Online and other live training stuff is great but does not imprint on my brain like actually operating the avionics in a live environment.

Simulators are better but using a new avionics suite is a perishable skill. You need hands on frequently.

Funny you mention that. On the other hand you don’t have an extra pilot to make it do something you are not expecting.

I was fiddle farting with the G750 in order to get the AP to capture. I reactivated the approach to the wrong WPT. John says “what’s it doing now?”


Ok to be fair he said “what did you do to it?”

You can short cycle this, and be better prepared, with avionic sims/software and practice not in the real airplane.

You can fly a 1000 hours and not explore all the corners of the avionics. Doing a sim to purposefully try everything helps.


Generally, this is caused by trying to make the avionics do everything it can instead of only what you need at the moment. You can simplify the work load by "dropping down a level". That is, ask for a heading, set the AP, then sort it out, when something goes wrong.

This video explains it really well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN41LvuSz10

Applicable to SP ops as well.

Mike C.

I've seen children of the magenta a good number of times. I agree with the concept but some people use this video as an excuse not to learn the intricacies of the AP and its interaction with the avionics. Knowing the AP is key to SP workload reduction. Yes, of course we have to be able to fly without an AP, at this point in most folks flying careers this isn't hard but it does take away some bandwidth and other than practicing some hand flying and a scan, it doesn't make sense to me to fly a jet SP without the AP. Kicking down one level if fine. If the AP surprises me, I kick it off, get it back to where it should be and usually kick it back on in heading mode then if needed I can go click buttons on the navigator to out why it surprised me. What's nice in the CJ is having the two different FMS's (Universal and the Garmin), if one doesn't do what I hoped I just switch to the other.

I don't know of a good simulator for the UNS box? I'd love to play with one. I've fired up the plane on a GPU and hit buttons for a hour but the plane is stationary and its not the same without the world coming at you.

No PC sim for the UNS-1 that I know of.

Flight Safety has ground procedure trainers in some locations with UNS-1. You can spend as much time as you want flying them while at the training center.

I don’t know. I would think most people jump on playing with the AP before learning how to handfly a plane proficiently. Not the other way around. Ones quite a bit more work than the other. IMHO. And day in day out work; not like riding a bike. And really, flying SP, in the real world, you’re pretty much a fool to not have George at least nearby. And know how it works as well as it’s limitations. We’ve all gotten ourselves in situations where we need a helping hand. Just the other day, I mean night, I’m in the soup, bopping along expecting an ILS vectors, get direct to an IF, go looking for a chart on one IPad, it’s not available since I’d failed to download the most current Jepp’s, so I have to dig out the backup. I called on George while I dug out the other charts. Serious SP needs a George in my opinion. But knowing how to reduce the saturation by dumbing it down? That’s big. That example of going into DFW expecting 18R and in the middle of everything getting 13R? That’s classic.

Operating AP is a requirement for SP operations in all turbojets. With your AP inop it is no go SP.

So George is always available to a SP.

John - if you don’t have VNav on the ap why use the universal box at all? Wouldn’t just using the GTNs as a primary source be faster and easier?

The UNS has great vertical
Nav. Much better than the single waypoint in the gtn.

UNS also has all the fuel calculations and landing weight calculations.

At dispatch.

Enroute, George may go bye bye.

One must be able to complete any flight safely without George.

Mike C.

UNS also has all the fuel calculations and landing weight calculations.

UNS or GTN does not. Collins FMS3000 does

Is vnav that useful? I got the full star going into DC recently, was doing cj2 speeds due to tailwinds and I found the vertical guidance fairly simple. Plus, I kept getting direct to future waypoints and altitudes so I wasn’t really flying per the plate most of the time.

If you have the star in the fms and then get a controller override, what happens? Does the fms show u a glide slope indication to the next waypoint?

Does the FMS account for the future altitudes on your flight when determining landing fuel? Example, say I am 500nm from Denver at fl410. Does it calculate my landing fuel based on cruise burn to destination or is it somehow smart enough to calculate the increase in burn as I descend on the STAR? If it doesn’t so that, what is the advantage over the fuel planning tools in the GTN?

Only asking all of this as I am looking at some planes that have FMS and my initial impression is the complexity is not worth it in the slower jets. I see many older citations that have straight gtn setups and that seems pretty good to me. Am trying to determine what situation te effort of using the FMS pays off on the older planes. I get it on something like a premier where everything is integrated, but on the older jets with hodgepodge panels, it’s benefit seems harder to quantify.

Given that they made visual approaches work in the GTN, it seems VNAV would be possible too. Wonder if Garmin will ever add that? Foreflight could also easily add it too. If your AP won’t fly it, if something tells you then rate and alt floor to the next waypoint based on your flight plan and the plate, you would be all set.

I have flown Honeywell Primus (Citation X), Collins (Beechjet) and Garmin 3000 (Phenom 300) and in all, descend via clearances are dirt simple - when the controller says “descend via the XXXXX arrival” set the lowest altitude per the plate, engage VNAV and it will hit every crossing restriction. The box calculates TOD points, required VS, etc. and you control the speed per the arrival (unless you have auto throttles) and monitor the AP. If you like to hand fly, do all of the above, disengage the AP, and follow the FD.

The Collins and the G3000 have a banana which is very useful for the monitoring part, Honeywell Primus 2000 didn’t have a banana so it is mental math added to the monitoring.

The Collins and G3000 are very accurate in hitting all the appropriate altitudes, the Honeywell would occasionally have a brain fart and miss one, you would just have to watch it closely and intervene when it arbitrarily decided to miss one.

If the descend via has an except issued by the controller, 10 seconds puts the new altitude for a fix in the box. If that becomes the clearance limit (i.e. descend via except cross Xxxx at 10000, maintain 10000), then just set the altitude preselect at 10000 instead of the lowest altitude, done.

Regardless of the speed that you are flying, this allows the AP to do the mental math and work, you become a monitor and watch the big picture.

This capability, along with many others, makes an FMS well worth its weight in gold.

Brad