Proline 21 or G1000/ G3000
12-19-2012, 08:14 PM
#1
Working weekends
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2005
Position: Left Seat
Posts: 2,384
Proline 21 or G1000/ G3000
which is the more capable system? what horsepower exists to convince an operator to NOT yank a P21 system that works perfectly and install the G1000 ? thanks guys
12-19-2012, 08:48 PM
#2
Line Holder
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: CE-560 Xtra Large, left
Posts: 36
Good problem to have
Is not the major $$ and downtime of the panel conversion not enough 'horsepower'?
From a human factors standpoint I think the ProLine21 is better - much fewer soft buttons and nested menus to page through. I can't see what operational advantage there would be w/Garmin either. Perhaps you get xm weather with Garmin but I'm sure there's an upgrade to the PL21 that can give you that and these days you can probably add in a bluetooth ADS-B box so you'll get real-time wx, traffic etc. bluetoothed right into your iPad.
Tell him to spend the money on your salary or a Full-service contract w/Flight Safety or an additional pilot, or a mechanic or on-board wi-fi or. . . so many better ways to spend that, what, $100k? $200k? panel re-work.
From a human factors standpoint I think the ProLine21 is better - much fewer soft buttons and nested menus to page through. I can't see what operational advantage there would be w/Garmin either. Perhaps you get xm weather with Garmin but I'm sure there's an upgrade to the PL21 that can give you that and these days you can probably add in a bluetooth ADS-B box so you'll get real-time wx, traffic etc. bluetoothed right into your iPad.
Tell him to spend the money on your salary or a Full-service contract w/Flight Safety or an additional pilot, or a mechanic or on-board wi-fi or. . . so many better ways to spend that, what, $100k? $200k? panel re-work.
12-20-2012, 09:01 AM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 144
I've flown the Garmin "Prodigy" in the Phenom, which is basically the G1000, and I've trained instructed (FSI) in the PL21. I LOVE the ProLine system. The Garmin's nice around Class B airspace for checking sector altitudes for speed restrictions and it's pretty to look at, but I'd take PL21 any day.
12-20-2012, 09:31 AM
#5
Moderator
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: ATP, CFI etc.
Posts: 6,056
Having spent many an hour working on G3000 prototype systems I am impressed with how well they bring together previously unrelated flight functions like the G1000 panels did ten years ago, but I would also recommend a potential buyer get some quality time using the system before making a purchase. The G3000 is a big move forward in avionics, but has some ways of doing things that you not like as much.
12-20-2012, 06:29 PM
#7
Working weekends
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2005
Position: Left Seat
Posts: 2,384
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
Why on earth would anybody replace a highly functional PL21 system in a turbine aircraft with the less functional (but arguably 'prettier') G1000?
yes.....w..t..f...
* I may be able to sausage block this but will need to articulate why keep P21....maybe some STC / RVSM / D.E.R. / etc stuff is applicable.
Last edited by satpak77; 12-20-2012 at 06:39 PM.
12-21-2012, 06:26 AM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: G550 & CL300 PIC
Posts: 369
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
Why on earth would anybody replace a highly functional PL21 system in a turbine aircraft with the less functional (but arguably 'prettier') G1000?
I fly a Phenom 100 with the G1000 and I swap it out for a PL4 in a heartbeat. My main issue with the G1000 is that it's a very new avionics platform but the CRJ Collins FMS which says "Copyright 1984" on boot up is way more functional.
I do like the PFD on the G1000 the synthetic vision is awesome. However that doesn't out weigh the short comings of the "FMS".
Things the G1000 can't do:
- Draw a hold. You can only hold at an IAF or missed approach holding point.
- No predictive fuel planning: It will take your instantaneous fuel flow and ground speed to calculate your landing fuel, however during a power idle descent you can fly to the moon, and during climb you'll crash in about 45 minutes. So if you are holding (using heading bug on the outbound and NAV on the in unbound leg. Don't forget your wind correction, especially fun in a 125kt crosswind) on the way to LGA and get a reroute that adds 200nm to your route the only want to figure out if you are going to make it is it do math by hand. Unless you want to dump your entire flight plan.
- No "Fix" page functions like on a Collins FMS. (You don't realize how useful they are until you don't have them)
- VNAV doesn't understand "or above" and "or below" on arrivals.
- No DME holding function
- No route overlay on radar
- No way to generate FMS glideslope to a runway w/o an IAP
To be clear I'm not saying you can't fly a jet without these features. I'd be more than happy to fly a DC9 w/ DAL. What I am saying is an advance avionics system that is very new should have these functions.
The G1000 was designed for piston singles it doesn't have the brains to be in a jet. But it looks pretty so people buy it.
If you have any other questions let me know.
12-21-2012, 07:16 AM
#10
Working weekends
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2005
Position: Left Seat
Posts: 2,384
Originally Posted by FlyingNasaForm
YES!
I fly a Phenom 100 with the G1000 and I swap it out for a PL4 in a heartbeat. My main issue with the G1000 is that it's a very new avionics platform but the CRJ Collins FMS which says "Copyright 1984" on boot up is way more functional.
I do like the PFD on the G1000 the synthetic vision is awesome. However that doesn't out weigh the short comings of the "FMS".
Things the G1000 can't do:
To be clear I'm not saying you can't fly a jet without these features. I'd be more than happy to fly a DC9 w/ DAL. What I am saying is an advance avionics system that is very new should have these functions.
The G1000 was designed for piston singles it doesn't have the brains to be in a jet. But it looks pretty so people buy it.
If you have any other questions let me know.
I fly a Phenom 100 with the G1000 and I swap it out for a PL4 in a heartbeat. My main issue with the G1000 is that it's a very new avionics platform but the CRJ Collins FMS which says "Copyright 1984" on boot up is way more functional.
I do like the PFD on the G1000 the synthetic vision is awesome. However that doesn't out weigh the short comings of the "FMS".
Things the G1000 can't do:
- Draw a hold. You can only hold at an IAF or missed approach holding point.
- No predictive fuel planning: It will take your instantaneous fuel flow and ground speed to calculate your landing fuel, however during a power idle descent you can fly to the moon, and during climb you'll crash in about 45 minutes. So if you are holding (using heading bug on the outbound and NAV on the in unbound leg. Don't forget your wind correction, especially fun in a 125kt crosswind) on the way to LGA and get a reroute that adds 200nm to your route the only want to figure out if you are going to make it is it do math by hand. Unless you want to dump your entire flight plan.
- No "Fix" page functions like on a Collins FMS. (You don't realize how useful they are until you don't have them)
- VNAV doesn't understand "or above" and "or below" on arrivals.
- No DME holding function
- No route overlay on radar
- No way to generate FMS glideslope to a runway w/o an IAP
To be clear I'm not saying you can't fly a jet without these features. I'd be more than happy to fly a DC9 w/ DAL. What I am saying is an advance avionics system that is very new should have these functions.
The G1000 was designed for piston singles it doesn't have the brains to be in a jet. But it looks pretty so people buy it.
If you have any other questions let me know.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
speedfreak4996
Flight Schools and Training
8
08-04-2011 04:07 PM
lstorm2003
Flight Schools and Training
16
07-15-2011 02:27 PM
