Garmin GNS430 & WAAS

Dude wrote:

I have never used one, but the word on the street and in the press is that
the interface is MUCH more different than that. Reviews of the units have
not been flattering about the interface.

Really? Tom Benenson in Flying has spoken well about it, as did someone in
one of the more recent IFRs. These are just the most recent; I've seen
other praise further in the past.

I don't recall reading of anyone complaining about the UI in the press.
Have you a reference; I'd like to see the specifics of the complaint(s).
Like you, I've not tried one.

[...]
In my search for a used 430, I have heard too much talk that a new panel
mount is just around the corner though.

From Garmin or someone else? I've been wondering by Bendix hasn't an entry
in that market (unless I've missed it).

- Andrew

Andrew Gideon wrote:
I don't recall reading of anyone complaining about the [GNS-480] UI in
the press. Have you a reference; I'd like to see the specifics of the
complaint(s). Like you, I've not tried one.

There are certainly things wrong with the CNX-80/GNS-480 UI (I've been
using it for a couple of years now). The biggest problem is that it's too
modal; there's too many pages hidden two or three layers deep and sometimes
you know what you want to do, but you just can't remember how to get to the
page where you can do it.

I think it also suffers a bit from trying to do too much. The ability to
have a blind transponder is nice, but hardly necessary. There's a
dedicated button (and a little bit of screen real-estate) devoted to
xponder operations; they could have been devoted to something else.
Perhaps a dedicated FPL button instead of an FPL soft key? I think that
would have made the whole box (a little) easier to use.

There's a whole page of fancy timer functions, but most of the time I just
want a button that I can hit RIGHT NOW that starts counting down from 1
minute (without interrupting the flight plan editing I was in the middle of
doing).

Overall, I like the box, but it definately has a steep learning curve, and
some UI warts. It really could have been a lot better with some better
usability testing before it shipped.

These are all complex boxes, and they're getting more complex as they add
features (interfaces to weather, traffic, transponder, fuel computers, CO
detectors, etc, etc, etc). Hopefully some of what we've learned about UI
design in the past 25 years will start to trickle down to the avionics
market and things will not only get better, but more standardized.

Roy Smith wrote:

/snip/ The ability to
have a blind transponder is nice, but hardly necessary. There's a
dedicated button (and a little bit of screen real-estate) devoted to
xponder operations; they could have been devoted to something else.
Perhaps a dedicated FPL button instead of an FPL soft key? I think that
would have made the whole box (a little) easier to use.
/snip/

Roy,

So, even if you don't have a remote xponder hooked up, the screen
*still* dedicates some space to that function? I'd hoped they would
switch that off if you didn't use it.

Happy Flying!
Scott Skylane
N92054

In article ,
Scott Skylane wrote:

Roy Smith wrote:

/snip/ The ability to
have a blind transponder is nice, but hardly necessary. There's a
dedicated button (and a little bit of screen real-estate) devoted to
xponder operations; they could have been devoted to something else.
Perhaps a dedicated FPL button instead of an FPL soft key? I think that
would have made the whole box (a little) easier to use.
/snip/

Roy,

So, even if you don't have a remote xponder hooked up, the screen
*still* dedicates some space to that function? I'd hoped they would
switch that off if you didn't use it.

Well, no, the screen real-estate does get reused for something else (UTC
clock in the one I fly with; for all I know, it's configurable), but the
key is still wasted. Panel real-estate is at a premium on these things; it
seems such a shame to waste a dedicated key on something which you don't
have installed (if you press it, you get a "Key Inoperative" message.

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 14:34:45 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:

Overall, I like the box, but it definately has a steep learning curve, and
some UI warts. It really could have been a lot better with some better
usability testing before it shipped.

There is definitely a learning curve in the box, just like there is
one in the 530 box, but I think that you could learn the functions
fairly quickly on a long VFR flight and just playing with it. That
seems to work best for me. I have both the GNS 480 and a 530 in two
different airplanes, and there are features that I like about each and
there are features that I dislike about each. I have both there
simulators on the computer here at home and try to navigate through
the system sitting at the desk, but the process is slow and painful
when you try and dial something in. I see way too many people use
just the direct button on their GPS and go. I think it is such a
waste of technology when you have something sitting in front of you
and you don't use it. My biggest grip about both systems is that I
cant pre-program a flight plan on the home computer and then download
it into the plane. It would sure save a lot of time in the cockpit
IMHO.


Scott D

To email remove spamcatcher

I started this thread and thank all of the guys who have provided input.
It seems to me that Garmin are in no rush whatsoever to get the GNS430
product ready to ship with WAAS enabled.
From the hearsay that is banded around, all that is forthcoming is a
possible indication that something may happen in 2005.
Garmin could have easily, by now, have issued a firm commitment to the
GNS430 and shipping them with enabled WAAS.
But I think that it is fact that no formal assurances have been issued at
all.

The GNS480 is available, and without assurances about the GNS430 Garmin are
indicating that the 430 will soon be shown on the discontinued list.
What Garmin are doing is typically good marketing, say nothing, keep smiling
and slowly let the product die !

I feel that any difficultly with using the GNS480 interface probably is just
a matter of familiarity.
Those users who learnt to operate GPS units via the GPS90/92, GPS195/6 hand
helds will have found the GNS430 to be a natural progression.
Therefore being easy for them to gain full control.

I can play tunes on pretty much all of the Garmin aviation hand held units.
Last week I sat down with the GNS480 simulator and admit that I had to go
back and read some parts of the manual.
But having done so, felt at home reasonably quickly. Also the use of
softkeys is an improvement over the GNS430.
I am sure that the lack of competition from Bendix [or others] is pretty
much leaving Garmin always in the Left Seat.
I can't wait till Oshkosh to see what Garmin might announce, so I am taking
the bull by the horns and will fit the GNS480 in my Archer.


--
Roy
N5804F - PA28-181 Piper Archer II


"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...
Dude wrote:

I have never used one, but the word on the street and in the press is
that
the interface is MUCH more different than that. Reviews of the units
have
not been flattering about the interface.

Really? Tom Benenson in Flying has spoken well about it, as did someone
in
one of the more recent IFRs. These are just the most recent; I've seen
other praise further in the past.

I don't recall reading of anyone complaining about the UI in the press.
Have you a reference; I'd like to see the specifics of the complaint(s).
Like you, I've not tried one.

[...]
In my search for a used 430, I have heard too much talk that a new panel
mount is just around the corner though.

From Garmin or someone else? I've been wondering by Bendix hasn't an
entry
in that market (unless I've missed it).

- Andrew

Most of the magazines tend to put a strong polish on the products unless
they are just pitiful (in which case they seem to just ignore them).

When I read the same article you quoted, I got negative impressions of the
UI.



"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...
Dude wrote:

I have never used one, but the word on the street and in the press is
that
the interface is MUCH more different than that. Reviews of the units
have
not been flattering about the interface.

Really? Tom Benenson in Flying has spoken well about it, as did someone
in
one of the more recent IFRs. These are just the most recent; I've seen
other praise further in the past.

I don't recall reading of anyone complaining about the UI in the press.
Have you a reference; I'd like to see the specifics of the complaint(s).
Like you, I've not tried one.

[...]
In my search for a used 430, I have heard too much talk that a new panel
mount is just around the corner though.

From Garmin or someone else? I've been wondering by Bendix hasn't an
entry
in that market (unless I've missed it).

- Andrew

Andrew,

Tom Benenson in Flying has spoken well about it,


He's got one, hasn't he?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Andrew,

Tom Benenson in Flying has spoken well about it,


He's got one, hasn't he?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)


Which brings up an excellent point. It seems we have all a lot invested in
our stuff, and we don't want what we got getting a bad name because we
probably will need to sell it in a few years. We even tend to do it without
knowing we do. I think it is a self defense mechanism so we don't have to
beat ourselves up for making a bad buy.

Dude,

I think it is a self defense mechanism so we don't have to
beat ourselves up for making a bad buy.


Yep. Except, for some guys, it becomes a job defense mechanism. That's
worse...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)