G1000 Based SimPits, Why No Buzz?

It seems that I hear a lot about people building Boeing-737 home cockpits featuring “Glass” cockpits. And I hear about people building Cessna-172 home cockpits featuring glass versions of “Analog” gauges. People used to build F-16 Viper home cockpits.

Just browsing around and doing forum searches, I am not picking up any buzz about Garmin-1000 based home cockpits. I mean, if I had recently graduated from a pilot program with 250 hours and was trying to move into air-cargo/air-taxi/air-ambulance, I think that there would be more openings for G1000 equipped small and medium aircraft (Cessna Caravans and Beechcraft Barons) compared to Boeing-737's. Wouldn't a G-1000 based home simulator be great for practicing navigation and landings appropriate for a target employer before a job interview? And you could still have fun visiting new places from tropical islands to snow-capped mountains.

Again, why no buzz, is there something "not-cool" about G1000's ?

Thanks in advance
JD
-----
Elsewhere on the internet …
Not many choices for G1000's simulators with buttons and knobs
1-Emuteq G1000 - 2,300 GBP ( ~ 3,000 USD )
--http://www.emuteq.com/G1000.html
2-F1 Tech 1000 (using Emuteq G1000 I think) - 5,000 USD
--http://www.flight1tech.com/Products/AvionicsSimulations/F1Tech1000.aspx
3-RedBird TD2 - 8,000 USD
--http://simulators.redbirdflight.com/products/td2
-----
Hello Zlatko, you gave an insightful answer to the question “Re: Which plane To build? 737 etc?”, have you looked at G-1000 sims?
-----
I found the attached picture on an x-plane forum. It is a Flight1/EmuTeq, and it looks like a nice setup and it looks a lot less costly than a 737 cockpit. (Personally I would make a nice wooden box to go around it, but it already has most/all of what I would need for practicing navigation and landings).
-----

Never mind,
25 views in 9 days here at MyCockpit.Org,
versus,
24 views in 1 hour over at FlightSim.Com.

Hi JD,

I think many dreamed of being an airline pilot and the 737/320 being their office. The G1000 was perhaps not what they dreamed of or had in mind. Cant be an airline pilot? no problem! build one! This is what people are doing! A 737 or A320 cockpit in your living room would look a damn lot cooler than 2 pc screens showing a PFD/ND and a moving map!

Also, yeah I agree, MyCockpit isn't what it used to be like 7 or 8 years ago when it was booming, its gradually slowed due to the rise of new sites on the net. But MC has the best archive of content overall....

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser/> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> Hello JD,
Sorry for the delayed answer (I was away). And You are right – G1000 is a damn good choice
for the GA minded person. Especially when one is looking for a quick build aimed to do training with the new GA systems.
I think every one of us have it’s own reasons for choosing a particular build, and here are mine – when I firs started the build (1 or 2 years ago), it was FS9 based and Fs9 wouldn’t naturally support G1000 software. And back then I new nothing about making front
panels with laser or router. Gentlemen’s from this forum demonstrated to all of us what is possible with a laser. Special thanks to JohnB , Thank You, John!
And the third reason – I was particularly interested how to make old stile steam gauges, how all systems in a GA planes work and interfere with each other, etc, etc.
Here special thanks goes to JimNZ, Horacio, Fess , TomG and many others for answering me to very specific questions and inspiring me to explore certain ideas.
When building every single system , at certain times I am finding myself
researching through airplane maintenance manuals how a particular system works
-wandering if I am building a sim or an experimental airplane… For example-
all carburetors C172 are using fuel primer and four positions fuel selector, while new fuel injected are using switch operated fuel pump, 3 pos. fuel selector and a separate fuel cut off valve. And when it comes to autopilot – there are 1 axis and 2 axis autopilots, some are taking signals from electric turn coordinator and others – from electric attitude indicator , etc. When you bother your mind with that sort of questions, it enables you with the knowledge to discuss real airplanes with real pilots and maintenance technicians within Pprune and other discussion boards. And that also could be considered as sort of training. When flying real GA planes and paying £150 /hour , time is just not enough to get a full grasp of how all different systems work.
And when implementing a ready made system , one wouldn’t even knew what are the right questions to ask. And again – G1000 is a great system – it might be part of my next project.
When speaking about G1000 system – it is not a uniform system for all GA planes – it is custom tuned for the particular plane , custom sensors installed, aimed to the airspace you are flying within and services available there.
About the forum – not the most crowded place indeed, but certainly – one of the most creative places amongst flight sim building communities. There are many authors of new ideas and solutions here. They couldn’t be creative 24hours / 7 days a week, could they? And certainly – not for free.

Regards.

Another point of view, if it helps. I currently have a G1000 cockpit in my sim, having recently gone from the traditional "steam" gauges. I am a GA person, I flew Pipers and Mooneys and the occasional Beech when I was actively flying (real). These days I only fly the sim and stick with single and twin engine retractables. I was hesitant to move to a glass cockpit and, honestly, I am still not sure if I am going to end up sticking with it as I still really like the old gauges but, in my very inexperienced and short time hands, I am incredibly impressed that the PFD - having all of the primary flight instruments in one place - has not only improved my scan but I think it has improved my flying. The MFD is incredible with an amazing amount of functions but, as expected, there is a learning curve to learning these systems as the hardware and software reproduces all of the actual G1000 capabilities.

There is no right or wrong and even if someone were interested in eventually going to the big iron (in real or in sim) the G1000 is a good trainer for the basics of flying a big jet, too, as the functions are the same, albeit in a different environment and in different places.

Fly what you like and enjoy it. I think the G1000 is great and can make you a better pilot (if you take the time to master it) if you fly IFR, but I also think a traditional cockpit layout is great. The big jets do not do it for me (and I have flown a real B-52 full motion simulator) but I appreciate what they do for others and I enjoy looking at them and reading and seeing what other folks are doing.

Thank you all for the thoughtful replies.
Somehow I thought that more of the people here were “preparing for their future”.
Thanks again
JD