AirVenture 2022: Honeywell Anthem Update

Honeywell Aerospace has been working on the clean-sheet-design Anthem integrated avionics suite, flying over 100 flight test hours (and counting) in hopes of eventual FAA certification. It was showing the system at AirVenture 2022 at Oshkosh, and Aviation Consumer Editor Larry Anglisano sat down with Honeywell's Andrew Barker for an update on the project.

[@porkrind]

Looks like Honeywell is finally trying to compete with Garmin after 15 years. I'd love to see someone else win some market share in the commuter jet/turboprop world. Its going to be a struggle to catch up and compete, but I wish them the best.

[@porkrind]

Most avionics companies seemed to agree, but garmin came in with the Apple approach of proprietary everything and it's worked well for them. I know nothing about the approach Honeywell has taken here, but if they make STC upgrades easier then garmin they have a good shot of succeeding

[@toldt]

@@porkrind Not entirely accurate depiction. Unlike Apple, Garmin products are compatible with devices from other manufacturers, like PFDs, autopilots, audio panels, etc.

[@andrewsmactips]

Translation: Yeah, absolutely. So someday it may go from horrifically expensive to just super expensive.

[@rashesthippo]

Shout out to Brett Michaels from Honeywell

[@moxievintage1390]

Bahhaaaaaaa🙌💯

[@rashesthippo]

@@starcrib It was just a lighthearted joke. just know your products and the rest isn't a big deal. Besides this was a more casual conversation anyway. it's a nice departure from the stuffy corporate clone attire.

[@AdvancedGroomers28]

Love Honeywell in the pilatus. Much better than a Garmin. #northup

[@robertlafnear9115]

I like his hat.😁

[@TomCook1993]

Garmin: man this avionics game is easy
Honeywell rising from the dead: hold my martini.

[@Kaipeternicolas]

It looks cool but I hate touch screen based interfaces in the cockpit. Maybe it's just me but I don't like it.

[@rashesthippo]

You want to touch that button? Turbulence has entered the chat!

[@Kaipeternicolas]

@@rashesthippo Haha exactly! Or fingerprints!

[@eisendrache787]

the system interfaces with tactile controls, CCDs, and simple knob control panels for GA installations. even for the large touch screen installations for TBMs, King Airs, Malibu/Mirage, and other aircraft types, there is a lot of hand stabilization around the displays that makes it easy to use touch even in moderate turbulence. Completely agree that the touch interface in turbulence is critical which is why Honeywell has done a ton of testing with large area touch displays in turbulence and on motion platforms with accurate dimension display installations

[@Kaipeternicolas]

@@eisendrache787 I don't know. I've used touch interface controls in the cockpit and just don't like them. Gets dirty and is a pain sometimes to navigate through menus and sub-menus.

[@eisendrache787]

@@Kaipeternicolas sorry for the delayed reply - your perspective is good and it's ok to not like touch - you can still use a limited number of low cost controls for zooming in/out and changing baro, speed, altitude etc. and you'll be good to go - most of the other controls that are touch button or menu driven are rarely needed/used given the design of the pilot interface - we still support CCD (essentially a mouse that allows point and click and is much easier to use than typical G1000/3000 joystick and concentric knob controls) and simple knob controls for key parameters like heading, speed, altitude etc. - what we've found in hundreds of hours of flight test even for pilots who typically sit back and don't normally touch the forward displays, is that they starting touching everything on the displays because it's so much faster unless you are in moderate to heavy turbulence and then when it does get bumpy, they quickly revert to the easy to use CCD. Pilots who want to avoid touch can avoid using touch and revert to the hard controls and CCD, but most pilots are doing it the fastest easiest way (touch) when not in moderate to heavy turbulence, the same way we do outside of cockpits with our consumer devices or with automotive interfaces.

[@toldt]

100 hrs of tests flight time isn't much

[@eisendrache787]

He said "well over" but the exact number shouldn't be shared in a publicly available youtube video and the time in the labs including on motion platforms simulating moderate and stronger turbulence it is in the thousands of hours now