Garmin unveiling?

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:57:15 -0400, Peter Clark
wrote:

That's what I do, but it's really annoying when they give you a
crossing restriction on a fix that isn't a turnpoint in an airway so
now you have to go fishing to find it rather than the entire set of
waypoints constituting an airway being in the plan automatically like
the higher-end FMS.

What happens if you're needing to leave or join the airway midway,
such as at an intersection bend?

If you were to program the airway as a waypoint, wouldn't the unit
expect you to fly it from beginning to end?

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:00:00 -0400, B A R R Y
wrote:

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:57:15 -0400, Peter Clark
wrote:

That's what I do, but it's really annoying when they give you a
crossing restriction on a fix that isn't a turnpoint in an airway so
now you have to go fishing to find it rather than the entire set of
waypoints constituting an airway being in the plan automatically like
the higher-end FMS.

What happens if you're needing to leave or join the airway midway,
such as at an intersection bend?

In the Mustang G1000 and high-end FMS (Collins ProLine, Honeywell a-la
Boeing/Airbus etc) system you program it as entry point, airway, exit
point and it fills in all the waypoints inbetween for you. So, for
example, BOSOX V1 DPK as dialled into a real system with airways (like
the CNX80 or Mustang/FMS) would automatically populate your flight
plan legs window with: BOSOX GRIPE GRAYM DVANY HFD WEGOT MAD BELTT
DPK. To fly that with a 430/530/non-Mustang G1000 would require
dialling in BOSOX GRAYM HFD MAD BELTT DPK. Say Bradly says cross
WEGOT at 11000, now you have to go find WEGOT on the chart and add it
to the plan in the right place then set up the VNAV profile. Pain in
the rear when with the other systems you can just highlight WEGOT,
fill in 11000 for the ALT, and have it tell you the descent rate
required to make the restriction since all waypoints are already in
there.

On Jul 12, 3:45 pm, B A R R Y wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 21:56:59 -0000, "Robert M. Gary"

wrote:
Airways. Until they put airways in the GPS systems they will still be
just help tools. This is the same with the G1000. I still have to
carry all my charts and reference them often in flight.

Can't you just program the route from Navaid to Navaid, and if
necessary, add the intersections where the airway bends?

Airways always run from something to something else (a Navaid or
intersection). Even a current databased 196 has the pints that define
an airway. While you still need the chart to program it, once it's
programmed, you can easily follow an airway.

Am I missing something?

Hopefully a mountain. Out West our airways bend to avoid mountains.
If you miss a bend (which can be easy to do when looking at a
sectional), you could hit the mountain. Its just an increased danager
that isn't necessary if the GPS had airways.
Also, if the GPS had airways I could program my route without having
to always have the paper chart sitting on my lap. Seems like with all
the technology in the cockpit today (I also fly a G1000) that making
us have to make frequent reference to the paper chart is odd.

-Robert

On Jul 12, 4:00 pm, B A R R Y wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:57:15 -0400, Peter Clark

wrote:

That's what I do, but it's really annoying when they give you a
crossing restriction on a fix that isn't a turnpoint in an airway so
now you have to go fishing to find it rather than the entire set of
waypoints constituting an airway being in the plan automatically like
the higher-end FMS.

What happens if you're needing to leave or join the airway midway,
such as at an intersection bend?

If you were to program the airway as a waypoint, wouldn't the unit
expect you to fly it from beginning to end?

In the King GPS I had you put two way points and the airway. You could
enter and exit the airway at any waypoint. However, because the GPS
had airways it was smart enough to make all the airway turns and not
just go direct from the first way point to the last (which may have a
mountain in the middle).

-Robert

On Jul 12, 3:55 pm, Peter Clark
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 21:56:59 -0000, "Robert M. Gary"

wrote:
On Jul 12, 6:09 am, Nathan Young wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 05:36:05 -0700, wrote:
Oshkosh seems to be the place where Garmin rolls out their latest and
greatest products. Any speculation on what the next will be?

From a software standpoint, there are probably lots of little features
that can be improved, but I cannot think of any big features that the
496 lacks...

Airways. Until they put airways in the GPS systems they will still be
just help tools. This is the same with the G1000. I still have to
carry all my charts and reference them often in flight.

There is hope. They have airways in the Mustang G1000 and ChartView
in the entire 2007 NAV III line and rumor has it the new software
(reportedly coming this month) for the rest of the NAV III line has
airways and chartview as well.

Awesome!!

AFAIK you still need to carry the charts though.

Sure, but carrying and having to frequently reference are different
things.

-Robert

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 21:56:59 -0000, "Robert M. Gary"
wrote:

Airways. Until they put airways in the GPS systems they will still be
just help tools. This is the same with the G1000. I still have to
carry all my charts and reference them often in flight.

Excellent point, I had forgotten about airways. I have been flying
with a Garmin 295 for years, but I also have my own moving map
software running on a tablet PC which displays airways and
intersections.

In Garmin's defense, the airways take up a lot of memory, are slow to
draw/paint on the screen, and consume/clutter the display... and that
is on a 900MHz Pentium III tablet PC with a 10.4" screen. Airways
would be a tough trick on a smaller 3-4" portable GPS screen.

Nathan Young wrote:
In Garmin's defense, the airways take up a lot of memory

Feh. The FAA distributes the airway database in an extremely verbose text
format which is about 10 meg in raw format, but compresses down (with gzip)
to a little under a meg. The only data in the file which doesn't already
need to be stored anyway (i.e. fix coordinates) is a list of which fixes
make up each airway. There's 42k records in the file. If you used a
32-bit pointer for each fix, plus some per-airway information (I count 2240
airways), the whole thing fits into under 200k. This is nothing.

"Roy Smith" wrote:

In Garmin's defense, the airways take up a lot of memory

Feh. The FAA distributes the airway database in an extremely verbose text
format which is about 10 meg in raw format, but compresses down (with gzip)
to a little under a meg. The only data in the file which doesn't already
need to be stored anyway (i.e. fix coordinates) is a list of which fixes
make up each airway. There's 42k records in the file. If you used a
32-bit pointer for each fix, plus some per-airway information (I count 2240
airways), the whole thing fits into under 200k. This is nothing.

G-D usenet. There's always some smartass who actually knows what he's
talking about to come along and spoil the fun!

--
Dan

"Gut feeling"

Intestinologists concur that the human gut does not contain any
rational thoughts.

What the human gut *is* full of is moderately well
known.

On 2007-07-12 14:56:59 -0700, "Robert M. Gary" said:

On Jul 12, 6:09 am, Nathan Young wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 05:36:05 -0700, wrote:
Oshkosh seems to be the place where Garmin rolls out their latest and
greatest products. Any speculation on what the next will be?

From a software standpoint, there are probably lots of little features
that can be improved, but I cannot think of any big features that the
496 lacks...

Airways. Until they put airways in the GPS systems they will still be
just help tools. This is the same with the G1000. I still have to
carry all my charts and reference them often in flight.

-Robert

They already had those in the MX20, which I think is being sold by Garmin now.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On 2007-07-12 15:45:27 -0700, B A R R Y said:

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 21:56:59 -0000, "Robert M. Gary"
wrote:

Airways. Until they put airways in the GPS systems they will still be
just help tools. This is the same with the G1000. I still have to
carry all my charts and reference them often in flight.


Can't you just program the route from Navaid to Navaid, and if
necessary, add the intersections where the airway bends?

You could, but the MX20 showed things like MEA.


--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor