Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Garmin 496 -Antenna
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

flysrv10(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 3:22 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

I started the subject of 430 vs 480 and wanted to thank everyone for taking the time to express their opinion.  I have to admit that the comments have not made the decision easier.  It seems that you get used to the unit and work around what might be regarded as essential by others.

Kelly, what is the offset used for?  I have a GNC 250 in my RV6 with the same feature and have never found a need for it.  Of course, I live in Florida and have to work REALLY hard to find IFR days to practice.

do not archive

 Rob Kermanj

On Dec 15, 2006, at 9:14 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:

[quote]--> RV10-List message posted by: "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2(at)gmail.com (apilot2(at)gmail.com)>

ou may be used to the 430, obviously you don't know the 480. Fact

remains that you can't enter more than one segment of an airway at a

time on the 430. If you get a reroute, you will be doing a lot of

heads down time, or just entering one or two fixes ahead at a time.

The 480 can do everything the 430 does in spades and more, whether VFR

or IFR.

Also kind of hard to fly an offset to an airway when you don't have

it, piece of cake for the 480. Flying in the Northeast means

relatively short flights. Maybe the 430 is right for you. I routinely

fly coast to coast and having airways mapped is extremely useful.

See Doug Preston's comments as one who has owned both units.

Not to mention it is available now. What do you suppose the delivery

on a 430W is, given there is a 6 month or more backlog for upgrades?

Not to mention that the 430 is a considerably older design, and much

of it will remain older even with the upgrade. It looks like from

various on-line vendors you are within $500 of each other right now,

although most listings are for the 430, not the 430W, appearing

discounted about $2000 from the 430W. Not hard at all to find the 480

advertised for $9000, probably less on unadvertised price.

On 12/15/06, W. Curtis <wcurtis(at)core.com (wcurtis(at)core.com)> wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  >The 430 is designed to go direct and fly an approach. If you fly where

 >that is real world it will be great.

 Huh? How do you come up with a statement like that?

 I fly a 430 IFR in the busy Northeast where you NEVER (at least I've never)

get to fly direct. "It doesn't have airways" only means that you can't enter

an airway in the flight planning section and they are not displayed on the

map. In practicality this only means that on the 430, you can't put in MIV

V1 JAX and have it determine all 12 intermediate points. With proper flight

planning you should have all these points anyway and not have to let a

navigator determine them for you. Otherwise, the flight planning section in

the 430 is pretty good. Get to know it and see for yourself. So I guess I

don't understand you statement about the 430 designed only "to go direct"

and "a VFR tool." If this is the way you are using a 430 then you are not

using it to even a small amount of its potential.

 I think a truer statement is that a 430 is a effective VFR AND and IFR

tool, while a 480 in ONLY a IFR tool.

 >Not to mention the 480 is now cheaper than the 430W and has a bigger

screen.

 Let's see, the 430W will list for $10,750, the 530W $16,495. The 480 used

to lists for $12,000. ????

 The economies of scale will make the 430W MUCH less expensive than the 480.

I've had my 430 since '99 and there are over 40,000 now in service and

continue to sell. Anyone care to wager on the 480 being available new in 5

years?

 William Curtis

 http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/

-- Please Support Your Lists This Month --

(And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)

  November is the Annual List Fund Raiser.  Click on

the Contribution link below to find out more about

this year's Terrific Free Incentive Gifts provided

by:

    * AeroElectric www.aeroelectric.com

* The Builder's Bookstore www.buildersbooks.com

* Aeroware Enterprises www.kitlog.com

* HomebuiltHELP www.homebuilthelp.com

  List Contribution Web Site

--> http://www.matronics.com/contribution

Thank you for your generous support!

-Matt Dralle, List Admin.

          - The RV10-List Email Forum -

  --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

 [b]

flysrv10(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 3:35 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

Kelly, searched for Doug's comments on the RV10 list and got nothing!  can you point me to it?

Thanks

Do not archive.

 Rob Kermanj

On Dec 15, 2006, at 9:14 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:

[quote]--> RV10-List message posted by: "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2(at)gmail.com (apilot2(at)gmail.com)>

ou may be used to the 430, obviously you don't know the 480. Fact

remains that you can't enter more than one segment of an airway at a

time on the 430. If you get a reroute, you will be doing a lot of

heads down time, or just entering one or two fixes ahead at a time.

The 480 can do everything the 430 does in spades and more, whether VFR

or IFR.

Also kind of hard to fly an offset to an airway when you don't have

it, piece of cake for the 480. Flying in the Northeast means

relatively short flights. Maybe the 430 is right for you. I routinely

fly coast to coast and having airways mapped is extremely useful.

See Doug Preston's comments as one who has owned both units.

Not to mention it is available now. What do you suppose the delivery

on a 430W is, given there is a 6 month or more backlog for upgrades?

Not to mention that the 430 is a considerably older design, and much

of it will remain older even with the upgrade. It looks like from

various on-line vendors you are within $500 of each other right now,

although most listings are for the 430, not the 430W, appearing

discounted about $2000 from the 430W. Not hard at all to find the 480

advertised for $9000, probably less on unadvertised price.

On 12/15/06, W. Curtis <wcurtis(at)core.com (wcurtis(at)core.com)> wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  >The 430 is designed to go direct and fly an approach. If you fly where

 >that is real world it will be great.

 Huh? How do you come up with a statement like that?

 I fly a 430 IFR in the busy Northeast where you NEVER (at least I've never)

get to fly direct. "It doesn't have airways" only means that you can't enter

an airway in the flight planning section and they are not displayed on the

map. In practicality this only means that on the 430, you can't put in MIV

V1 JAX and have it determine all 12 intermediate points. With proper flight

planning you should have all these points anyway and not have to let a

navigator determine them for you. Otherwise, the flight planning section in

the 430 is pretty good. Get to know it and see for yourself. So I guess I

don't understand you statement about the 430 designed only "to go direct"

and "a VFR tool." If this is the way you are using a 430 then you are not

using it to even a small amount of its potential.

 I think a truer statement is that a 430 is a effective VFR AND and IFR

tool, while a 480 in ONLY a IFR tool.

 >Not to mention the 480 is now cheaper than the 430W and has a bigger

screen.

 Let's see, the 430W will list for $10,750, the 530W $16,495. The 480 used

to lists for $12,000. ????

 The economies of scale will make the 430W MUCH less expensive than the 480.

I've had my 430 since '99 and there are over 40,000 now in service and

continue to sell. Anyone care to wager on the 480 being available new in 5

years?

 William Curtis

 http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/

-- Please Support Your Lists This Month --

(And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)

  November is the Annual List Fund Raiser.  Click on

the Contribution link below to find out more about

this year's Terrific Free Incentive Gifts provided

by:

    * AeroElectric www.aeroelectric.com

* The Builder's Bookstore www.buildersbooks.com

* Aeroware Enterprises www.kitlog.com

* HomebuiltHELP www.homebuilthelp.com

  List Contribution Web Site

--> http://www.matronics.com/contribution

Thank you for your generous support!

-Matt Dralle, List Admin.

          - The RV10-List Email Forum -

  --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

 [b]

wcurtis(at)core.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 4:01 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

[quote]Fact remains that you can't enter more than one segment of an  >airway at a time on the 430. If you get a reroute, you will be  >doing a lot of heads down time, or just entering one or two fixes  >ahead at a time.  Kelly,  Help me understand this-what do you mean by "more than one segment of an airway?"  Three fixes constitute two segments.  Are you telling folks they can't enter more than 2 fixes with a 430?  This is at best misinformed, at worst disingenious.  I mentioned getting to know the flight planning section of the 430, it seems all you know about is the Direct-To button.   >The 480 can do everything the 430 does in spades and more,  >whether VFR or IFR.  It has WAAS and airways over the 430, only airways over the 430W-- is this your definition of "spades and more?"   >Also kind of hard to fly an offset to an airway when you don't have >it, piece of cake for the 480.   >Flying in the Northeast means relatively short flights.  >Maybe the 430 is right for you. I routinely fly coast to coast  >and having airways mapped is extremely useful.  If by short you mean NJ to Charlotte or NJ to Jacksonville, then yes that's short compared to coast to coast.  What's the range of an RV-10 again? --that of any typical high performance single?  Now tell me what "relatively short flight" have to do with the navigator you use?   >It looks like from various on-line vendors you are within $500 of each  >other right now, although most listings are for the 430, not the 430W,  >appearing discounted about $2000 from the 430W. Not hard at all to find  >the 480 advertised for $9000, probably less on unadvertised price.  Like your air navigation I don't understand you economics.  Previously I posted list prices, so let's look at street prices.  The best you can get a 480 for is about $9,000.  You can get better from Stark, but from Van's you can get a 430 for $6,760.  Add $1,500 for WAAS and you are still almost $1,000 less than a 480.  What am I missing?  I too have flown both units but admittedly I'm biased towards the 430. After factoring in what the 480 offers, the user interface and the cost, I determined that the 430 was still better for me and the type of flying I do.  I DO NOT regularly fly "coast to coast", I more routinely fly 4-600 mile legs.  I can't say what is best for Jet A burning coast to coast flyer's only what is best for me and my typically mission.  I always use the flight plan and only use the Direct-To when ATC clears me to some fix ahead already in the flight plan.  This is what typically happens in the real world and this is MUCH easier on the 430.   William Curtis http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/  [quote][b]

Tim(at)MyRV10.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 4:17 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

To give you a picture of the routing capabilities, when I flew

around the rockies enroute to Albuquerque, I played with the

flight planning on my 480.  I was flying airways to ensure

terrain clearance and make it easier on me and everyone else.

I went to load a flight plan and on the 480 when you start

with a fix and then choose an airway, you can automatically

scroll through many optional routes, and it has them drawn

on the screen. Then when you select one, it loads that path,

but you only see the major segments until you expand it when

you want ultimate detail.  It then shows all of your time to

fixes and everything else.  And you hardly had to even add

any points to the route, to have even a 20 point route entered.

I would probably have to actually read the manual and practice

with it for 20 minutes to get good at it.  I find the Chelton

flight planning to be top notch, so it's hard to get motivated

on the 480, but I'm really screwing myself if I don't....so

that's a New Year's resolution for me.   The 480 does lots

of things that I haven't even yet touched.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Rob Kermanj wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   I started the subject of 430 vs 480 and wanted to thank everyone for 

 taking the time to express their opinion.  I have to admit that the 

 comments have not made the decision easier.  It seems that you get used 

 to the unit and work around what might be regarded as essential by others.

 

 Kelly, what is the offset used for?  I have a GNC 250 in my RV6 with the 

 same feature and have never found a need for it.  Of course, I live in 

 Florida and have to work REALLY hard to find IFR days to practice.

 

 do not archive

 Rob Kermanj

 

 

 

 On Dec 15, 2006, at 9:14 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:

 

> 

> <mailto:apilot2(at)gmail.com>>

>

> ou may be used to the 430, obviously you don't know the 480. Fact

> remains that you can't enter more than one segment of an airway at a

> time on the 430. If you get a reroute, you will be doing a lot of

> heads down time, or just entering one or two fixes ahead at a time.

> The 480 can do everything the 430 does in spades and more, whether VFR

> or IFR.

> Also kind of hard to fly an offset to an airway when you don't have

> it, piece of cake for the 480. Flying in the Northeast means

> relatively short flights. Maybe the 430 is right for you. I routinely

> fly coast to coast and having airways mapped is extremely useful.

> See Doug Preston's comments as one who has owned both units.

> Not to mention it is available now. What do you suppose the delivery

> on a 430W is, given there is a 6 month or more backlog for upgrades?

> Not to mention that the 430 is a considerably older design, and much

> of it will remain older even with the upgrade. It looks like from

> various on-line vendors you are within $500 of each other right now,

> although most listings are for the 430, not the 430W, appearing

> discounted about $2000 from the 430W. Not hard at all to find the 480

> advertised for $9000, probably less on unadvertised price.

>

> On 12/15/06, W. Curtis <wcurtis(at)core.com <mailto:wcurtis(at)core.com>> wrote:

>> >The 430 is designed to go direct and fly an approach. If you fly where

>>  >that is real world it will be great.

>>

>>  Huh? How do you come up with a statement like that?

>>

>>  I fly a 430 IFR in the busy Northeast where you NEVER (at least I've 

>> never)

>> get to fly direct. "It doesn't have airways" only means that you 

>> can't enter

>> an airway in the flight planning section and they are not displayed 

>> on the

>> map. In practicality this only means that on the 430, you can't put 

>> in MIV

>> V1 JAX and have it determine all 12 intermediate points. With proper 

>> flight

>> planning you should have all these points anyway and not have to let a

>> navigator determine them for you. Otherwise, the flight planning 

>> section in

>> the 430 is pretty good. Get to know it and see for yourself. So I guess I

>> don't understand you statement about the 430 designed only "to go direct"

>> and "a VFR tool." If this is the way you are using a 430 then you are not

>> using it to even a small amount of its potential.

>>

>>  I think a truer statement is that a 430 is a effective VFR AND and IFR

>> tool, while a 480 in ONLY a IFR tool.

>>

>>  >Not to mention the 480 is now cheaper than the 430W and has a bigger

>> screen.

>>

>>  Let's see, the 430W will list for $10,750, the 530W $16,495. The 480 

>> used

>> to lists for $12,000. ????

>>  The economies of scale will make the 430W MUCH less expensive than 

>> the 480.

>> I've had my 430 since '99 and there are over 40,000 now in service and

>> continue to sell. Anyone care to wager on the 480 being available new 

>> in 5

>> years?

>>

>>  William Curtis

>>  http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/

>>

>>

>>

>>

>

> (And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)

>   November is the Annual List Fund Raiser.  Click on

> this year's Terrific Free Incentive Gifts provided

>     * AeroElectric www.aeroelectric.com <http://www.aeroelectric.com>

> www.buildersbooks.com

> www.kitlog.com

> www.homebuilthelp.com

>   List Contribution Web Site

> --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution

> Thank you for your generous support!

>           - The RV10-List Email Forum -

>   --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

>

 

 *

 

 

 *

Tim(at)MyRV10.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 4:22 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

While some may look down on their statement and see it as a big pitfall,

I see it as proof of how ultimately exacting some of these things

are viewed...and when a manufacturer isn't willing to stick their

neck out into the grey area for you, it just shows you want to

exercise caution.  This from all points, including antenna mounting

locations, and such.  You want and need great performance out of

these things.   I did not find GPS issues with either AHRS system,

and I don't yet have a freeflight GPS.  I may actually add on a

freeflight at some point, but it's more for it's value on paper

in my case.  I find the built-in GPS does a fantastic job, but

having a 480 next to it just seals it up for me.

Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Larry Rosen wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

 Well sort of.

 The Chelton system (SV-Sport) is not certified.  Built into the Pinpoint 

 GADAHRS is a GPS.  The optional FreeFlight 1101 WAAS GPS has full 

 integrity monitoring.  The Chelton SV-Sport is "based" on their 

 certified system.  The FreeFlight 1101 GPS according to Chelton is the 

 same as the certified 1201 but without the TSO sticker.  So, it is not 

 certified.  I believe it meets the standard, but you can decide for your 

 self.  The closest Chelton will come to saying if you can legally fly 

 IFR with there system is this, "As an option, add to your SV-10 the 

 FreeFlight WAAS GPS with full integrity monitoring, and your SV-10 can 

 be used for  stand-alone IFR GPS navigation.

 Larry Rosen

 #356

 Bill Schlatterer wrote:

> 

> <billschlatterer(at)sbcglobal.net>

>

> .....

> Does the Chelton Freeflight have certified a GPS built in?  If so back up

> with the 496 is gold, if not it's just two x non-certified.

>

> Maybe some AIM scholar will weigh in 

>

> Just my .02

> Bill S

> 7a engine

>

>

flysrv10(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 4:29 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

thanks.

do not archive

 Rob Kermanj



 



On Dec 16, 2006, at 7:16 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:

[quote]--> RV10-List message posted by: "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2(at)gmail.com (apilot2(at)gmail.com)>

Here you go Rob.

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: DOUGPFLYRV(at)aol.com (DOUGPFLYRV(at)aol.com) <DOUGPFLYRV(at)aol.com (DOUGPFLYRV(at)aol.com)>

Date: Dec 15, 2006 4:17 PM

Subject: Re: Garmin 496 -Antenna

To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)





I HAVE USED THE 430 IN THE LAST 3 RV'S. NOW HAVE THE 480 AND U R

CORRECT....IT IS MORE COMPLEX, BUT, THE MORE I USE IT AND LEARN IT,

THE BETTER I LIKE IT. IT IS MORE LIKE THE FMS WE USE IN THE CORPORATE

JETS. I AM ALSO GOING TO USE THE 480 IN MY RV10.

GOOD LUCK

DO NOT ARCHIVE

DOUG PRESTON

RV-7A

N196VA

-- Please Support Your Lists This Month --

(And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)

  November is the Annual List Fund Raiser.  Click on

the Contribution link below to find out more about

this year's Terrific Free Incentive Gifts provided

by:

    * AeroElectric www.aeroelectric.com

* The Builder's Bookstore www.buildersbooks.com

* Aeroware Enterprises www.kitlog.com

* HomebuiltHELP www.homebuilthelp.com

  List Contribution Web Site

--> http://www.matronics.com/contribution

Thank you for your generous support!

-Matt Dralle, List Admin.

          - The RV10-List Email Forum -

  --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

 [b]

Tim(at)MyRV10.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 4:36 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

One part not often thought about is what you will do after you've filed

/G and the weather got worse than expected.  On my trip home from

ElPaso, I was supposed to have 1200' ceilings at my fuel stop in the

middle of the country.  What I ended up with was finding that the AWOS

at my planned stop was inop, but local airports that ATC could read off

were showing ceilings varying from 300-1200', and it was solid overcast

up to 6000'.  So there was not going to be ANY getting down easy.

I continued on, flying a full approach, figuring that sometimes it's

best to stick with a plan, and be prepared to change it than just

go throwing wrenches into the system right away.  I was IMC for

at least 85 miles over the course of the approach.  Popped out around

400' ceilings, right at minimums.  Had it been worse, I'd now be

looking at a missed and rerouting to another airport for a different

approach.   Most 100% certainly not something that you would want

to face even on an emergency approach with a handheld GPS, or

not "made for the job" system software.  You certainly don't have

time to run all of the approach fixes into your unit individually.



Now, people could say that I could have made it easier by changing

destinations to the 1200' ceilings.  Sure, but now I'd be digging

up the necessary info to do that approach safely, and have to

mentally re-work all of that...unnecessarily.  And what would it

have got me....the last 30 seconds of the approach might

have been a little easier.  Fact is, even at 1200' ceilings,

there wasn't a way that someone with a handheld was going to

get in safely to that 1200' ceiling airport, without  calling

an emergency and trying to do some wacky modified vectored straight

in approach with lots of help from ATC.  And then where would your

pilot certificate be once you talked to them on the ground?



You really don't want to file /G unless you're prepared for

the worst with it, because it may have to be proven some day.

I had an interesting situation develop over Atlanta years ago

where I did just this.  To my benefit, the handheld did allow

me to navigate direct to a fix, and they didn't bust me even

though I admitted up front it was a VFR ONLY gps (handheld).

I fessed up right away because the weather situation was

pretty bad.  No sense leading them on, because that can only

lead to worse things.  Once I told them I could go to a

intersection fix, they gave me a list of a couple fixes to

fly.  Good thing they only gave me a couple, because it's

not fun to be heads-down in the clouds punching in 5-letter

fixes that you're not familiar with.  It all worked out,

but convinced me that if you file /G with a handheld,

some day someone's going to call your bluff.



Be careful out there.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Bill Schlatterer wrote:

[quote] 

 

 Dan, maybe the local FDSO knows something but it goes deeper than that with

 the 396/496.  Questions on filing /g with a non-certified unit assume that

 it is used only on the enroute phase(not sure it's legal but some do

 anyway).  I may be wrong on this point, but when you file /g you are telling

 ATC that you have equipment on board capable of flying a full GPS approach

 and not just the enroute leg.  The AIM says that /g means "GPS with enroute

 AND terminal capability".  Since the 396 and 496 don't show anything other

 than the FAF segment, it doesn't appear that you have the "terminal"

 capability required to fly the full approach. Until Garmin adds the full

 approach procedures to the 396/496 all the other questions would seem moot.

 Of course, it is a chicken and the egg thing so maybe if the FDSO loosened

 up some, Garmin might add them. 

 

 Does the Chelton Freeflight have certified a GPS built in?  If so back up

 with the 496 is gold, if not it's just two x non-certified.

 

 Maybe some AIM scholar will weigh in 

 

 Just my .02

 Bill S

 7a engine

 

 --

flysrv10(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 4:47 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

Thanks for the info.  Any time someone mentions Chelton, I kick myself!

Do not archive.

 Rob Kermanj

On Dec 16, 2006, at 7:17 AM, Tim Olson wrote:

[quote]--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com (Tim(at)MyRV10.com)>

To give you a picture of the routing capabilities, when I flew

around the rockies enroute to Albuquerque, I played with the

flight planning on my 480.  I was flying airways to ensure

terrain clearance and make it easier on me and everyone else.

I went to load a flight plan and on the 480 when you start

with a fix and then choose an airway, you can automatically

scroll through many optional routes, and it has them drawn

on the screen. Then when you select one, it loads that path,

but you only see the major segments until you expand it when

you want ultimate detail.  It then shows all of your time to

fixes and everything else.  And you hardly had to even add

any points to the route, to have even a 20 point route entered.

I would probably have to actually read the manual and practice

with it for 20 minutes to get good at it.  I find the Chelton

flight planning to be top notch, so it's hard to get motivated

on the 480, but I'm really screwing myself if I don't....so

that's a New Year's resolution for me.   The 480 does lots

of things that I haven't even yet touched.

Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Rob Kermanj wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  I started the subject of 430 vs 480 and wanted to thank everyone for taking the time to express their opinion.  I have to admit that the comments have not made the decision easier.  It seems that you get used to the unit and work around what might be regarded as essential by others.

Kelly, what is the offset used for?  I have a GNC 250 in my RV6 with the same feature and have never found a need for it.  Of course, I live in Florida and have to work REALLY hard to find IFR days to practice.

do not archive

Rob Kermanj

On Dec 15, 2006, at 9:14 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  --> RV10-List message posted by: "Kelly McMullen" <apilot2(at)gmail.com <mailto:apilot2(at)gmail.com (apilot2(at)gmail.com)>>

ou may be used to the 430, obviously you don't know the 480. Fact

remains that you can't enter more than one segment of an airway at a

time on the 430. If you get a reroute, you will be doing a lot of

heads down time, or just entering one or two fixes ahead at a time.

The 480 can do everything the 430 does in spades and more, whether VFR

or IFR.

Also kind of hard to fly an offset to an airway when you don't have

it, piece of cake for the 480. Flying in the Northeast means

relatively short flights. Maybe the 430 is right for you. I routinely

fly coast to coast and having airways mapped is extremely useful.

See Doug Preston's comments as one who has owned both units.

Not to mention it is available now. What do you suppose the delivery

on a 430W is, given there is a 6 month or more backlog for upgrades?

Not to mention that the 430 is a considerably older design, and much

of it will remain older even with the upgrade. It looks like from

various on-line vendors you are within $500 of each other right now,

although most listings are for the 430, not the 430W, appearing

discounted about $2000 from the 430W. Not hard at all to find the 480

advertised for $9000, probably less on unadvertised price.

On 12/15/06, W. Curtis <wcurtis(at)core.com <mailto:wcurtis(at)core.com (wcurtis(at)core.com)>> wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  >The 430 is designed to go direct and fly an approach. If you fly where

 >that is real world it will be great.

 Huh? How do you come up with a statement like that?

 I fly a 430 IFR in the busy Northeast where you NEVER (at least I've never)

get to fly direct. "It doesn't have airways" only means that you can't enter

an airway in the flight planning section and they are not displayed on the

map. In practicality this only means that on the 430, you can't put in MIV

V1 JAX and have it determine all 12 intermediate points. With proper flight

planning you should have all these points anyway and not have to let a

navigator determine them for you. Otherwise, the flight planning section in

the 430 is pretty good. Get to know it and see for yourself. So I guess I

don't understand you statement about the 430 designed only "to go direct"

and "a VFR tool." If this is the way you are using a 430 then you are not

using it to even a small amount of its potential.

 I think a truer statement is that a 430 is a effective VFR AND and IFR

tool, while a 480 in ONLY a IFR tool.

 >Not to mention the 480 is now cheaper than the 430W and has a bigger

screen.

 Let's see, the 430W will list for $10,750, the 530W $16,495. The 480 used

to lists for $12,000. ????

 The economies of scale will make the 430W MUCH less expensive than the 480.

I've had my 430 since '99 and there are over 40,000 now in service and

continue to sell. Anyone care to wager on the 480 being available new in 5

years?

 William Curtis

 http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/

(And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)

  November is the Annual List Fund Raiser.  Click on

this year's Terrific Free Incentive Gifts provided

    * AeroElectric www.aeroelectric.com <http://www.aeroelectric.com>

www.buildersbooks.com

www.kitlog.com

www.homebuilthelp.com

  List Contribution Web Site

--> http://www.matronics.com/contribution

Thank you for your generous support!

          - The RV10-List Email Forum -

  --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

*

*

-- Please Support Your Lists This Month --

(And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)

  November is the Annual List Fund Raiser.  Click on

the Contribution link below to find out more about

this year's Terrific Free Incentive Gifts provided

by:

    * AeroElectric www.aeroelectric.com

* The Builder's Bookstore www.buildersbooks.com

* Aeroware Enterprises www.kitlog.com

* HomebuiltHELP www.homebuilthelp.com

  List Contribution Web Site

--> http://www.matronics.com/contribution

Thank you for your generous support!

-Matt Dralle, List Admin.

          - The RV10-List Email Forum -

  --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

 [b]

Tim(at)MyRV10.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 4:50 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

What Kelly means is that you enter where you start,

where you're going, and which airway you want,

and often the entire list of segments can be filled

automatically.  Or when you're progressively entering

airways, some of which can be hundreds of miles long,

you aren't forced to enter the intermediate fixes...they

are already there, as part of that airway.  So you

may be able to enter a couple dozen fixes as one

entry.  I see you bouncing back to Kelly that he must

not know the 430 very well.  I would say that it looks

like from your end of the discussion that the alternate

is true.

I myself have not spoken much of the 430's limitations and

spent my time trying to turn people away from it.  This is

because I haven't got the experience flying behind one enough

to really comment on it at all.  Notice I'm limiting my commentary

usually on the 480 to things I've actually punched in and made

work in flight.   I'm thinking that if you really don't want to

come across as completely one sided, you either have to be

willing to be open-minded in the discussion, or you have to go

out and spend the due diligence to fly the other system enough

to make yourself qualified to speak on it.  Even from my minimal

knowledge of the 480, the below segmenting questions would be

blatantly obvious if you had some good time behind it.

Sorry, but it just irks me when someone with a completely one

sided viewpoint keeps hammering on with a closed mind, when they

don't have experience on the other end.   Talk to the points

you know, tell the good about the items you know about, and

any well-known flaws of the other...then leave it at that. The

products need to survive on their merits.  It's why you don't

see me bashing the other EFIS systems, but instead just pointing

out the capabilities of what I myself know.  If I had spent 10

or 20 hours behind a BMA / GRT / Dynon / AFS / G1000 / Avidyne,

then perhaps I could throw some stones.  At this point I'm not

qualified to do so.   So honestly, other than your extreme

dissatisfaction with anything that costs $1000 more than the

next thing, exactly why do you like throwing stones and talking

people away from a product that you don't understand the

capabilities of?

Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

W. Curtis wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		    >Fact remains that you can't enter more than one segment of an

  >airway at a time on the 430. If you get a reroute, you will be

  >doing a lot of heads down time, or just entering one or two fixes

  >ahead at a time.

 Kelly,

 Help me understand this-what do you mean by "more than one segment of an 

 airway?" Three fixes constitute two segments. Are you telling folks they 

 can't enter more than 2 fixes with a 430? This is at best misinformed, 

 at worst disingenious. I mentioned getting to know the flight planning 

 section of the 430, it seems all you know about is the Direct-To button.

wcurtis(at)core.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:26 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

[quote]Sorry, but it just irks me when someone with a completely one  >sided viewpoint keeps hammering on with a closed mind, when they  >don't have experience on the other end.  Tim,  I understand what you are saying but what you have said is the EXACT thing that got me on this "rant."  Which is more on sided and/or inaccurate; any of the things I've stated about the 480 or the below comments about the 430?    Comments such as:  >>The 430 is designed to go direct and fly an approach. If you fly where >>that is real world it will be great.   >>Not to mention the 480 is now cheaper than the 430W and has a bigger >>screen.   >>An IFR tool vs a VFR tool.  My responses were to show why the above comments were inaccurate.  Tell me why you think mine are one sided and closed minded?   William Curtis http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/  [quote][b]

wcurtis(at)core.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:44 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

[quote]Sorry, but it just irks me when someone with a completely one  >sided viewpoint keeps hammering on with a closed mind, when they  >don't have experience on the other end. Talk to the points  >you know, tell the good about the items you know about, and  >any well-known flaws of the other...then leave it at that  Tim,  Please point out to me ANY negative (opinionated or il-informed) comments I've made about the 480?  If you look back through my posts you will notice I've only addressed inaccurate statements made about the 430 which I know well.  I have never made any of the pointed comments that others have made about a product of which I admittedly know very little.  All I've done is attempt to correct misstatements and to you that constitutes "closed minded hammering?"  Help me understand this?  Do not archive.  William Curtis http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/   [quote][b]

apilot2(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 6:22 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

On 12/16/06, W. Curtis <wcurtis(at)core.com> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   >Sorry, but it just irks me when someone with a completely one

  >sided viewpoint keeps hammering on with a closed mind, when they

  >don't have experience on the other end.

  Tim,

  I understand what you are saying but what you have said is the EXACT thing

 that got me on this "rant." Which is more on sided and/or inaccurate; any of

 the things I've stated about the 480 or the below comments about the 430?

  Comments such as:

  >>The 430 is designed to go direct and fly an approach. If you fly where

  >>that is real world it will be great.

You haven't refuted the fact that you have to enter each segment,

begining and ending waypoints, same as a VFR direct to handheld.

 	  Quote: 	
		    >>Not to mention the 480 is now cheaper than the 430W and has a bigger

  >>screen.

I had seen cheaper prices quoted earlier, Tim confirms the 480 is

available at under $9000, is available with STC, which for TC aircraft

means no local FSDO approval needed, unlike the 430, which reduces

cost for those aircraft, and it is a fact the screen is bigger than

the 430. Lets see what the real price of a 430W becomes. Garmin has

gone back on their $1500 upgrade price at least once, to their credit

they seem to have come back to it, but you still have the hassle of

getting the upgrade separately on somebody else's schedule, not your

build schedule, not your flying schedule. Market prices and relative

prices fluctate every day for many reasons.

The fact the two units are as close as they are in price is surprising.

 	  Quote: 	
		    >>An IFR tool vs a VFR tool.

Airways are the fact of life in most parts of the country for IFR ATC

operations. Being able to call those up on screen is the difference

between having to constantly divide your attention to a paper chart

and not. Just my opinon, obviously not yours. I fly a lot in

mountainous areas where off airway direct often isn't feasible without

going above 15K. Where doglegs in airways are very common, just like

the one around Indiantown Gap in your area, just different purpose.

 	  Quote: 	

  My responses were to show why the above comments were inaccurate. Tell me

 why you think mine are one sided and closed minded?

So pricing has changed on me...the rest of what I said is more

accurate than not, and supported by what others have said, here and

elsewhere.

wcurtis(at)core.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:04 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

Kelly,  Thank you for you comments.  I guess the only thing we can conclude is that you like the 480 and I like the 430.   What we think is largely irrelevant as the market will ultimately decide.  Does this mean you will take the wager:-)?  Do not archive William Curtis http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/  [quote][b]

LloydDR(at)wernerco.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:08 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

The Chelton has two different ones to choose from one with the TSO and

one without.

As for the Portable Garmins, they do have the information, and the

capability to do it, they have just been disabled through software

programming. IE the FAA says do not enable it, and to comply and not

allow the functionality Garmin disabled it from displaying it. The two

things that need to be resolved to using a handheld is consistent power

and antenna placement. Once there is a way to force that then the

software can be enabled, do I think it will happen? No, but we can

always hope. The 496 is definitely a faster processor and screen refresh

rates are great in comparison, they have WAAS, just need the software.

My .02

Dan 



--

Bill Schlatterer

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 195

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:25 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

Tim, I missed something here!  Are you saying the 480 will let you enter an

airway just like you would enter a fix and then give you the closest entry

point.  That would be pretty helpful from time to time.  I fly a 430 and

have to pull out the chart and find a fix to enter to get to the airway.

Maybe I missed something in the 430 manual as well    Realistically, in

the south central states, it seems to be very unusual for ATC to move you

off direct and put on an airway but it does happen.  IME



Bill S

--

dlm46007(at)cox.net
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:49 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

The market decides If and only If the products are  marketed by different companies. Hence after Garmin bought the only WAAS  approved system, competition is eliminated. Garmin marketing will decide which  one survives by pricing , development dollars, etc.

 [quote]   ---

rtitsworth

Joined: 16 Jan 2006
Posts: 76
Location: Detroit, Mi

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:57 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

William,  

Is that the “only” think you can conclude?  What about the objective facts?  For example, I also concluded that there are functional differences such as “you can’t enter an airway into the 430”.  A fact - correct?  Why, after all the diatribe, do you brush away all the facts and revert to subjective personal opinion?  Worse yet, you revert to public opinion/market economics rather than sound science/engineering?  Perhaps a proven political move – but very bad science/engineering!  

   

There was a time when (most) everyone thought the world was flat and/or that heavier than air flight was impossible (oops).  Personally, I expect more from the members of this group.  

         

  

  

From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of W. Curtis

 

   

Kelly,

 Thank you for you comments. I guess the only thing we can conclude is that you like the 480 and I like the 430. 

 What we think is largely irrelevant as the market will ultimately decide. Does this mean you will take the wager:-)?

 

   [quote] [b]

rene(at)felker.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:15 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

My solution to this is simple.  I file what the C-182 is equipped with i.e.

/u and them once in route ask for vectors direct and inform the controller

that I have a VFR GPS.  Worked great from Jackson Hole to Ogden Utah.

Standard departure, once turned on course given direct to Ogden, then

vectored to the ILS once in the area.  No fibbing required.  With an MEA of

15,000 feet, the 10 minutes saved leaves me more O2 reserve.



Rene'

801-721-6080

--

rtitsworth

Joined: 16 Jan 2006
Posts: 76
Location: Detroit, Mi

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:21 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

Daniel said: "The two things that need to be resolved to using a handheld is

consistent power and antenna placement"



What about predictive RAIM?  I do not know of any handheld with that

required functionality and annunciation (perhaps I am uninformed)?



What about the CDI?  To view that on most portables, you need to leave the

map display mode.  Seems that the advantages of map based situational

awareness are lost when you do that (i.e. why not then just use a Nav radio

and CDI).  Furthermore, the scale of the CDI needs to automatically adjust

based on your position within the approach.  I do not know of any handheld

with the capability to do that (perhaps I am uninformed)?



What about approaches with outbound procedure turns and course reversals?

What about DME arcs?



Perhaps my investigation into handhelds has missed something.  But it seems

that most handheld inquiries do not comprehend the full functionality suite

of a certified IFR GPS.

rtitsworth

Joined: 16 Jan 2006
Posts: 76
Location: Detroit, Mi

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:33 am Post subject: Garmin 496 -Antenna

More importantly, it will allow you to enter an airway that has turns along

it without needing to enter each intermediate fix (turn).  Very nice in

areas where snaking airways are needed to provide terrain and/or airspace

avoidance.



--

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 3 of 4

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum