Garmin 396 Glitch??

I would agree... 2-3 years should lead to obselescence. Except that
Garmin really hit an aviation sweet spot with this one. Surely there
will be competitors (turn-key fully integrated GPS/Weather systems) with
advantages over the 396 but I'm guessing that the 396 will still be a
fine machine in 2 - 3 years. We'll see.

My first few experiences blew me away.
Newps wrote:
Stick around, within 2 and at most 3 years the 396 will be obsolete.
ADS-B right now works on the East coast from New Jersey to Florida and
in a few other places. The momentum is just starting to pick up.
Several companies, Garmin among them, have announced they will be
bringing to market these new products. The weather that will be offered
won't be quite as extensive as XM's but it will be free. You will also
be able to display traffic, also for free.

tvnav.com wrote:

"Alexandros" wrote in message
oups.com...

Hello to all - especially Dan Luke,

I had already my battery to normal and not saver mode....
But still no luck

It seems their support in not at the same level of quality like their
devices (when they have no problems)....

I am thinking to get rid of the device and choose another brand...



Like what?? AFAIK there is no other brand that competes with the 396.

Maule Driver wrote:
I would agree... 2-3 years should lead to obselescence. Except that
Garmin really hit an aviation sweet spot with this one. Surely there
will be competitors (turn-key fully integrated GPS/Weather systems) with
advantages over the 396 but I'm guessing that the 396 will still be a
fine machine in 2 - 3 years. We'll see.

What will make it obsolete is having to pay for weather. Take away the
XM and you have a 296.

In article ,
Newps wrote:
I would agree... 2-3 years should lead to obselescence. Except that
Garmin really hit an aviation sweet spot with this one. Surely there
will be competitors (turn-key fully integrated GPS/Weather systems) with
advantages over the 396 but I'm guessing that the 396 will still be a
fine machine in 2 - 3 years. We'll see.

What will make it obsolete is having to pay for weather. Take away the
XM and you have a 296.


I'm not sure what ADS-B provides as far as weather, but the XM service
is pretty comprehensive--I doubt that ADS-B will provide all of the same
information.

In addition, ADS-B doesn't provide an entertainment services like XM
radio, for those who might use it.

I'm not sure how ADS-B is delivered, but my guess is that it won't be as
portable or versatile as the XM service.

The bottom line is that the 396 and XM weather service will probably
continue to be very useful even after ADS-B is fully deployed, whenever
that may be.



JKG

Jonathan Goodish wrote:



I'm not sure what ADS-B provides as far as weather, but the XM service
is pretty comprehensive--I doubt that ADS-B will provide all of the same
information.

You're right, XM provides more, but not $30 more per month, much less $50.



In addition, ADS-B doesn't provide an entertainment services like XM
radio, for those who might use it.

I have an XM radio in my plane now. Although XM in the 396 works it is
a secondary function and as such is not all that convenient to use.



I'm not sure how ADS-B is delivered, but my guess is that it won't be as
portable or versatile as the XM service.

It will be delivered by many hundreds of ground transmitters and will be
available in handhelds like the 396 as well as PDA's. Versatility is up
to the software designers. I would expect it to be the same as the 396.

In article ,
Newps wrote:
I'm not sure what ADS-B provides as far as weather, but the XM service
is pretty comprehensive--I doubt that ADS-B will provide all of the same
information.

You're right, XM provides more, but not $30 more per month, much less $50.

Not sure that I agree with your assessment. I subscribe to the $50 XM
option and have found almost every element provided to be very useful.
Not to mention that Baron seems to do a decent job with data quality--I
wonder where the data from ADS-B comes from.

I just don't understand the whining that I hear everywhere about the
cost of XM weather. In an era where folks pay close to $100/month for
cable television, give a cell phone to every pre-teen in their
household, and drive huge SUVs, I can't understand where the pain of
paying $30-$50/month for weather uplink is coming from. It's not for
everyone, but frequent flyers can certainly benefit from it.



In addition, ADS-B doesn't provide an entertainment services like XM
radio, for those who might use it.

I have an XM radio in my plane now. Although XM in the 396 works it is
a secondary function and as such is not all that convenient to use.

Actually, I think it's pretty intuitive. Garmin did a good job with the
integration, though it's not quite as convenient for things like channel
selection. But it is a nice, integrated package that works well.



I'm not sure how ADS-B is delivered, but my guess is that it won't be as
portable or versatile as the XM service.

It will be delivered by many hundreds of ground transmitters and will be
available in handhelds like the 396 as well as PDA's. Versatility is up
to the software designers. I would expect it to be the same as the 396.

Until those "hundreds of transmitters" are live and active, ADS-B is
pretty much moot. I doubt in 2-3 years we will see widespread ADS-B
available as we have XM available today. And, I wonder what happens to
your data if you're out of range of a transmitter?

The bottom line is that I firmly believe that there will be a strong
market for XM weather for a long time to come. I suspect that Baron/XM
will provide more, better quality information, that some folks will
always be willing to pay for. Once the ADS-B system is live and the
receivers have had time to mature, I'm sure that it will be a great
system, but that all isn't going to happen overnight.



JKG

Jonathan Goodish wrote:

I just don't understand the whining that I hear everywhere about the
cost of XM weather. In an era where folks pay close to $100/month for
cable television, give a cell phone to every pre-teen in their
household, and drive huge SUVs, I can't understand where the pain of
paying $30-$50/month for weather uplink is coming from.

You don't understand that most people *don't* pay close to $100/month for cable
TV, *don't* hand out cell phones like candy, and *don't* drive huge SUVs. That's
why you can't understand that many of us will find $30-$50/month for a glorified
radio a PITA.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

In article 5nwcf.24704$w_6.3913@trndny09,
George Patterson wrote:
You don't understand that most people *don't* pay close to $100/month for
cable
TV, *don't* hand out cell phones like candy, and *don't* drive huge SUVs.
That's
why you can't understand that many of us will find $30-$50/month for a
glorified
radio a PITA.

I'm not sure how it's "a PITA?" You're not paying $30-$50/month for the
radio, you're paying for the data. If you want the data, pay the
[reasonable] fee. If you don't want the data, don't buy the radio and
don't pay the fee--and quit whining.

It seems that the greatest myth about ADS-B is that it will be "free."
Nothing is free.


JKG

"GP" == George Patterson writes:

GP You don't understand that most people *don't* pay close to
GP $100/month for cable TV, *don't* hand out cell phones like
GP candy, and *don't* drive huge SUVs.

I have no firsthand knowledge of people's spending habits for cable TV
and cell phones, but the SUVs (and monster pickups) I see on the
freeways every day here in Sacramento. They outnumber sedans. I hope
gasoline keeps creeping higher so they get skunked.

Jonathan Goodish wrote:


You're right, XM provides more, but not $30 more per month, much less $50.


Not sure that I agree with your assessment. I subscribe to the $50 XM
option and have found almost every element provided to be very useful.
Not to mention that Baron seems to do a decent job with data quality--I
wonder where the data from ADS-B comes from.

Nexrad and other weather comes from the government.



I just don't understand the whining that I hear everywhere about the
cost of XM weather. In an era where folks pay close to $100/month for
cable television, give a cell phone to every pre-teen in their
household, and drive huge SUVs, I can't understand where the pain of
paying $30-$50/month for weather uplink is coming from. It's not for
everyone, but frequent flyers can certainly benefit from it.

Why would you pay $50 per month when just about everything you get for
that $50 will be free? Not to mention the people that wouldn't pay a
nickel for weather now get it for free.




In addition, ADS-B doesn't provide an entertainment services like XM
radio, for those who might use it.

I don't pay anything extra for XM in the plane right now. I simply take
one of my radios with me when I fly.


I have an XM radio in my plane now. Although XM in the 396 works it is
a secondary function and as such is not all that convenient to use.


Actually, I think it's pretty intuitive. Garmin did a good job with the
integration, though it's not quite as convenient for things like channel
selection.

Bingo, once you've had an XM in the plane the 396 is really cumbersome.



Until those "hundreds of transmitters" are live and active, ADS-B is
pretty much moot. I doubt in 2-3 years we will see widespread ADS-B
available as we have XM available today. And, I wonder what happens to
your data if you're out of range of a transmitter?

You're right, it is a chicken and egg problem. However it is already in
place and running for the entire east coast. In 2-3 years I'll bet the
entire country is covered. And one of the driving factors will be
traffic information, something XM does not and cannot provide.

In article ,
Newps wrote:
Nexrad and other weather comes from the government.

Some of the raw data comes from the government, but not all of it.
Lightning detection, for example, is not provided by the government.
Regardless of where the data comes from, the important element isn't the
data, it's how that data is processed. NWS and various private weather
companies, such as Baron, have their own algorithms and processes for
weather data. The results, even on a NEXRAD reflectivity display, can
be drastically different.



Why would you pay $50 per month when just about everything you get for
that $50 will be free? Not to mention the people that wouldn't pay a
nickel for weather now get it for free.

What is "just about everything?" Personally, I would pay the $50 per
month if the product is better and more reliable. At this point, the XM
service is well known and is used both inside and outside of aviation.
I have yet to actually hear a first-hand detailed account of ADS-B
weather products.



You're right, it is a chicken and egg problem. However it is already in
place and running for the entire east coast. In 2-3 years I'll bet the
entire country is covered. And one of the driving factors will be
traffic information, something XM does not and cannot provide.

Where are the receivers? As far as I can tell, the system is still in
the experimental stage for all practical purposes.

Traffic information will be nice, but I never thought that TIS was worth
the investment because there were areas which simply weren't covered.
Products like SkyWatch are independent of any ground-based facility, so
are much more effective, but require a substatial up-front investment.

The bottom line is that the system is still a pipe dream for all
practical purposes. The reality is that manufacturers aren't going to
develop and mass-market receivers until the deployment is substantial
and there is a demand for them. The time between substantial deployment
and mass demand is going to be more than 2-3 years... I highly doubt the
deployment will be done in 2-3 years, especially given the fact that it
is a government project.

The other issue that concerns me is that there is no free lunch. ADS-B
and every other government service requires funding. That funding is
going to have to come from somewhere, whether it's a user fee,
subscription fee, fuel tax, etc. One way or the other, YOU will be
paying for it even if you don't use it. It will not be "free."



JKG