Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2012 16:42:35 -0500
Message-ID: <redirect-5416493@logan.com>
Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.160.52; envelope-from=hackmo15@gmail.com
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of hackmo15@gmail.com designates 10.68.227.105 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.68.227.105;
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: G900 users
From: jon hadlich <hackmo15@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8ff24bd1cf6deb04b9ce652c

--e89a8ff24bd1cf6deb04b9ce652c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

  G900 users and guys thinking EFIS. When you buy Garmin you are dealing
with the new King, with intended pun. They are probably now the leaders of
most GA related equipment. When you deal with them you get a huge company
with a perceived sense of reliability and dependability. What you also get
is the FAA mandating certain things. They're very regimented in their
thinking. They have certain things they want to see and don't want to see.
The FAA is a little more lax with the experimental community ( they let you
have engine monitoring on the EFIS), but still expect certain things Garmin
can't deviate from.One of these things is probably software updates and the
testing procedure. It's probably a pain in the ass. I think this is where a
lot of ignoring of any recommendations or advice from the users comes from.
Garmin can't budge either due to FAA, cost or both.
  If you  want to suggest or ask for something out of the ordinary or
specific to your airframe, go with Advanced Flight Systems, Grand Rapids
Tech, Dynon. These systems are geared toward the experimental community and
are more open to suggestions or unusual requests.Their equipment is
designed for a wide range of aircraft instead of just 5. In my experience
all these companies are just as picky about their equipment as Garmin and
they are generally as dependable. And they're mostly very nice to deal with.
  As to software, all software is the ultimate "black box" to most of us.
All software should be completely tested in a flight environment, my
opinion. I'm sure all the EFIS software guys do this. And there's still
that bug that might crop up in an obscure situation that the testing guys
didn't try.
I'm not an EFIS expert, just an installer. When you buy Garmin, you get
some of the best. But you're stuck with what you get.

-- 
Jon Hadlich
AI Systems
(541) 815-7381

--e89a8ff24bd1cf6deb04b9ce652c
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=A0 G900 users and guys thinking EFIS. When you buy Garmin you are dealing =
with the new King, with intended pun. They are probably now the leaders of =
most GA related equipment. When you deal with them you get a huge company w=
ith a perceived sense of reliability and dependability. What you also get i=
s the FAA mandating certain things. They&#39;re very regimented in their th=
inking. They have certain things they want to see and don&#39;t want to see=
. The FAA is a little more lax with the experimental community ( they let y=
ou have engine monitoring on the EFIS), but still expect certain things Gar=
min can&#39;t deviate from.One of these things is probably software updates=
 and the testing procedure. It&#39;s probably a pain in the ass. I think th=
is is where a lot of ignoring of any recommendations or advice from the use=
rs comes from. Garmin can&#39;t budge either due to FAA, cost or both.<br>
=A0 If you=A0 want to suggest or ask for something out of the ordinary or s=
pecific to your airframe, go with Advanced Flight Systems, Grand Rapids Tec=
h, Dynon. These systems are geared toward the experimental community and ar=
e more open to suggestions or unusual requests.Their equipment is designed =
for a wide range of aircraft instead of just 5. In my experience all these =
companies are just as picky about their equipment as Garmin and they are ge=
nerally as dependable. And they&#39;re mostly very nice to deal with.<br>
=A0 As to software, all software is the ultimate &quot;black box&quot; to m=
ost of us. All software should be completely tested in a flight environment=
, my opinion. I&#39;m sure all the EFIS software guys do this. And there=
9;s still that bug that might crop up in an obscure situation that the test=
ing guys didn&#39;t try. <br>
I&#39;m not an EFIS expert, just an installer. When you buy Garmin, you get=
 some of the best. But you&#39;re stuck with what you get.<br clear=3D"all"=
><br>-- <br>Jon Hadlich<br>AI Systems<br>(541) 815-7381<br>

--e89a8ff24bd1cf6deb04b9ce652c--