Let's Be Honest

But-for the Garmin 430 IFR
authorization (STC??) to be IFR, the Lowrance product (and perhaps the
Garmin 295/395) is really just about as good.

The accuracy and reliability of a high end VFR GPS is actually
equivalent to an IFR GPS. That's going to change - the VFR GPS units
are going to get better. Remember - the specifications (TSO) for the
IFR GPS was based on what the industry already knew how to do. The TSO
only means that the manufacturer jumped through lots of hoops to prove
that he was doing what was already industry standard. It adds cost,
not value. It also means the design gets frozen really hard,
competition is limited, etc.

The user interface and general user-friendliness of a high end VFR GPS
is always going to be better than that of an IFR GPS. The IFR GPS must
conform to TSO. The VFR GPS can be made to do what the pilot needs. I
have much time flying behind the 430 and the same-vintage 295. There
is no doubt in my mind that the 295 is a much better unit.

The issue with satellite lock is a red herring - GPS antennas are
pretty standard, and you can always have an external antenna for the
portable GPS. I never bothered because my dash-mount antenna has yet
to lose lock. On the other hand, I see older IFR-certifiable panel
mounts lose lock routinely - their performance in that regard is more
like the low end VFR GPS units.

Michael

In article .com,
"Michael" wrote:

But-for the Garmin 430 IFR
authorization (STC??) to be IFR, the Lowrance product (and perhaps the
Garmin 295/395) is really just about as good.

The accuracy and reliability of a high end VFR GPS is actually
equivalent to an IFR GPS. That's going to change - the VFR GPS units
are going to get better. Remember - the specifications (TSO) for the
IFR GPS was based on what the industry already knew how to do. The TSO
only means that the manufacturer jumped through lots of hoops to prove
that he was doing what was already industry standard. It adds cost,
not value. It also means the design gets frozen really hard,
competition is limited, etc.

Remember, the TSO specifies minimum performance standards.
The vendor/applicant is not prevented from providing increases/enhanced
performance and/or functionality.

An example would be the Honeywell EGPWS (the E is for Enhanced) which
met the TSO for GPWS and added terrain awareness/warning functionality.

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule