Garmin Behind the Curve on WAAS GPS VNAV Approaches

Richard Kaplan wrote:

wrote in message ...

Check the RNAV Runway 24 at KCRQ, then pass that one by us again.

Could you be more specific? What are the interesting features of this
approach and how does that relate to this discussion?


I believe you said you could continue to VNAV minimums so long as you didn't
violate any LNAV stepdown fixes. Note the huge difference in LNAV vs. VNAV
minimums on that IAP and there are no LNAV stepdown fixes to use to stay out of
harm's way.

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
news:08e5297f8b04a12ba98b54fe2071e26e@TeraNews...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

No. I am writing that Garmin is now going to have to play catch up.

Then what did you mean when you said "WAAS alone could not add any new
services to existing GPS"?

The use of a data base and pressure altitude are being used to pump the
probabilities for the UPS box.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...
"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
news:6823bf21e87c61799d150096f329071b@TeraNews...
| Garmin's website now says they are "committed" to providing WAAS GPS
| approach capability for the 400/500 series by the "end of 2004."
|
| UPSAT's site states that their CNX-80 is WAAS approved now but I cannot
find
| an explicit statement that it supports WAAS approaches at this point.
|

UPS told us that the CNX-80 database needs an upgrade before you can do WAAS
approaches and has promised that it has already been release and that we
should get it soon.

Howdy!

1. WAAS is turned on but only "approved operators with approved
equipment" may do the LNAV/LPV/WAAS/GPS Precision Approaches.
2. The CNX80 is ONLY approved equipment for NON-PRECISION GPS
Approaches.
3. The CNX80 is NOT approved for PRECISION GPS Approaches
(RNAV/VNAV/etc) and will not be for several months to come.
4. GARMIN's 530/430 equipment is only approved for NON-PRECISION GPS
Approaches.
5. GARMIN's 530/430 equipment may or may not beat UPSAT's CNX80 in the
quest for PRECISION GPS Approach Approval.
6. IFR Enroute, Terminal, and Oceanic IFR-Approved GPS units with an
IFR-Approved installation AND CURRENT database may be used as a
substitute for DME in the U.S. (Consider that the rest of the world
still thinks NDBs are a pretty neat idea and the U.S. DOD OWNS and
OPERATES GPS. Of course the rest of the world still has their heads up
their arses when it comes to GPS, they didn't think of it first, and a
valid concern about the US military's ability to turn off GPS.)

I don't think GARMIN has missed the boat at all. Their delay in
implementing WAAS upgrades is deliberate to allow the FAA to turn on
WAAS all over the country and not just the 16 Approaches that could be
flown with GPS/WAAS equipment. WAAS and LAAS are not fully
operational, and GARMIN wants to see which system will win, if not
both, and GARMIN's upgrade will handle the appropriate system. This is
why GARMIN is implementing Terrain and TAWS this year, and WAAS next
year. At this time, terrain is a software upgrade, TAWS is a hardware
upgrade, and that will probably change before GARMIN ships the units.
GARMIN is planning for WAAS to be a software upgrade. The difference?
Software upgrades can be done at a dealer.

UPSAT's CNX80's WAAS-Enabled GPS is a bunch of marketing hype until
such time that the FAA allows Precision GPS approaches. Aloft, a
difference of 1' (WAAS) versus 3' (GPS) doesn't make a critical
difference in avoiding terrain or other obstacles. Being 200' over the
end of the runway, 1 foot versus 3 feet might make a critical
difference, hence the extended wait for GPS Precision Approaches.

The FAA's slowness in implementing WAAS approaches and approvals might
be deliberate due to the number of airspace and altitude busts by
pilots with the fancy GPS units on board. The FAA may be waiting for
the pilot community to get themselves trained on these GPS units
before certifying the system as safe for the general aviation pilots.

Where is my information from? The technical standard orders for
precision and non-precision GPS units, several days at the Aircraft
Electronics Association Convention, digging through the pounds of
manuals and installation manuals for the various units, and from the
mouths of the engineers and techs themselves at GARMIN, UPSAT, and L3.

Fly SAFE!
Jedi Nein
www.slantgolf.com (in progress)

Slightly off topic, but interesting in this context:

The latest edition of the FAA's SatNav News contains a graphic of
projections for various navaids through 2020. It shows the current number of
VORs (1033) diminishing to about 500 beginning in 2010; however, the listing
for VOR-DME/VORTAC shows an increase from 878 to more than 930. TACAN shows
no change from 2002 through 2020. Long range NDBs are retained in Alaska and
coastal. ILS Cat I and LOC approaches diminish from 1158 to about 546, while
the number of Cat III ILSs increases slightly.

GPS is strong throughout...WAAS comes up in 2003 and LAAS Cat 1 in 2005.

The decision on the fate of Loran is still up in the air.

Bob Gardner

"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
news:6823bf21e87c61799d150096f329071b@TeraNews...
Garmin's website now says they are "committed" to providing WAAS GPS
approach capability for the 400/500 series by the "end of 2004."

UPSAT's site states that their CNX-80 is WAAS approved now but I cannot
find
an explicit statement that it supports WAAS approaches at this point.

Does anyone know for sure if the CNX-80 supports WAAS GPS approaches
*now*?

In any event, can Garmin really be that far behind the curve as to plan
WAAS
only fo rthe "end of 2004"? This seems very much atypical for Garmin and
almost an embarrassment for them.


--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

(Jedi Nein) wrote in message . com...

Howdy!

GARMIN is planning for WAAS to be a software upgrade. The difference?
Software upgrades can be done at a dealer.

Um, is the terrain stuff going to be a processor upgrade then?

I thought part of the issue w/ the Garmin units was that they
update 3x at an interval where FAA's WAAS spec requires 5x,
and Garmin was unsuccessful at lobbying the FAA to decrease
the time interval. Doesn't sound like a software issue to me
but whatdoIknow.

OTOH, if they take care of the hardware now, they can handle
WAAS as a software upgrade later.

UPSAT's CNX80's WAAS-Enabled GPS is a bunch of marketing hype until
such time that the FAA allows Precision GPS approaches. Aloft, a
difference of 1' (WAAS) versus 3' (GPS) doesn't make a critical
difference in avoiding terrain or other obstacles.

Hmmm, somehow I thought the difference in precision was greater
than that.

The FAA's slowness in implementing WAAS approaches and approvals might
be deliberate due to the number of airspace and altitude busts by
pilots with the fancy GPS units on board. The FAA may be waiting for
the pilot community to get themselves trained on these GPS units
before certifying the system as safe for the general aviation pilots.

Documentation on said number of airspace and altitude busts? As
far as I know, if one does bust altitude or airspace, no one keeps
track of what sort of GPS one had on board.

Cheers,
Sydney