Garmin 496-XM Radio-PS Engineering Intercom Follow up...

Jay,

Where did you find this menu? I looked on my 396 yesterday to figure
out if I've got this on the wrong setting, and I couldn't find anywhere
where I could toggle from Line Out to Headphones.

Thanks,
Eric Bartsch
1959 Pilatus P-3 A-848
http://www.hometown.aol.com/bartscher/P3A848.html



On Nov 30, 4:09 pm, "Jay Honeck" wrote:
...
Finally I navigated to the "Sound" page in the 496, and found a menu
item named "Audio". Selecting that gives you two choices -- "Line
Out" and "Headphones". It was on "Line Out" so I switched it to
"Headphones" -- and SHAZAAM! -- it was like night and day!

The stereo sound we *THOUGHT* was so excellent was suddenly ten times
better, and the "static" problem instantly went away. So, even though
"Line out" sounds like it makes sense (feeding into the intercom),
obviously the right choice is "Headphones" -- and that's where we left
it....

Where did you find this menu? I looked on my 396 yesterday to figure
out if I've got this on the wrong setting, and I couldn't find anywhere
where I could toggle from Line Out to Headphones.

It's under "Sound" after you've hit the "Menu" button twice.

Or, at least it is on the 496. I don't know if the menus are the same?

--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

It's not on a 396.

Karl
wrote in message
ups.com...
Jay,

Where did you find this menu? I looked on my 396 yesterday to figure
out if I've got this on the wrong setting, and I couldn't find anywhere
where I could toggle from Line Out to Headphones.

Thanks,
Eric Bartsch
1959 Pilatus P-3 A-848
http://www.hometown.aol.com/bartscher/P3A848.html



On Nov 30, 4:09 pm, "Jay Honeck" wrote:
...
Finally I navigated to the "Sound" page in the 496, and found a menu
item named "Audio". Selecting that gives you two choices -- "Line
Out" and "Headphones". It was on "Line Out" so I switched it to
"Headphones" -- and SHAZAAM! -- it was like night and day!

The stereo sound we *THOUGHT* was so excellent was suddenly ten times
better, and the "static" problem instantly went away. So, even though
"Line out" sounds like it makes sense (feeding into the intercom),
obviously the right choice is "Headphones" -- and that's where we left
it....

Jay, Karl,

Thanks for confirming that this menu is on the 496 and not the 396. I
thought I was looknig in the right place last weekend.

Thanks,
Eric Bartsch
1959 Pilatus P-3 A-848
http://www.hometown.aol.com/bartscher/P3A848.html


On Dec 3, 2:06 pm, "karl gruber" wrote:
It's not on a 396.

wrote in oglegroups.com...


-

That P-3 must be a fun airplane to fly.

Karl
wrote in message
ups.com...
Jay, Karl,

Thanks for confirming that this menu is on the 496 and not the 396. I
thought I was looknig in the right place last weekend.

Thanks,
Eric Bartsch
1959 Pilatus P-3 A-848
http://www.hometown.aol.com/bartscher/P3A848.html


On Dec 3, 2:06 pm, "karl gruber" wrote:
It's not on a 396.

wrote in
oglegroups.com...


-

On Dec 5, 8:04 pm, "karl gruber" wrote:
That P-3 must be a fun airplane to fly.

wrote in oglegroups.com...


Yep, its a lot more fun than the Cessnas and Pipers I had previously
flown (not that I had an issue flying those though...). Unfortunately
it has very little value for transportation which means it gets
replaced sometime in the next few years with something a bit more
practical that the family can ride in. That's why I had been starting
the conversations on light twins vs. singles.

The P-3 has by far the best handling of anything I have flown except
the Pitts S2B. Its also built like a tank, which is a good thing for a
warbird approaching 50 years old. It is a lot more solid than a T-34,
although you pay the price in lower climb performance because the
airframe is so heavy. The other nice thing is that the interior is huge
for a 2 seat plane. I'm 6'2" and there is a lot of extra space inside.
I've had passengers who are 6'5" in the back seat and they had the seat
raised up off of the lowest position to give a better view over the
nose, with no headroom issues.

The European warbirds tend to be cheaper than the US ones because
nobody knows what they are. I've only landed at a couple of airports
where I wasn't asked what the plane is.

Anyway, I'd highly recommend the P-3 to anyone looking for something
really fun & different to fly, at roughly the same price & operating
cost as an older Cherokee Six, 210, 206, 182RG, etc... I'd love to be
flying a radial engined warbird someday (T-6, T-28), but those are
really out of my league on operating cost.

Where are you based out of Karl?

Eric Bartsch
1959 Pilatus P-3 A-848
http://www.hometown.aol.com/bartscher/P3A848.html

wrote in message
ups.com...
On Dec 5, 8:04 pm, "karl gruber" wrote:
That P-3 must be a fun airplane to fly.

wrote in
oglegroups.com...


Yep, its a lot more fun than the Cessnas and Pipers I had previously
flown (not that I had an issue flying those though...). Unfortunately
it has very little value for transportation which means it gets
replaced sometime in the next few years with something a bit more
practical that the family can ride in. That's why I had been starting
the conversations on light twins vs. singles.

The P-3 has by far the best handling of anything I have flown except
the Pitts S2B. Its also built like a tank, which is a good thing for a
warbird approaching 50 years old. It is a lot more solid than a T-34,
although you pay the price in lower climb performance because the
airframe is so heavy. The other nice thing is that the interior is huge
for a 2 seat plane. I'm 6'2" and there is a lot of extra space inside.
I've had passengers who are 6'5" in the back seat and they had the seat
raised up off of the lowest position to give a better view over the
nose, with no headroom issues.

The European warbirds tend to be cheaper than the US ones because
nobody knows what they are. I've only landed at a couple of airports
where I wasn't asked what the plane is.

Anyway, I'd highly recommend the P-3 to anyone looking for something
really fun & different to fly, at roughly the same price & operating
cost as an older Cherokee Six, 210, 206, 182RG, etc... I'd love to be
flying a radial engined warbird someday (T-6, T-28), but those are
really out of my league on operating cost.

Where are you based out of Karl?

Eric Bartsch
1959 Pilatus P-3 A-848
http://www.hometown.aol.com/bartscher/P3A848.html



I'm based out of Bremerton,Washington and fly the world's most hangar queeny
Cessna 185.

My day job is flying a Falcon 50.

Karl
"Curator" N185KG

I'm based out of Bremerton,Washington and fly the world's most hangar queeny
Cessna 185.

My day job is flying a Falcon 50.

Karl
"Curator" N185KG- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -

Both are great planes. Unfortunately I've never had the chance of
flying either one.

Eric Bartsch
1959 Pilatus P-3 A-848
http://www.hometown.aol.com/bartscher/P3A848.html