how much is it to get the avidyne 5000 upgraded to the R9? I’m guessing a lot. i have only seen a couple of the g3s with it, i’m guessing its a great grab if already installed… obviously not as good as the perspective, but for the 300k price point its a lot closer to the perspective i would guess than the old 5000?
Other than a few R9 software updates that took to long I havent heard anyone say anything negative about the system. And many say it has a much better user interface.
I think the main reason one might want to go with Perspective is for familiararity( thats got to be spelled wrong) with the next plane upgrade.
Not as good as the Perspective. It is better. By a mile, maybe 2.
Absolutely better. Capability wise its pretty much the same. Usability wise it is far superior.
If you plan on keeping your plane for a while its even worth the money.
Eric:
I am a very satisfied R9 user ( one of the first). I upgraded from the Avidyne / Garmin a avionics suite installed in my new G2. I would upgrade it again today, however you should look at the Avidyne 540/440 with Avidyne digital autopilot. It is close to drop in replacement, and uses a subset of the R9 software (all R9 functions are not available) but still very capable for less cost. This upgrade can be done incrementally, which is another advantage if you don’t like writing big checks. Check it out here. http://www.avidyne.com/products/Ifd540/
Gil
And another nice thing about the 440/540 is that any existing equipment the worked with your 430’s should also work with them (XM receivers, WIFI, lightening, traffic, autopilots, ect.)
Hi Andrew
Just out of interest, does it have Baro VNAV and user defined holds?
cheers
David
The question has not been answered… I think it is roughly 80-90k… Is that correct?
I never went ahead with the conversion but my R9 quote came in a little below that. I suspect its a little less than your bottom number but my information is a little stale FWIW.
The Avidyne website says $69,900. Not sure whether installed or what but Dave at NexAir could tell ya definitively. One of the easiest upgrades to get less than 10% of your investment back based on two specific situations I’m familiar with. Buying one that has been upgraded though seems to be a no brainer if you like R9.
Anyone have a clue how many Cirrus R9 aircraft exist?
It has had User defined holds for 6 years!
Baro VNAV not yet [:’(]
It has to be coming soon. The 440/540’s already have it (when connected to an ADAHRS like Aspen). I think they can even use grey code from an encoder but I’m not sure about that.
Probably the biggest safety advantage of R9 is dual ADHRS computers and full redundancy of the displays. They are equivalent and if one fails no issue flying with a single display. If ur gonna fly IFR much then that is a huge safety margin u hope to never need. U don’t get that with the box swap.
I remain convinced that the R9 system is a great choice. So are the IFD 440 and 540.
However, there is a tremendous difference in the integration and experience even thought the code is similar. An R9 pilot could easily fly an IFD equipped airplane and vice versa for an IFD owner.
But, there are significant differences. The dual AHARS that Kevin mentioned is a big point. There are several others. The integration with the autopilot is better in R9. No more secret handshakes (VS+ALT). VNAV capability that allows you to program descents and follow crossing restrictions without much effort. Vector mode is superior in R9. There are few other items that set R9 apart from the IFD series.
Now then, there are some awfully nice features on the IFD that R9 does not have. Touch interface, better access to frequency information, Rubber band routing and other neat features.
To be frank, I would have a tough time choosing today. But, I think that there will be a lot more IFD’s in the field over time than R9. They will be in a wider variety of airframes. So, if redundancy is what is important. By redundancy I mean both in terms of dual PFD otpions but also a second source to drive the autopilot, R9 is the best answer. If you are looking for updating without adding redundancy but move into more functionality and a modern FMS system with broad support and slightly easier maintainabliity, I would go with IFD 540/440 and remote transponder.
Hi Eric -
This kind of depends on the starting point of the upgrade. This is because of the trade in value. We have done about 35 R9 upgrades and have done Serial number 0110 all the way into the last of the Avidyne G3s. Changing the 6-Pak to R9 of course tends to be the higher value because of the extra work and the lack of trade-in equipment. The best would be a 430W aircraft with DFC90. These we advertise for $65,000. A 6-Pak could go up to 80K. A Non-WAAS 430 with 55X would be $75,000. I would be happy to quote or answer any questions. I am fairly confident we can do R9 better and cheaper than any shop.
Some of the key benefits as I see them:
-
16W Transmitters
-
Dual ADAHRS
-
DFC100 - Full Digital Autopilot with VNAV
-
Synthetic Vision
-
Redundant data on both Screens - right can be PFD
Probably 20 more that make R9 a fully integrated system and hands down more intuitive to fly.
Dave
NexAir Avionics
Ron Laughlin:
The 440/540’s already have it [baro VNAV] (when connected to an ADAHRS like Aspen). I think they can even use grey code from an encoder but I’m not sure about that.
No, it requires corrected baro altitude, which has to come from the PFD. There is no way of setting a QNH on an altitude encoder.
via COPAme
The IFD540/440 will take the ARINC 429 from the Aspen or the Avidyne PFD and provide baro. The original setting in the 430s (Sandel HSI) will not provide this so if you have IFDs in an Avidyne PFD aircraft you need to change the input to Honeywell EFIS to get the baro. This can then be simply verified looking at the calculator and changing baro.
Dave
NexAir Avionics