Recently, bangbang posted:

In article . net,
Neil Gould wrote:

Hi,

Disclaimer: I own a Garmin 295, not the AvMap. However, I have a
couple of suggestions for your consideration.

I don't see why swapping CF cards would be such a pain. It would be
a lot quicker and more reliable than Garmin's method of downloading
the data directly to the unit over the internet.

Interesting. I've never downloaded anything from Garmin (don't own
one - I feel like I'm the last hold-out sometimes!) so I don't know
what makes the process slow or unreliable. I do have a very fast (and
reliable) internet connection, so I'm used to being able to download
things - even very large things - with no hassles. It sounds like
Garmin has some usability issues they need to address with thier
online update system?

To be clearer, I suggested that swapping CF cards would be a lot quicker
than downloading. Unplug one card, plug in the other... done. No fiddling
with settings, cables, etc. It would also be more reliable, because you
wouldn't have to rely on the status of any server in the chain between
your unit and Garmin. If you've used CF cards in a digital camera (or any
of the other removable media for that matter), this would be easier to
understand.

Surely having to stock, manage and physically ship all that stuff
costs a LOT more than setting up a good system that pushes the actual
distribution tasks off to the end users. Online updates (at least in
theory) ought to allow more frequent and cheaper updates. Perhaps
it's just a question of improving on Garmin's existing system?

I don't see it that way. It would be *cheaper for the manufacturer* to
only have on-line updates, but the other issues are questionable. How
often do you expect to update your data? Once a year? Twice? A subscriber
system could easily supply the removable media in a timely manner, and
with "swap credits" (like the core charge for batteries), the cost could
be the same. Keep in mind that updates aren't free! ;-)

Battery life is the limiting factor. If you get 100 minutes (as Jay
indicated), that would define that your longest leg between battery
swaps. You probably don't want to be doing that while airborne.

I'm not so sure about that. I occasionally change the batteries in my
portable CD player in flight, and it's genetally not a really big
deal. Of course I'd never do this in busy airspace, but I fly in the
west and there are a lot of real big wide open spaces here where
changing batteries in flight would be no problem.

I'm not saying that it *couldn't* be done. However, to do that with the
295 at least, you have to remove it from the mount (typically on the
yoke), then start your fiddling. You'll have your eyes inside the cockpit
and off of flight instruments for quite a while. If you're comfortable
with that...

I use my 295 wired to the cigar lighter, and with the external
antenna, even though I get more than 100 minutes out of a set. I
also carry a spare charged set of NiMH cells as a backup. The wiring
doesn't get in the way, even though the lighter is on the right side
of the cabin.

I might eventually come to the same conclusion, but would like to have
the option to at least try keeping things wireless.

In such a case, perhaps your best option is to prioritize getting a unit
with a battery life that exceeds the longest possible leg of your flight
( 4 hrs. or so?).

Regards,

Neil