dynon vs. GRT (David Lloyd)
5. 12:30 PM - Re: Dynon vs. GRT (Joe Dubner)
6. 05:14 PM - Re: Dynon vs. GRT (Brinker)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Avionics-List message posted by: "Herron, Al" <Al.Herron@Aerojet.com>
I'm trying to decide which whiz-box EFIS to put in my RV, Dynon vs. Grand
Rapids Technologies. I'm leaning toward the GRT unit but have heard from
one individual who said that the set-up process was pretty cumbersome.
Anybody out there that can shed some real-world light on what it's like to
set up either one of these things?
Al Herron
RV-7A
<html xmlns:o"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<style>
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:Arial;
color:windowtext;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<span style'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Im trying to decide which whiz-box EFIS to put in my
RV, Dynon vs. Grand Rapids Technologies. Im leaning toward the GRT
unit but have heard from one individual who said that the set-up process was
pretty cumbersome. Anybody out there that can shed some real-world light
on what its like to set up either one of these things?
<span style'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>
<span style'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Al Herron
<span style'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>RV-7A
<span style'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dynon vs. GRT |
--> Avionics-List message posted by: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
I do not have any experience on either one but I will say the GRT has a
lot more features than the Dynon. So will be more tedious to hook up
depending on what other avionics you decide on. It will accually act as an
MFP where the Dynon will not. I am leaning toward going with both. The GRT
as primary and Dynon as backup. I do know that on the GRT site they do have
wiring diagrams showing how to hook up various Garmin products and from
emailing GRT with lot's of questions Todd has been very helpful and fairly
quick with answer's several times. But Michael Schofield at Dynon is also
fairly quick with answer's although I have only contacted him once. So I
think you cannot go wrong with either on customer service.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Herron, Al" <Al.Herron@Aerojet.com>
Subject: Avionics-List: Dynon vs. GRT
> --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Herron, Al" <Al.Herron@Aerojet.com>
>
> I'm trying to decide which whiz-box EFIS to put in my RV, Dynon vs. Grand
> Rapids Technologies. I'm leaning toward the GRT unit but have heard from
> one individual who said that the set-up process was pretty cumbersome.
> Anybody out there that can shed some real-world light on what it's like to
> set up either one of these things?
>
>
> Al Herron
>
> RV-7A
>
>
> <html xmlns:o"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
> xmlns:w"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word"
> xmlns"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
>
>
> <style>
> <!--
> /* Style Definitions */
> p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
> {margin:0in;
> margin-bottom:.0001pt;
> font-size:10.0pt;
> font-family:"Times New Roman";}
> a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
> {color:blue;
> text-decoration:underline;}
> a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
> {color:purple;
> text-decoration:underline;}
> span.EmailStyle17
> {mso-style-type:personal-compose;
> font-family:Arial;
> color:windowtext;}
> @page Section1
> {size:8.5in 11.0in;
> margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
> div.Section1
> {page:Section1;}
> -->
> </style>
>
>
> <span style'font-size:10.0pt;
> font-family:Arial'>Im trying to decide which whiz-box EFIS to put in my
> RV, Dynon vs. Grand Rapids Technologies. Im leaning toward the GRT
> unit but have heard from one individual who said that the set-up process
> was
> pretty cumbersome. Anybody out there that can shed some real-world light
> on what its like to set up either one of these things?
>
>
> <span style'font-size:10.0pt;
> font-family:Arial'>
>
>
> <span style'font-size:10.0pt;
> font-family:Arial'>Al Herron
>
>
> <span style'font-size:10.0pt;
> font-family:Arial'>RV-7A
>
>
> <span style'font-size:10.0pt;
> font-family:Arial'>
>
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dynon vs. GRT |
--> Avionics-List message posted by: "David Lloyd" <skywagon@charter.net>
I don't know much about glass screen concepts but, here is one concept to
keep in mind.
Don't mix instrumentation display concepts if you have the option.
Here is why.....
Like anything hi tech these days, the learning curve is difficult if you
plan to learn all the functions.
A EFIS designer usually designs around a special control philosophy concept.
It is difficult enough to learn one company's concept and then, to mix in
another is usually way beyond what a normal pilot can handle especially when
the brain is flooded with an emergency situation. Pick one manufacturers
concept and stay with it.
An good example is Garmin......
The controls for both use the same concept and functions can easily be
mentally transferred from one to the other once learned.
Garmin also now has the 480. A fantastic GPS navigator that came out of the
"Tomorrow" or UPS company when Garmin bought them. If one were to make the
mistake of installing a Garmin 480 and Garmin 430, I believe that is a
disaster waiting to happen to the hapless pilot. The usage of the controls
and data flow design concepts are almost totally different. You have to
learn both; like learning to use all the functions of a PC and an Apple
computer.
Imagine trying to sort out the functions when your mind is bogged down with
ice on the wings or flying into IMC "accidentally" and trying to use the
David
PS: I am embarrassed to mention that too many pilots friends can't even
handle 50% of the functions of a simple Garmin let alone having a mixed bag
on the panel........
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
Subject: Re: Avionics-List: Dynon vs. GRT
> --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
>
> I do not have any experience on either one but I will say the GRT has
> a
> lot more features than the Dynon. So will be more tedious to hook up
> depending on what other avionics you decide on. It will accually act as an
> MFP where the Dynon will not. I am leaning toward going with both. The GRT
> as primary and Dynon as backup. I do know that on the GRT site they do
> have
> wiring diagrams showing how to hook up various Garmin products and from
> emailing GRT with lot's of questions Todd has been very helpful and fairly
> quick with answer's several times. But Michael Schofield at Dynon is also
> fairly quick with answer's although I have only contacted him once. So I
> think you cannot go wrong with either on customer service.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Herron, Al" <Al.Herron@Aerojet.com>
> To: <avionics-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Avionics-List: Dynon vs. GRT
>
>
>> --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Herron, Al" <Al.Herron@Aerojet.com>
>>
>> I'm trying to decide which whiz-box EFIS to put in my RV, Dynon vs. Grand
>> Rapids Technologies. I'm leaning toward the GRT unit but have heard from
>> one individual who said that the set-up process was pretty cumbersome.
>> Anybody out there that can shed some real-world light on what it's like
>> to
>> set up either one of these things?
>>
>>
>> Al Herron
>>
>> RV-7A
>>
>>
>> <html xmlns:o"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
>> xmlns:w"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word"
>> xmlns"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
>>
>>
>> <style>
>> <!--
>> /* Style Definitions */
>> p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
>> {margin:0in;
>> margin-bottom:.0001pt;
>> font-size:10.0pt;
>> font-family:"Times New Roman";}
>> a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
>> {color:blue;
>> text-decoration:underline;}
>> a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
>> {color:purple;
>> text-decoration:underline;}
>> span.EmailStyle17
>> {mso-style-type:personal-compose;
>> font-family:Arial;
>> color:windowtext;}
>> @page Section1
>> {size:8.5in 11.0in;
>> margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
>> div.Section1
>> {page:Section1;}
>> -->
>> </style>
>>
>>
>> <span style'font-size:10.0pt;
>> font-family:Arial'>Im trying to decide which whiz-box EFIS to put in my
>> RV, Dynon vs. Grand Rapids Technologies. Im leaning toward the GRT
>> unit but have heard from one individual who said that the set-up process
>> was
>> pretty cumbersome. Anybody out there that can shed some real-world light
>> on what its like to set up either one of these things?
>>
>>
>> <span style'font-size:10.0pt;
>> font-family:Arial'>
>>
>>
>> <span style'font-size:10.0pt;
>> font-family:Arial'>Al Herron
>>
>>
>> <span style'font-size:10.0pt;
>> font-family:Arial'>RV-7A
>>
>>
>> <span style'font-size:10.0pt;
>> font-family:Arial'>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dynon vs. GRT |
--> Avionics-List message posted by: "David Lloyd" <skywagon@charter.net>
2nd message..... don't know what happened but some of the text got deleted
going to the List servers.
See below for missing stuff..
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Lloyd" <skywagon@charter.net>
Subject: Re: Avionics-List: Dynon vs. GRT
> --> Avionics-List message posted by: "David Lloyd" <skywagon@charter.net>
>
> I don't know much about glass screen concepts but, here is one concept to
> keep in mind.
>
> Don't mix instrumentation display concepts if you have the option.
> Here is why.....
> Like anything hi tech these days, the learning curve is difficult if you
> plan to learn all the functions.
> A EFIS designer usually designs around a special control philosophy
> concept.
> It is difficult enough to learn one company's concept and then, to mix in
> another is usually way beyond what a normal pilot can handle especially
> when
> the brain is flooded with an emergency situation. Pick one manufacturers
> concept and stay with it.
>
> An good example is Garmin......
........."If one installs a Garmin 530 and a 430 as the second unit
> The controls for both use the same concept and functions can easily be
> mentally transferred from one to the other once learned.
>
> Garmin also now has the 480. A fantastic GPS navigator that came out of
> the
> "Tomorrow" or UPS company when Garmin bought them. If one were to make
> the
> mistake of installing a Garmin 480 and Garmin 430, I believe that is a
> disaster waiting to happen to the hapless pilot. The usage of the
> controls
> and data flow design concepts are almost totally different. You have to
> learn both; like learning to use all the functions of a PC and an Apple
> computer.
>
> Imagine trying to sort out the functions when your mind is bogged down
> with
> ice on the wings or flying into IMC "accidentally" and trying to use the
> David
> PS: I am embarrassed to mention that too many pilots friends can't even
> handle 50% of the functions of a simple Garmin let alone having a mixed
> bag
> on the panel........
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
> To: <avionics-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Avionics-List: Dynon vs. GRT
>
>
>> --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
>>
>> I do not have any experience on either one but I will say the GRT has
>> a
>> lot more features than the Dynon. So will be more tedious to hook up
>> depending on what other avionics you decide on. It will accually act as
>> an
>> MFP where the Dynon will not. I am leaning toward going with both. The
>> GRT
>> as primary and Dynon as backup. I do know that on the GRT site they do
>> have
>> wiring diagrams showing how to hook up various Garmin products and from
>> emailing GRT with lot's of questions Todd has been very helpful and
>> fairly
>> quick with answer's several times. But Michael Schofield at Dynon is also
>> fairly quick with answer's although I have only contacted him once. So I
>> think you cannot go wrong with either on customer service.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Herron, Al" <Al.Herron@Aerojet.com>
>> To: <avionics-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Avionics-List: Dynon vs. GRT
>>
>>
>>> --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Herron, Al"
>>> <Al.Herron@Aerojet.com>
>>>
>>> I'm trying to decide which whiz-box EFIS to put in my RV, Dynon vs.
>>> Grand
>>> Rapids Technologies. I'm leaning toward the GRT unit but have heard
>>> from
>>> one individual who said that the set-up process was pretty cumbersome.
>>> Anybody out there that can shed some real-world light on what it's like
>>> to
>>> set up either one of these things?
>>>
>>>
>>> Al Herron
>>>
>>> RV-7A
>>>
>>>
>>> <html xmlns:o"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
>>> xmlns:w"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word"
>>> xmlns"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
>>>
>>>
>>> <style>
>>> <!--
>>> /* Style Definitions */
>>> p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
>>> {margin:0in;
>>> margin-bottom:.0001pt;
>>> font-size:10.0pt;
>>> font-family:"Times New Roman";}
>>> a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
>>> {color:blue;
>>> text-decoration:underline;}
>>> a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
>>> {color:purple;
>>> text-decoration:underline;}
>>> span.EmailStyle17
>>> {mso-style-type:personal-compose;
>>> font-family:Arial;
>>> color:windowtext;}
>>> @page Section1
>>> {size:8.5in 11.0in;
>>> margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
>>> div.Section1
>>> {page:Section1;}
>>> -->
>>> </style>
>>>
>>>
>>> <span style'font-size:10.0pt;
>>> font-family:Arial'>Im trying to decide which whiz-box EFIS to put in my
>>> RV, Dynon vs. Grand Rapids Technologies. Im leaning toward the GRT
>>> unit but have heard from one individual who said that the set-up process
>>> was
>>> pretty cumbersome. Anybody out there that can shed some real-world light
>>> on what its like to set up either one of these things?
>>>
>>>
>>> <span style'font-size:10.0pt;
>>> font-family:Arial'>
>>>
>>>
>>> <span style'font-size:10.0pt;
>>> font-family:Arial'>Al Herron
>>>
>>>
>>> <span style'font-size:10.0pt;
>>> font-family:Arial'>RV-7A
>>>
>>>
>>> <span style'font-size:10.0pt;
>>> font-family:Arial'>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dynon vs. GRT |
--> Avionics-List message posted by: Joe Dubner <jdubner@yahoo.com>
Al,
I have a Dynon EFIS-D10A in my Long-EZ; I can speak about that EFIS but
I know nothing about the GRT one. They're not in the same price range
nor do they have the same features AFAIK.
You didn't mention your mission requirements: VFR, IFR, night, whatever
... I fly mostly day VFR but I've done all of the above (briefly) with
my D10A. The setup is easy -- trivially so since the latest firmware
doesn't require a Windows PC (for setup/calibration) any longer. (A PC
is still required to update the firmware of course.)
Here's the deal: I like my D10A but I don't "love" it. The D10A fixed a
lot of the dissatisfiers that I had with my earlier D10 but like many
who frequent this list, I must be somewhat anal because I'm very
particular about certain little things. Might have to do with advancing
age :-)
I suppose the biggest item for me is the display size -- it's just too
small and cluttered IMO for all the information that can be put up
there. But then it costs a lot less than competing EFIS models with
larger displays. If I were buying one today, I'd skip the D10A in favor
of the D100 and I'd be a pretty happy camper.
The D10A works well and provides me with a lot of value for the money.
On top of that, Dynon has treated me well -- exceedingly well. When I
returned my D10 (not D10A) with a problem, it was fixed at no cost and
returned promptly _and had a $100+ lithium ion backup battery
installed_. When I asked about it, the service rep. said it was their
way of compensating me for my troubles! Amazing!
--
Joe
Long-EZ 821RP
Lewiston, ID 83501
http://www.nicon.org/chapter328/jd/
On 11-Nov-05 10:12 Herron, Al wrote:
> --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Herron, Al" <Al.Herron@Aerojet.com>
>
> I'm trying to decide which whiz-box EFIS to put in my RV, Dynon vs. Grand
> Rapids Technologies. I'm leaning toward the GRT unit but have heard from
> one individual who said that the set-up process was pretty cumbersome.
> Anybody out there that can shed some real-world light on what it's like to
> set up either one of these things?
>
>
> Al Herron
>
> RV-7A
[Meaningless HTML and MS Office crap trimmed from my reply.]
[And I wish others would do the same too.]
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Dynon vs. GRT |
--> Avionics-List message posted by: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
David you are absolutely correct the confusion involved with all
the new avionics these days and changing so fast it is mind boggling. But at
the same time getting reasonable enough the average man can afford them.
Which is a fantastic thing since they bring so much more situational
awareness to the cockpit.
Looks to me (but looks can be decieving) that the GRT and Dynon
are basicly the same insofar as the screen layout is concerned on the basic
efis. From what I can tell once they are both operational there is not much
to fiddle with on the Dynon except for setting the altimeter, but depending
on what is connected to the GRT it will require a little more effort.
My theory was to keep the Dynon switched off most of the time,
especially when in possible lightning strike. Of course there is always the
possibility that lightning will even cross an open circuit to damage
electronics. That is why I have been somewhat torn between using the Dynon
vs. conventional (old style) Altimeter, vsi, asi, adi as backup. By the way
I will not use vacuum instrument's since they are prone to failure. Sure a
backup pump can be installed but by the time this is done and all is figured
in the price get's more and more. There are lot's of "if's" involved. But
one saving grace these days is that most of the portable gps's (I have a 196
I now use) have all that info on them too as even more "3rd" backup. It's
amazing how anal I can be about safety.
By the way Mike at Dynon replied back to me today on an inquiry and
only took a couple of hours to get the email response and gave me his phone
number for additional info, just wanted to let everyone know how good they
seem to be to deal with.
Randy
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Lloyd" <skywagon@charter.net>
Subject: Re: Avionics-List: Dynon vs. GRT
> --> Avionics-List message posted by: "David Lloyd" <skywagon@charter.net>
>
> I don't know much about glass screen concepts but, here is one concept to
> keep in mind.
>
> Don't mix instrumentation display concepts if you have the option.
> Here is why.....
> Like anything hi tech these days, the learning curve is difficult if you
> plan to learn all the functions.
> A EFIS designer usually designs around a special control philosophy
> concept.
> It is difficult enough to learn one company's concept and then, to mix in
> another is usually way beyond what a normal pilot can handle especially
> when
> the brain is flooded with an emergency situation. Pick one manufacturers
> concept and stay with it.
>
> An good example is Garmin......
> The controls for both use the same concept and functions can easily be
> mentally transferred from one to the other once learned.
>
> Garmin also now has the 480. A fantastic GPS navigator that came out of
> the
> "Tomorrow" or UPS company when Garmin bought them. If one were to make
> the
> mistake of installing a Garmin 480 and Garmin 430, I believe that is a
> disaster waiting to happen to the hapless pilot. The usage of the
> controls
> and data flow design concepts are almost totally different. You have to
> learn both; like learning to use all the functions of a PC and an Apple
> computer.
>
> Imagine trying to sort out the functions when your mind is bogged down
> with
> ice on the wings or flying into IMC "accidentally" and trying to use the
> David
> PS: I am embarrassed to mention that too many pilots friends can't even
> handle 50% of the functions of a simple Garmin let alone having a mixed
> bag
> on the panel........
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|