![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I also use the zoom-out, pan, zoom-in technique and that works much better than
trying to scroll over long distances while zoomed in. How do you get around the problem of detail disappearing when you zoom out? Example: Flying to Michigan, we wanted to see what the weather was like in Joliet, IL -- an area of questionable weather. If you zoom out so that you don't have to "slew" (or scroll), Joliet disappears. You then have to put your cursor where you *think* Joliet is, and hit the "zoom in" button to see it again. If you set detail levels to so that Joliet doesn't disappear at that zoom level, you can't see it, cuz it's buried in too many airports. Worse, not all airports are weather reporting stations -- and those cute little triangles (that indicate XM weather reporting) also disappear when you zoom out. Now, you're stuck selecting an area and zooming in on it, hoping that there will be a reporting station there -- wherever "there" is. The only solution we've found is to slew around, and put up with the slow refresh rate. Ultimately, the solution will come when Garmin (or Lowrance) incorporates weather into a larger display that can display everything in a readable format at a usable zoom level. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have to admit, I'm still in the honeymoon phase with my 'old' 396 with
autokit. But isn't it great that we're fussing about the need to zooming out and guessing where a weather reporting station before zooming in to get the weather? All overlaid on a combined Nexrad and cloud cover image. I mean, doesn't it all beat calling Fligh****ch and trying to jot down some facts while hand flying in some choppy soup? I gotta get an autopilot so I can more fully enjoy playing with this thing while motoring along. "Honey, would you prefer the 60s or 70s music channel now? The US Open broadcast just ended, I'm sorry you missed listening to Phil self destruct but I muted it when you went to sleep" Heck, my panel mount 300XL seems like a stone tablet now... talk about refresh time! Loving it all Jay Honeck wrote: I also use the zoom-out, pan, zoom-in technique and that works much better than trying to scroll over long distances while zoomed in. How do you get around the problem of detail disappearing when you zoom out? Example: Flying to Michigan, we wanted to see what the weather was like in Joliet, IL -- an area of questionable weather. If you zoom out so that you don't have to "slew" (or scroll), Joliet disappears. You then have to put your cursor where you *think* Joliet is, and hit the "zoom in" button to see it again. If you set detail levels to so that Joliet doesn't disappear at that zoom level, you can't see it, cuz it's buried in too many airports. Worse, not all airports are weather reporting stations -- and those cute little triangles (that indicate XM weather reporting) also disappear when you zoom out. Now, you're stuck selecting an area and zooming in on it, hoping that there will be a reporting station there -- wherever "there" is. The only solution we've found is to slew around, and put up with the slow refresh rate. Ultimately, the solution will come when Garmin (or Lowrance) incorporates weather into a larger display that can display everything in a readable format at a usable zoom level. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article . com,
"Jay Honeck" wrote: How do you get around the problem of detail disappearing when you zoom out? Example: Flying to Michigan, we wanted to see what the weather was like in Joliet, IL -- an area of questionable weather. If you zoom out so that you don't have to "slew" (or scroll), Joliet disappears. You then have to put your cursor where you *think* Joliet is, and hit the "zoom in" button to see it again. Presumably you know approximately where Joliet is in IL, correct? You can zoom out, then position the cursor over the approximate location, zoom in a little more (now you see IL), position the cursor more accurately, and zoom in further. No scrolling required. Alternately, if Joliet is in your flight plan route, simply go to the route page and select it to see the weather at that point in your route. No scrolling required. If you had an instrument rating you'd probably be more concerned with the NEXRAD image and convective activity than enroute surface observations, and that information can be obtained without zooming in to the individual airport. Also, don't forget about NRST weather. I haven't tried it, but I'll bet if you turned off terrain shading on the base map, scrolling performance would improve significantly. JKG |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jay Honeck wrote:
I also use the zoom-out, pan, zoom-in technique and that works much better than trying to scroll over long distances while zoomed in. How do you get around the problem of detail disappearing when you zoom out? I don't get around it, I just don't see it as a serious problem. Example: Flying to Michigan, we wanted to see what the weather was like in Joliet, IL -- an area of questionable weather. If you zoom out so that you don't have to "slew" (or scroll), Joliet disappears. You then have to put your cursor where you *think* Joliet is, and hit the "zoom in" button to see it again. Yep. Not too hard. If you set detail levels to so that Joliet doesn't disappear at that zoom level, you can't see it, cuz it's buried in too many airports. Would you like some cheese with that whine? Worse, not all airports are weather reporting stations -- and those cute little triangles (that indicate XM weather reporting) also disappear when you zoom out. Now, you're stuck selecting an area and zooming in on it, hoping that there will be a reporting station there -- wherever "there" is. XM doesn't get to decide which airports report weather. As far as I know, any airport that reports SAs shows up on the XM display. Is your experience different? The only solution we've found is to slew around, and put up with the slow refresh rate. You could demand a refund, then take the money and go buy the unit that works better. Ultimately, the solution will come when Garmin (or Lowrance) incorporates weather into a larger display that can display everything in a readable format at a usable zoom level. While we're waiting, I'll just enjoy my 396. Dave |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If you set detail levels to so that Joliet doesn't disappear at that
zoom level, you can't see it, cuz it's buried in too many airports. Would you like some cheese with that whine? Yes. For $3000, I should be able to demand any cheese I'd like. Face it -- Garmin just hasn't kept up with the competition in the crucial area of display design. Worse, the only work-around to using a too-small display -- slewing around -- doesn't work very well because of insufficient processing power. It's a design flaw. Fortunately for Garmin, if you want XM weather in a box, they are currently the only show in town. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article .com,
"Jay Honeck" wrote: Face it -- Garmin just hasn't kept up with the competition in the crucial area of display design. Worse, the only work-around to using a too-small display -- slewing around -- doesn't work very well because of insufficient processing power. That isn't the only work-around, as pointed out by myself and others. For some reason, you apparently refuse to acknowledge the alternatives, which work fairly well. It's a design flaw. No, it's not. I'm sorry, but while I wish the 396/496 screen was perhaps twice as big, that still wouldn't solve the "problem" of having to scroll around. And, I don't believe that the mass aviation market wants a 7" or 10" or 12" screen in a portable GPS. JKG |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Face it -- Garmin just hasn't kept up with the competition in the
crucial area of display design. Worse, the only work-around to using a too-small display -- slewing around -- doesn't work very well because of insufficient processing power. That isn't the only work-around, as pointed out by myself and others. For some reason, you apparently refuse to acknowledge the alternatives, which work fairly well. Something that works "fairly well" isn't what I expect in a $3,000 piece of equipment the size of my son's PSP. Zooming out causes the target you are searching for to disappear, as that tiny little screen "declutters" itself. If it DIDN'T do that, all you would see was a giant glob of gibberish, with the airport names entangled with one another. The only solution to that problem is video screen acreage -- period. The screen is simply too small, and the landscape orientation doesn't let you see far enough ahead without slewing. It's a design flaw. No, it's not. I'm sorry, but while I wish the 396/496 screen was perhaps twice as big, that still wouldn't solve the "problem" of having to scroll around. And, I don't believe that the mass aviation market wants a 7" or 10" or 12" screen in a portable GPS. Check the sales of Lowrance's Airmap 2000c. THAT is a usably-sized screen -- and they were selling like hot-cakes at OSH. Don't get me wrong -- XM weather is awesome, I absolutely love flying with it, and the 496 is a nice, robust unit. But as soon as Garmin (or anyone else) comes out with a larger screened version, you'll see hundreds of 396s/496s on Ebay, overnight. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article .com,
"Jay Honeck" wrote: Something that works "fairly well" isn't what I expect in a $3,000 piece of equipment the size of my son's PSP. Zooming out causes the target you are searching for to disappear, as that tiny little screen "declutters" itself. If it DIDN'T do that, all you would see was a giant glob of gibberish, with the airport names entangled with one another. Zooming out--even to hundreds of miles--still shows the state outlines, and presumably you know where your "target" is in the appropriate state. Zoom out, position the target on the appropriate location, zoom in, and repeat progressively until you've acquired your target. Alternately, if your target is in your flight plan route, just select it and hit "enter" to view the weather. It isn't "perfect," but I'm not sure of a better solution; you would need something like a 46" wide-screen to maintain a practical high detail display over long distances. Check the sales of Lowrance's Airmap 2000c. THAT is a usably-sized screen -- and they were selling like hot-cakes at OSH. The AirMap 2000c has a slightly larger screen, but actually displays LESS on that big screen because of its lower resolution. The big selling point to the Lowrance units is price. However, I suspect that Garmin far outsells Lowrance with portable aviation GPS units. One point I will give to Lowrance is that they have the screen oriented the right way. I don't care so much what's on my sides as I do what's in front of me, and the Garmin units are lacking with the landscape orientation of the display. with it, and the 496 is a nice, robust unit. But as soon as Garmin (or anyone else) comes out with a larger screened version, you'll see hundreds of 396s/496s on Ebay, overnight. That's always the case, and it has nothing to do with a larger screen. There are plenty of 396 units on the used market because folks want the "latest and greatest." I would love to see a larger screen version of the 396/496, but it can't be so large that it is cumbersome, and even a screen twice the size as that of the 396/496 will still require some manipulation to see conditions over longer distances. It is always going to be a compromise. JKG |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I would love to see a larger screen version of the 396/496, but it can't
be so large that it is cumbersome, and even a screen twice the size as that of the 396/496 will still require some manipulation to see conditions over longer distances. It is always going to be a compromise. On this, we agree. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article .com,
"Jay Honeck" wrote: Fortunately for Garmin, if you want XM weather in a box, they are currently the only show in town. vistanav also provides XM weather. It looks like a waaaay bigger bigger display, too. Unfortunately, I can't figure out where to put that big a display in my airplane. -- Bob Noel Looking for a sig the lawyers will hate |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Garmin GpsMap 396 - Flight Test #2 | Mike Spera | Owning | 17 | July 9th 06 01:21 PM |
Amateur Review of the Garmin GPSMAP 296 GPS | Rhett | Piloting | 10 | March 23rd 05 01:16 AM |
Pirep: Garmin GPSMAP 296 versus 295. (very long) | Jon Woellhaf | Piloting | 12 | September 4th 04 11:55 PM |
Amateur Review of the Garmin GPSMAP 296 GPS | Rhett | Products | 10 | April 29th 04 06:57 AM |
Garmin 90 Database Updates Discontinued | Val Christian | Piloting | 14 | August 20th 03 09:32 PM |