pietromarx wrote: ↑Fri Nov 17, 2023 3:16 am
I bought a DA-40 in 2003. The second with a G1000. What was true then is true today. Virtually the same words and conversations from the customers and ... silence from Diamond. This is perhaps why everyone I know says buy EAB versus certificated if possible and never, ever, anything with an integrated flight deck.
I am watching Garmin and Avidyne on the Cirrus side (COPA member). Avidyne has been showing off their path forward for the older Entegra based planes (it is called Vantage). Avidyne has hinted, but not said outright, that they have a path forward to upgrade older G1000 planes.
I recall reading stuff on the G1000, but I cannot recall what the answer was. And I very might well be confusing other brands...
Tim
The challenge is that there is no STC'd path for DA-40s with G1000s. You can't turn the airplane into experimental and you can't go forward in the certificated path. Therefore, it eventually becomes a museum piece. The bill of materials for the G1000 contains a number of components no longer in production, so it is rather like buying a Macintosh 128 computer from 1981. Eventually it becomes a door stop. Or perhaps you buy another DA-40 for parts?
I like the airplanes and, truth be told, I also bought another DA-40 in 2016 with a G1000, this time knowing that it was "set in stone." The plane met my needs for what I needed at the time and I was able to sell it for more than I paid. (Woot!)
However, my needs and wants are different these days. I truly enjoy flying and have moved into a CubCrafter XCub. Fun, smaller, Lycosaurus, and ... in every way flexible and sustainable. A Part 23 and EAB version of a 1940s design.
You won’t get any arguments from me about CubCrafters … I built an EX3 in the factory build-assist program and flew it for a few years before ultimately selling it (wasn’t able to spend enough time to maintain TW proficiency and my mission was - and still is - largely Point A to Point B). Great experience and great airplanes. You flying a tailwheel XCub or a nosewheel one? I’ve demo’d in both and actually like the nosewheel version a lot (flew the market survey plane at OSH a couple years ago down at Camp CubCrafters). Experimental aircraft aren’t a panacea; they have their own issues, including variable build quality, higher accident and insurance rates and in my case, I can’t use them for Angel Flights so they are off my table for now as a primary airplane. But they do have tremendous flexibility for the owners.
The Garmin G3X avionics are outstanding and I don’t see any reason why you shouldn’t be able to use them in certificated planes, but the process is very cumbersome for Garmin to get it approved (and that’s a kind word for it). I also had them in my LSA (not for IFR though). Hopefully one day all this will be simpler but there is definitely truth to the notion that an integrated flight deck has a price to be paid down the road if the TC holder doesn’t provide an upgrade path. As noted, there’s a lot of storm and fury about this for the older G1000 Cirruses (I bought and flew an Avidyne Cirrus in part for this reason vs. an early G1000 model). But when you know this going in, each owner can make up their own mind about the pros and cons.
So far, neither Diamond nor Garmin has addressed this issue. My understanding is that Textron worked with Garmin to due the STC and solve the issue. Cirrus has implied that when Garmin can no longer support older G1000 planes, they will have a path forward (but not positive on this). I know there have been a few other announcements, but I do not recall them, and quick web search did not show who.
TimS wrote: ↑Tue Nov 28, 2023 2:11 pm
So far, neither Diamond nor Garmin has addressed this issue.
They did. Three years ago they promised (Garmin and DAI) to informal group of owners (regular posters here) NXi upgrade for legacy G1000 and even provided price list. On the next meeting Diamond Canada CEO at that time (Scott McFadzean) informed us that they are pulling out. After that they announced they would release 15.3 for legacy G1000 and that would be the last update for this platform. As far as I understand, for DAI it’s the end of this story.
There is a path from legacy G1000 to G1000 NXI through Diamond's Factory Maintenance Rebuilt program. The older airplane is stripped and remanufactured with current production engines and avionics. There is no STC required because the resulting product matches current production and certification.
Looking at the current listings, you'll see a DA40NG with a D4 serial number. That means it started life as a DA40-D with a Continental engine. This means the DA42-TDI owners would need to convert to Austro Engines. I'm unaware of any equivalent offering by Cirrus for their legacy G1000/perspective planes. Both Canada and Austria factory maintenance have performed these remanufactured projects.
The Textron/Cessna "NXI upgrade" that swaps the legacy GDU1040s for NXI GDU1050s (essentially Diamond's NXI "phase one") is problematic, mainly if the motivating concern for upgrading to NXI is continued hardware support for the Legacy G1000 avionics. Those legacy GIA63Ws and the GMA1347 are still in the system. The Cessna "partial NXI" upgrade is only available to planes with WAAS and the GFC700 installed. The planes with early G1000, GIA63s, and KAP140s are not eligible.
chili4way wrote: ↑Tue Nov 28, 2023 6:40 pm
There is a path from legacy G1000 to G1000 NXI through Diamond's Factory Maintenance Rebuilt program. The older airplane is stripped and remanufactured with current production engines and avionics. There is no STC required because the resulting product matches current production and certification.
If this is Diamond's answer to the upgrade path for G1000 equipped DA40-180s, that's absurd. I'm not going to trade in an otherwise perfectly fine (with newly overhauled engine) airplane to get upgraded avionics just because Diamond and Garmin can't get their shit together.
Diamond also never delivered on the promised GDU v15 upgrade for the DA40-180. Why should I believe they'll support NXi equipped airplanes when the time comes? At least I can rip out the G1000 entirely when the time comes with the -180 since it's installed by STC.
chili4way wrote: ↑Tue Nov 28, 2023 7:39 pm
Matt, what solution and pricing would be satisfactory for your plane? Does it have WAAS and a GFC700?
The 2019 update from Garmin on G1000 NXi retrofit availability [1] has a list price of $28,995. That seems reasonable to me. I would be interested in such an option; however I would also want some sort of commitment from Diamond and Garmin that they would not abandon me once again in 20 years. Otherwise, I plan to migrate off of integrated avionics completely when the legacy G1000 is out of support.
An NXi upgrade was offered for the DA62 at a price of $58,000. I suspect the disparity is due to the choice of Diamond to require the GIA64 versus the GIA63W. But I presume the cost of an NXi equipped DA40-180 would be less than that of a DA62.
Yes, I have WAAS (which I had tried to purchase through Diamond's program, unsuccessfully, but found a pair of GIA63Ws on my own), and the GFC700.
I provided all this feedback in the owners survey as well.
I think MHoran's point is right on the money: the idea of having to remanufacture an airplane to obtain some slightly improved PCBs (printed circuit boards) is absurd. When originally offered by Diamond and Garmin, the idea was that the G1000 would be "future proof" with easy updates through the LRUs and with software. I spent a lot of time with the product manager at Garmin on this as I had one of the very first ones ... and having a background building chips, software, systems, and PCBs it is also a comfortable place for me. Without having specifics, I can guesstimate that the bill of materials (BOM) for the G1000NXi's upgrade over the G1000 is less than the smartphone you're probably reading this on.
The truly galling part is that this was (is) an entirely human decision made by someone at Diamond, probably made because there was no direct ROI demonstrated. There is no reason that the regulators wouldn't approve a new STC or that a product or service couldn't be provided. (I once faced a similar issue at a company I worked at who felt that installing Wi-Fi at the office needed to have an ROI calculation ... in a eerily parallel universe to Diamond, they went from being a leader in their industry to less than half the size of their smarter competitor.)
Even today I am working on some aviation-related stuff. For example, I have an effort going on putting cellular (yes, "5G") into a fleet of fully certificated helicopters that fly in urban environments 24/7/365 in the public safety space. The effort of getting those devices installed - and I won't go into the details other than to say that the regulatory hurdles were substantial, beyond what Diamond or Garmin have to do to get an upgrade on an STC approved - took the better part of a year. Heck, Garmin has certificated auto-landing autopilots that can be retrofitted into King Airs ... just imagine what that took to persuade the FAA. By comparison, a G1000 NXi upgrade is virtually nothing.
There really can be little doubt that manufacturer here has simply walked away from their existing customers. I won't buy another Diamond, but I would consider another manufacturer who has maintained their relationship with their existing customers. As mentioned above, though, I have gone to something a bit closer (to a farm field!) - an XCub (NXCub). And the helicopters are certainly enjoyable.
So far, neither Diamond nor Garmin has addressed this issue. My understanding is that Textron worked with Garmin to due the STC and solve the issue. Cirrus has implied that when Garmin can no longer support older G1000 planes, they will have a path forward (but not positive on this). I know there have been a few other announcements, but I do not recall them, and quick web search did not show who.
Tim
Yeah ... this one is very much the reason for my cynicism about Diamond here. For some strange reason, Diamond had Garmin do the STC in 2003 to put the G1000 into the DA-40. Diamond then blamed Garmin for every issue henceforth, essentially saying that it was Garmin's fault for no upgrade path. Fiddlesticks!
The reality was rather less, though, in that Diamond never found the $ or initiative to work through the problem. They could have bought the STC, done a new STC, or pursued another economic model with Garmin.
The other manufacturers have their issues, to be clear. However, if Textron can find a way forward with Garmin, then it should not be that challenging for Diamond to figure it out. Garmin would be happy to sell their products to the folks here and, it is clear, that there are a lot of folks who want continually improved electronics and software.
