What the difference between the

In article , Aluckyguess wrote:
So the radios are hard to work on the 480? I heard the 480 was a lot harder
to learn

I don't think "a lot" is warranted; I could figure out how to do most of
what I wanted to do on the 480 without manual-reading and found it
reasonably intuitive, though the 430 makes the basics more obvious. On
the other hand, if you want to use the full functionality of the box I
like the 480 better than the 430; I think the flight planning functions
are more logical.

Physically, the 480 has a larger screen than the 430.

I gather there are places where /G aircraft can actually get direct
clearances instead of airways, but not around here; having airways saves
a bunch of twiddling.

andrew m. boardman wrote:
In article , Aluckyguess wrote:
So the radios are hard to work on the 480? I heard the 480 was a lot harder
to learn

I don't think "a lot" is warranted; I could figure out how to do most of
what I wanted to do on the 480 without manual-reading and found it
reasonably intuitive, though the 430 makes the basics more obvious.

I haven't found the 480 difficult. Neither has really Margy. The
advantage for us is that we weren't tainted by having learned the
Garmin-style interface first. There's a lot of key multiplexing
due to cramming a lot of features in a tiny amount of space.

The basic is, if you want to use a non-GPS function, make sure
you press it's button first. If you want to use a GPS function,
press MAP first to get to a known state.

So the radios are hard to work on the 480? I heard the 480 was a lot
harder to learn

The Apollo/IIMorrow systems were very logical and followed a branching
tree structure (I believe the present term is chapters and pages).
IIMorrow originally placed a diagram of structure in each manual.
Viewing the diagram made the operation and functions self-explanatory.
As the systems grew in complexity, the manuals changed and the "tree"
was no longer included. By sitting down with the manual, you can create
your own tree by diagraming the "chapters and pages" from the manual.

john smith wrote:
So the radios are hard to work on the 480? I heard the 480 was a lot
harder to learn

The Apollo/IIMorrow systems were very logical and followed a branching
tree structure (I believe the present term is chapters and pages).
IIMorrow originally placed a diagram of structure in each manual.
Viewing the diagram made the operation and functions self-explanatory.
As the systems grew in complexity, the manuals changed and the "tree"
was no longer included. By sitting down with the manual, you can create
your own tree by diagraming the "chapters and pages" from the manual.

The MX20 quick reference certainly shows the tree. I guess you're
right about the 480 manual.

But the tree isn't all that complex.

"Aluckyguess" wrote in message


I downloaded the simulator and the radio does have a nice function in
remembering 10 of the last radio frequencies. The 480 seems a little
similar to the Apollo 60 that is in the plane already.

There's a very good reason for that.

http://www.garmin.com/pressroom/corporate/082203.html

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://openspf.org
____________________