AirVenture 2023: Honeywell Anthem Pilatus PC-12 Tour
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 08. 2024
- Introduced in 2021, Honeywell's clean-sheet Anthem integrated flight deck has racked up over 120 hours of flight testing in a Pilatus PC-12 turboprop, and the test bed (with pre-production test hardware) was on public display for the first time at AirVenture 2023. Aviation Consumer Editor Larry Anglisano climbed aboard the Pilatus with company flight test pilot Ed Manning for an exclusive first-look demo.
- Auta a dopravní prostředky
I want to say a hearfelt thank you to the entire team for putting out these videos while a
Airventure is going on! I appreciate it and I am vicariously experiencing Airventure in "realtime" thanks to all of you!
Looks like a beta test version of a G3000. (note/edit: I'm glad Honeywell is trying to bring their way out of date flight deck up to do date, but this really feels like a 1991 software upgrade to 2005 rather than 2023). That GUI isn't nearly as good as Garmin's and they still don't have an autoland offering. If Beechcraft wasn't terrible at manufacturing the Denali would be crushing the PC-12 in sales right now on the flight deck alone.
The vast majority of customers who get even a short amount of time to fly the system either in the lab or on the aircraft have made comments like “there is a lot in here that Garmin doesn’t do that makes flying precisely much easier”, or “it’s clear a lot of thought has gone into minimizing the amount of training that is required to understand this symbology” or “this is much easier than Garmin” - but I’m sure Honeywell would rather have you experience it first hand so they can learn directly from your inputs - you may have a different perspective after experiencing it for real instead of commenting on a video
Looks like the Wish version of a G3000 panel.
😂😂😂
My thoughts exactly
Competition is good though.
@@jbw9999 I think competition is a good thing, and I definitely like this flight deck better than the previous honeywell on the PC-12, but if you're going to compete then you should compete, i.e. a new product should be better than the current version of the competition's product. This looks like honeywell is moving from early 1990s tech to 2005 tech, but definitely not 2023 tech. If I was Pilatus I'd be having a serious conversation about switching to Garmin because the autoland is a huge selling point for their GA customers who are generally of an age where heart attacks can occur and they don't want to kill off their family in the event of a heart attack. This makes it look like Honeywell is still at least a decade behind the competition in terms of development. If the Denali ever gets built they're going to crush PC-12 sales simply based on having the G3000 and autoland.
@@2011blueman The vast majority of customers who get even a short amount of time to fly the system either in the lab or on the aircraft have made comments like “there is a lot in here that Garmin doesn’t do that makes flying precisely much easier”, or “it’s clear a lot of thought has gone into minimizing the amount of training that is required to understand this symbology” or “this is much easier than Garmin” - but I’m sure Honeywell would rather have you experience it first hand so they can learn directly from your inputs - you may have a different perspective after experiencing it for real instead of commenting on a video
Why does everything that’s not Garmin have such a noticeably low frame rate with synthetic vision?
The Honeywell SVS is the highest refresh on the market at over 30fps which with Part 25 level of cert (higher than the G3000 cert levels) is very difficult to pull off and still get approved through V&V etc. with multiple demands on the real time OS and computing HW
@@eisendrache787 wtf is this shameless corporate botting lmao
Yea PLEASE do NOT put this in the PC12
Full touch interfaces are a no-go. Interacting with Foreflight on an iPad is nearly impossible in even light turbulence. With physical buttons you can anchor your hand and find the button before pressing.
The video states clearly that tactile control panels just like every other avionics system offers, in the Anthem case each pilot could have their own simple 3 or 4 knob control panels conveniently installed for best reach distance. Please listen to what is being stated in the video as Ed is walking folks through it - lower cost smaller CCDs (not joysticks which are a complete pain in the G systems) are also available to be integrated)
@@eisendrache787 Please make a control panel the default included option with touch only for some non-critical functions.
This is a mess. I hope they don't actually put this in the 12.
They should have gone full Garmin with the NG! And Cessna/ Beech.... Textron whoever is building the Denali should have put a PT6 in it!
Honeywell is the worst part about the NG and NGX, Moneywell!
Amen
That was my first thoughts as well. What a mess.
@@jpmeyer4159Beechcraft is building the Denali.
This flight deck is based on hundreds or thousands of hours of flying in all kinds of weather and addresses many of the shortcomings seen in other avionics systems including old and dated fonts and colors, bad touch target sizes, and gimmicky instead of helpful and accurate synthetic vision and safety systems. Can’t wait for this system to be available on a wide variety of GA aircraft
Interface looks pretty wack the g3000 or 5000 are way better what would make sense tho would be if Honeywell is a cheap option then it might do well
Oh man, this is bad. G600 TXi all the way.
Can we please have buttons and knobs back.
Amen, for the love of god bring them back.I’m hoping it’s just a trend.
All new flight deck systems are having touchscreen and preserve the cursor control pointing device feature. This video doesn't show the cusor control device.
Whenever I hear “it’s kind of like your phone” I lose interest in flying the new stuff. Why don’t they try to listen to actual pilots for once? I don’t want to touch on the PFD (or any screen) and then type in my desired altitude. Just as one of many examples.
I fly something with a GTN750 and whenever we have turbulence it’s a pain in the ass to enter a waypoint or do anything besides changing frequencies (physical knob).
don't worry, the guy their are listening to will soon indulge us with some "AI" stuff, "because everybody is moving to AI so we need to move along..." whatever that means
Yes, typing in an altitude was the line for me. That's terrible.
@@oisiaa you can do what you prefer - Ed could have used the altitude select knob also but touch is actually generally 2 to 3x faster as long as you are in moderate or lighter turbulence. Anthem doesn’t take away the ability for traditional mindset pilots to use knobs to set things
@@eisendrache787 I drive a Tesla and I love the touch interface, but the moment the pavement is rough or I need to make an input without taking my eyes off the road, it's game over. You need to be able to fly with full focus on the PFD and be able to feel for knobs to make changes without taking your eyes off of your flight path. I know you've done studies. Put someone in hard IMC conditions with turbulence, have ATC give them a random hold with ATIS blaring in their ear from a second radio. Please make a control panel standard equipment and the default for training.
@@oisiaa completely agree - Honeywell has done a ton (hundreds of hours) of testing in aircraft and on motion platforms good for EASA and FAA data gathering to support cert. that show pilots generally, without confusion, do what is comfortable at the time. Touch is much faster when not in more than light to moderate turbulence. There is no plan to eliminate tactile controls or CCDs for cases when turbulence is a factor - the data Honeywell gathered in flight and in labs is very clear on this.
Where is Paul?
My very same thought!
The resolution upgrade from the apex system I'd long overdue. But the PIDU is way too close to the pilots knee. The pc12 is already a little cramped and that will only make it worse.
I’m a big fan of GLASS cockpits, but this does not look like it would be practical in flight. I’m hoping this is a concept & still under development.
Perhaps they should chat to more of their ‘end users’ before putting it into production 🤷🏻♂️
Raising the gear from the right seat? Well... maybe not.
This is a test configuration, not a final config - likely you would just have 3 Touch Display Units (TDUs) in a PC12 retrofit scenario because it isn’t necessary like it is in the Garmin to have the remote controls GTCs in the lower position (only way you can manipulate the forward displays which slows pilots down a lot). You can basically do everything you need to, including looking at Synoptics, charts, checklists, radios, and maps, all on one TDU which is especially helpful for any reversion or non-normal scenarios
OMG, the UI is WAYYYYY too slow. Imagine that you're in hard IMC trying to put in a divert/hold/approach and you have to deal with a laggy UI...that will kill people.
don't worry, it's touchscreen... I mean, just make it responsive, it's not like we are running graphics intensive operations here or anything like that
or you can just fly the plane. hence "pilot" and not "operator."
@@jmwintenn I'm sorry to break the news to you, but pilots fly planes through the flight management system. You can't fly IFR without using the system.
@@oisiaa you are a child of the magenta
@@MrFujinko I am not, but I do realize that old mechanical instruments are a thing of the past and I would never want to fly with them again. I'm a fan of flat screen displays with mechanical buttons/switches for all functions. Touch screens seem like a bad idea.
Ouch. Looks like engineers designed the UI/UX. Still, I love what Honeywell is working towards here. Please get some real UI/UX designers.
Would love your inputs on what you don’t like - lots of hours - thousands with UX/UI types not engineers with those UX/UI types as pilots have gone into the current layouts - work like this looks simple, but as you probably know (assuming you are a UX/UI type) lots of iterations and testing needs to be done with competent designers for interfaces to work well. You probably also know that the principle of “transferrence” is very important in aviation where we need the right balance between good UI design and what pilots ALREADY KNOW AND ARE USED TO doing in the cockpit so it isn’t a case where you can make it work like your car without creating large training problems
@@eisendrache787 Very good point about what pilots are used to. Though I'd love to see a clean sheet design, esp. in this case with so many innovations. The potential of Anthem has me very excited and hopeful. I'd be very happy to review usability studies conducted (love doing those), designs and their evolution, situations of usage flow in different scenarios, user cases, etc. Let me know how to connect.
Has anyone at the company even used a Garmin or flown a aircraft? This looks like an arcade game or experimental budget panel from 2005.
Touchscreen is also a joke, give some real tactile buttons and knobs
Yes, most of the team, UX/UI designers, and Human Factors specialists, and the pilots (not just Ed) involved with the project have Garmin experience (multiple systems) and are deliberately avoiding mistakes Garmin makes while retaining the good that most (not just Garmin) avionics providers offer pilots on multiple aircraft types
The framerate of the UI SUCKS!!! Needs to be buttery smooth 60fps with no drops.
That looks awful.
Just get a Garmin, I mean this thing is embarrassing
The vast majority of customers who get even a short amount of time to fly the system either in the lab or on the aircraft have made comments like “there is a lot in here that Garmin doesn’t do that makes flying precisely much easier”, or “it’s clear a lot of thought has gone into minimizing the amount of training that is required to understand this symbology” or “this is much easier than Garmin” - but I’m sure Honeywell would rather have you experience it first hand so they can learn directly from your inputs - you may have a different perspective after experiencing it for real instead of commenting on a video
@@eisendrache787 thanks for the reply. Clearly I don’t know what I’m talking about and I need to spend some time with the system, maybe I’m just an old schmuck who’s against change though I’ve always loved Garmin systems and I found the G 3000 to be particularly intuitive, I appreciate you sharing though
@@LocalConArtist happy to arrange some time with Honeywell where you can provide direct feedback if you can make it out to the Phoenix area. Honeywell is always open to improving systems and learning from pilots' wide variety of experiences.
This is a mess. As a gulfstream pilot (450/550-650) and owner of a single pilot Citation this is terrible. Need knobs and buttons muscle memory operate during high workload phases of flight, ESPECIALLY in turbulence
PC12 is such an amazing airplane, but I doubt anyone will want to buy one with this avionics suite. It sucks.
as long as you aren't Garmin OEM affiliated, I'm sure Honeywell, under an NDA, would be happy to have you provide your direct feedback locally in person in Phoenix. Honeywell is constantly learning from pilots with a wide variety of experiences, especially those who haven't been exposed to why much of the symbology, menu layouts and interactions, and other aspects of the newer systems, like the Honeywell systems on the E2 jet, on the Falcon F10X and Gulfstream's G500/600/700/800 are all better than other avionics systems on the market. While Garmin's autoland is mislabeled to fool the industry (it's only usable in an emergency and should be called Emergency Autoland not Autoland), Honeywell avionics are regularly actually autolanding aircraft like the 787, the E2, and others, usable at will in normal operations, not emergencies. Talk to pilots who regularly fly Honeywell in a variety of aircraft about the quality of the audio, power of transmission, reliability in extreme weather (not cheating on environmental tests), robustness when system failures occur, and a number of other factors including symbology and accuracy of the Synthetic vision, and you may find your view changes on which system is better. That said, again, I'm sure Honeywell is open to your personal feedback. Please feel free to DM me if you want to arrange a direct feedback session Christoph.
This graphic design is a crime against nature. No information hierarchy or discernible design philosophy. Every piece of information competing with everything else. Random colors, fonts, font weights, use of white space, margins, borders. The slide out menus are easily the worst part. I'm struggling to find a design sin that hasn't been committed here. Also, no hard buttons at all? Those exposed glass edges are virtually guaranteed to be damaged regularly. Operators will be super pleased when they're spending six figures a year to replace those. This mess has to be the result of corporate hacks taking all the wrong lessons from Tesla. Get your act together. I would be ashamed to have anything to do with this product.
will they sell a self driving package that never really arrives too? that would be a solid Tesla move
Lololol
@danielreuter2565 - what are you looking at? Provided you aren’t employed by Garmin we would love to have you provide your feedback directly in person - we are continually making improvements - the line weights fonts and colors are very deliberately set and balanced, but it’s always possible there is at least one pilot out there who wants something better or different - would love to learn more about what you are seeing
Too many acronyms being tossed around.
The old -9 & -10 with simple but feature rich Honeywell EFIS were the best….I want to fly not play a video game!!!!
It’s not a video game, but it is much more intuitive to fly, simple visual symbology that makes flying much more precise and easier without all the mental math than the cockpits you are referring to. You still need to be a pilot, but you can do this with much lower cognitive workload than G systems and others.