Garmin GpsMap 396 - Flight Test #4

Yesterday we planned on a proposed flight 50 miles away for dinner with
a light GA airplane newbie on board . The radar at home showed a very
narrow band of showers to the Northwest on a SW - NE line marching SE
towards us. The rain was limited to the lightest 2 green shades with an
occasional yellow dot showing here and there. In my experience, this is
usually light if it makes it to the surface at all. It looked like it
would take about 3-4 hours plus to arrive given its speed of advance.
Normally, I would make the "go decision" based on this and launch.

We went off to the airport and prepared the plane for the trip. Once the
396 had acquired weather data on the ground, it already showed the once
narrow band of green to be a much wider band of nearly solid yellow with
a few orange dots growing. This is usually some pretty moderate to heavy
rain and I was uncomfortable in challenging it. So, we went up locally
to show the newbie the wonders of the sky since the rain was several
hours away and the local skies were high broken. I did not do a whole
lot of testing, but the sat reception after upgrading to SW version 3.2
was much improved. Many more sats near the top. Never lost sat lock.

After a while, the rain band got wider still and I was convinced I did
the right thing scrubbing. We may have made it there and back, but it
would be awfully close. Then, the animation on the 396 looked like the
line had actually sped up in its Southeast track. I was now positive I
made the right choice.

Having this information in front of me was invaluable. Ordinarily, we
would have made the trip because we would not have known about the
deteriorating conditions. As the heavy rain would have started hitting
the windshield, I would have been torn between pressing on (with the old
radar information) or turning around because it had obviously changed.

As a funny aside, the rain did speed up and arrived 1.5 hours later.
However, right after we landed, the rain mass began to deteriorate again
to very light stuff. Our entire route saw only a few drops here and
there. This was a good illustration of how quickly things can change and
how valuable this info in the cockpit can be.

I am definitely keeping this thing!

Thanks,
Mike

I am definitely keeping this thing!

Thanks, for all the PIREPs, Mike. They have been very helpful.

Mary and I are reluctantly considering buying the 396, precisely for
the reasons you just outlined in your post. It's a great tool --
perhaps, even, life-saving -- but (IMHO) it's just saddled with a
too-small screen.

We're holding out till OSH, under the (perhaps foolish) hope that
Lowrance or AvMap will finally introduce a weather-capable unit. If
they don't, we'll just have to get used to that dinky screen, I guess.

(Caveat: This isn't really a slam on the 396 per se. After flying
behind the AvMap and the Airmap 2000c, *everything* else on the market
looks "dinky"...)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message ups.com...
I am definitely keeping this thing!

Thanks, for all the PIREPs, Mike. They have been very helpful.

Mary and I are reluctantly considering buying the 396, precisely for
the reasons you just outlined in your post. It's a great tool --
perhaps, even, life-saving -- but (IMHO) it's just saddled with a
too-small screen.

We're holding out till OSH, under the (perhaps foolish) hope that
Lowrance or AvMap will finally introduce a weather-capable unit. If
they don't, we'll just have to get used to that dinky screen, I guess.

(Caveat: This isn't really a slam on the 396 per se. After flying
behind the AvMap and the Airmap 2000c, *everything* else on the market
looks "dinky"...)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"


IMHO, the 396 is over priced. Sure, the nexrad radar stuff is good to know, but it is not a real picture of the storms.
It is a representation of the echoes from the doppler radar station. The doppler is limited in that if a heavy down pour
is happening, it can not see through that down pour very well and other stations need to help out with interpolating the
data. I do like the METAR information, but like the radar, you can get updated from FSS or ATC real time also, but it
does take talking on the radio ;-)

".Blueskies." wrote:

IMHO, the 396 is over priced.

Then don't buy one. That's how a free market works.

Sure, the nexrad radar stuff is good to know, but it is not a real picture
of the storms.

It is plenty real enough--I've been using it to dodge CBs in Thunderstorm
Alley for two years. I promise you that what you see on the screen is what
you will see out he window.

It is a representation of the echoes from the doppler radar station. The
doppler is limited in that if a heavy down pour is happening, it can not
see through that down pour very well and other stations need to help out
with interpolating the data.

Which makes it better than on-board radar, which has no way to overcome
attenuation.

I do like the METAR information, but like the radar, you can get updated
from FSS or ATC real time also, but it does take talking on the radio
;-)

Ever try to maintain a mental picture of moving thunderstorms by talking to
Fligh****ch and looking at a sectional? It's like flying blind compared to
having an animated NEXRAD picture in front of you.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

IMHO, the 396 is over priced. Sure, the nexrad radar stuff is good to know, but it is not a real picture of the storms.
It is a representation of the echoes from the doppler radar station. The doppler is limited in that if a heavy down pour
is happening, it can not see through that down pour very well and other stations need to help out with interpolating the
data. I do like the METAR information, but like the radar, you can get updated from FSS or ATC real time also, but it
does take talking on the radio ;-)



I agree that it is overpriced. My earlier whining attests to that. But,
I'm not sure about the assessment about the National Nexrad composite
being somehow inaccurate. Because several stations view the rain events
from multiple angles, I believe what you do get is an accurate
representation. On board radar suffers from attenuation (low power,
small aperature) but that is balanced by the fact that on board is real
time. I thought that high powered, large aperature, ground based weather
radar could punch through about any weather. Am I misunderstanding the
capabilities of these units and this system? Anyone have objective data
and stats?

I also like the Metar/TAF/TFR data being at hand. Yes, I agree that you
can call FSS. If on an IFR plan, you have to check out and back in to do
so. During moderate turbulence in solid IMC, looking at the 396 is WAY
less workload for me. Also, I can scroll ahead and view METARs along the
route, or off-route to find a better path. In IMC, there is no way I can
even see the red blob in my path to even ask for a heading change. If
ATC is not busy, they may tell me, maybe not.

Is this worth the current price, probably not to some. But, with tens of
thousands invested in this airplane, ANYTHING that will increase its
utility is worth considering to me.

Thanks for the alternate viewpoint. The GPS makers need to be listening in.

Mike

"MS" == Mike Spera writes:
MS On
MS board radar

Isn't any comparison to OBR an intellectual exercise for almost all of
us, given that our planes do not and will not have it? So for
realtime--or nearly so--weather info you have your eyes, your radio
tuned to 122.0, or the Garmin 396 (or equivalent with a PDA).

I'd love to get the 396, but the cost (both initial and ongoing) and
smallish screen deter me. Besides it's hard to justify in
N. California's Central Valley--anybody can make a reasonable
prediction of weather 10 years ahead.

On 9-Jul-2006, Mike Spera wrote:

In IMC, there is no way I can even see the red blob in my path to even ask
for a heading change. If
ATC is not busy, they may tell me, maybe not.


Most of my flying is in the Pacific Northwest where thunderstorms are rare.
(Icing is far and away the biggest weather limitation to IFR flight.) But
on a flight over the Continental Divide in Montana last summer, while in
IMC, the controller advised me of a new and urgent SIGMET for an area of
scattered, embedded thunderstorms that had popped up, unforcasted, right
along my flight path. He then did a masterful job of vectoring me through
them. I hit some rain, but no real turbulence. Still, it would have been a
lot less nerve wracking if I had been able to see where I was going in
relation to the storms. Also, if this had been in busy airspace I doubt
that the controller would have had time to do this vectoring for more than a
couple of planes at most.

Whether by vectors or in-cockpit display, Nexrad can't be used for picking
your way though a line of weather, but it will work for steering safely
between and around scattered storms.

If I flew frequently in thunderstorm country I would have already bought a
396 (or some other Nexrad display system). As it is, it's high on my wish
list.

-Elliott Drucker

FPS396 Precip Colors

Do the precip colors displayed on the GPS396 correspond to FSS Level 1-6?

How do you know how heavy the precip within a given color band is?

What decision making criteria do you use to determine if you will fly
within a given color band?

In article ,
".Blueskies." wrote:
IMHO, the 396 is over priced. Sure, the nexrad radar stuff is good to know,
but it is not a real picture of the storms.
It is a representation of the echoes from the doppler radar station. The
doppler is limited in that if a heavy down pour
is happening, it can not see through that down pour very well and other
stations need to help out with interpolating the
data. I do like the METAR information, but like the radar, you can get
updated from FSS or ATC real time also, but it
does take talking on the radio ;-)

You are not correct about the weather information and, IMO, not correct
about the price when compared to similar products on the market. I
agree, the previous $2695 price tag was a bit expensive, but the new,
lower price is more reasonable.

The NEXRAD information is pretty much as good as it gets. Ground radar
stations are not subject to the same attenuation problems suffered by
airborne weather radar, and as a result, generate a much better overall
picture of current and developing conditions. Composite imagery is used
from multiple radar sites and multiple antenna tilts. Combine the
NEXRAD picture with other data such as Echo Tops, and you have a pretty
accurate picture of developing conditions.



JKG

"Jonathan Goodish" wrote in message
...
In article ,
".Blueskies." wrote:
IMHO, the 396 is over priced. Sure, the nexrad radar stuff is good to know,
but it is not a real picture of the storms.
It is a representation of the echoes from the doppler radar station. The
doppler is limited in that if a heavy down pour
is happening, it can not see through that down pour very well and other
stations need to help out with interpolating the
data. I do like the METAR information, but like the radar, you can get
updated from FSS or ATC real time also, but it
does take talking on the radio ;-)

You are not correct about the weather information and, IMO, not correct
about the price when compared to similar products on the market. I
agree, the previous $2695 price tag was a bit expensive, but the new,
lower price is more reasonable.

The NEXRAD information is pretty much as good as it gets. Ground radar
stations are not subject to the same attenuation problems suffered by
airborne weather radar, and as a result, generate a much better overall
picture of current and developing conditions. Composite imagery is used
from multiple radar sites and multiple antenna tilts. Combine the
NEXRAD picture with other data such as Echo Tops, and you have a pretty
accurate picture of developing conditions.



JKG

The NEXRAD is only as good as the interpretation, like you said. Ground based is subject to the attenuation issues just
like airborne (granted they do have more power so they can see further), and the NEXRAD is not real time as some seem to
think. Like you said, all the data needs to be taken together to get some sense of the conditions, particularly
lightening strikes. Does the 396 display the lightening also?