Garmin GNS430 & WAAS

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 10:06:58 -0500, Tom Fleischman
k wrote:

You have to send your CNX-80 in to Garmin. They change the firmware,
update the software, put a new face plate on it and ship it back to you
as a GNS-480, with WAAS enabled.

I think you missed the (hopefully humorous) point I was trying to make.

The OP asked about getting a WAAS enabled *430*.
You said they were available to owners of *CNX80*'s.

So I was hoping to get a WAAS enabled *430* (for $1500 perhaps), as I
already have a WAAS enabled CNX80!

And they did not change the faceplate -- it still says CNX80.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

It has nothing to do with the AT aquisition and everything to do with
availible resources and certification. It took forever to get TAWS
certified too.

Mike
MU-2


"Tom Fleischman" k wrote in
message
news:280320051013571550%bodhijunkoneeightyeightjun ...
In article , Peter R.
wrote:

Dude wrote:

We are all waiting for the 430 units to start shipping or upgrading.

A couple of months ago I called Garmin and asked them to speculate on the
availability of the WAAS upgrade for the GNS-430 and a tech told me June
or
July 2005 (in the US).

My local avionics shop claimed that they had heard this date, too.

FWIW...

I wouldn't hold my breath.

It seems to me that the reason they bought out Apollo/UPSAT in the
first place was so that they wouldn't have to really tackle the problem
of providing an upgrade for the 430/530. They were months behind on
that schedule a year and a half ago. The last thing they want to do is
to resurrect that old chestnut. They want to sell 480's now and you can
bet dollars to doughnuts that they don't want to compete with
themselves.

The GNS-480 a superior product anyway. Maybe they will take 430/530's
in trade. :-)

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 18:37:51 -0500, Tom Fleischman
k wrote:

The vertical guidance on the GPS approaches is awesome.

Concur. That really blew me away the first time I did the GPS 15 KEPM
approach. And it's just a plain LNAV approach!


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Dude wrote:

All I know is that I am not willing to learn the 480's interface, and
neither are most of the folks around here.

Why? It's certainly different, and I'd expect a learning curve. But if I
were given a chance to swap the 430s I fly (in 4 club aircraft) for 480s,
I'd leap at it. Ignoring the feature differences, there's one UI
difference - entering flight plans just as they're described as IFR
clearances - that's *extremely* desirable in my opinion.

But I'm curious why you disagree.

- Andrew

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...
Dude wrote:

All I know is that I am not willing to learn the 480's interface, and
neither are most of the folks around here.

Why? It's certainly different, and I'd expect a learning curve. But if I
were given a chance to swap the 430s I fly (in 4 club aircraft) for 480s,
I'd leap at it. Ignoring the feature differences, there's one UI
difference - entering flight plans just as they're described as IFR
clearances - that's *extremely* desirable in my opinion.

But I'm curious why you disagree.

- Andrew


I have never used one, but the word on the street and in the press is that
the interface is MUCH more different than that. Reviews of the units have
not been flattering about the interface. If the FPL was the ONLY
difference, I would be willing to go that route.

In my search for a used 430, I have heard too much talk that a new panel
mount is just around the corner though. I am going to hold off until after
OSH no matter what.

Dude wrote:

I have never used one, but the word on the street and in the press is that
the interface is MUCH more different than that. Reviews of the units have
not been flattering about the interface.

Really? Tom Benenson in Flying has spoken well about it, as did someone in
one of the more recent IFRs. These are just the most recent; I've seen
other praise further in the past.

I don't recall reading of anyone complaining about the UI in the press.
Have you a reference; I'd like to see the specifics of the complaint(s).
Like you, I've not tried one.

[...]
In my search for a used 430, I have heard too much talk that a new panel
mount is just around the corner though.

From Garmin or someone else? I've been wondering by Bendix hasn't an entry
in that market (unless I've missed it).

- Andrew

Andrew Gideon wrote:
I don't recall reading of anyone complaining about the [GNS-480] UI in
the press. Have you a reference; I'd like to see the specifics of the
complaint(s). Like you, I've not tried one.

There are certainly things wrong with the CNX-80/GNS-480 UI (I've been
using it for a couple of years now). The biggest problem is that it's too
modal; there's too many pages hidden two or three layers deep and sometimes
you know what you want to do, but you just can't remember how to get to the
page where you can do it.

I think it also suffers a bit from trying to do too much. The ability to
have a blind transponder is nice, but hardly necessary. There's a
dedicated button (and a little bit of screen real-estate) devoted to
xponder operations; they could have been devoted to something else.
Perhaps a dedicated FPL button instead of an FPL soft key? I think that
would have made the whole box (a little) easier to use.

There's a whole page of fancy timer functions, but most of the time I just
want a button that I can hit RIGHT NOW that starts counting down from 1
minute (without interrupting the flight plan editing I was in the middle of
doing).

Overall, I like the box, but it definately has a steep learning curve, and
some UI warts. It really could have been a lot better with some better
usability testing before it shipped.

These are all complex boxes, and they're getting more complex as they add
features (interfaces to weather, traffic, transponder, fuel computers, CO
detectors, etc, etc, etc). Hopefully some of what we've learned about UI
design in the past 25 years will start to trickle down to the avionics
market and things will not only get better, but more standardized.

"Dude" wrote in message
...


I have never used one, but the word on the street and in the press is that
the interface is MUCH more different than that. Reviews of the units have
not been flattering about the interface. If the FPL was the ONLY
difference, I would be willing to go that route.

I think I know which article you are referring to, but it was based on a
test that was not conducted very well (the people tested already had
familiarity with the Garmin product but not the UPS-AT). Since that time,
in head-to-head tests I believe the 480 was picked overwhelmingly over the
430.

I started this thread and thank all of the guys who have provided input.
It seems to me that Garmin are in no rush whatsoever to get the GNS430
product ready to ship with WAAS enabled.
From the hearsay that is banded around, all that is forthcoming is a
possible indication that something may happen in 2005.
Garmin could have easily, by now, have issued a firm commitment to the
GNS430 and shipping them with enabled WAAS.
But I think that it is fact that no formal assurances have been issued at
all.

The GNS480 is available, and without assurances about the GNS430 Garmin are
indicating that the 430 will soon be shown on the discontinued list.
What Garmin are doing is typically good marketing, say nothing, keep smiling
and slowly let the product die !

I feel that any difficultly with using the GNS480 interface probably is just
a matter of familiarity.
Those users who learnt to operate GPS units via the GPS90/92, GPS195/6 hand
helds will have found the GNS430 to be a natural progression.
Therefore being easy for them to gain full control.

I can play tunes on pretty much all of the Garmin aviation hand held units.
Last week I sat down with the GNS480 simulator and admit that I had to go
back and read some parts of the manual.
But having done so, felt at home reasonably quickly. Also the use of
softkeys is an improvement over the GNS430.
I am sure that the lack of competition from Bendix [or others] is pretty
much leaving Garmin always in the Left Seat.
I can't wait till Oshkosh to see what Garmin might announce, so I am taking
the bull by the horns and will fit the GNS480 in my Archer.


--
Roy
N5804F - PA28-181 Piper Archer II


"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...
Dude wrote:

I have never used one, but the word on the street and in the press is
that
the interface is MUCH more different than that. Reviews of the units
have
not been flattering about the interface.

Really? Tom Benenson in Flying has spoken well about it, as did someone
in
one of the more recent IFRs. These are just the most recent; I've seen
other praise further in the past.

I don't recall reading of anyone complaining about the UI in the press.
Have you a reference; I'd like to see the specifics of the complaint(s).
Like you, I've not tried one.

[...]
In my search for a used 430, I have heard too much talk that a new panel
mount is just around the corner though.

From Garmin or someone else? I've been wondering by Bendix hasn't an
entry
in that market (unless I've missed it).

- Andrew

Roy Smith wrote:

/snip/ The ability to
have a blind transponder is nice, but hardly necessary. There's a
dedicated button (and a little bit of screen real-estate) devoted to
xponder operations; they could have been devoted to something else.
Perhaps a dedicated FPL button instead of an FPL soft key? I think that
would have made the whole box (a little) easier to use.
/snip/

Roy,

So, even if you don't have a remote xponder hooked up, the screen
*still* dedicates some space to that function? I'd hoped they would
switch that off if you didn't use it.

Happy Flying!
Scott Skylane
N92054