![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roy Smith wrote:
In article , Sam Spade wrote: Roy Smith wrote: "Chris Quaintance" wrote: Hi Folks- Please forgive what is probably a simple question regarding GPS approaches. I am new the the /G world. I was out flying my 182P today to do some practice approaches. The airplane is equipped with a GNS480 and I have a Garmin 296 on the yolk. I was buzzing around NW of the Salinas airport on vectors and was told to expect the GPS13 approach as I requested. So far, so good. Fight plan entered into the 480 and the 296, approach loaded on both. Here's the approach: http://www.naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0701/00363G13.PDF NorCal cleared me direct EWTOF at 3200, cleared for the approach. When looking at the approach on both the 480 and the 296, it seemed to commence at UBBEP rather than EWTOF. Yeah, right, you got a bum clearance. I had a similar experience not long ago and wrote about it here (http://tinyurl.com/yt8vkn). It's pretty common. The problem is that while from the point of view of somebody sitting in a dark room watching blips move around a screen, it's a perfectly reasonable thing to have you do, the software in the GPS wants you to either start the approach from an IAF, or get vectors to final. It would be nice if controllers gave clearances that were flyable, but the often don't, and then you're struggling to figure out how to tell the GPS to do something it doesn't want to do. Roy, This handling is now approved and is no problem whatsoever with a Garmin 400 or 500. Is it with the 480? At least with the software rev we've got, it is. When you select an approach, the only things that come up in the menu are Vectors and all the IAFs. I believe you can fake it out by looking on the approach plate, figuring out which IAF you can select that gives you a route including the specified IF, load that up, then go into FPL mode, scroll down to the IF, and do -D- to that. That's a lot of fumbling, looking, and button-pushing to do at a busy time of the flight. Yes, but once you select one of the IAFs and it loads the approach into the active flight plan, aren't all of the waypoints then available for a direct-to operation? Matt |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
R172K Approach Configuration | facpi | Instrument Flight Rules | 10 | January 5th 07 03:58 PM |
RNAV vectors | Dan Luke | Instrument Flight Rules | 74 | December 26th 06 10:31 PM |
Trust those Instruments.... Trust those Instruments..... | A Lieberman | Instrument Flight Rules | 1 | May 2nd 06 03:54 PM |
Approach Question- Published Missed Can't be flown? | Brad Z | Instrument Flight Rules | 8 | May 6th 04 04:19 AM |
Why is ADF or Radar Required on MFD ILS RWY 32 Approach Plate? | S. Ramirez | Instrument Flight Rules | 17 | April 2nd 04 11:13 AM |