Anywhere Map with XM weather

In article ne.com,
Andrew Gideon wrote:
TheÂ*abilityÂ*toÂ*haveÂ*allÂ*ofÂ*theÂ*NACOÂ*IAPsÂ* atÂ*your
fingertips is another capability that may be useful.

How well do these work? Inside the outer marker isn't where I want to be
scrolling around on a PDA?

There are larger devices which can display an entire plate, but they start
to look cumbersome to me (unless mounted into the panel, of course).


I don't have the plates, but have friends who do, so I've seen them.

My feeling is that they would be impractical unless you could take the
time to brief the approach while someone else flies the plane (another
pilot or autopilot). I usually fly with my wife, who is also an
instrument pilot, and have the approach briefed and the important
numbers noted on a note pad prior to initiation. One pilot flies while
the other navigates. In this scenario, the plates would probably work
well. We are still thinking of purchasing them, because that will
eliminate the chance that we will need a plate when we don't have a
printed copy. Current info that you have to scroll to see is better
than no info when you need it.

One thing you can do from the Pocket Plates software on the PC is print
the plates that you think you'll use, so you're just using the iPaq for
situational awareness on the approach. The plates can be
geo-referenced, so you will actually see your airplane follow the
approach. I know that you can also print the plates from the NACO web
site, but if you find yourself diverting somewhere at the last minute,
you may end up somewhere that you don't anticipate and suddenly don't
have the plate to get into the only airport within range that isn't
below minimums (personal experience speaking here, but thankfully I had
the plate).

There's no question that a Tablet PC is a more idea solution for the
plates, the moving map, the weather, etc. But it's also more expensive,
and much more difficult to accommodate in a small cabin.


JKG

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...
Matt Barrow wrote:

Trivia (AIC): When a ship travels through the Panama Canal, it actually
gains/loses about 25 feet from entry to exit depending on the direction
of
travel. Sea Level is not 100.0% level.

I remember learning this as a kid and not understanding. Is this just
tidal
difference?

Something from the earth's rotation?

Otherwise, why doesn't it balance out?


It's been YEARS since I read this and I don't recall the attributed any
reason to it but your explanation seems entirely plausible.

I am waiting for the first NTSB report regarding someone's attempt to
use a PDA-based AI in IMC... Then the inevitible lawsuits.

If you don't have an certified backup, practice partial-panel. I just
can't imagine risking my life on a Microsoft-driven PDA...

It may have already happened. I hadn't heard of any law suits.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?...FA005& akey=1


"PPT33R" wrote in message
oups.com...
I am waiting for the first NTSB report regarding someone's attempt to
use a PDA-based AI in IMC... Then the inevitible lawsuits.

If you don't have an certified backup, practice partial-panel. I just
can't imagine risking my life on a Microsoft-driven PDA...

In article .com,
"PPT33R" wrote:

I am waiting for the first NTSB report regarding someone's attempt to
use a PDA-based AI in IMC... Then the inevitible lawsuits.

If you don't have an certified backup, practice partial-panel. I just
can't imagine risking my life on a Microsoft-driven PDA...

Hmmm... so you'd rather have nothing than a Microsoft-driven PDA with
solid state gyro as a backup. Interesting approach. Personally, I want
any available assistance that I can get in an emergency situation,
certified or not. Just because something isn't certified doesn't mean
that it's worse than something that is certified.

As far as I am aware, none of these PDA systems are certified for
anything, and the vendors make that clear. The same is true for the
handheld GPS units, but there are folks all over the place that use them
for enroute and approach guidance in IMC. They are no more "certified"
than the PDAs.



JKG

Stephen McNaught wrote:
It may have already happened. I hadn't heard of any law suits.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?...FA005& akey=1


That crash doesn't seem to involve the PDA based AI. The pilot seemed
to have been using the ControlVision GPS software to fly a GPS approach.
I don't see any indication that his basic flight instruments weren't
working. The general gist of the report is that the pilot descended
below an authrorized altitude either due to an altimeter missetting or
the fact that he had not properly pinpointed his location with respect
to the approach step down points.