If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
GNS 430W vs GNS 480
Robert M. Gary wrote:
Sam Spade wrote: Robert M. Gary wrote: Are we speaking of the same thing? In the 480 you tell it to hold, give it the turn direction, leg length etc and it flys the hold. I've not seen that in any other GPS product. No, I think you are speaking of holds not in the database. Sounds like the 480 does a nice job of that. I am speaking of charted approach chart holds. Did this change in the 430 with WAAS? From my teaching in the 430 and G1000 when you cross the holding fix it just goes into suspend mode (with a suggested entry procedure). The 480 actually figures the entry procedure and flys it, you never touch the yoke. Does the 430 WAAS unit fly the entry procedure? -Robert In the 400/500 series it goes into suspend and displays a message with the recommended entry procedure. It does graphically show the entry track. The 400/500 W series do (I have only used the trainer). Only one lap around a HIL pattern is allowed then suspend drops out. On a missed approach hold suspend does not drop out. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
GNS 430W vs GNS 480
Peter R. wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote: Does the 430 WAAS unit fly the entry procedure? If the sim for the GNS430W is to be believed, yes it will, assuming of course it is coupled with an appropriate AP. With a roll steering autopilot it will. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
GNS 430W vs GNS 480
Does the 430 WAAS unit fly the entry procedure? If the sim for the GNS430W is to be believed, yes it will, assuming of course it is coupled with an appropriate AP. -- Peter I am really interested to hear how many of us have actually been asked to fly a Holding pattern by ATC in the recent past ? Roy |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
GNS 430W vs GNS 480
Roy N5804F wrote:
I am really interested to hear how many of us have actually been asked to fly a Holding pattern by ATC in the recent past ? It is more common than you think, assuming you routinely fly IFR to uncontrolled airports (at least in the Northeast US). While certainly not a lot, I have been asked twice over the year I was commuting to Dunkirk, NY, to momentarily hold due to another IFR aircraft ahead of me flying the approach. Additionally, on frequency I have heard holding instructions go out to every aircraft (air carriers and GA alike) approaching the big three NY airports when a line of t-storms was about to move through. The point being that the more you fly IFR, the more likely you will encounter a request to hold. -- Peter |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
GNS 430W vs GNS 480
Roy N5804F wrote:
Does the 430 WAAS unit fly the entry procedure? If the sim for the GNS430W is to be believed, yes it will, assuming of course it is coupled with an appropriate AP. -- Peter I am really interested to hear how many of us have actually been asked to fly a Holding pattern by ATC in the recent past ? Roy The holding pattern that the Garmin 400/500 have are flown a lot and without ATC request. They are the course-reversal hold (known as "HIL" or hold-in-lieu-of procedure turn) and the missed approach holding pattern. These holds are far more prevelant today as RNAV procedures increase in ron-radar areas. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
GNS 430W vs GNS 480
Peter R. wrote:
Additionally, on frequency I have heard holding instructions go out to every aircraft (air carriers and GA alike) approaching the big three NY airports when a line of t-storms was about to move through. The point being that the more you fly IFR, the more likely you will encounter a request to hold. Airliners sometimes hold for an hour, or more on STARS serving JFK, EWR, and LGA. Holding west of Boston is very common, too. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
GNS 430W vs GNS 480
Sam Spade wrote: Peter R. wrote: "Robert M. Gary" wrote: Does the 430 WAAS unit fly the entry procedure? If the sim for the GNS430W is to be believed, yes it will, assuming of course it is coupled with an appropriate AP. With a roll steering autopilot it will. That's a motivation to upgrade the G1000 to WAAS. However, I just read somewhere that the rumor is that the WAAS G1000 systems will not drive VNAV to the KAP140. So you won't be able to fly fully coupled VNAV approachs with the KAP140 (even though you can fly a fully coupled ILS with it). Not sure what the techical limitation is but Garmin's solution is to upgrade to their Garmin autopilot (which I don't believe is certified for many applications yet). However, that will fix the issue of having to set the barometer 3 times (G1000, KAP140, standby alttitude) since the Garmin autopilot will take the baro setting from the G1000 directly. -Robert |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
GNS 430W vs GNS 480
"Roy N5804F" wrote in message link.net... I am really interested to hear how many of us have actually been asked to fly a Holding pattern by ATC in the recent past ? Excluding HIL-type course reversals in approaches, I have had to hold at least twice in IMC during the last year or so, always due to more than one aircraft trying to get into and out of the same untowered fields. And I hear it over the radio fairly frequently, for one to hold as another completes the approach. |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
GNS 430W vs GNS 480
Robert M. Gary wrote:
That's a motivation to upgrade the G1000 to WAAS. However, I just read somewhere that the rumor is that the WAAS G1000 systems will not drive VNAV to the KAP140. So you won't be able to fly fully coupled VNAV approachs with the KAP140 (even though you can fly a fully coupled ILS with it). If an LNAV approach has VNAV minimums will you be able to use DA or will you have to use the MDA concept? |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
GNS 430W vs GNS 480
On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 11:17:15 -0800, Sam Spade wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote: That's a motivation to upgrade the G1000 to WAAS. However, I just read somewhere that the rumor is that the WAAS G1000 systems will not drive VNAV to the KAP140. So you won't be able to fly fully coupled VNAV approachs with the KAP140 (even though you can fly a fully coupled ILS with it). If an LNAV approach has VNAV minimums will you be able to use DA or will you have to use the MDA concept? On the Jepp charts, the LNAV/VNAV minimums are designated as DA. The LNAV approaches have an MDA. Perhaps what you are asking is whether the MDA on an LNAV approach with advisory vertical guidance can be treated as a DA. When last I checked (with the local FSDO) this was in a state of flux. However, the written guidance from Garmin indicates that LNAV approaches should be flown using the MDA concept, even if there is advisory vertical guidance. Could be confusing also in that the annunciation on the CNX80 of an LNAV approach with advisory vertical guidance is LNAV/VNAV. Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|