What the difference between the

On Apr 2, 7:09 am, "Aluckyguess" wrote:
So the radios are hard to work on the 480? I heard the 480 was a lot harder
to learn


I guess it depends on the pilot. In the 480 you have to be on the
correct page in order to swap nav/com freq etc. The 430 has dedicated
knobs. I think the 430 is a bit more intuitive but if its your
airplane you will learn to use either one. I think the 480's flight
plan is a bit more complicated because you define start and end points
then route, the 430 just assumes the last fix is the end point (i.e.
you bring up the flt plan and see end to end). However, the 480 has
airways. I'm just waiting for the first NTSB report to list the 430's
lack of airways for causing a plane to go into a mountain. In
California our airways bend around mountains, if you just put in two
ends of the airway there may be a mountain in the middle.

-Robert

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Apr 2, 7:09 am, "Aluckyguess" wrote:
So the radios are hard to work on the 480? I heard the 480 was a lot
harder
to learn


I guess it depends on the pilot. In the 480 you have to be on the
correct page in order to swap nav/com freq etc. The 430 has dedicated
knobs. I think the 430 is a bit more intuitive but if its your
airplane you will learn to use either one. I think the 480's flight
plan is a bit more complicated because you define start and end points
then route, the 430 just assumes the last fix is the end point (i.e.
you bring up the flt plan and see end to end). However, the 480 has
airways. I'm just waiting for the first NTSB report to list the 430's
lack of airways for causing a plane to go into a mountain. In
California our airways bend around mountains, if you just put in two
ends of the airway there may be a mountain in the middle.

-Robert
I downloaded the simulator and the radio does have a nice function in
remembering 10 of the last radio frequencies. The 480 seems a little similar
to the Apollo 60 that is in the plane already. The 480 will also load the
approach plate on the MX20.
If I can find a deal on a 480 I think I will try it.

Thanks for the help

On Apr 2, 1:10 pm, "Aluckyguess" wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in ooglegroups.com...



On Apr 2, 7:09 am, "Aluckyguess" wrote:
So the radios are hard to work on the 480? I heard the 480 was a lot
harder
to learn

I guess it depends on the pilot. In the 480 you have to be on the
correct page in order to swap nav/com freq etc. The 430 has dedicated
knobs. I think the 430 is a bit more intuitive but if its your
airplane you will learn to use either one. I think the 480's flight
plan is a bit more complicated because you define start and end points
then route, the 430 just assumes the last fix is the end point (i.e.
you bring up the flt plan and see end to end). However, the 480 has
airways. I'm just waiting for the first NTSB report to list the 430's
lack of airways for causing a plane to go into a mountain. In
California our airways bend around mountains, if you just put in two
ends of the airway there may be a mountain in the middle.

-Robert

I downloaded the simulator and the radio does have a nice function in
remembering 10 of the last radio frequencies. The 480 seems a little similar
to the Apollo 60 that is in the plane already. The 480 will also load the
approach plate on the MX20.
If I can find a deal on a 480 I think I will try it.

I think that's what most people find. The 430 is a bit easier to learn
but the 480 is more powerful (or at least featureful).

-Robert

"Aluckyguess" wrote in message


I downloaded the simulator and the radio does have a nice function in
remembering 10 of the last radio frequencies. The 480 seems a little
similar to the Apollo 60 that is in the plane already.

There's a very good reason for that.

http://www.garmin.com/pressroom/corporate/082203.html

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://openspf.org
____________________