My experience with the GLD39 is better. The connection with my Garmin 795 is stable, the pitch info is fine and I do see some ( but of course not all ) GA traffic. The only problem I had was the unit overheating on the dashboard on a particularly hot sunny day.
and I do see some ( but of course not all ) GA traffic
Where would you put the % of GA traffic seen on pure ADS-B, @Peter_Mundy, and where in Europe would that figure apply?
Peter_Mundy wrote:
My experience with the GLD39 is better. The connection with my Garmin 795 is stable, the pitch info is fine and I do see some ( but of course not all ) GA traffic. The only problem I had was the unit overheating on the dashboard on a particularly hot sunny day
I’m very pleased your experience is better than mine although the overheating problem is not unknown to me either.
Ill admit I was sucked into buying the GDL39 3D, seduced into thinking this could provide me a greater utility and was wrong.
I have never used it with any Garmin hardware, employing it only with either simultaneous, or discrete, iPad & iPad Mini connections, running Garmin Pilot (which I rate highly), in an IFR / CAS environment and in the mid range altitudes of FL100 – FL160 (and only once at FL180).
The Garmin GLO performs faultlessly. connects quickly and has never, thus far, dropped out – the GDL39 3D has done this on several occasions, once at a fairly critical moment.
Thanks, I’ll stick to Garmin Pilot, GLO and my GNS530WAAS with 430 WAAS backup.
PS: Wanna buy another by any chance? 
@Peter – the problem with these devices is almost nobody has ADSB out so the traffic value is very limited. It is the AHRS that makes it interesting.
It is the AHRS that makes it interesting.
I am not convinced yet a portable AHRS is really needed. Obviously for normal operations the aircraft instruments are used. And in any form of coordinated flight some form of backup horizon can be computed from GPS data. So a backup portable AHRS would be most usefull in badly uncoordinated flight when the primary aircraft instruments are no longer available. But will a portable bluetooth device which is maybe flying through the cabin and an iPad be really usefull at this stage?
same for me I am attracted by the AHRS, traffic might come later.
Oscar Tango this device will connect via Wifi so I expect it to be stable and it comes at half the price you paid so our frustration might be only half of yours.
Sebastian I am sure there are ways to fix these devices in a way they won’t fly around the cabin. Today my back up AI is on the copilot side and the parrallax view in case of failure of my main AI during an IMC approach is not something I fancy much. I’d rather use my remainig main instruments and have a confirming synvis in my direct line of sight. A cool and experienced jockey might master partial panel easily a less experienced one like myself might be happy to have an additional help.
I have the Xavion app which I have tested in VMC and it has successfully guided the plane to the next avaiable runway in case of an engine out. I am sure some might chuckle to me it adds a sense of safety.
The last US AOPA magazine has this:
Is the European info really correct? Mandatory 2016 for all new planes, and mandatory for all in 2020, it says.
Interestingly the 978MHz UAT version is below 18000ft only in the USA which IMHO means it will die out, and everybody will be using the 1090 ES version.
This is correct, do note that this is for aircraft above 5700 kg or with cruise speed exceeding 250 KTAS, so not for the average GA aircraft.
I think 978 MHz UAT will not die out, it is an economical alternative for a lot of aircraft.
Jesse,
Are you saying that the 2020 date only applies to aircraft above 5700kt or with cruise speed exceeding 250kts?
I can’t imagine that there are all that many of those that aren’t flying IFR, and thus already require it.
